Gay Episcopal Bishop

Ultima, genetics and the choices one makes are probably much more interrelated than you think. Fighting certain impulses are going to be easier for some than others, and some people are going to have urges that other people don't. You don't think that might have anything to do with a person's genes? And there is a whole lot more to things than just genetics and choice anyway so stop trying to boil everything down to a simple black and white issue.

As for homosexuality, I maintain that a homosexual can choose what they do but not necessarily what they think. That is the way they are, not the way they choose to be. We are just gonna have to disagree on that one. Also, if a guy is going to be attracted to CD trays, well then I think it probably at least has SOMETHING to do with genetics. And another note I'll add is that I'm not pinning all man's flaws on genetics (although I probably could make a good argument for it).

The last thing I would like to state is this: I am just glad that most of the views here do not represent those of the medical or general scienific community or else we'd all be in a whole heap of trouble.
 
There body may produce some chemical that makes them think that way. Like a chemical imballance(though unproven) So you are arguing the "possibility" of what "Might" be, They might have been abused by aliens that tweeked there mind to like Guys, the simple fact is you cannot make a point using examples that can simple be "Not proven wrong". you have to make your argument based on things that have been proven.

I know Homosexuals HAVE choosen to leave that life and life a heterosexual life. that IS PROVEN,

Saying is is Genetic is about as reliable as saying Aliens did it to them. There is NO proof of it.

Annorexia is a disease, and we treat as one, we should also treat the mental disease of Homosexuality. Give them help and get there mind thinking strait(no pun intended)
 
So what else is above it all, next to choice and birth, GM? You said it's not all black and white...but I would say that every action can fall under black and white.
Affair with that hottie next door. You seem to be saying it's more than genes and choice...I would say it's choice. A big choice at that one, with tremendous repercussions.

Universal man is not born with an impulse to strangle his parents. It just doesn't happen. He gains that through life. What ultimately decides it all is choice at the end: do I or don't I kill 'em?

Man is not made with this intent to cheat his fellow man out of his hard-earned wealth...he makes that choice. GENES cannot CHOOSE if I want to steal something...how the freak would they know what stealing and taking and giving and receiving are? They can't! The mind does. The man does. Not his genes. His genes don't decide that he has sticky hands (well...maybe Peter Parker, but he's an exception) and has got to grab everything in sight...genes can't do that. Genes aren't sentient. Genes didn't evolve themselves. Genes didn't sense their environs and adapt...genes grow, mutate, worsen, better, and change. They do not choose what they want to be...
"But Mommy, I wanna be a T in the chain!" -Junior Gene
Genes did not make American scientists build the A-Bomb...we chose to.

We did not choose to be born with twisted lungs...the genes were set out that way. They didn't choose it, they just did.

You CAN restrict every action man makes to impulse and choice. You can. If you don't want to believe it, that's up to you.
 
Homosexuality can't be genetic.

Genes are passed on through reproduction.

Think about it....
 
And you might want to think about learning something about genetics to relieve yourself of your ignorance, widowson. Take a class, read a book, do something.

Ultima, I know there is no way we will agree on this matter but I believe that things like experiences, situational factors, and other external factors beyond our control will affect the "choices" we make. There is plenty of research on a variety of behaviours, psychological problems, and other such things that clearly point to hereditary factors. If you don't want to believe it then fine, there is nothing I can do about that. Most of the people here said "screw science and rationality" a long time ago anyway.

rlxc, you want to talk about proving things? Don't make me laugh. Also, living a "hetersosexual life" doesn't mean that you can't be a homosexual.
 
But living a homosexual life doesn't disprove your heterosexuality?

No no no. I think a ton of factors affect choice. Don't get me wrong...but what you do is ultimately decided by choice. For instance: poor boy is born in slum. Is shot because he went down the Knights' turf. End poor boys' life because of wrong choice.
Second instance: poor boy is born in slum. Kills Knights' off on vendetta of vengeance after Knights kill friend for making wrong choice. The Knights of NYC then return for second poor boy and kill him.

