"Why would anyone choose to be gay?" mental illness and or perversion...
Posted on 06/09/2013 8:20:56 AM PDT by neverdem
One of the more effective arguments used by those arguing for same-sex marriage and sexual orientation anti-discrimination laws is that homosexuals have no choice in the matter -- that sexual orientation is something that you are born with, and you can't change it. The claim is that this is a natural part of human variability, no different from skin color or hair color or how tall you are. As an acquaintance -- a generally conservative, gay high power rifle shooter (talk about being a member of the world's smallest cross-section of identity groups) told me once, "Why would anyone choose to be gay?"
There is pretty persuasive evidence that what determines sexual orientation, at least for some homosexuals, is environmental. At a minimum, the evidence of a connection between being sexually abused as a child and homosexual or bisexual orientation as an adult is so widespread that the refusal of the scientific community to seriously consider a causal connection suggests a willful blindness.
The paper "Sexual Abuse, Sexual Orientation, and Obesity in Women," published in the Journal of Women's Health, examined the relationship between obesity and lesbianism -- a relationship that has long been recognized but never systematically explored. What the researchers found was that lesbians in their sample of women over 35 were more likely than the heterosexual women to have a "previous mental health diagnosis" and to be well-educated, and significantly more likely to be obese (40.2% compared to 30.4%). Most importantly, lesbians were almost twice as likely as matched heterosexual women to be have been victims of "intrafamilial" child sexual abuse (CSA), and more than twice as likely to be victims of extrafamilial CSA. Suddenly, the wall of fat that is one stereotype of lesbianism makes a lot of sense -- something to drive away men, and...
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Want to make a liberal’s brain explode. . .especially a homosexual liberal?
Just say that IF a gay gene is discovered, would they support unrestricted abortion of homosexual babies?
After all, they support unrestricted babies for any other reason, why not sexuality.
The idea that homosex is natural is beyond ridiculous. If it was the natural way we would not exit. If we did not procreate we would be extinct. If it was natural then it would exist through out nature in all creatures, it does not.If it was natural more then 1% of human population would be homosexual. If it was natural, then there would not be entire populations and cultures where it does not exist
At the risk of sounding Clintonesque, that depends on the meaning of "be." You can "be" an alcoholic but never take a drink. You can "be" a philanderer and never touch another woman but your wife (unless you're Ted Kennedy). You can "be" a serial murderer but never lay a finger on another human being.
What you "are" and what you DO are two separate things. God has given us free will, the ability to choose those acts in which we engage, however tempting it is to engage in the WRONG ones. All the homo movement has done is make it easier to engage in acts that will damn your soul to hell, and make your time on earth a tawdry chain of obscene episodes, shorten your life, and propagate the myth of homosexual "normalcy."
Instead of giving in to abominable lusts, why not try to turn your life toward something positive, something that denies the sordid temptations of carnality and elevates you beyond the rut?
I have a relative who works with foster and troubled children. I hear a lot of stories of anonymous children passing through “the system” and the absolute common denominator among all is sexual abuse and broken families. The two go hand-in-hand.
If you want to statistically guarantee that a child will grow up to be a broken and troubled adult, then give them one (or no) parent, and have an adult sexually abuse them.
The cruelest irony is that the Democrats could care less about homosexuals. They support homosexuality because it is a means of population control.
Dear homosexuals: we conservatives want you to enjoy the fullness and richness of life that marriage to someone of the opposite sex brings. The Democrats don’t want you to reproduce. Which side cares more about you?
If the evolutionary process is true, the only way homosexuals are part of a natural process is for the purpose of ending a genetic line. It must be some sort of evolutionary mechanism to rid future generations of certain characteristics or traits. Baring the evolutionary explanation, the only remaining options are nurture and choice.
This is what I don’t understand. I am a male, I am attracted to women. The more curves, beauty, the better. I am not attracted to women that look like men. Yet male and female homosexuals have men that act like women and women that act like men. What is the point? If I am a male homosexual, shouldn’t I be attracted to a studly male instead of a flamming, limp wristed, Obama?
Open to an educated reply as why a woman would be attracted to a bull dyke wearing an “appliance” instead of a real biker dude?
If there is a homosexuality gene, then it must be a defective mutation since it would not lead to the survival of a species.
In societies where the population is mostly naked, there is little sexual reaction to nudity.
But in a society where women’s faces are covered, there is a known sexual arousal when men see a woman’s face.
What arouses sexually is truly a learned thing, and can be modified. This is well-known, but ignored because it does not fit the “victimhood” argument.
I only worked with him a few years and then moved, I don't know whatever became of him as it was the early 80's and the whole homo thing was just getting into full swing. He probably got sucked into it. Poor kid.
“At a minimum, the evidence of a connection between being sexually abused as a child and homosexual or bisexual orientation as an adult is so widespread that the refusal of the scientific community to seriously consider a causal connection suggests a willful blindness.”
What makes me confident in this diagnosis was independently coming to the same conclusion based on conversations with all of the homosexuals I knew, prior to having read any of the literature on the subject. One does, however, also need to add heterosexual nymphomaniacal obsessions into that as well. The tendency was dramatic and clear...with the few that did not fall directly into that being sons with a complete failure to bond with their father at all.
Homos are attracted to the perversion more than the natural procreative tools God provides. The more perverted, the better, in their sick minds. This is why homosexuality and pedophelia often mix and why homosexuals adopting children is putting those children at a heightened risk of sexual abuse.
"Why would anyone choose to be gay?" mental illness and or perversion...
I knew identical twins in college. 1 is gay and the other isn’t.
The identical twin studies disprove heritability.
‘If I am a male homosexual, shouldn’t I be attracted to a studly male instead of a flamming, limp wristed, Obama?’
The Homosexual men are attracted to studly males...but most of the homosexual men are of the ‘feminine type’.
Very few of the studly men are colon cowboys...
... To say that "ALL" are would be about as ridiculous as saying that all blind people are "Born that way." Some are.... some aren't. Not all variants can be contained within a single diagnosis.
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.