The "Wrong way" wong778 aka MrSpike2 ZOT guy ZOTTED again: Why do left handed people choose left han


	Human Handedness	Human Sexual Orientation

Distribution [1]	Stable bimodalism, behaviorally expressed	Stable bimodalism, behaviorally expressed

Population distribution:	Majority and Minority orientations Majority orientation: 92% Minority orientation: 8%	Majority and Minority orientations Majority orientation: 95% Minority orientation: 5%

Population distribution of orientations according to sex:	Male: 9% Female: 7%	Male: 6% Female: 3%

Male : Female ratio for minority orientations	1.3 : 1 Minority orinetation 30% higher in men than women	2 :1 Minority orientation 100% higher in men than women

Does minority orientation coorelate with race? geography? culture? [2] Mental or physical pathology? [3]	No No No No	No No No No

Age of first behavioral appearance of trait:	around age 2	around age 2

Is either orientation chosen?	No	No
Is either orientation pathological?	No	No
Can external expression be altered?	Yes	Yes
Can interior orientation be altered clinically?	No	No

Is trait familial/does trait run in families?	Yes	Yes

Pattern of familiality:	"Maternal effect" implies X-chromosome linkage.	"Maternal effect" implies X-chromosome linkage. [4]
Parent-to-child segregation?[5]	Little to none. Handedness of adopted (i.e. non-biological) children shows no relationship to that of adoptive parents, indicating a genetic influence.	Little to none. Sexual orientation of adopted (i.e. non-biological) children shows no relationship to that of adoptive parents, indicating a genetic influence.

Do siblings of those with minority orientation have increased rates of minority orientation?	Yes. Elevated rate of left-handedness in families with other left-handed children.	Yes. Elevated rate of homosexuality in families with other homosexual children.
Are monozygotic (identical) twins more likely to share minority orientation?	Yes	Yes

MZ concordance for minority orientation [6] (vs. background rate):	12% (vs. 8%, so MZ rate is 1.5 times higher)	50% (vs. 5%, so MZ rate is 10 times higher)

From: A Separate Creation: The Search for the Biological Origins of Sexual Orientation

Sources: I.C. McManus, "The Inheritance of Left-Handedness," Biological Asymmetry and Handedness, Ciba Foundation Symposium 162. (Chichester) John Wiley & Sons: 1991, 251-267; J. Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard, "A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation," Archives of General Psychiatry 48 (December 1991): 1089-1096; Dean Hamer et al., "A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation," Science 261 (July 16, 1993): 321-327 [return to top]

¹Both traits show a very small number of humans are ambioriented. Handedness shows almost none for both men and women--McManus: "Measures of handedness usually show a bimodal distribution with few subjects appearing truly ambidextrous." Sexual orientation, likewise, shows almost none for men but a still small though significant number for women. [return to footnote 1]

²However, may highly influence expression. [return to footnote 2]

³There is currently fierce debate over the existence of a correlation between left-handedness and certain pathologies, most notably schizophrenia. Some researchers assert that handedness, thought to reflect one aspect of brain lateralization, may be a result of a cause--in some manner a concomitant--of schizophrenia's etiology or pathophysiology. A study done by Charles Boklage ("Schizophrenia, brain asymmetry deveopment, and twinning," Biol. Psychiatry 12, 19-35, 1997) powerfully developed the hypothesis, and Nancy Segal ("Origins and implications of handedness and relative birth weight for IQ in monozygotic pairs," Neuropsychology 27, 549-561, 1989) also supports some form of correlation. On the other hand, Luchins et al. (1980) and Lewis et al. (1989), in their respective replication attempts of Boklage's work, found little support, and Gottesman et al. ("Handedness in twins with schizophrenia: was Boklage correct?" Schizophrenia Research 9, 83-85, 1993) conclude that there does not appear to be an association between handedness and schizophrenia. (See Gottesman for a more complete bibliography.) The point, however, is the distinct difference between the trait profile of handedness and that of sexual orientation: while there is clinical debate in scientific and research circles over whether handedness correlates in some way with psychobiological abnormalities, no such debate exists regarding sexual orientation, and neither heterosexuality nor homosexuality are implicated in any mental or physical pathology. [return to footnote 3]

⁴A subset of gay men show the maternal effect. It does not appear in women. [return to footnote 4]

⁵"Segregation" is a genetic term of art meaning the way the trait shows up in individuals down through generations. [return to footnote 5]

⁶Indicates that genetics play a significantly greater role in sexual orientation than in handedness. [return to footnote 6]

Apples and oranges.

1. Being left-handed is not contrary to the natural biological function of the human hand. Homosexual acts are contrary to the biological function of human sexual organs.

2. Morality is based upon choice. Since no one makes the conscious choice to be homosexually oriented, homosexual orientation is not objectively immoral. Deliberate acts of homosexuality are immoral, since they involve conscious choices.

3. The human family (husband, wife, children) is the fundamental cell of organic human society everywhere. Behaviors which do not contribute to the formation of families, such as homosexual acts, masturbation, divorce, polygamy, etc., are therefore deliterious to human society.

4. Immoral sexual acts by their intrinsic nature foster the rise and spread of serious infectious diseases among their practioners and the general public.

5. Moral sexual behavior (i.e. sex between husband and wife) is based upon self-giving and the desire to create and nurture life and the human family. Immoral sexual activity is based upon self-gratification and the desire for physical pleasure as its highest ideal, thus tending to dehumanize its practioners, reducing them to mere creatures of lust, suited only to use others or to be used by them.

I see no evidence that supports the contention that some people are "born queer". However, even if this contention were to be demonstrated scientifically, such would only serve to reduce homosexuality to the status of a birth defect. Is that what you want?

No one is saying it's a sin to be attracted to members of the same sex.. Homosexual orientation is inherently disordered (= contrary to the natural law), true, but the Catholic Church teaches only that disordered actions are sinful; the mere orientation towards same-sex relations is considered to be a burden, not a sin.

And even if people are born queer, so what? One's natural orientation is not necessarily a good thing; some are better resisted than given in to. Some people are born with a disordered craving for alcohol, for example. Should we congratulate them when they practice their natural, alcoholic lifestyle? Othere are born with the desire to have sex with children. Should they resist those urges, or should they "be themselves" and go around victimizing little kids?

Your analogy has failed. Please reconsider the issue.

Admit it. This is why you keep coming back, ain't it?

You swine. You vulgar little maggot. You worthless bag of filth. As we say in Texas, I'll bet you couldn't pour p!ss out of a boot with instructions on the heel.

You are a canker. A sore that won't go away. I would rather kiss a lawyer than be seen with you. You're a putrescent mass, a walking vomit. You are a spineless little worm deserving nothing but the profoundest contempt. You are a jerk, a cad, a weasel. Your life is a monument to stupidity. You are a stench, a revulsion, a big suck on a sour lemon.

You are a bleating foal, a curdled staggering mutant dwarf smeared richly with the effluvia and offal accompanying your alleged birth into this world. An insensate, blinking calf, meaningful to nobody, abandoned by the puke-drooling, giggling beasts who sired you and then killed themselves in recognition of what they had done. I will never get over the embarrassment of belonging to the same species as you. You are a monster, an ogre, a malformity. I barf at the very thought of you.

You have all the appeal of a paper cut. Lepers avoid you. You are vile, worthless, less than nothing. You are a weed, a fungus, the dregs of this earth. And did I mention you smell? Try to edit your responses of unnecessary material before attempting to impress us with your insight. The evidence that you are a nincompoop will still be available to readers, but they will be able to access it more rapidly.

You snail-skulled little rabbit. Would that a hawk pick you up, drive its beak into your brain, and upon finding it rancid set you loose to fly briefly before spattering the ocean rocks with the frothy pink shame of your ignoble blood.

May you choke on the queasy, convulsing nausea of your own trite, foolish beliefs. You are weary, stale, flat and unprofitable. You are grimy, squalid, nasty and profane. You are foul and disgusting. You're a fool, an ignoramus. Monkeys look down on you. Even sheep won't have sex with you.

You are unreservedly pathetic, starved for attention, and lost in a land that reality forgot. And what meaning do you expect your delusionally self-important statements of unknowing, inexperienced opinion to have with us? What fantasy do you hold that you would believe that your tiny-fisted tantrums would have more weight than that of a leprous desert rat, spinning rabidly in a circle, waiting for the bite of the snake?

You are a waste of flesh. You have no rhythm. You are ridiculous and obnoxious. You are the moral equivalent of a leech. You are a living emptiness, a meaningless void. You are sour and senile. You are a disease, you puerile, one-handed, slack-jawed, drooling, meatslapper. On a good day you're a half-wit. You remind me of drool.

You are deficient in all that lends character. You have the personality of wallpaper. You are dank and filthy. You are asinine and benighted. You are the source of all unpleasantness. You spread misery and sorrow wherever you go. You smarmy lagerlout git. You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john. You clouted boggish foot-licking twit. You dankish clack-dish plonker. You gormless crook-pated tosser. You churlish boil-brained clotpole ponce. You cockered bum-bailey poofter. You craven dewberry pisshead cockup pratting naff. You gob-kissing gleeking flap-mouthed coxcomb. You dread-bolted fobbing beef-witted clapper-clawed flirt-gill.

You are a fiend and a coward, and you have bad breath. You are degenerate, noxious and depraved. I feel debased just for knowing you exist. I despise everything about you, and I wish you would go away.

I cannot believe how incredibly stupid you are. I mean rock-hard stupid. Dehydrated-rock-hard stupid. Stupid, so stupid it goes way beyond the stupid we know into a whole different dimension of stupid. You are trans-stupid stupid. Meta-stupid. Stupid collapsed on itself so far that even the neutrons have collapsed. Stupid gotten so dense that no intellect can escape. Singularity stupid. Blazing hot mid-day sun on Mercury stupid. You emit more stupid in one second than our entire galaxy emits in a year. Quasar stupid. Your writing has to be a troll. Nothing in our universe can really be this stupid. Perhaps this is some primordial fragment from the original big bang of stupid. Some pure essence of a stupid so uncontaminated by anything else as to be beyond the laws of physics that we know. I'm sorry. I can't go on. This is an epiphany of stupid for me.

After this, you may not hear from me again for a while. I don't have enough strength left to deride your ignorant questions and half baked comments about unimportant trivia, or any of the rest of this drivel. Duh. The only thing worse than your logic is your manners. I have snipped away most of what you wrote, because, well... it didn't really say anything.

Your attempt at constructing a creative post was pitiful. I mean, really, stringing together a bunch of insults among a load of babbling was hardly effective... Maybe later in life, after you have learned to read, write, spell, and count, you will have more success. True, these are rudimentary skills that many of us "normal" people take for granted that everyone has an easy time of mastering. But we sometimes forget that there are "challenged" persons in this world who find these things more difficult. If I had known, that this was your case then I would have never read your post. It just wouldn't have been "right". Sort of like parking in a handicap space. I wish you the best of luck in the emotional, and social struggles that seem to be placing such a demand on you.

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.

	Hit Me, Please! Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
SUPPORT FREE REPUBLIC Help Keep "The Duck" out of the White House!