(11-19-2013 02:46 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:41 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:30 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:23 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:16 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Social pressure. You would think one would not choose to be a white supremacist either given the societal shunning of them, yet properly mixed environmental factors and upbringing still lead some people to make that choice.

Social pressure from who? He was ostracized by damn near everybody.

Maybe there was a group of homosexualists at school willing to except him while his parents wouldn't, he wasn't smart enough to hang with the nerds, and it was clear the cool kids weren't going to accept him. So if he was ostracized anyway, the only difference being "gay" is there is now a group willing to accept him despite being ostracized.

So, why was he ostracized in the first place?

And he got along with his parents until he came out of the closet.

I don't know. I don't know him and frankly, am not interested in trying to answer individual anecdotes. I believe people choose to live socially undesirable lifestyles. Nerds aren't born that way, white supremacists aren't born that way, cult members aren't born that way, witches aren't born that way, and homosexualists aren't born that way. They all choose these lifestyles despite the fact they are undesirable to most people, and as homosexualism becomes a more desirable alternative, more will choose it. It is already happening, walk through any mall, amusement park, or movie theatre. I bet the percentage of gay males under the age of 21 is approaching 20% and I live in a pretty conservative city socially.

Do you realize how horrible humans are at accurately guessing the frequency or probability of events?

So, assuming I concede that (and I don't), what's your big hang up? That a gay couple might move in next door and increase your property values?

(11-19-2013 02:45 PM)Lord Stanley Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:35 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  But most of the gay women I know were straight, had a really bad experience with a guy, and changed sides.

I agree 100%. I have two divorced women friends who have made it clear they are looking to bat for the other side for a while.

Don't forget LUGS. Lesbian Until Graduation. Luckily, I knew a few at NIU but now they are all married to men and have kids, at least according to Facebook. However, one girl I dated in HS is now married to a women, adopted two kids from Africa, and works as a some sort of militant librarian.

I wonder what of the above was because of me?

Lesbianism and experimentation has been acceptable among the young for quite awhile, really at least since since the internet porn explosion of the late '90s. Now you are starting to see the same thing happen to our boys, but this isn't something we can afford to shrug off. While lesbianism is relatively harmless from a physical standpoint, man on man sex is destructive and carries great risk of disease. This is not a good thing for society, I don't care if you are King Libertarian.

Pssst. Straight sex can be every bit as destructive and also carries great risk of disease.

Maybe legalizing gay marriage would curb a lot of the promiscuity.

Besides, if they all get AIDS and die, then it's no skin of your nose is it, unless you think the gay is contagious.

(11-19-2013 02:52 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Pssst. Straight sex can be every bit as destructive and also carries great risk of disease.

Maybe legalizing gay marriage would curb a lot of the promiscuity.

Besides, if they all get AIDS and die, then it's no skin of your nose is it, unless you think the gay is contagious.

It is clearly contagious. That is settled science.

(11-19-2013 02:55 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 02:52 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Pssst. Straight sex can be every bit as destructive and also carries great risk of disease.

Maybe legalizing gay marriage would curb a lot of the promiscuity.

Besides, if they all get AIDS and die, then it's no skin of your nose is it, unless you think the gay is contagious.

It is clearly contagious. That is settled science.

Being gay?

Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

(11-19-2013 03:03 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

I'd like to see some actual honest-to-gosh science behind that assertion.

(11-19-2013 03:07 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:03 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

I'd like to see some actual honest-to-gosh science behind that assertion.

I've read the science for his first claim, and it doesn't go along with what EverRespect is saying. Adopted children of gay parents are no more gay then children of hetero couples.

As if science isn't depending on which scientist you talk to.

(11-19-2013 03:26 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  As if science isn't depending on which scientist you talk to.

You don't know what you're talking about.

(11-19-2013 03:26 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  As if science isn't depending on which scientist you talk to.

But he said it was settled, so there should be a consensus, yes?

(11-19-2013 01:41 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I honestly believe that homosexuality is due to both nature and nurture. The spectrum of human sexuality is too broad and too complex to chalk it up to being either a choice or a trait. If homosexuality is a trait then is bisexuality a trait or a choice? The issue is just too complex for one worded answers.

The act and the mental state are seperate and distinct from one another in my mind.

