Regrets for my tangent … I failed to come back to my original point: statistical research is just that – statistical.
When the science journal says “homosexual males respond to Androstadienone in the same way as heterosexual females” based on statistical research, what it really means is:“enough homosexual males responded the same as heterosexual females … to be statistically significant” If there are many homosexualities as a result of hormonal imbalances at various points in gestation, then we should not, perhaps, expect all homosexuals to respond to pheromones in a uniform way.
naturally, that would be anybodys guess when this subject is discussed from my angle. of course, i did substatiate my claims, however, which is what was asked of me. it is up in the air about whether or not it is a biological issue, or a conscious decision, though. it is obvious in those links that there are people in the gay community that attest to it being a choice, and that the entire ‘born-gay’ theory is nothing more than an attempt to further gay rights. to be honest, the only reason why i’m against the ‘born-gay’ theory is because it implies that peoples orientation is set in stone, and there isn’t a thing they can do about it. i think that is utter bullshit, if you ask me. again, with such a theory you can imagine the ignorance that has already infiltrated our society with people automatically stereotyping others as being in the closet. that is what irks me about it. i cannot stand people who try to convince others that they’re gay. that’s nonsense, and that’s what i find intolerable.
You basically summed up my feelings about ignorance. It is impossible for anybody to “know” somebody is “in the closet.” I don’t care how much they fit the stereotype, no outside perception validates the circumstance. It is the person that ultimately knows themselves, regardless of the issue.
I don’t see how anybody can justify ignorance. By the way, just because I don’t feel people are born gay doesn’t mean that I’m a homophobe. I don’t care what people do with their lives as long as it is between consenting adults. The moral issue is subjective, and that again is only perceptive of the individual. There are many religious folk that find homosexuality to be tolerable within the belief system itself, however, I am not one of those people. I just feel that it is a choice, a rather complicated one, but it is a choice, nontheless. If that somehow conflicts with your viewpoint, which it apparently does, then I think it’s safe to agree to disagree.
Folks, we have to have perspective here. After all, the earth is only 5,000 years old, Adam and Eve rode dinosaursto work every day, and the Grand Canyon was created by Noah’s Flood.
Also, don’t forget, you weren’t born, you were delivered by a Stork.
Oh, yes if you take a vacation, you don’t want to sail off the edge of the earth, since it is flat after all.
No no! The world was created in 4004BC! That makes it close to 6000 years, not 5000!
I live not far from a community that made mention in a book about “Fads and Fallicies.” Seems some of the founders (and I suspect some residents even today) are adherents of the flat earth concept…
Also: sorry lor. I was born male, and with red/blonde hair. But I’m sure that with proper counseling I will come around.
I had some pretty black and white ideas back in my younger days too. Then experience intervened and wisdom grew…
By the way, according to your “theory” of choice, when do heterosexuals choose to be attracted to members of the opposite sex/gender? Is it a difficult decision? Is it subject to review and reconsideration? Why or why not?
I’m with you and Ricky on this one, with one exception: when you really, really want to bed that person, then perhaps, for a while anyway, nothing else compares in importance.
It is a matter of environment & nurture. I used to play House as a child in kindergarten with my focus on the mother and father role as a family. Sexual attraction is just that, sexual attraction… you decide how you want to excerise it.
I think you’re taking my argument a little too literal. Nobody wakes up one day and “decides” to have sex with the same gender. This is an acquired attraction that is formed through gradual exposure.
Not at all. You stated that it was a conscious choice.
Now you’re saying it’s largely not conscious but acquired almost invisibly, in not-noticed increments over time? Is it possible to tell, at any given point in time, whether a person is 30% or 68% of the way to choosing? And what about those inconvenient bisexuals? Are they refusing to choose, or are they choosing both?
I do agree, no matter how sexual orientation comes to be, how one chooses to express their sexuality is a choice, and that choice is fully protected under the principles of free speech and privacy, subject to the common limits we’ve adopted: public indecency, child abuse, informed consent between adults, etc.
But you know that the kernel of the argument has nothing to do with the expression of sexuality, it has to do with the source of one’s sexual orientation. So why the smoke screen?
Oh, I think it is noticeable, but so subtle that it is easily ignored. My thing is, if there is a biological element to homosexuality, than it is within all of us. However, I cannot level with the biological argument, because of the fact that there are other bizarre sexual attractions ala pedophilia, beastiality, necrophilia, and other fetishes that account for this much broader spectrum of disturbed psychology. I think the same acquired attraction applied to homosexuality can be also applied for the above examples. I understand the difference in that homosexuality is between two consenting adults (usually), but I cannot escape the fact that is psychological. Of course, there has to be a biological role in the attraction, because that is how every living creature is able to function. Still, while I’m heterosexual, I am not attracted to every female, and thus my biological function complies with my psyche. See what I’m saying? There is a mind/body connection that still needs to be explained by science (please link me to a source that does, i’m willing to read up on it) that could very well better explain sexual orientation. The mind is a very complex structure as we all know, and thus I see cutting this subject strictly to just a biological stance is a bit shallow.
I keep forgetting to ask about the hormonal imbalances during gestation. I’d like to read up on it. The reason why I’m not so sure about that theory is because there was a guy who had no testosterone at all, and with a few visits to the doctor for a few shots, he was able to raise his test. levels to normal level. I shouldn’t say “raise” his test. levels, because he had NO testosterone at all. He said that he didn’t have any sexual attraction whatsoever until he recieved the shots. I’ll try to find an article on it. And as far as the brain changing, I know that it changes all of the time ala while meditating or praying. If you are talking about studies comparing changes in the brain from homosexual men to heterosexual men, well, then I’d like to see like comparisons for other sexual attractions aswell. Bisexuality is just like everything else, it is gradual exposure, and “experimentation” that leads to this acquired attraction.
Evolution is a stretch, aswell as the Big Bang Theory. Either could be applied to religion considering the fact that it could be simply stated that it is the process in which God created the universe and every living thing in it. So, it doesn’t really disprove Gods existence at all. I just find both to be incredible on so many levels (while realizing that religion also is a stretch to some in the same manner). There is a lot more to religion than you’re used to hearing on the surface. Ever hear of the pre-Adamite earth? the Nephilim? gap theory? Btw, they did discover the Ark, and there is evidence of a world flood.
waits for somebody to bring up that ridiculous discovery of Yeshuas tomb
it is right about HERE when i say mindset has lost all credibility with me .
its one thing to be ignorant, and its another to lump healthy people people in with unhealthy people because you cant wrap your head around something.
