The Homosexual Agenda

[larkin31]

So it is genetic?.So my original question still stands. If homosexuality is genetic. And homosexuals by nature don’t have sex with opposite sex. Then they can’t breed. So how do they pass on the gay gene? Or how do they get the “gay” gene? If indeed it happens to be a regressive gene. It is either gentic or learned. If it is learned it is not natural. If it is genetic. How do they get the gene?

Seeker has already given you examples of how. If you actually showed any interest in becoming informed, someone might tell you further.

You can start here: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype

 

[larkin31]

Are you trying to tell us that homosexuality is an anomolous genetic throwback? If so, what to? Some earlier cercopithecoid whose direct ancestors use sex as a bargaining and a social organising tool and who mainly live in trees?

Is this the limit of your understanding of genotypes and genetic expression? Of human sexual behavior? Do you think that there is a “straight gene,” too? Are you playing a game here?

 

[larkin31]

False again. You don’t have the moral courage to face these arguments, but simply gloss over or past them and your responses at best are condescending and at worst, puerile. I’m still waiting on a response to post #299.

I have the moral courage to say you’re wrong. I face these arguments every time. You just get unhappy and frustrated and then derogatory because you can’t persuasively (in an objective way) demonstrate the actual existence of this thing called “natural law.” I KNOW that you believe it to exist, but its actual existence is a whole other matter. And I full respect those posters above who have stated that “natural law” is based on religious belief. Yes, it sure is. And on a series of broad generalizations about the natural world and human existence.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

oh man. How I’ve heard that so many times by liberal drones. “Who cares what they do in bed” "Whats the big deal " “Your a bigot” “Your intolerant”

and of course when their promiscuous daughters start popping out their illegitimate children with the father no where to be found and goto uncle sam for help from MY tax money to help them, then that of course is all good. I wonder how those shows “Secret life of an American Teenager” will have helped them out then when all the guys they have slept with have used them as tissues and their stuck alone. Maybe then they think of that person who was trying to defend to dignity of marriage and modesty a while ago who was being called a bigot and intolerant by herself and her liberal drone friends. Only then it will be too late.

Meanwhile 1 out of 2 people divorce and the western world has the highest rate of marital problems than of any other part of the world. And yet people have the nerve to ask why Christians are so concerned about the weakened state of marriage as it is today…

Out of curiosity, is it the fact that YOUR tax money (your emphasis) is going to support these people or their immoral actions that landed them in a place of need?

 

[LCMS_No_More]

So it is genetic?.So my original question still stands. If homosexuality is genetic. And homosexuals by nature don’t have sex with opposite sex. Then they can’t breed. So how do they pass on the gay gene? Or how do they get the “gay” gene? If indeed it happens to be a regressive gene. It is either gentic or learned. If it is learned it is not natural. If it is genetic. How do they get the gene?

I don’t think it’s genetic. I don’t think it’s learned. I think it’s the result of a lot of factors: inborn personality traits, father/child relationship, mother/child relationship, parents/child relationship, peer relationships, society, etc. I can point to a lot of the factors in my life that led me to turning out SSA. I’ve made some progress in overcoming a lot of those factors.

I do want to put this on the record, though. I hate my own same-sex attractions so much that if it were genetic and there was a way to test for it in the uterus, I would have rather not been born than live the life of same-sex attractions I have lived. That’s how much of a curse I see SSA being. I’d rather have never existed than live with it.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

So it is genetic?.So my original question still stands. If homosexuality is genetic. And homosexuals by nature don’t have sex with opposite sex. Then they can’t breed. So how do they pass on the gay gene? Or how do they get the “gay” gene? If indeed it happens to be a regressive gene. It is either gentic or learned. If it is learned it is not natural. If it is genetic. How do they get the gene?

A fair question to raise, latin rite.

“This Is The Way God Made Me”
A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality
and the “Gay Gene”
Brad Harrub, Ph.D. and Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Dave Miller, Ph.D.

An interesting scientific paper, with the following conclusion:

Consider the obvious problem of survival for individuals who allegedly possess a gay gene: individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means). Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether. **We now know that it is not scientifically accurate to refer to a “gay gene” as the causative agent in homosexuality. ** **The available evidence clearly establishes that no such gene has been identified. Additionally, evidence exists which documents that homosexuals can change their sexual orientation. ** Future decisions regarding policies about, and/or treatment of, homosexuals should reflect this knowledge.
. . . . . .
We know why gay behavior proponents want to push the idea of a gay gene. But science does not even agree with them. So they go through these contortions in logic and creative arguments.
. . . . . .

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

How did you conclude from our responses that “it isn’t genetic”? Do you understand genes and gene expression? Do you understand amino acids and protein synthesis? Do you understand the regulatory processes of genetic expression? Do you understand genetic change?