I'm not here to tell people whom to have sex with or whom they should love.

That said, it's an evolutionary dead-end and as such doesn't contribute to the furtherance of our species which is the outright natural goal of all animals. Due to that I don't support it in any of the current political contexts but I have no problem with what people choose to do in their own beds or whatever else.

Your argument makes no sense at all. If people are going to be Gay, then why discriminate against them in employment or downgrade their citizenship. Its not like we penalize straight persons that don't/can't reproduce. If your argument was coherent, you'd support making procreation required for marriage.

(11-19-2013 03:31 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 01:41 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  I honestly believe that homosexuality is due to both nature and nurture. The spectrum of human sexuality is too broad and too complex to chalk it up to being either a choice or a trait. If homosexuality is a trait then is bisexuality a trait or a choice? The issue is just too complex for one worded answers.

The act and the mental state are seperate and distinct from one another in my mind.

I'm not here to tell people whom to have sex with or whom they should love.

That said, it's an evolutionary dead-end and as such doesn't contribute to the furtherance of our species which is the outright natural goal of all animals. Due to that I don't support it in any of the current political contexts but I have no problem with what people choose to do in their own beds or whatever else.

Your argument makes no sense at all. If people are going to be Gay, then why discriminate against them in employment or downgrade their citizenship. Its not like we penalize straight persons that don't/can't reproduce. If your argument was coherent, you'd support making procreation required for marriage.

It isn't an argument. It's an opinion. The rest of your comment is a waste of my time.

(11-19-2013 01:28 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  I think so as science is most definetly to the contrary.

(11-19-2013 01:31 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Please explain the scientific reasons specifically. Thank you.

WPDAWG08
Still Waiting.

(11-19-2013 03:24 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:07 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:03 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

I'd like to see some actual honest-to-gosh science behind that assertion.

I've read the science for his first claim, and it doesn't go along with what EverRespect is saying. Adopted children of gay parents are no more gay then children of hetero couples.

Right, and the earth is flat...

(11-19-2013 03:24 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:07 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:03 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

I'd like to see some actual honest-to-gosh science behind that assertion.

I've read the science for his first claim, and it doesn't go along with what EverRespect is saying. Adopted children of gay parents are no more gay then children of hetero couples.

There is a widely discredited study, conducted by a member of the anti-Gay right wing, Regenerus, that makes all sorts of specious claims regarding Gay parenting. That study has been thoroughly debunked. Other than that, you've got a crackpot study by censured persons like "Dr" (I think they took away his license) Cameron and dangerous Gay cures from male-prostitute patronizing "Dr's" like George Rekers (whose star case study client, Kraig, committed suicide).

But that hasn't stopped Regenerus' "study" from being used to support all kinds of discrimination from opposition to marriage equality to actually advocating taking the biological children away from LGBT parents and placing them in orphanages (Russia).

(11-19-2013 03:27 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:26 PM)oklalittledixie Wrote:  As if science isn't depending on which scientist you talk to.

But he said it was settled, so there should be a consensus, yes?

There is consensus, overwhelming in its scope, by the professional researchers, and medical/psychological that Gays and Lesbians should not face pressure to change their sexual orientation.

(11-19-2013 03:35 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 01:28 PM)WPDAWG08 Wrote:  I think so as science is most definetly to the contrary.

(11-19-2013 01:31 PM)GoApps70 Wrote:  Please explain the scientific reasons specifically. Thank you.

WPDAWG08
Still Waiting.

It's an interesting legal issue if you consider homosexuality to be a mix of nature versus nurture. If you do then it isn't a civil rights issue based on immutable quality like with blacks etc. It also elevates it above being an outright choice, like no shoes no shirt no service.

It's brand new legal ground if we buy the human sexuality spectrum.

(11-19-2013 03:35 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:24 PM)dmacfour Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:07 PM)Smaug Wrote:  

(11-19-2013 03:03 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  Parents who are gay have children who are gay. Boys who are sexually molested or abused by adults of the same sex become gay themselves. Yes, that is settled.

I'd like to see some actual honest-to-gosh science behind that assertion.

I've read the science for his first claim, and it doesn't go along with what EverRespect is saying. Adopted children of gay parents are no more gay then children of hetero couples.

Right, and the earth is flat...

So, hows about you show us flat-earthers your science.