It is a learned behavior. How else do you explain the flaming homos bizarre quirks?
The sad thing is, by making homosexuality a searing hot political issue, gay activists have ensured no unbiased scientific research is ever going to be done on the origins and effects of homosexuality.
bump for truth
“God changes people through Christ, regardless of the sin.”
Amen. Simple as that.
Ouch!!!!....Thats gonna leave a mark.
ping
Scripture is verified again.
Romans 1
It’s not a “gender identity” problem, either. Since the 1960s, scientists have known how to manipulate the gender identity of fetuses in the womb, about halfway through gestation. For *animals* this determines their gender identity—but *not* for people. People are much more complicated than that.
About halfway through gestation, a male fetus will excrete a bit of testosterone from its testes, that goes to its brain, and tells it that it is a “male” brain. If that testosterone squirt doesn’t get there, the brain is a “female” brain by default.
There are all sorts of ways to manipulate this. You can give a squirt to a female fetus brain that will make their brain male. You can block the squirt completely. You can direct the squirt to just one side of the brain or the other.
However, if there is a gender identity problem in humans, it does *not* manifest itself as homosexuality. There *may* be some gender confusion, such as effeminate boys and masculine girls, but that is within normal range.
In extreme cases, there are children who feel they are in the wrong gender body, and crave a sex change. But even this is not related to who they are sexually attracted to.
Homosexual men can be either effeminate or masculine, the same with lesbians. They may have very firm gender identity, or they might be of the opposite gender, or they may be androgynous.
Are these the same tards that said sex w/ kids won’t hurt them!
No cred.
As a research psychologist for over 20 years, I am not aware of this publication. (It is a PC area that I will never get involved with). I am interested in the citation. Does anyone have it?
I suspect that people are misreading this, but I don’t have the article. IMHO, homosexual behavior is probably like “intelligence”. Some of it is learned. Some of it is genetically influenced (mostly at the extreme ends). The question is “how much influence does genetics have?”
Over time, the role of genetics in intelligence seems to have increased (while the lefties work furiously at redefining “intelligence”). I suspect that over time, the influence of genetics on homosexuality will be far lower than many topside estimates (10-15%). But, we simply don’t know.
The author is confused. Genetic factors are not the only ones that cause a person to be "born that way."
There are als non-genetic biological factors. A good example is the uterine environment. This IMO is where one sees the most promising research on this issue.
I am loathe to proclaim any characteristic free of any biological influence. It is exceedingly unlikely.
First, the APA has become very political and I doubt they would intentionally claim there’s no proof of genetic homosexuality.
I feel certain that -*for some*- (at least), it is not genetic at all. In today’s society, it has even become chic and I feel some have chosen to be gay because it has become a societal identifier, not because it is a sexual proclivity.
My liberal brother became one and, while he will deny it, I am certain he was not “born gay”. He hid Playboy magazines in his bedroom as a teen just like the other boys in our house.
But I feel there were two major issues that led him into homosexuality. One is that he found he wasn’t in much demand by girls. And as he socialized, he found he was welcomed by gays. Naturally, he gravitated to the group where he found acceptance.
Secondly, he’s become more liberal. As liberal dogma preaches that hetero white males are the source of all evil in the world and the “oppressor class”, he found he couldn’t do anything about being white or male but he *could* do something about being hetero - so, in this way, he could move psychologically from oppressor to oppressed, from victimizer to victim, which allows him to be a member in good standing with his liberal friends.
Some of you probably think I am nuts for believing this but he once confided that he wouldn’t have turned out gay if he’d only found the “right girl”.
So while I could be persuaded that some homosexuals may have a genetic trigger that makes them that way, I believe many more are that way because of social conditioning, including the lunacy of liberal dogma that puts everyone in a group and then assigns blame or exoneration of people based on which group they are in.
Congress votes to protect pedophiles against ‘hate speech’
Canada Free Press | May 13, 2009 | Andrew Walden
Posted on 05/14/2009 2:26:43 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2251100/posts
Homosexual Group Admits Health Risks of Homosexual Behavior
Dakota Voice | May 14, 2009 | Bob Ellis
Posted on 05/14/2009 2:19:06 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2251094/posts
Frank wants broad limits on exec. pay for all firms
[all publicly held companies.......]
The Hill
Posted on 05/14/2009 10:21:07 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
Edited on 05/14/2009 2:09:16 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2250927/posts
Chairman Frank Succeeds in Funding ACORN (Barney Frank & ACORN)
Michelle Bachmann | May 8, 2009 | Staff
Posted on 05/14/2009 10:25:53 AM PDT by yoe
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2250933/posts
So how long will this take to get into the text books?
Thanks. We added a link to our article about this new info:
http://www.faithfacts.org/christ-and-the-culture/gay-rights
BTTT!
“An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there’s no homosexual “gene” — meaning it’s not likely that homosexuals are born that way.”
One does not follow the other.
Regarding change and the right to treatment, lesbian activist Camille Paglia offered the following observations:
"Homosexuality is not 'normal.' On the contrary it is a challenge to the norm...Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction...No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous...homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.....
"Is the gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not wish to be gay? Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are theoretically possible. However, habit is refractory, once the sensory pathways have been blazed and deepened by repetition-a phenomenon obvious in the struggle with obesity, smoking, alcoholism or drug addiction....helping gays to learn to function heterosexually, if they wish, is a perfectly worthy aim.
"We should be honest enough to consider whether homosexuality may not indeed be a pause a the prepubescent stage where children anxiously band together by gender....current gay cant insists that homosexuality is 'not a choice,' that no one would choose to be gay in a homophobic society. But there is an element of choice in all behavior, sexual or otherwise. It takes an effort to deal with the opposite sex; it is safer with your own kind. The issue is one of challenge versus comfort."
Source Paglia, C., Vamps and tramps. New York: Vintage Books. 1994, pp. 70, 72, 76, 77, 78, 91
Pulled from: http://www.narth.com/docs/innate.html