Posted on 08/04/2012 2:40:13 AM PDT by gareththomasnz
Conservative Party leader Colin Craig has sparked outrage by saying homosexuality is a choice and gay people are more likely to have been abused as children.
The comments on TV3's The Nation this morning came in a discussion with Labour MP Louisa Wall over her bill to legalise same-sex marriage.
Asked if he thought the bill might encourage homosexuality, Mr Craig replied people chose to be homosexual and factors other than genetics could determine whether someone was gay.
"I think most people recognise that there are other influences such as upbringing, such as events in life," he said.
"For homosexuals, they are statistically far more likely to have suffered child abuses as a child... It certainly can make a difference in someone's choices in life, there's no question about that in my mind."
Mr Craig said he was not worried the bill would fuel homosexuality, because it was a personal choice.
Ms Wall responded: "Homosexuality isn't a choice Colin, people are born the way they are born."
Mr Craig's comments sparked an immediate backlash on Twitter.
Claudette Hauiti described the comments as dangerous, homophobic and ignorant.
Kaine Thompson tweeted: "How can Colin Craig get away with saying homosexuality comes about because of child abuse?"
Bruce Buckman tweeted that Colin Craig would have campaigned against women's suffrage in the 1890s on the grounds that it "undermined institution of democracy".
Ms Wall told The Nation her bill would recognise the equality of people's citizenship in a modern democracy.
"What my bill seeks to do is to allow two people - regardless of their sex, sexual orientation or gender identity - to marry within the institution of love that I think marriage is."
Ms Wall said marriage was the primary focus of the bill, but by virtue of the definition, married same-sex couples would be able to adopt.
Here is my email I sent to the conservative party:
I am 44 & live in Auckland. I am politically conservative & quite right wing. I am however an atheist and a scientist. Despite this in general I agree with the moral ethics of most religious people over the immoral left.
I base my judgements upon psychology & neuroscience in matters concerning behaviour.
The basic fact is that while genetic factors influence sexual orientation - "neuroplasticity" of the nervous system is far more powerful in defining behaviour.
If we were dumb animals then yes it would be genetic - end of story. But as adult human beings we are "accountable" for our behaviour - directly because of neuroplasticity.
The homosexual movement is deliberately undermining this accountability.
The danger of this alone is obvious. But, a greater danger is that not just sexuality is alterable by neuroplasticity. Intelligence is also plastic. Our society and culture are still oppressive in this respect. But cognitive enhancement has been practised for thousands of years.
By perpetrating the lie of eugenics the left is reinforcing the intellectual oppression of the population & at the same time undermining personal accountability.
Essentially they are socially engineering an oppression of the population. This is their objective.
The scientific facts are very clear and their is no "debate" to be had.
Also with regard to sexual abuse and sexual orientation. Personally I was the victim of a violent sexual attack as a child & was nearly murdered when I was 12 by a stranger. If anything this experience made me very anti-homosexual. I did not experience any confusion of sexual orientation as an adolescent after puberty. I have always been heterosexual, which is quite a long time now. Most victims of sexual assault do not go on to become sexual offenders. However there is an increase in the probability. There is a much greater likelihood of drug & alcohol abuse.
This I believe is where the link with increased sexual offending occurs. Drug and alcohol users are the most likely of all to be sex offenders whether they were abused themselves or not.
You need to attack the homosexuals on personal "accountability" and blow away the false argument of genetics with the facts of neuroplasticity.
They will then argue that homosexuality is not wrong anyway even if its not genetic. This is of course false as it is a contradiction of ones physiological potential and the sexual purpose of ones physiological drives. To be fulfilled as a man or a woman. They will the say "what about hermaphrodites?" 1:1000 are hermaphrodites so it is a mute point.
The point must also be driven that homosexuality itself is socially, psychologically and physiologically dysfunctional.
Those are the facts.
There’s no getting away from the fact that to stick your dick up another man’s rectum is indeed a CHOICE!
Nothing forces anyone to do that. Yes or NO?
once they have had homosexuality rationalized as an immutable birthright then all sorts of "rights" can be bastardized into another protected class
.
The point must also be driven that homosexuality itself is socially, psychologically and physiologically dysfunctional.
Right on! Male and female genitalia are made for sexual union. Male/male and female/female sexual union can only be achieved through risky acts of sexual perversion.
