Posted on 12/11/2012 10:00:28 AM PST by edcoil
I smell BS. This is another effort to get themselves established as a protected class.
Here comes the “professing to be wise they became fools” moment ...
BINGO. This is the age of Idiocracy.
We are born naked. There is no “wear the clothes of the opposite sex” gene. Clothes are dictated by fashion and society’s norms. Those who are transvestites are lured by cultural influences not genetics.
I worked with an identical twin - one was gay - the other, straight
Perverts, are well, perverts by choice
What’s a liberal to do??? Will gay rights trump a woman’s right to privacy and abortion? The rest of us can sit back and watch the cat fight.
This study may be (and likely is) “total crappola,” but the link you posted doesn’t prove a thing. All your link says is that, by 1997 (15 years ago), “[n]o researched ha[d] found provable biological or genetic differences between heterosexuals and homosexuals that weren’t caused by their behavior.” That does not prove that these researchers, in 2012, did not find such differences.
They will get around it by declaring any prenatal test for homosexual inclination to be a hate crime, and will burn to the ground any lab that dares to offer the test.
This whole deterministic farce rests on the axiom that more testosterone masculinizes girls and low testosterone feminizes boys. But doctors will tell you that giving a woman testosterone might put hair on her chest but it won’t make her sexually interested in other women. Nor will administering female hormones to males necessarily entice them into sex with other men.
So the basic thesis of this “study” is as flawed as its politically correct (and therefore scientifically suspect) conclusion.
They’re calling it the San Francisco gene.
Man, if this pans out it will throw the pro choice and pro life crowd all into a tizzy.
They develop a “gay test” and the mother is told the fetus will turn out gay.
Choices Choices.
George Will claimed consensus has been reached that homosexuality is normal. Except there PREVIOUSLY was consensus that it was abnormal. He claims the consensus has now been reached because older generations are dying off.
Science isn’t about “consensus”. It’s about facts, whether the masses accept them or not.
My mother was one of 11 children, 7 boys & 4 girls. None of which were gay. I have roughly 50 cousins of which 6 boys are gay & 1 gay girl.
All of the gay ones come from 3 of my aunts. None come from uncles & none from my mother.
The gay gene? was passed from aunt to daughter as these cousins have gay children also.
To sum it up only females have had gay kids.
Is this coincidence?
Won't make a difference, this is all cover anyway. They will continue to recruit and abuse children to convert more meat for their desires.
It is a fascinating genetic disorder. I am unaware of any other genetic condition that suddenly becomes active in prison.
K Y
"Hey, this Kentucky Jelly doesn't taste very good on my toast!"
hahahahahaha
Shelley Berman did a comedy routine in the fifties, in which he called up a woman on the phone, and a young kid answered.
He talks baby-talk to the little tyke. He tries to get the kid to bring mommy to the phone, but the kid evidently continues to babble, as we gather from Shelley’s side of the conversation. He can’t seem to get the kid to stop talking and go get mommy.
He tries to establish a bit of rapport with the kid. He asks, “Say, are you a little boy or a little girl?”
“I dunno.”
“Would you please, please, get Mommy on the phone? Pretty please?”
“Oh, OK.”
Finally Mommy comes on the phone. Shelly is still in a state of exasperation.
“Madam, please tell your child whether it’s a boy or a girl. If you don’t, it may grow up and make AN ARBITRARY DECISION!”
Translation. Scientists have been trying to prove for a long time that people are born gay.
They tried the crap about the “gay gene” then got laughed into silence when someone realized that a “gay gene” would not be transmitted from generation to generation.
So here’s an idea that we dreamed up. It’s too complex for the average American who has his head up his a$$, so it’s sure to be adopted as scientific truth.
LOL! I guess that you’re right on that one. it certainly will be the end of the line.
It is interesting that in at least one of the families, there were other factors that would also contribute to the end of the line, physical problems that interfered with reproduction in some of the women who were not gay.
English is a lousy language for saying what you mean. If by "normal" you mean common, homosexuality is clearly not that. If by "normal" you mean innate and unchangeable, it may be that, but so is Down's Syndrome. And while you don't mistreat people with Down's Syndrome, it is not a normal condition. If by "normal" you mean "nothing to get upset about," then it's a matter for consensus.
But if you could gain consensus that it was "normal" for human beings to eat their own vomit, that still wouldn't make it good.
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.