Choices, choices, choices. But those choices were influenced by other factors, namely, place, situation and mindset. Maybe the first kid was on a high, thought he was invincible and then looked down at the fist-sized hole in his spleen. Maybe the second kid thought the Knights would look better tacked to his den walls and so went out and purchased a few guns from Old Vinnie down the street.

Who knows what makes people do what people do? But I do know that people make a choice for what they do, and the responsibility that comes with said choice is all theirs. But I will NOT negate the fact that other factors influence choices all the time. It's bogus to deny it. But I don't believe a life-orienting mindset such as homosexuality is genetic...there is choice there.
Maybe Bob had bad luck with girls, and hey, what's really the difference between a guy and a girl when you come down to it, is what he thinks? So he takes off his straight clothing and goes gay.
Maybe Will had bad luck with girls, and then decided to ask that babe Melissa from Study Hall out, and bam, next thing you know, they're married, have two kids, and live in an English castle.
True...it's not as simple as that, but for crude examples they will do. It's choice what you do. I am born for women, and women are born for me (me being male...don't think I'm cocky, 'cause I ain't). Women aren't born for women, nor men for men. It just doesn't work that way. They make that choice to segregate themselves from that life, and they go for what they want, and if what they want is each other, that is their choice, not their creation.
 
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Grand Master @ Sep. 05 2003,12:47)]And you might want to think about learning something about genetics to relieve yourself of your ignorance, widowson. Take a class, read a book, do something.
Click to expand...
OK, I'll explain it further.

The theory of natural selection holds that genetic traits are passed on by those lifeforms that are the *most* successful at reproduction.

Additionally, it also holds that genetic traits that inhibit or reduce the possibility of reproduction will become increasingly marginalized and die out in favor of more "successful" genes.

E.G. A pecock with a prefectly normal reproductive system, but has less spendand feathers, will not have as great chance of reproducing as one with colorful and vibrant feathers.

Let's say for instance, that a homosexual gene existed.

By the very nature of homosexual sex YOU DON'T REPRODUCE.

Even accounting for the possibility of incidental and bisexual reproduction by this "genetically gay" lifeform, this gene will become increasingly marginalized and disappear.

Very quickly.

This is because lifeforms and genetic traits have died out that still enabled animals to reproduce, but they died out because they wern't successful enough.

Again, in homosexual sex, YOU DON'T REPRODUCE.

The reason I think homosexuality has found support amongst the psychological and scientific fields is because of what many call the "secular theocracy."

I.E. They hold liberal humanism to be so irrefutably true, that they will not even consider the possibility that they may be wrong.

Also, amongst this predominatly liberal establishment, there is frankly a base hatred of fundamental christianity, leading to some odd/stupid beliefs.

Why are liberals so tolerant of radical Islam? Radical islam is the exact opposite of everything they believe, it hates women, is intolerant, promotes ignorance, but it opposes christianity so it can't be *all* bad.

Israel. Christians support the Jews as a matter of faith, so liberals MUST oppose it.

Homosexuality. The old and new testamant clearly define it as a sin so, therefore, Liberal Humanists MUST support it.

An argument can be made that the actual, root cause of homosexuality is:

-Pedophilia. Many, I'd bet most, gay men were molested as children and/or raped during their formative years.

-Horrible mother figure. Gay men, and I know this from asking many, are repulsed by women. And, IN EVERY SINGLE CASE they had a very poor mother figure, usually an abuser, harlot, ect. that contributes twords this repulsion.

However, this theory will not even be considered or even tested by psychologists despite the preponderance of anecdotal, historical, and recent evidence. The question won't even be asked.

Why?

Because, if proven true, it lends credence to Christian beliefs and homosexuality, according to their scientific method would become:

Mental Illness.
 
Ahem, *cough*, I would absolutely hate to get in a fight with another ignorant person, if ignorance is thus.
biggrin.gif
 
widowson that is such a poor argument that I have no idea why you would even try to bring it up. Have you even thought it through? You know what? There are sterile people born ALL the time. They, just like homosexual people, cannot reproduce. According to your flawed logic, such people should never exist. Oh wait, I guess they choose to be sterile.

