Posted on 10/01/2008 9:52:55 AM PDT by steve-b
Today, the National Stonewall Democrats issued the following statement in response by accusations from Governor Sarah Palin that sexual orientation is a choice:
"John McCain chose a poor running mate, but he did not choose his sexual orientation. This is another example of why we need a pro-equality President like Barack Obama in the White House. For Governor Palin to suggest that individuals randomly choose their sexual orientation based on nothing but a whim is wrong and it repeats the talking points of the anti-gay special interests which continue to control the McCain/Palin campaign and the Republican Party."...
(Excerpt) Read more at marketwatch.com ...
Well said.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
My, aren’t YOU an arrogant one.
For a SINGLE gene, and for purposes of this post, we will define:
G = Dominant gene
g = Recessive gene
Assuming NO mutations (straight gene combinations between parents):
G-G combination causes dominent trait to be manifested.
G-g combination causes dominent trait to be manifested.
g-g cross is ONLY instance in which recessive trait is manifested.
Two G-G parents will ALWAYS produce G-G offspring (manifestation of dominent trait).
One G-G and one G-g parent STILL result in dominant gene manifestation in all off-spring, but one in four chance of G-g off-spring.
G-g an G-g parent result in 3/4 chance of dominant gene menifesting and 1/4 chance of recessive gene mainfestattion (g-g “cross”).
And so forth, unitl we get to the situation in which:
Two g-g parents will ALWAYS produce g-g offspring.
REAL genetics is much more complicated than the single gene example because more than one pair of genes is involved in defining many traits.
HOWEVER, since one of the characteristics of a homosexual is a greatly reduced tendency to reproduce, and because it is CLEARLY biologically detrimental to a species to NOT reproduce, it is PERFECTLY plausible to argue that the RECESSIVE trait of homosexuality, regardless of how many actual g-g recessive gene combinations would have to be “triggered” for it to manifest itself, WOULD be “bred out” of the species over a relatively short period. This would occur through a combination of the rarity of the occurence of the trait, and the tendenecy of those in whom the trait is manifested to NOT reproduce.
PS - I do not care whether you ever “get back” to me or not. You are arrogant and condescending and I have NO USE for people like you.
Other than you, who’s defending the language of pedophiles?
IT’S SEXUAL ORIENTATION, STUPID
20/25%
Where did you read that, got a link?
YES!!!!!! So plain and simple it’s staggering!
These are the same folks who claim people have no choice about whether or not they have sex, and therefore abortions is a right.
Anyone who is that much a slave to sex, of any kind, has a problem!
“For Governor Palin to suggest that individuals randomly choose their sexual orientation based on nothing but a whim is wrong...”
Well if it is wrong, riddle me this all you democrats, if a homosexual is naturally gay, then does not their nature proclude them from procreating? If their natural state makes it impossible to procreate, then why are homosexuals fighting so hard to adopt? Why do lesbians artificially inseminate themselves to become parents? Which “nature” are homosexuals who wish to adopt or wish to give birth following? Are they following their natural desire to procreate and parent or are they chosing to deny their natural gay state?
If homosexuality is truly their natural state, then their nature would not give them the desire to procreate. If their natural state gives them a desire to procreate, then they are chosing to live a lifestyle that denies their nature.
You’re not exagerating.
That’s where the left wants to go.
Back to the days where boys are for pleasure and women for making babies.
The left twists ANYTHING that reminds them of their choice to sin into something evil on the part of the reminder.
No, maybe you don’t choose what you WANT TO DO.
But you DO choose what you DO.
LOL, that's gonna hurt. Next she's going to lose the abortion vote if she isn't careful.
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.