That is chock full of false dichotomies, there jsg!
Repeat after me: biological does NOT mean genetic.
Environmental factors (including those affecting the womb) absolutely affect the development of a child. Who denied that? But the idea that sexuality is solely or even mostly a matter of personal choice has long ago been debunked.
Trying to be the neutral party is asinine. The “I’m above your petty squabbles and have an enlightened middle path” response is inane and pointless.
You’re worse, in a lot of ways by saying it doesn’t matter. Obviously it does and trying to play Suzy Peacemaker is counterproductive and stupid.
Anyone who argues so is an idiot. There are 15 different genes that influence eye color. The idea that one or two genes could be completely responsible for something as complex as sexuality is laughable. In the past, some people have pushed hard for the genetic argument to establish the immutability of sexual orientation. That was a well-meaning but wrongheaded effort. I have dark brown hair and I was born that way but with dye, I can be any color I want. I was not born with the ability to speak english. I was taught it through my environment, but that doesn’t make it a choice. I can’t choose to not know english and while I could choose to learn another language, I can never know it to the extent and with the familiarity that I know english. I do not know and I do not care if being gay is a choice. All I know is that I am gay and I expect that to be respected.
You would be wrong. Par for the course around here.
Whoooooooooosh
Yeah, I’m hardly surprised you think so.
What are you getting at here? Who said it did?
The reason an individual is gay is unimportant because being gay is nothing to be ashamed of and is nobody’s business but the consenting adult’s. That’s the message that needs to come across, IMO. By claiming that being gay is beyond the power of the individual to influence, I think you risk giving the impression that being gay is an undesirable trait or a disease.
Yes, I can now see how braying like an ass is better. Thanks.
It doesn’t matter to me. It shouldn’t matter to others, IMO. In any event, even if a clear biological cause for homosexuality were discovered, it would cut little ice with the sort of person who thinks climate change research is a conspiracy.
I do.
It’s because you’re stupid as fuck and think that your ideas actually have merit.
Mystery solved.
None of them.
I believe I have posted this before, but I’ll put it back up again so that the libs can howl in outrage some more.
-
The norm for humanity is heterosexuality. It’s how the species reproduces into the next generation and it doesn’t get any more fundamental than that. Biology 101.
-
There is no medical evidence to date of the existence of a “gay gene”, although people are frantically trying to find one.
-
What we are left with, then, that homosexuality is learned behavior which deviates from the norm and is engaged in by choice. The only other explanation is that it is a mental aberration of some sort. I tend to go with the simpler explanation.
Now if the “gay gene” in step 2 is found, then that obviously changes things and I will be the first to admit that my conclusions in step 3 were wrong.
No, this is what you are left with, because you’re so shit-fuck stupid.
-
The norm for humanity is Chinese. It’s how the species communicates into the next generation and it doesn’t get any more fundamental than that. Biology 101.
-
There is no medical evidence to date of the existence of a “english gene”, although people are frantically trying to find one.
-
What we are left with, then, that english is learned behavior which deviates from the norm and is engaged in by choice. The only other explanation is that it is a mental aberration of some sort. I tend to go with the simpler explanation.
Now if the “english gene” in step 2 is found, then that obviously changes things and I will be the first to admit that my conclusions in step 3 were wrong.
Assuming this is accurate: So what?
I think you misunderstand my meaning.
These “friends” of yours appear to be smarter than you, if that is your understanding.
It’s pretty clear you couldn’t pass Bio 101 if your life depended on it.
I think Mace was pointing out that it was perfectly possible to be both lying and a stupid, clueless bigot.
Ha. Oops.
Sorry, John Mace. I get frustrated with your attempts at impartiality at times and it colored my reading of what you wrote and made me all Clothahump-like.
I think that “the norm for humanity is heterosexuality” has no scientific basis. It might be the most common, but that isn’t scientific for “norm”, it might be for “mode” if it is true. I suspect masturbation is actually the most common form of human sexuality, and that certainly isn’t heterosexual in the sense of being with another person of the opposite sex. People engage in all sorts of sexual activity and are attracted to all sorts of sexual activity. Even Rick Santorum has said that if gay sex is legitimized that the next thing would be man on dog, presumably because he would want to screw your Shi-Tzu.
It is this desire to make other people conform to your personal notions of whom they should not feel love for that draws you so much negative attention here Clothy. It’s none of your business, nor the government’s business.
Did you have to “learn” to be heterosexual, or was it just so? Was there ever a time when you were attracted to boys, but you chose to not go that route?
I can only imagine how it must grate on you that those dirty homosexuals are trying to make you accept them as normal. Oh. You hadn’t heard that one before? It’s a new thing. Ask your friends about it.
The real problem is people believing that it is a binary switch. You’re either gay or straight, and this must be either a choice or genetics. It is this firm black/white gay/straight on/off one/the other insistence on a fixed duality that is THE major headache and cause of Teh Stupid in all of this.
Truth is there is a spectrum of attraction based on multiple causes.