So you think scientists don't want to classify homosexuality as a mental illness beacause it will lend credence to Christian beliefs? First of all, those are probably more accurately classified as conservative Christian beliefs. Secondly, homosexuality WAS classified as a mental illness until DSM III. Thirdly, there have been studies looking at parenting and homosexual children. Nothing has been found linking parenting styles or relationships to incidence of homosexuality.

Why don't you go ask some male homosexuals where they got their lisps from, or find out why they usually to like playing with girls as children or why they like feminine games and the like as children. Yeah, all that stuff is just a fluke. There is a pattern of multiple behaviours seen among homosexuals. To suggest that it is a choice is total garbage at this point. You have not an ounce of evidence to support such claims.
 
so its a random gene tossed around who cares, sinse the fall bad genes have been coming to us, but homosexuality was a problem even in the earliest of times ( yes i cant spell and have bad gramar get over it). now then if it was a GENE and not a CHOICE why are there so FEW gays in the world today compared to how many they had back lets say in Abraham's day. i mean come on by your logic gays should out number us atleast 2-1 by now i mean they have had all these centuries to, and it seems more and more children are "born" gay.
 
But you said actions help to determine actions and choices and whatnot in the later years, GM...are you backpedalling with this homosexuality issue now, that gays don't help to face themselves off in the future by laying out foundation actions in the beginning, say, their childhood?

And besides, we can say "scientists have proven" til Christ comes, but scientists contradict themselves often. Weird atmospheric conditions when the gay was a kid, role models and self-unsureness during childhood, a gene made em go queer, they hung out with too many girls, had bad mother examples...et cetera.

Scientists have proven all that...why then do they not agree with each other?

Homosexuality is one of those black areas, but people can distort it to make it a blurry grey if they so choose...it ain't up to me what people want to see it as. But if we're arguing about what scientists say about homosexuality we'll be here forever.

And Lion...we never got numbers on homosexuality from the Bible. For sure we had two entire cities that were basically havens for homosexuality...but how big were they? And then how widespread was it throughout the rest of all Judaica, and even the rest of the world?
 
ok lets say there where 500 people in those cities ( i know large for the time) but still that would be atleast 750 gay people, now then with more and more people coming out in this time, i think lets just say the gay population is like i dont know 10 million sound fair? i think it is way more but i dont know just random numbers now then in

you start with 750
and now have 10million
lets say 500kids are "born" gay now a year
in the 4,000 years sinse then

but like i said it SHOULD BE more of a sliding scale so in reality i just think the numbers disprove themselves and should be way way way way way higher like id ont know 3/4th of the earth should be gay because of this "gene"
 
I am not backpedalling on anything. I am saying that gays commonly exhibit these behaviours as children BECAUSE they are gay.

LionofJudah, I don't know how you are coming up with these figures but it makes no sense just to make up some fictional numbers and try to form an argument based on that. Actually, I don't really even understand your argument.
 
Actually...I think those are gays that try to show the world they are gay.
I know a few gay people who otherwise look perfectly straight. They don't act anyway. In fact, my bro's friend, football team captain, cheerleader magnet, everything...married, even...but says he's gay. My bro never knew, couldn't tell. In all ways he seemed just like a straight.
So to say that there are specific characteristics that show who's gay and straight...well, I dunno about that.
 
Well, there you go, Ultima. You have a real example of a gay guy trying to live a straight life. The characteristics I spoke of are generalities... not everyone will be exactly the same.
 
It's...bizarre.
No. He wasn't trying to live that life, it seems to me. He wanted to be gay, but he wanted to hide behind it I suppose, by placing up a facade to hide the truth.
I do not think that is being gay and trying to live the straight life.
Though I do not doubt that there are several people out there who were once originally gay...trying to live the American Straight Way. Who knows the minds of the gays?
Choice...or gene? Will genes conflict with one another to change what you say is natural (homosexuality) with what everyone else says is natural and you say is equally natural to homosexuality (heterosexuality)? Will the genes make a body try to distort its heterosexuality to homosexuality?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top