Replies

It's interesting how your zero interest in this subject continues with various posters. You're not interested but you keep talking about it.

Yes, I've called you uneducated in this subject because you continue to demonstrate a profound ignorance whenever you talk about it. Your ignorance is obvious to those who have spent years studying a subject in which you have zero interest. I'm quite secure in what I state here and will continue to point out your obfuscation.

Homosexual activists are the ones pushing the gay gene. That is, the single gene that causes homosexuality. Yet not a single credible scientist supports that statement. In fact, credible scientists have stated environment is the major factor behind homosexuality. If you read the How Might Homosexuality Develop? Putting the Pieces Together article I previous posted you'd begin to get an education on the subject. After that, try The Gay Gene? for background information.

You write as if you're familiar with the facts of homosexuality. To demonstrate your familiarity with the facts, point out the flaws in the articles I've presented then we'll have something to talk about. Until then you're just obfuscating.

Your Wal-Mart reference is misdirection because you failed to point out the flaws in the articles. The AFA articles referenced are supported by the information found here. Search for GLSEN and you'll find more than enough to support the AFA articles. You'll read a lot of information similar to:

These books are in middle and high schools around the nation.

"Doing it: Gay men...Many people don't know the anus is not only an organ to remove waste. It's very sexually exciteable...Your first few times having anal sex might be a little hard. You may have to practice a bit before it starts feeling really good. I sure did." (pg. 81)

Unfortunately, there's too much information there for somebody with zero interest in the subject.

And don't forget the APA Has No Disagreement With the Treatment of Unwanted Homosexual Attraction. The activists and liberals in the APA are losing the ill-gotten ground they grabbed in the 70s.

It's interesting how your zero interest in this subject continues with various posters. You're not interested but you keep talking about it.

Aptly noted. It is always interesting to show people that they don't know what they're talking about, as they seldom do know. Also, I'm not one to walk away from a discussion, since I enjoy a discussion of any kind. Even with you.

Yes, I've called you uneducated in this subject because you continue to demonstrate a profound ignorance whenever you talk about it. Your ignorance is obvious to those who have spent years studying a subject in which you have zero interest. I'm quite secure in what I state here and will continue to point out your obfuscation.

I should warn you: your repeated aggressive reaction is quite telling, especially if you feel the psychological need to restate that you are 'quite secure'. Well, I cannot say that you aren't, but this response is quite telling.

Homosexual activists are the ones pushing the gay gene. That is, the single gene that causes homosexuality.

I don't care about what those people were pushing. This is not about them, this is about you. *You* were attacking a straw man, namely that my statement that it is partly 'genetic' means that a single gene is responsible for this condititoon, and that no credible evidence can be found about a single gene.

In fact, credible scientists have stated environment is the major factor behind homosexuality.

I know environment is a major factor behind many conditions. If you look at how schizofrenia might develop, genes play a very important role, but environment does, too.

You write as if you're familiar with the facts of homosexuality. To demonstrate your familiarity with the facts, point out the flaws in the articles I've presented then we'll have something to talk about. Until then you're just obfuscating.

You can't hide behind articles. Show some courage, my friend, and write something for yourself.

Your Wal-Mart reference is misdirection because you failed to point out the flaws in the articles.

I need not point out the flaws. If you say that the earth is flat, then that casts doubt on your credibility. When you continue to say that 9/11 was caused by the American government, I'll be less likely to put any stock in your second assertion.