Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

I guess the message is that if you have gay relatives, you should let them spend time with your kids so the "gay genes" can fully express themselves.
1 posted on 02/11/2010 12:53:22 PM PST by Cementjungle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last
To: Cementjungle

I wonder if God approves of this..


2 posted on 02/11/2010 12:55:44 PM PST by gibtx2 (keep up the good work I am out of work but post 20 a month to this out of WF Check)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle; Revolting cat!
As Barack Obama Jr. learned, you can even get them from a "family friend".


3 posted on 02/11/2010 12:55:47 PM PST by a fool in paradise ("like it or not, we have to have a financial system that is healthy and functioning" Obama 2/4/2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle; wagglebee

So now “genes” can be passed along through social interaction, not just biology.


5 posted on 02/11/2010 12:57:02 PM PST by a fool in paradise ("like it or not, we have to have a financial system that is healthy and functioning" Obama 2/4/2010)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Molestation is probably the mechanism for the “gene transfer”.


7 posted on 02/11/2010 12:58:11 PM PST by achilles2000 (Shouting "fire" in a burning building is doing everyone a favor...whether they like it or not)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Wonder who paid for this study? I do not find it “special” or “genetic” that an uncle would be more predisposed to care for a niece or nephew than for a stranger’s children. I tend to favor my own nieces and nephews over children with whom I have no relationship, and I have no need to perpetuate my genes like that.


8 posted on 02/11/2010 12:59:14 PM PST by La Lydia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

http://www.mygenes.co.nz/

There is another objection to the notion of a genetically
induced homosexuality. An unreproductive behavior
cannot be “genetic” and also continue to exist in the population. According to mainstream genetics,
genetically enforced homosexuality (exclusively same-sex
sex) would die out of the population in several generations.

Here’s how. A gene is retained in the gene pool when an average of at least one child is born to every
adult having that gene (one child per person). As unlikely
as it sounds, surveys show that of persons classifying
themselves as exclusively homosexual, one in five has a child. At that rate, a homosexual gene, or
genes, could not be replaced.

But most homosexuals may be married (see Chapter Two). Wouldn’t this preserve any homosexual
gene or genes? Not necessarily. A married homosexual is (usually) bisexual. According to surveys, bisexuals
have an average
of 1.25 children each. On its own, that’s enough to replace the adult gene or genes, but the
average total number of children produced by bisexuals and exclusive homosexuals still comes to less than
one child per person
- 0.9. At that rate, any homosexual gene or genes would still slowly but inevitably breed
out of the population.
Sociobiologists, almost the only group of academics who argue seriously that all human behavior is
preordained
by genes, have great difficulty accounting for the persistence of SSA in the population. They
try to argue that genes causing male SSA would also exist in the sisters of gays, and that the homosexual
male would help ensure those genes were passed on by helping his sister and her family - for example, babysitting,
and later helping with money and resources. But these arguments are unusually weak. Those with
SSA have much weaker ties with their biological families than average.

http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch1.pdf


9 posted on 02/11/2010 1:00:23 PM PST by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle
So nature is, through genetic predisposition, encouraging a behavior that insures the non-procreation of a species, is that right.

First time that has occurred on this planet since the beginning of life.

11 posted on 02/11/2010 1:01:13 PM PST by traderrob6
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

They keep trying. They failed to prove that there is a “gay gene,” so now they’re trying something new. Just proves that the leftist “mind” is a terrible waste of brain cells.


13 posted on 02/11/2010 1:02:28 PM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Homosexuality is not genetic.


14 posted on 02/11/2010 1:02:57 PM PST by Persevero
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

New study: “Gay brothers nature’s baby sitter”


16 posted on 02/11/2010 1:04:51 PM PST by Rodebrecht (No army can stop an idea whose time has come.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle
So is that how evolution works with one species “associating”with another? No wonder Neanderthal went extinct, they were just too ugly!
19 posted on 02/11/2010 1:08:33 PM PST by mountainlion (concerned conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle
So is that how evolution works with one species “associating”with another? No wonder Neanderthal went extinct, they were just too ugly!
20 posted on 02/11/2010 1:08:50 PM PST by mountainlion (concerned conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Ah yes. Uncle Ernie syndrome.


21 posted on 02/11/2010 1:08:56 PM PST by Antoninus (The RNC's dream ticket: Romney / Scozzafava 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

24 posted on 02/11/2010 1:14:43 PM PST by TheThirdRuffian (Nothing to see here. Move along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Turkey baster?


25 posted on 02/11/2010 1:17:57 PM PST by TigersEye (It's the Marxism, stupid! ... And they call themselves Progressives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

I don’t know WHY, but I’ve seen more than one example of uncle/nephew niece queerness.


27 posted on 02/11/2010 1:24:48 PM PST by goseminoles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Boy they really are confused. I have a question for them tho, if it is natural to be homosexual, why do they have a desire to “nurture” anything? Is their natural desire to have sexual relations that proclude them from procreation or is their desire to procreate their natural state?

Which nature are they denying with their chosen lifestyle?


28 posted on 02/11/2010 1:26:09 PM PST by CSM (The only reason a conservative should reach across the aisle is to slap a little sense into a lib!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Darwin was a putz. Matter did not randomly mix itself and produce life, much less conciousness. Now we have the believers of Darwin trying to explain away the failings of their theory. Hint, if an exception to a theory is found, we conclude the theory, at a minimum, to not be universal and possibly to be inoperative (false). Gay men cannot pass their genes to the next generation without a woman. Secondly, there is no genetic marker for homosexuality. So, again how would they pass something that doesn’t exist to the next generation? Sticky problems for the church of random selection.


30 posted on 02/11/2010 1:28:04 PM PST by equalitybeforethelaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

Pathetic example of a so-called scientist who twists the data to “prove” what he thought all along.


32 posted on 02/11/2010 1:30:07 PM PST by Leftism is Mentally Deranged
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Cementjungle

It IS Genetic!

It’s called SIN.

And everyone is born with it.

Just some choose to repent and others choose to make it a lifestyle choice.


37 posted on 02/11/2010 1:34:00 PM PST by RachelFaith (2010 might be bigger than 1994)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-33 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson