Posted on 06/30/2008 4:22:54 PM PDT by wagglebee
Good to have a new name for a post like that. Just for your own safety, and all.
But, what would the junk science community do without all the government grants?
Uh, hmmmm...Troll alert!
I don’t honestly see how they could rule it illegal to do. Hell, it’s very popular these days to do the illegal anyway. And you’ll get tens of thousands of dollars worth of free goodies too.
That was no criticism.
We did away with the traditional greased-pig-chase, and we came up with baptism by fire.
And there we have the reason why the results were hidden. The more evidence that homosexuality is behavior and not identity is made public, the less the public will have sympathy to their causes.
Homos can and do reproduce — the same way other people do. For example that notorious Episcopal Bishop has children.
While I do enjoy reading the educated discourse here on FreeRepublic, after looking at many of your posts - I think a name that might better suit you would be “YearningToArgue”. This particular reply was a little smart-aleck.
But hang around, if you can - you may end up learning something after all.
I'm not sure either but perhaps they've been greatly mislead by all the scientific misrepresentations? At least now the APA (American Psychological Association) doesn't have a problem with helping gays become ex-gay, if that's what they want.
Simon Levay, a scientist who also happens to be gay said: "people who think that gays and lesbians are born that way are also more likely to support gay rights." Well, gays and lesbians are not born that way as evidenced from every study on the subject, so when voters know the truth they'll be less likely to support gays rights.
California voters need to know that gays and lesbians are not born with their same-sex attraction before they vote in November.
Welcome to FRee Republic!
Warning: It can be addictive.
Cheers!
Every credible scientific study demonstrates environment plays a part in our sexuality. Children raised by homosexuals will more likely grow up to be homosexual due to the environment in which they are raised. That’s what science tells us.
H'mmm, interesting semantic drift.
It used to be that homosexual *behaviour* was criminalized, regardless of one's GBLTQ status, and regardless of frequency.
Since, oh, say the 1969 Stonewall Riots or thereabouts, the disputed ground of the debate has moved to one's "orientation"--as though a mere biological inclination to engage in an activity was in itself enough to dismiss moral considerations.
(Trivial counterexample: heterosexual adultery or gluttony)
Now the question has become, "How many licks does it take to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop"?
Curiouser and curiouser.
Cheers!
The issue in this particular article is talking about "some self-described pro-homosexual researchers who uncovered such results attempted to conceal them by declaring that no differences were found". They were hiding evidence, basically.
You should probably write Dr. Hansen for answers to your questions.
Dang - he hung around all day and then a post to me is the one that got him zotted. Well, if any thread will get a troll zotted, it’s a “Homosexual Agenda” thread.
I love FreeRepublic!
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.