Posted on 05/21/2015 8:09:52 AM PDT by xzins
?
If they were “born that way”, i.e. a way that does not permit reproduction to occur without deviating into heterosexuality, the genetic basis would be selected-out and homos would be very rare. The “born this way” argument fails under the most basic understanding of genetics.
Thread title...concept...”Are gays ‘born that way’? Most Americans now say yes, but science says no”
parody banner....Obies boys discover GAY GENE.....
I think some sodomites are suffering from basically a birth defect.
But the majority have serious mental issues stemming from some sort of abuse usually of a sexual nature.
This propaganda is the basis of a another decision the Scotus will perhaps force upon the nation regarding homosexual marriage.
Homosexuality makes the culture, the neighborhood, more dangerous.
Some people hate a 'slippery slope' line of reasoning, but to me it makes sense. The slippery slope says that other lifestyles will also be legalized if the Scotus rules in favor of homosexual marriage. Scalia argued vehemently in that regard in the Scotus' last foray into homosexualism. He was ignored. Time has proven him correct.
So, you are right on the money.
Yeah, they hate hearing that one.
They also seem unfazed when children become entangled in the situation either through adoption or one of the parents deciding they have more fun “this way’.
The verdict is in, and it has been in for many years:
The best way to create a homosexual male is to molest him as a child.
Most male homosexuals report being abused by older boys/men.
Coincidence? Homos would say “Yes”.
Since the country has gone insane, there can be no rational debate over this.
I don't believe that number...
Sit down most average Joe or Jane American and without the pressure of PC, the vast number would say "I really don't know" or "Are you stupid, of course not ! "
There have been several studies of identical twins, (I am one) meaning both have the same DNA when conceived and there is no correlation between being gay and the DNA you carry...
Identical twins would have a much higher rate of both being homosexual and they don't...
Yes, and I wasn’t even necessarily keying on the legal aspect - just the logical aspect.
If sexual orientation is inborn, then ANY sexual orientation is inborn, period.
Exactly. Even if there was only a 1% less chance of reproduction (because, for example, social mores forced them to get married), eventually this gene or combination of genes would self-select for extinction. Which begs the question of HOW do those genes arise in the first place, i.e. what genetic advantage did they offer that would offset a lack of reproduction? None come to my mind, and I've thought about it for a while.
The "born that way" thesis is factually false based on the simplest of genetics principles. Therefore, it MUST be behavioral, which means that the mental conditions underlying it can be treated in some fashion.
Most Jay Walkers now say yes, but science says no.
What a bunch of idiots and proud of it.
What I haven’t seen in most of these studies is “what was different” for the twin that had SSA. That might be important information. Perhaps it’s too varied(?).
Also, when you’re a kid growing up, there’s a tendency to generalize your unique experiences to others, i.e., “other families and kids must be going through the same stuff as me,” or not speak out due to fear of getting in trouble. What does it mean to a kid today to be a man or a woman? That can’t be clear in their minds (as it isn’t for most adults).
Boy, what a mess. Since the family unit has been under attack for so long, is it any wonder that we might be seeing more gender confusion? I would not want to be a kid growing up now (hard enough back in the 50’s where type A personalities were championed as the only type man worth being). Liberalism, as it is defined today, is just another word for rebellion against God and his holiness and sovereignty. The Communist Party goals listed as objectives many of the destructive issues we are dealing with today in our culture. They have won, I’m afraid.
Scientifically speaking, whether they are born that way or not, queers wOULD NOT EXIST if it were not for MAN AND A WOMEN getting together.
Otherwise,I don’t understand how a MICRO percent of the population can rip and route how civilized man has live for thousands of years.
Oh that’s right, they are prog commies.
Good discussion. Thanks.
Perhaps the homosexuality of near-relatives (uncles, aunts, etc.) confers some sort of material advantage on the individual.
At least before the advent of wanton displays of homosexuality and the rise in AIDS, having a low-profile homosexual uncle or an aunt "on the down-low" - one who never married, or at least never had children - might have had its benefits. The afflicted older relative could devote more resources to raising the children of his normal relatives; the younger relatives would have more to inherit.
Regards,
>>Perhaps the homosexuality of near-relatives (uncles, aunts, etc.) confers some sort of material advantage on the individual.
molestation?
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.