Absolutely I do. My genes have never made me thrust any part of my body into any part of anyone elses. Desires are a different story… And we have been given freedom of will by God, not to give us the freedom to do what we want, but to give us the freedom to do what is right and abandon our whims and desires for the greater good of God.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Is this the limit of your understanding of genotypes and genetic expression? Of human sexual behavior? Do you think that there is a “straight gene,” too? Are you playing a game here?

See LCMS_No_More’s quote below…

I have the moral courage to say you’re wrong. I face these arguments every time. You just get unhappy and frustrated and then derogatory because you can’t persuasively (in an objective way) demonstrate the actual existence of this thing called “natural law.” I KNOW that you believe it to exist, but its actual existence is a whole other matter. And I full respect those posters above who have stated that “natural law” is based on religious belief. Yes, it sure is. And on a series of broad generalizations about the natural world and human existence.

They are broad, observable, and (mostly) testable. Kind of like evolution: A broad statement about how everything came to be, that is (almost) observable, and (statistically [lies, damn lies, and statistics]) observable.

But it IS based upon a theological world view. There is no way around that one…

I don’t think it’s genetic. I don’t think it’s learned. I think it’s the result of a lot of factors: inborn personality traits, father/child relationship, mother/child relationship, parents/child relationship, peer relationships, society, etc. I can point to a lot of the factors in my life that led me to turning out SSA. I’ve made some progress in overcoming a lot of those factors.

I do want to put this on the record, though. I hate my own same-sex attractions so much that if it were genetic and there was a way to test for it in the uterus, I would have rather not been born than live the life of same-sex attractions I have lived. That’s how much of a curse I see SSA being. I’d rather have never existed than live with it.

 

[larkin31]

Absolutely I do.

Then you are a dissembler: a dishonest poster pretending not to know a scientific subject in order to obfuscate. No one who knows actually how genes express themselves in morphology and/or behavior would ask the questions that you have asked here. Even a basic knowledge of genetics already gives you the answer: the same answer that Seeker gave.

My genes have never made me thrust any part of my body into any part of anyone elses. Desires are a different story… And we have been given freedom of will by God, not to give us the freedom to do what we want, but to give us the freedom to do what is right and abandon our whims and desires for the greater good of God.

This behavioral and theological point sidesteps my direct challenge to you about your apparent lack of understanding of how genes express themselves, and the nature of dominant and recessive genes and other biological factors that influence behavior.

There is NO genetic or biological requirement that gays have gay parents. Your questions ASSUME this expectation, which is clearly false, and simple understanding of genetics tells you this. Which is why I immediately challenged your knowledge in the area.

 

[larkin31]

See LCMS_No_More’s quote below…

This reply does not account for the twin studies and the studies of prior-male-sibling patterns, both of which suggest a genetic component (as yet undetermined). Clearly, environment, socialization, family, religion, also have clear influence on human sexual behavior. No one denies this.

But does this also explain a 97% heterosexual demographic factor also? We just socialize straights into being straight? Treat them “normally” so that they come out “normal”?

 

[qui_est_ce]

I’d rather have never existed than live with it.

Hi Friend LCMS-
You are suffering. Suffering unites you with the sufferings of Jesus. I’m glad to have met you in these forums. I’m keeping you in my prayers.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

This reply does not account for the twin studies and the studies of prior-male-sibling patterns, both of which suggest a genetic component (as yet undetermined). Clearly, environment, socialization, family, religion, also have clear influence on human sexual behavior. No one denies this.

But does this also explain a 97% heterosexual demographic factor also? We just socialize straights into being straight? Treat them “normally” so that they come out “normal”?

Actually, it does. Notice I mentioned a sensitive personality type? That’s something that’s part of a person’s makeup from birth. Its source is unknown, but I’d say that this is a major factor with relation to a person possibly developing ssa.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

Then you are a dissembler: a dishonest poster pretending not to know a scientific subject in order to obfuscate. No one who knows actually how genes express themselves in morphology and/or behavior would ask the questions that you have asked here. Even a basic knowledge of genetics already gives you the answer: the same answer that Seeker gave.

This behavioral and theological point sidesteps my direct challenge to you about your apparent lack of understanding of how genes express themselves, and the nature of dominant and recessive genes and other biological factors that influence behavior.

There is NO genetic or biological requirement that gays have gay parents. Your questions ASSUME this expectation, which is clearly false, and simple understanding of genetics tells you this. Which is why I immediately challenged your knowledge in the area.

