Posted on 01/14/2006 4:14:10 PM PST by wagglebee
You don't need to find the gene. It can be cured *now* through godly therapy.
Some is by choice, some is by outside corruption, some is confusion, but I think some percentage is genetic.
There is a hyper-feminine x chromosome thesis that has no proof but anecdotal evidence. It is that the X chromosome from the mother is so superior that her daughters are very desirable, hyper-feminine, but her sons Y chromosome is overwhelmed and they are effeminate.
That is hardly scientific, but I know that a large percentage of the most feminine, beautiful, erotic women I have known have had homosexual brothers. I am not the only one to notice it either.
No. You're framing it wrong. The "defect" is "same-sex attraction." What these people do with their defect is a "choice."
Homosexual marriage and polygamy, no. Incest of course is problematic if it produces children, but I said nothing about incest, now did I?
Your incoherent babble about eating pork and burkas actually works against your point. I don't want to be put under the thumb of the Muslim theocrats anymore than I want to be under the thumb of the Christian theocrats (like you).
TO MRS EDWARD A. ALLEN: from The Kilns1 February 1958
I quite agree with the Archbishop that no sin, simply as such, should be made a crime. Who the deuce are our rulers to enforce their opinions about sin on us? - a lot of professional politicians, often venal time-servers, whose opinion on a moral problem in one's life we shd attach very little value to. Of course many acts which are sins against God are also injuries to our fellow-citizens, and must on that account, but only on that account, be made crimes. But of all the sins in the world I shd have thought homosexuality was the one that least concerns the State. We hear too much of the State. Government is at its best a necessary evil. Let's keep it in its place.
From The Letters of C.S. Lewis, pg. 473
Good for you, and good luck. I tried making that argument here awhile back and was accused of everything this side of mother-raping. I agree with you. It used to be libs that were concerned with what everybody else was doing. Now it's so-called conservatives.
I agree that people have the right to do whatever they want in their bedroom, so long as it doesn't involve children or animals. However, I also don't think that a sexual fetish is a valid basis for status as a protected minority with special rights.
One thing for sure, if homosexulaity was "normal" in our species we would have died out eons ago.
That is true. Some made by birth, some made by nurture, some made by individual or societal decision, some permanent, some who switch teams, and some who play both teams.
Still not sure if it is a "gay gene" or some environmental influence on the developing embryo, but there is a hereditary nature to psychological and emotional dispositions in families. (Can you tell we've got one in ours?)
Aside from homosexuality there are other instances of identical twins where one has an anomaly, personality trait, or whatever you want to call it...that the other genetic twin does not share. It cannot be said that every embryo, even if genetically identical, experiences exactly the same circulatory, hormonal and other pre-birth experience.
I agree with you. There should not be special rights for anyone. But let's not pretend that's what wagglebee's problem is. Scratch under the surface and you'll find that the problem for wagglebee is that homosexuals aren't being imprisoned.
you can't be a LITTLE queer, like ya can't be a little pregnant.
True. Strangley enough my wife works with a woman, a lesbian. Thats is not the starange part. She has twin siblings one male one female. Both are gay as well.
strong circumstantial evidence for the gay gene in that family.
Evolution would have "selected out" homosexuality in a couple of generations through natural selection, nothing genetic about it imo. Also, I don't believe in evolution, this arguement is for those that do!
DWR
Reagan is buried in the ground and forgotten. People like wagglebee march to the beat of Rick Santorum's drum.
You don't believe in natural selection? Had any roach problems lately?
You're confusing "normal" with "universal". Some people are sterile. Some people are celibate by choice. It doesn't mean they're abnormal. The conservatism that I love is one that recognizes that Americans are free to live as they want, as long as nobody else is hurt. The Puritan strain of modern so-called-conservatism is very bothersome to me. As Barry Goldwater said re: gays in the military: I don't care if they are straight, as long as they can shoot straight. Barry Goldwater is my hero.
If there is a gay gene it is a birth defect.
Is this the gay lobby's argument?
I would reply that the particular cause of homosexuality is irrelevant -- totally beside the point -- because society experiences gayness exclusively as a *behavior*. We don't know someone is gay until they do certain things or act a certain way. Not so with race. Unlike sexual orientation, you can know a person's race simply by glancing at their photograph. This is because unlike sexual orientation, race is something you are rather than something you do.
Now, it's normal and just for a society to pass judgements on people's behavior. In fact, Martin Luther King implored us to judge a man not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character -- i.e. by his behavior. Ending the bigotry of race-based marriage laws was in perfect accord with this, since skin color has no bearing on the things married couples do. After all, a marriage across racial lines can be just as healthy and fruitful as any other marriage. A mixed couple can bring children into the world and be a father and mother for them just as any other couple can.
Not so with a homosexual couple. They can never do these things. And because society has a right to judge and to make laws based upon behavior (i.e. what people do), it has the right to deny a homosexual couple public license for their relationship. Thus the barring of homosexual marriage is in no way harmed by arguments based on descrimination against a person's DNA.
Case closed.
Great points!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.