Homosexual Researchers Debunk ‘Born Gay’ Urban Legend

Traditional Values Coalition ^ | 7/30/02 | Traditional Values Coalition

[Undivided Heart]

I don't know. I've seen lots of straight comedians do the gay lisp. They do it better. Craig Shoemaker's Lovemaster act for one.

[Hot Tabasco]

Just adding my 2 cents here and submitting an observation which I have yet to see in print.

Homosexuality does not exist in any other species simply because if there were such a gene in that species it would have been eliminated eons ago.

If human population were to procreate via the same internal instincts inherent in all other species, such homosexual gene would also have been eliminated eons ago.

However, the human species is the only species which copulates without any genetic predisposition to the survival of the species. We copulate and self gratificate merely for the pleasure of such activity but in the instances of married couples (or unmarried it really doesn't matter), such activity creates birth if that is their desire. In other words, the ability to create a newborn has evolved beyond species survival to personal choice.

Since homo-sapiens have evolved beyond the primitive instincts of mating when the female becomes fertile and have developed intelligence to the degree that sexual contact has now become a choice rather than a drive, the only logical explanation left is that sexual behavior is just what it is, behavior. Behavior which is totally controllable by the individual if he/she wishes because behavior is driven strictly by societal and psychological influences....

[Hot Tabasco]

Sorry to hear about your dysfunctional family but read my post #102.....

[Clint N. Suhks]

“What ‘causes’ homosexuality?”…

Mental illness, it’s a paraphilia and you know it. Some day I hope you seek help for your homosexuality, you’ll be whole person when you start a family. Pretending you’re not hurting inside only prolongs your torment. Narth and Exodus only want to help, get some before it’s too late.

[Truthsearcher]

I am not missapplying.

You are plotting a point for each sexual encounter, I am not, I am plot one for each distinct sexual attraction. Sexual attraction is a specturm involving almost as many variations are there are human beings. That's why I always found the classifying of people as heterosexuals and homosexuals as over generalizing.

There are men who are attracted to fat women, thin women, some have breast fetish, others have a foot fetish, some like to tie women up, some like to be tied up by women, some like tall women, some like petite women, some like women who are butch,etc, etc, etc. No one can adequately explain why we like what we like. Some of these attractions are found in the majority of men (big breasts, etc), some are found in a much smaller numbers. But they all exist. Men attracted to other men is just a subgroup of all these various attractions.

Having sexual attractions that doesn't exist in the majority of one's peers is a deviation. But a deviation that is to be expected. Life would be so boring if we all had the exact same taste.

[yendu bwam]

Mouth... thin upper lip, large distance between nose and lip Hips...very narrow hips.

Yikes!

[SarahW]

And is polycarp trying to say genetics have nothing to do with psycho-sexual development?

OF COURSE there is a genetic element. The uterine environment plays a role as well.

[Old Professer]

Not being familiar with you or your sense of humor I rebutted

Forgive me, but given the title of this thread, I can't help butt laugh.

[MAWG]

" Do you know what is being taught at your school?"

I dont have any children so I dont " have " a school. Nothing that you could tell me about The Peoples Republic of Taxachussetts or Socialist Vermont surprises me. It is stunning, nonetheless, to hear of such officialy sanctioned depravity.

[yendu bwam]

I dont have any children so I dont " have " a school. Nothing that you could tell me about The Peoples Republic of Taxachussetts or Socialist Vermont surprises me. It is stunning, nonetheless, to hear of such officialy sanctioned depravity.

I think we could agree on live-and-let-live as a rule for homosexuals. It's a free country and they should be able to live their lives as they see fit. But I should be able to raise my family as I see fit (religiously, and with regard to sexual education). That's where I have (big) problems with gays.

[LiveFreeOrDieTryin]

I remember my neighbor's bird dogs when I was growing up that seemed naturally inclined to bugger each other when given the chance.

Dogs use "mounting" behavior as a demonstration of superiority. Males and females will hump dogs of either gender, to claim dominant status within the pack. This is true whether they are sexually intact or neutered.

[Vinnie]

Hide it with a moustache. (G)

[CalConservative]

You don't mean to say they have been lying to us about this issue?? I'm shocked - shocked! /sarcasm

[JMJ333]

mille99...Perhaps you would like to explain to these fine men why you think inter-racial marriage is comparable to homosexual sex.

You see, this brilliant person finds it objectionable that I view men having anal sex with each other as morally wrong. His attempt to link normal heterosexual marriage between different races and deviant perverse homoesxual sex is a slap in the face.

But that is what you get from someone with no standards. Everything goes!

[MAWG]

" But I should be able to raise my family as I see fit ..."

Yes you should but the left wingers and the Gays wont let you do so unless you give to them the one thing they want from all of us " normal " people, APPROVAL.ACCEPTANCE. They know that what they are doing is wrong yet they are powerless, or at least that's what they tell themselves, to change. I believe that with some homosexual men, most even, that is probably the case.

[Truthsearcher]

But what is *morally* wrong about it?

If it is done in private, by consenting adults, what makes it wrong? Define you standard of right and wrong, and explain why this would be wrong using that standard.

Or is the standard simply "the bible said so"?

[gitmo]

The desire to sin inhabits all men. The temptations are different for different people.

It is a choice to commit the sin.

Heb 4:
5. For we have not a high priest that cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but one that hath been in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
16. Let us therefore draw near with boldness unto the throne of grace, that we may receive mercy, and may find grace to help us in time of need.

[MoscowMike]

Howdy

I am saying that it is incorrect, that it is not representative of the human experience, that everyone's sexuality is a continuum between 100% heterosexual and 100% homosexual, with a statistical norm of some percent attraction to the same sex and some percent of one's sexual urges in attraction to the opposite sex.

That's absolute drivel.

People are not, say, sixty percent heterosexual and forty percent homosexual in orientation, there are people with a normal sexual orientation and there are people with problems.

That is not to say people who are overwhelmingly desirous of sexual relations with rutabegas should be scorned and persecuted, it is just that society should not reshape its norms, lifeways, and taboos to be reflective of a condition which is fictitious.

Redefining deviancy into merely a different location on a single continuum of sexuality would produce a society much more user friendly to deviants, but such a society would also suffer lower life expectancy, so one wonders whose interests would be served by reshaping society to be reflective of a bogus model of human sexuality.

Hmmmm?