Two things:

1. I cannot sidestep a direct challenge made in the same post you that tell me I sidestepped.
2. I am neither a dissembler nor a liar and would appreciate not being called such. My statement regarding behavior was what you asked for in the beginning of your post “No one who knows actually how genes express themselves in morphology and/or behavior”. Genetics play a part in urges, desires, etc. NOT behavior. Behavior is, almost without exception, a choice. I CHOOSE to do this thing. Genes are not this magical mechanism that force us to do things. we always have to make the decision to follow our impulses.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

This reply does not account for the twin studies and the studies of prior-male-sibling patterns, both of which suggest a genetic component (as yet undetermined). Clearly, environment, socialization, family, religion, also have clear influence on human sexual behavior. No one denies this.

But does this also explain a 97% heterosexual demographic factor also? We just socialize straights into being straight? Treat them “normally” so that they come out “normal”?

So then, according to you, they are some kind of mutant freakish 3%? That lends credence to LCMS_No _More and his opinion that he would rather have been aborted… Which is something I would find abhorrent were it to become a reality.

 

[edwest2]

So then, according to you, they are some kind of mutant freakish 3%? That lends credence to LCMS_No _More and his opinion that he would rather have been aborted… Which is something I would find abhorrent were it to become a reality.

Why is anybody wasting time with guessing? We’re on the information superhighway or something not invented by Al Gore - take your pick.

narth.com/docs/hope.html

Opinions are not worth getting excited about.

God bless,
Ed

 

[larkin31]

Two things:

1. I cannot sidestep a direct challenge made in the same post you that tell me I sidestepped.
2. I am neither a dissembler nor a liar and would appreciate not being called such. My statement regarding behavior was what you asked for in the beginning of your post “No one who knows actually how genes express themselves in morphology and/or behavior”. Genetics play a part in urges, desires, etc. NOT behavior. Behavior is, almost without exception, a choice. I CHOOSE to do this thing. Genes are not this magical mechanism that force us to do things. we always have to make the decision to follow our impulses.

sexual orientation is not a behavior. Not in heterosexuaals any more or any differently than homosexuals.

This discussion has been about the genetics of the orientation, not whether you or I ever actually have sex of whatever kind.

 

[larkin31]

So then, according to you, they are some kind of mutant freakish 3%?

You’re simply being childish now.

 

[larkin31]

Genes are not this magical mechanism that force us to do things. we always have to make the decision to follow our impulses.

No one said that they were. I keep stating CLEARLY that human sexuality occurs along an entire spectrum of orientation, inclination, and behaviors. Studies suggest (these are well-known studies) that there is a genetic factor in sexual orientation. It is ALSO widely understood that many other factors effect human sexual orientation and behavior. And no one claims that there is a “gay gene,” except ignorant posters who want to argue against homosexuality via a straw man.

I can’t put this any more plainly. And I have repeated it many times at CA, and already on this thread.

 

[larkin31]

This reply does not account for the twin studies and the studies of prior-male-sibling patterns, both of which suggest a genetic component (as yet undetermined). Clearly, environment, socialization, family, religion, also have clear influence on human sexual behavior. No one denies this.

For example here, on this same page.

 

[John21652]

I have the moral courage to say you’re wrong. I face these arguments every time. You just get unhappy and frustrated and then derogatory because you can’t persuasively (in an objective way) demonstrate the actual existence of this thing called “natural law.” I KNOW that you believe it to exist, but its actual existence is a whole other matter. And I full respect those posters above who have stated that “natural law” is based on religious belief. Yes, it sure is. And on a series of broad generalizations about the natural world and human existence.

You do not face these arguments every time. For example, you still have not responded to my post #299. You can repeat ad nauseum that there is no such thing as Natural Law, yet there is a world of evidence that there is. Over on this thread, Gay Marriage - who cares, there is enough argument plus evidence to sink a ship, as there is on this thread, to show that Natural Law is real , yet you continually just say “no there isn’t” and in the process you are whitewashing at least half the intellectual enquiry of the human race over many millenia. Many of us have traced the intellectual development of Natural Law showing that it did not begin with a theological base, but a metaphysical, ontological, cosmological and epistomological one. Theology came later. In all of that enquiry, using reason, humanity has formulated certain moral truths which are held as universal and ordered. It is rather obvious that a good deal of the homosexual agenda is breaking down that obvious universality and its accepted norms. Even that agenda proves the existence of Natural Law!! However, in the process, so much illogicality becames manifest that the agenda is exposed for what it is; an exercise in self serving, selfish hedonism, with ‘wrong’ dressed up as ‘right’, ‘disorder’ dressed up as ‘order’ and ‘abnormal’ dressed up as ‘normal’. It wont ever wash and intuitively the vast majority of people know it. I suspect that even you know it. You accuse me of unhappy, frustrated and derogatory. If that is the case it is because you continually evade, obscure and obfuscate.