|
Post by redleg on Apr 15, 2014 18:52:48 GMT -5
And homosexuality is a genetic disorder. Or a recessive, which have also been around as long as humans. You have, of course, a scientific paper to cite which backs this up? First, it must elaborate on the genetic basis - what genes and polymorphisms of them are involved? Please share with the class, Professor! I was replying to your post. Since you posited that homosexuality was a genetic disorder, obviously you would be the one to provide the 'proof'. However, I think it's a mental disorder, and so did the psychiatric community, until they had enough Progressives in their midst to tell them "you'd better stop calling it that, or we'll come after you".
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 15, 2014 18:53:58 GMT -5
And homosexuality is a genetic disorder. Or a recessive, which have also been around as long as humans. Cuz the bible tells him so. That's one source. And a far better source than your Progressive masters whispering in your ear.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 15, 2014 18:55:24 GMT -5
I don't know what causes it. And neither does redleg. If anyone does know they are keeping it a secret. Of course we don't know what is the cause, the two main theories are environment, or genes, nature vs nurture. If you choose nature which most of the gays and lefties seem to prefer then genes would be the cause, if you choose the predominantly rightie slant then it is a choice and that would be nurture. Since Redleg was leaning on the born that way theory (big surprise that), then I would argue that he was correct in his genes guess, and the evolution theory that you were asking why it hadn't been taken out of the gene pool. Do you see how I am interpreting this thread conversation? So in evolutionary terms it might not have had time to be weeded out before civilization has put a stop to evolutionary forces which kept gays from breeding. Of course it wouldn't have stopped all gays because there are plenty of gays who have trod both sides of the fence, and have had natural kids which could pass on that gene. I am not taking a side, and will argue either side, pick one and we can continue the discussion. Actually, no. I was simply replying to EY's contention that it was. I don't know, but I believe it's a mental illness.
|
|
|
Post by howarewegoingtopay on Apr 15, 2014 19:20:13 GMT -5
Of course we don't know what is the cause, the two main theories are environment, or genes, nature vs nurture. If you choose nature which most of the gays and lefties seem to prefer then genes would be the cause, if you choose the predominantly rightie slant then it is a choice and that would be nurture. Since Redleg was leaning on the born that way theory (big surprise that), then I would argue that he was correct in his genes guess, and the evolution theory that you were asking why it hadn't been taken out of the gene pool. Do you see how I am interpreting this thread conversation? So in evolutionary terms it might not have had time to be weeded out before civilization has put a stop to evolutionary forces which kept gays from breeding. Of course it wouldn't have stopped all gays because there are plenty of gays who have trod both sides of the fence, and have had natural kids which could pass on that gene. I am not taking a side, and will argue either side, pick one and we can continue the discussion. Actually, no. I was simply replying to EY's contention that it was. I don't know, but I believe it's a mental illness. That does seem more consistent with you usual positions.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 15, 2014 19:37:48 GMT -5
Of course we don't know what is the cause, the two main theories are environment, or genes, nature vs nurture. If you choose nature which most of the gays and lefties seem to prefer then genes would be the cause, if you choose the predominantly rightie slant then it is a choice and that would be nurture. Since Redleg was leaning on the born that way theory (big surprise that), then I would argue that he was correct in his genes guess, and the evolution theory that you were asking why it hadn't been taken out of the gene pool. Do you see how I am interpreting this thread conversation? So in evolutionary terms it might not have had time to be weeded out before civilization has put a stop to evolutionary forces which kept gays from breeding. Of course it wouldn't have stopped all gays because there are plenty of gays who have trod both sides of the fence, and have had natural kids which could pass on that gene. I am not taking a side, and will argue either side, pick one and we can continue the discussion. Actually, no. I was simply replying to EY's contention that it was. I don't know, but I believe it's a mental illness. See I knew we would find common ground. i believe those bigoted against gay people are mentally ill. LOL
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 15, 2014 21:37:14 GMT -5
Actually, no. I was simply replying to EY's contention that it was. I don't know, but I believe it's a mental illness. See I knew we would find common ground. i believe those bigoted against gay people are mentally ill. LOL I have no heartburn with gays, as long as they aren't trying to force me, and the rest of society, to conform to their deviancy, and to rewrite societal rules specifically for them. Next thing you will be cheering will be pedophila.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 15, 2014 21:55:47 GMT -5
See I knew we would find common ground. i believe those bigoted against gay people are mentally ill. LOL I have no heartburn with gays, as long as they aren't trying to force me, and the rest of society, to conform to their deviancy, and to rewrite societal rules specifically for them. Next thing you will be cheering will be pedophila. Google can be your friend, I can tell some on here don't know the difference between the two.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 16, 2014 7:48:50 GMT -5
I have no heartburn with gays, as long as they aren't trying to force me, and the rest of society, to conform to their deviancy, and to rewrite societal rules specifically for them. Next thing you will be cheering will be pedophila. Google can be your friend, I can tell some on here don't know the difference between the two. Nearly all the pedophilic attacks in your favorite boogey man, the Catholic Church, were homosexual attacks. When you star t accepting deviancy, where do you stop?