It is dereliction of responsibility for policy makers to compromise the health and safety of the people they represent by pretending that homosexual union is normal and acceptable.
I wonder if we could create a new discriminated identity class called Conservatives.
There are probably some homosexuals who feel they don’t have a choice, just as heterosexuals don’t. But, there are probably others who get roped into (talked into) the lifestyle. It’s pretty naive to think humans don’t have a choice about such things. Lesbians are famous for going back and forth. There are also many bi-sexual men, which (by definition) can pick or choose their partner’s gender.
“I wonder if we could create a new discriminated identity class called Conservatives.”
It is not a choice. I was born that way.
You’re right.
Not even at the point of a gun would I even consider engaging in such vile behavior.
Humans are complex organisms and are imperfect. We all suffer from defects. I myself suffer from defective blood chemistry (high cholesterol not manageable by diet alone), a congenital defect that limits my hearing, and a host of other things. In other words, I'm a typical human being getting by the best he can with the genetic cards he's been dealt. It may well be possible that, as in alcoholism, there is a genetic factor that renders some people more likely to experience same sex attraction later in life, especially given certain experiences early in childhood or puberty, but the jury is clearly still out on that and researchers aren't even allowed to investigate it these days.
Environmental factors are also clearly in play. Indeed, I've noticed many correlations among my gay friends and acquaintances. 1) the men especially had defective or non-existent relationships with their fathers as children, 2)they tend to exhibit obsessive or compulsive behaviors in their lives which tends to make them excel in their chosen field but also renders them susceptible to chemical addictions and other personally destructive behaviors, etc. There are also other, darker correlations.
I've also seen theories that indicate same sex attraction is a form of addiction and that many men and women who have abandoned the gay lifestyle refer to themselves as being in a perpetual state of recovery, much like alcoholics do. This is indeed possible given my observations above.
Bottom line is that the campaign to declare same sex attraction normal and healthy is political and not based in science. The APA’s endorsement of homosexuality in the ‘70s was left wing political activism, nothing more. There is a growing movement in that organization to now declare pedophilia just another sexual orientation - again a political, not scientific conclusion.
Remember that you can't gain complete control of a free people without first undermining the three pillars of liberty: the family, the church, and private property. The Soviets knew this and made those objectives central to their campaign against the west. That torch is now being carried by other movements, including some within our own borders like the homo-fascists attacking a chicken food chain.
Many current and former homosexuals agree with him.
There is a danger here, from the typically conservative side.. there might be an external, physical, environmental cause. It is a disorder, and there ought to be further study into it. Denying these, as most conservatives tend to do, could lead to more people being affected and not cured.
Is Wellington still the San Francisco of NZ ???
Absolutely. The ‘born that way’ argument was made to curtail and shut down all further discussion. It created a class of persons who needed special rights and had a civil rights battle to wage.
Plenty of cultures raise “excess” sons to be gay. American Samoa comes to mind. Boys raised to be “girly” wind up gay.
Scientific studies of identical twins raised apart also give the lie to the “gay gene” theory.
Plenty of cultures raise “excess” sons to be gay. American Samoa comes to mind. Boys raised to be “girly” wind up gay.
Scientific studies of identical twins raised apart also give the lie to the “gay gene” theory.
Excellent write up. If people want to think it’s a personal choice and there’s nothing wrong with it, then I’d suggest they take their children down to the next gay rights celebration. People can only stick their heads in the sand for so long.
these homosexuals are in a snare of satan. Understand the true enemy is not these people personally, but satan who has taken them captive to do his will.
Exactly what is an "excess" son? I've been around the block a time or two and have never heard that term.
Scientific studies of identical twins raised apart also give the lie to the “gay gene” theory.
Studying identical twins,particularly those raised apart,is the "gold standard" in settling "nature vs nurture" debates.Alcoholism and depression are other subjects where they're valuable.Do these studies actually put the lie to the "I was born this way" debate? If so,one would think that psychiatrists....physicians who study human behavior *and* the brain....would vocally slap down the "I was born this way" debate.Maybe I'll do some research on the matter.I wish I still has access to the Countway Library at Harvard Medical School and to Harvard's computer database of medical journals and periodicals...that would make my research much easier.
In Samoa, the first son is raised to be a “chief,” a heterosexual who will breed, and inherit the family land. The other sons are raised with the girls, as girls, and presto, most “turn out gay.”
