Posted on 05/21/2015 8:09:52 AM PDT by xzins
That's the point. It was talking about a genetic advantage. There were no children, so they didn't pass anything along.
What do you think? Wouldn't any financial advantage a homosexual uncle might have passed on to a heterosexual niece, for example, have to be be seen from the standpoint that that niece would likely have reproduced anyway?
Oh, please! That equals .0003% of the population. Three one-thousandths of one percent.
Yep. Sampling the population is a tricky business, and we’ve learned that these kind of polls are easily manipulated.
Also the entertainment media is a willing participant in the deception. The elites there embrace any and all liberal agendas and present them in their programs as "the new normal".
Pat Caddell was going nuts about a poll a week or so ago that had a sample with 44% democrats to prove, iirc, that Hillary is doing just fine.
What's the chances that 'father' was doing that 'son' and turned him?
Is that 'recruitment via abuse' a legitimate reason to think homosexuality makes our culture, neighborhoods, more dangerous?
There was a thread here a few days ago that claimed the majority of Americans approve of socialism. When the internals were revealed further in the piece, the dims had a 55% favorable view while republicans were at 37%. In order for the results claimed, the dims would have to be oversampled to achieve a majority (50% +1) overall.
Who determines the polling samples? The people who want to get the results they are seeking. That could be either the pollsters or the people commissioning the polls.
And it’s only in election season that they report based on likely voters.
That 44% sample I mentioned would have itself been far worse for Hillary if only likely voters had been sampled. IIRC, the lady has had a permanent disapproval rating of about 42% for years.
Basically they are saying it is a one way choice street. You can become gay, but you can never go back. How does that fit with the gay gene original?
Gay marriage is oath to anal intercourse for life. It also forbids people from sharing each other’s genes inherently. It is a violation of civil rights because based in a racist marriage without gene share.
This is why they are trying to push the gay gene or racist gene eugenics program.
Anyway you have seen through the headline and understand how the polling architecture was skewed on the hildabeast approval poll.
Imagine how many people are just headline readers.
Wait, are you saying that Progressives are waging their own War on Science??
Hey, when the old media and homowood lie, people listen and believe.
As always, they pay attention only to the science that supports their hare-brained ideas.
Ask those that “feel” homos are born that way if they “feel” psychopaths and schizophrenics are born that way as well?
Even with a homosexual near relative, the odds of the mythical “gay gene” being passed to the next generation is reduced...so the argument is the same, that the gene self-selects for extinction, just more slowly (since, presumably, the niece or nephew of the gay person would be a potential carrier). I’m not buying that, though, because “self-selecting for extinction” is so completely counter to the whole idea of genetic science that it makes no sense...and, again, how would such a gene evolve in the first place?
Regarding SOME propagation of the mythical “gay gene,” this was/is possible where a gay person gets married due to societal pressures. Either there will be no kids because the person is firmly homosexual (no pun intended, kids), or there are less (1 or 2, vs. 3 or more) because some of the sexual energy of the gay person is expended upon people of the same gender who simply cannot reproduce. Either way - no propagation or less propagation - the mythical “gay gene” goes extinct after X number of generations, because it MUST do so - the math demands that this be so.
As a result, THERE IS SIMPLY NO WAY THAT THERE IS A “GAY GENE” (or a complex of them). This is behavior, folks, no two ways about it.
Being gay isn’t determined by a gene any more than there is a gene for heterosexuality.
At what point did you consider “hmmm, should I be gay or straight?” you never did. You are what you are.
There’s also no gene for right-handedness or left-handedness, or for people who prefer Asian women over other races, or for people who only like blondes, or people who like plumper people.
My brother is gay, and he was never abused (we’ve talked at length about this) and frankly, I knew he was probably before he knew he was.
People have all kinds of kinks and fetishes. How you got that way does not matter.
I am of the opinion that it’s none of my business what anyone likes to do in the bedroom any more than it’s any of anyone else’s business what I like to do in the bedroom. Pretty much anything two consenting adults decide to get up to, hey, don’t hurt anybody, don’t f*ck any kids or animals or incapacitated people who can’t give consent, and knock yourself out.
Yes, I know there are passages in the bible that say you shouldn’t do it. There are also passages that say I shouldn’t masturbate or eat shrimp cocktail or have a cheeseburger, and let me tell you, those are some of my favorite things to do.
Homosexuality is dangerous biologically, physically, socially, and spiritually. It's puts health at risk, it thrives on recruitment, particularly of the young, it results in early death to its practitioners, and it opposes Nature's God, since it glorifies the unnatural over the natural.
So,it hurts lots of people.
Most Americans are idiots.
I hate stating the obvious.
Homosexual anal sex is no more harmful than heterosexual anal sex, and there’s plenty of heterosexual anal sex going on. I’m not a fan of it, but some people are.
Oral or digital sex between people of the same sex or different sex is no more harmful one way or another.
I’ve known literally hundreds of gay people in my life. I worked for years in restaurants and I’ve never been afraid of them. Not once have I ever been “recruited”.
My relationship with Nature’s God is none of your concern.
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.