|
|
|
Post by bluto on Apr 16, 2014 16:59:42 GMT -5
Google can be your friend, I can tell some on here don't know the difference between the two. Nearly all the pedophilic attacks in your favorite boogey man, the Catholic Church, were homosexual attacks. When you star t accepting deviancy, where do you stop? You really don't get it. Well you had the pedophile right but then you called it homosexual. It would of been young girls if available. You are just plain scare crapless that some guy will come up to one day and either grab some arse or try and kiss you. Don't worry, no one will try it on a 75 year old grey haired white guy using a walker.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 16, 2014 17:17:00 GMT -5
Google can be your friend, I can tell some on here don't know the difference between the two. Nearly all the pedophilic attacks in your favorite boogey man, the Catholic Church, were homosexual attacks. When you star t accepting deviancy, where do you stop? So you don't understand the difference between forcing sex on a child and homosexuality? Seriously dude.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Apr 16, 2014 19:48:13 GMT -5
He also doesn't seem to understand that the real problem with the Church was how it handled the matter.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 16, 2014 19:56:54 GMT -5
He also doesn't seem to understand that the real problem with the Church was how it handled the matter. Ohhh I think that is just the tip of the iceberg of what redleg doesn't seem to understand.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 17, 2014 8:57:50 GMT -5
Nearly all the pedophilic attacks in your favorite boogey man, the Catholic Church, were homosexual attacks. When you star t accepting deviancy, where do you stop? You really don't get it. Well you had the pedophile right but then you called it homosexual. It would of been young girls if available. You are just plain scare crapless that some guy will come up to one day and either grab some arse or try and kiss you. Don't worry, no one will try it on a 75 year old grey haired white guy using a walker. Ah, yes. Typical of the Left, since they can't win on the argument, claim "fear", "racism", "sexism", ect. Except it doesn't work any more. Why not pedophilia? When you are forced to accept one perversion, why not another? And how do you know "it would have been young girls if available"? Are there no young girls in the Catholic religion? Are priests barred from all contact with young girls? Or, far more likely, did gays infiltrate the Catholic church to besmirch it's name, since that's their biggest single opponent?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 17, 2014 8:59:14 GMT -5
Nearly all the pedophilic attacks in your favorite boogey man, the Catholic Church, were homosexual attacks. When you star t accepting deviancy, where do you stop? So you don't understand the difference between forcing sex on a child and homosexuality? Seriously dude. So, all perversions are not equal? Really? They were nearly all homosexual assaults. So, explain the difference, with references, between a normal homosexual rape, and the homosexual rape of a child? Or were they simply combining perversions?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 17, 2014 9:01:01 GMT -5
He also doesn't seem to understand that the real problem with the Church was how it handled the matter. Au contraire. I have many times said that it was an abomination, especially for a church. Protecting children is one of the primary purposes of a society, and the church is supposed to be the leader in that. However, I wasn't even discussing the handling. Simply the fact, in context with the rest of the discussion, that most, nearly all, of the assaults were homosexual.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 17, 2014 9:02:00 GMT -5
He also doesn't seem to understand that the real problem with the Church was how it handled the matter. Ohhh I think that is just the tip of the iceberg of what redleg doesn't seem to understand Ah, yes. When you've lost the debate so completely, deflect, deflect, deflect.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Apr 17, 2014 10:56:06 GMT -5
Simply the fact, in context with the rest of the discussion, that most, nearly all, of the assaults were homosexual. You should do more reading on this subject. Expects generally conclude that homosexuality and pedophilia are different patterns of behavior. The one does not imply the other. You'd like this to be about homosexuals because that dovetails nicely with a variety of bigotry you hold. The Church clearly agrees with you considering the actions it has taken to remedy the problem. Time with tell whether they were right.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 17, 2014 12:25:00 GMT -5
He also doesn't seem to understand that the real problem with the Church was how it handled the matter. Au contraire. I have many times said that it was an abomination, especially for a church. Protecting children is one of the primary purposes of a society, and the church is supposed to be the leader in that. However, I wasn't even discussing the handling. Simply the fact, in context with the rest of the discussion, that most, nearly all, of the assaults were homosexual. See, still unable to understand the difference between homosexual and pedophilia? Perhaps you should let the adults talk then.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 18, 2014 10:07:33 GMT -5
Simply the fact, in context with the rest of the discussion, that most, nearly all, of the assaults were homosexual. You should do more reading on this subject. Expects generally conclude that homosexuality and pedophilia are different patterns of behavior. The one does not imply the other. You'd like this to be about homosexuals because that dovetails nicely with a variety of bigotry you hold. The Church clearly agrees with you considering the actions it has taken to remedy the problem. Time with tell whether they were right. Would these be the same type of "experts" that insist we are all going to die from global warming if we don't hand all our liberties to the UN to tell us what to do? Would these be the same type of "experts" that declare Puppettax a "success" because a couple of million of Americans were extorted to sign up for it? If you think there is no political or social pressure for the psychological community to conform to the Leftist agenda, you haven't been paying attention. Both are perversions, and just because some homosexuals prefer young boys to men, it doesn't mean there is a real difference. It's a matter of degree, not type.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 18, 2014 10:08:45 GMT -5
Au contraire. I have many times said that it was an abomination, especially for a church. Protecting children is one of the primary purposes of a society, and the church is supposed to be the leader in that. However, I wasn't even discussing the handling. Simply the fact, in context with the rest of the discussion, that most, nearly all, of the assaults were homosexual. See, still unable to understand the difference between homosexual and pedophilia? Perhaps you should let the adults talk then. Still defending perversion in all it's forms, I see. You don't admit the connection, because it would destroy your carefully built wall of denial.