We've known this happens with clinging moms (usually single moms) who overprotect their sons, and raise them to be too gentle and feminine. Add in predators along the way who “help them to discover their true (sic) sexual identity,” and another “gay is born.” Actually, he was made, in most cases.
The separated twins studies have been done, and they show no “gay gene,” but the opposite. This is why you don't hear much about the “gay gene” anymore. But the studies were buried and ignored, since they run counter to the accepted conventional “wisdom” (sic) that gays are “born that way.”
See #21. Comments? Thoughts?
If we were dumb animals then yes it would be genetic - end of story. But as adult human beings we are “accountable” for our behaviour - directly because of neuroplasticity.
The homosexual movement is deliberately undermining this accountability.
Thank you, sir and spot on. Gee, science doesn’t seem to be a big priority for the supposed “Party of Science”.
Unless, of course, it can be folded, spindled and mutilated to fit the narrative.
Once again, thank you.
“I wonder if we could create a new discriminated identity class called Conservatives.”
It is not a choice. I was born that way.
LMMFAO.
If I wasn’t, Dad and the Marine Corps made sure I was born again,......and again, if necessary!
If a person adheres the concept of a gay gene, they need to then take the next step and ask for what biological purpose does it serve. Logic would dictate that if there is a genetic cause for homosexuality then the reason must be argued the only purpose would be to eliminate that genetic line from humanity. Taking the next step, why would nature have a mechanism designed to eliminate a genetic line?
The only other alternative is that homosexuality is not a genetic condition. This leaves the causes of homosexuality to be choice or conditioning.
and that all this is about .. other than turning people against each other
.
Normalizing gender confusion seems like such a great idea.
No one has EVER disallowed anyone else to DO AS THEY LIKE, nor could they have. Homosexuals have lived as couples for a long time without being assaulted by heterosexuals. (If they’re lobbying for “legalizing” their marriages, they better be also lobbying for good DIVORCE laws as well. “Ever after” is no more guaranteed for them than it is for straight couples. - Societal approval is something NONE of us is guaranteed no matter how the Supreme Court rules or how many speeches the President gives.”
***Add in predators along the way who “help them to discover their true (sic) sexual identity,” and another “gay is born.” Actually, he was made, in most cases.****
Back in the mid 1980s I was reading a book on Human Behavior and found this story which I believe proves being gay is a choice. I wish I could remember and find that book again.
The story: A young man was born way back in the hills of the Ozarks. His mother died in childbirth and he was raised by his father and uncles. He never saw a woman till drafted into the military.
The military noticed he was “strange” and gave him a series of tests to see if he was homo.
They showed him a picture of naked women. No reaction.
They showed him pictures of naked men. No reaction.
Then someone showed him a picture of a cow. Instant sexual arousal.
***The other sons are raised with the girls, as girls, and presto, most “turn out gay.”***
I wonder what the “gay” rate is in a place like New Guinea where men and women have separate lodges? I believe there the boys are raised with their moms till weaned, then they are taken to live in the men’s lodge.
Sadly, the attitude is what I find most common here, and mark my words, it wont help things one bit, and in the end, "they" will win because not enough people were willing to see the problem for what it may well be.
It is not a choice, it is a mental illness, same sex affection disorder. The choice involved is to act or not to act on the compulsion.
HOMOSEXUAL, because there’s nothing GAY about it!
Well, don't play coy - what may the problem be?
Imagine if something external were at least partly the cause of gayness? As things stand now, no one will EVER find this out because things have settled into two main camps:
A- The "we were born this way" crowd which thinks that people are simply born there for whatever reason, and that it is NOT something "wrong" with the person. Those people would NEVER agree with trying to find a "cure", and then B- "Its a choice" crowd, who would also never look for a cure, because they believe there is none, because it is a choice.
I'm afraid at this time, this is an avenue that may never be explored, even though it could "save" millions.
“Cultures that are land-strapped such as small islands or steeply mountainous sometimes evolve systems to prevent fighting over the tiny parcels to be inherited.”
This is exactly what the peaceniks are trying to do - to homosexualize & pacify the populace. Some are doing this because of their own homosexuality, some in the delusion of pacifism, and others to undermine the military capability of the society to the military advantage of others.
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.