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Apr 18, 2014 13:50:09 GMT -5
Would these be the same type of "experts" that insist we are all going to die from global warming if we don't hand all our liberties to the UN to tell us what to do? Would these be the same type of "experts" that declare Puppettax a "success" because a couple of million of Americans were extorted to sign up for it? If you think there is no political or social pressure for the psychological community to conform to the Leftist agenda, you haven't been paying attention. Both are perversions, and just because some homosexuals prefer young boys to men, it doesn't mean there is a real difference. It's a matter of degree, not type. Do you contend that you are the only individual who is an expert, and that those who disagree with you, regardless of their education and experience, have been coerced into doing so by evil forces?
|
|
|
Post by howarewegoingtopay on Apr 18, 2014 14:10:30 GMT -5
Would these be the same type of "experts" that insist we are all going to die from global warming if we don't hand all our liberties to the UN to tell us what to do? Would these be the same type of "experts" that declare Puppettax a "success" because a couple of million of Americans were extorted to sign up for it? If you think there is no political or social pressure for the psychological community to conform to the Leftist agenda, you haven't been paying attention. Both are perversions, and just because some homosexuals prefer young boys to men, it doesn't mean there is a real difference. It's a matter of degree, not type. Do you contend that you are the only individual who is an expert, and that those who disagree with you, regardless of their education and experience, have been coerced into doing so by evil forces? Hey, you must be new here. Let me clue you in, we all think we are experts in all subjects.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Apr 19, 2014 12:58:44 GMT -5
Would these be the same type of "experts" that insist we are all going to die from global warming if we don't hand all our liberties to the UN to tell us what to do? Would these be the same type of "experts" that declare Puppettax a "success" because a couple of million of Americans were extorted to sign up for it? If you think there is no political or social pressure for the psychological community to conform to the Leftist agenda, you haven't been paying attention. Both are perversions, and just because some homosexuals prefer young boys to men, it doesn't mean there is a real difference. It's a matter of degree, not type. Do you contend that you are the only individual who is an expert, and that those who disagree with you, regardless of their education and experience, have been coerced into doing so by evil forces? Nope. However, having a wife that just completed her bachelors and is working on a masters in psychology, I do have some knowledge on the subject. The psychiatric field, until about 30 years ago, considered homosexuality to be a mental illness. It wasn't until the Left got enough of their people in the field that it changed, because deviant behavior that they agree with can't be considered 'bad'. It has far more to do with ideology than with science, as do all subjects the Left takes an interest in.
|
|
|
Post by joefriday on Apr 22, 2014 16:49:25 GMT -5
I've explained that before. When less than 10% of the population is behaving a particular way, and especially when that less than 10% is willing to destroy the lives of anyone that doesn't agree to the point of celebration, they are deviants. That's only the 10% you know about.
|
|
|
Post by kashmir on Apr 22, 2014 16:59:32 GMT -5
Do you contend that you are the only individual who is an expert, and that those who disagree with you, regardless of their education and experience, have been coerced into doing so by evil forces? Nope. However, having a wife that just completed her bachelors and is working on a masters in psychology, I do have some knowledge on the subject. The psychiatric field, until about 30 years ago, considered homosexuality to be a mental illness. It wasn't until the Left got enough of their people in the field that it changed, because deviant behavior that they agree with can't be considered 'bad'. It has far more to do with ideology than with science, as do all subjects the Left takes an interest in. So being married to someone who "just completed her bachelors and is working on a masters in psychology" and you posted therefore you"do have some knowledge of the subject", so lets assume that your wife is a woman, you now know what it is like to be a woman? redleg you are special, adorably special.
|
|