WTF is this forum coming to? Awesome discussions on life, the universe & everything!

I'm not so sure it's that long off, genetics is advancing in leaps and bounds. People may "poo poo" the idea that parents would do this, all I have to say is look at India/China and the female population. EOS.

 

Thanks Asura but I do understand his view point, I was just trying to get him to give a rational reason for his belief which he failed to do repeatedly.

 

Want to provide some factual information to back up that claim homosexuality is genetic?

 

Actual facts? sure I could look something up on Google and post it. If not genetic then what else? environmental? social? if one of those two, then we must assume that the homosexual condition is reversible, yet modern "progressive" "dogma" is they are "born that way" i.e. genetic.

I have accepted modern "progressive" "dogma".

Am I wrong for doing so?

 

face palm moment

you just defaced my value system, good versus evil, you know the good versus evil that star-wars brings. I'm an INFP http://typelogic.com/infp.html

you do remember that my first sexual experience was with a girl and i am still sexually attracted to women as well as men, it certainly hasn't caused me any issues.

I love the way abortion rolls off your tongue as if that is an answer.

my eyes are wide open like a deer in headlights, that with my mouth wide open (and there is no cock in sight)

 

One other quick point, I do know for a fact, that genetic sexual mutations occur. There are human hermaphrodites, human Chimeras and others. Can I not take the leap that a boy would be born with a genetic affection to boys and a girl born with a genetic affection to girls?

I am certainly not judging right or wrong here of a genetic condition. I could judge right or wrong on actions if I chose.

Please keep in mind, once sin was introduced to this world, it became imperfect. All sorts of problems have arisen because of this. Including the homosexual condition, yes?

 

Sin does not exist and was never introduced, it was made up and is believed mainly by Christians.

I agree that sexual mutations occur in nature but the ones you have mentioned are physical not psychological so I don't think you can make that leap without further proof. So you believe that homosexuality is a burden on the "sufferer" of this condition and his or her family?

 

Are you able to make a post without it containing some sexual remarks?

No one remembers your first sexual encounter. Your enthusiasm for bringing it up and constantly making sexual comments would indicate that you think this will get you attention on here?

 

I haven't prescribed any answer as of yet, just my thoughts on the future of homosexuality. Your bi-sexuality is a smaller subset of the homosexual condition.

Would I want a child aborted because it was a girl? a la China/India? Hell no! Yet there are possibly by now multi millions in this world who have done so. Does that make it right? In those peoples mind, apparently yes. In a secular, morally relevant world, absent of absolutes, who are we to prescribe right and wrong to those whom have done such a thing?

I know your values and Morals and have NO PROBLEM with them, and quite admire you for them.

 

I know for a fact that children will take on mental traits and responses to environmental stimuli similar to parents that they have minimal to no exposure to. I need no study or scientific paper to tell me that. I'd bet the majority of adults with children would agree just from seeing their children grow.
Me knowing that, there is no doubt in my mind that there is much in the brain that is genetically passed on. So as progressive ideology states, and I accept, they are born that way.

As far as homosexuality being a burden, I unfortunately only have anecdotal proof, through news stories of the suffering that these young children go through as they discover/decide they are homosexual, and come out to their peers.

 

As longweight said, sin is a part of the Christian worldview and is of no consequence to people who do not hold that worldview.

But longweight, you can't say things like "X does not exist" because you do not have the knowledge required to make that statement as an absolute. The invisible pink unicorn doesn't exist as far as I know, but it might; so I cannot say categorically that it does not.

 

Actually it was all brought up in context and directed at IDS-IPS.

As for attention here, give it a rest, if i want attention i know where and how to get it and it is not here, the way i post is the way i am, which i wont be changing any time soon.


longweight do you actually have a sense of fun (or are you one of those people who would rather go shopping then have sex all day), i take it you don't watch southpark or anything else with innuendo, say family guy.

 

made a little fix for you, I think you prolly meant it that way.

Babe, I know you directed it to your hubby. look, some peoples are intimidated by a strong sexual woman. I do see the hypocrisy in some areas of this forum that allows some males to post sexual things, yet when a woman does it, it's all "T'sk T'sk" on them.

We've been around long enough........ nothing new I suppose.

 

well longweight was suggesting in another certain thread to search for topless pics, hahaha

you know you really shouldn't preach longweight then try to clean up your posts

http://forums.bit-tech.net/showpost.php?p=2984512&postcount=3389

 

I bet longweight would prescribe sin as something other or more than just a Christian view and as more a religious view (Judaic, Muslim, etc.). Correct me if I've implied you have a differing view.


The secular view of "sin is only a religious thing", to be dismissed by the enlightened, I do find curious at times.
With out moral absolutes your left with relevants. How am I to accept relevant morals, as they always change....How am I to accept that killing babies is ok in one society and wrong in another?

I'm tired and not even sure I'm making sense any longer....maybe time for sleep.

 

Lordy, this has ran on a bit. OK:

@ Kayinblack: consider my position on homosexuality the same as Gallileo's. The science speaks for itself. Those who think homosexuality is "wrong" or unnatural are obviously still catching up in knowledge (this leads up to something, bear with me).

There is indeed a genetic component to sexual orientation. Why else would homosexuality exist everywhere in the world, to the same extent, regardless of whether the local culture is tolerant or hostile to it, even in the face of strong persecution and indoctrination against it? In fact there are about 16 different factors that influence the physical and paychological gender and sexual orientation that we end up with, genetic, physiological, developmental and psychosocial. It's complex stuff.

Although homosexuality has a genetic component, it is not shown to be hereditary as such. Homosexual parents produce straight children; straight parents produce the occasional homosexual child. Nor is it taught: children raised by homosexual couples have been shown to grow up straight and have no gender or sexual orientation confusion (in fact, in terms of overall adjustment, children of lesbian parents do slightly better than children raised by straight or gay parents). Knowledge, right there: people can stick their fingers in their ears and chant their prefered verse loudly, but yet it moves.

Although I'm sure that eventually science could identify homosexually wired children in utero, I think it is more likely that by that time culture will have changed. Knowledge eventually catches up to most people, and it is just crazy Fundies (including of atheist denomination) that still try to pretend we live in the Dark Ages.

 

Not trying to hide anything! I only implied it I didn't make openly sexual statements like you repeatedly do.

 

Oh, by the way: a sin is to treat people (including yourself) as things.

That is all.

 

well i'm used to pulling all nighters, you on the other hand are not.

 

Kayin; I'll come back to you this evening after work - you now have my brain ticking over with absolute truth, at first I thought it would have to be included with the mixing back in of god, but based on world view and perception it could easily exist without a divine entity.

IDS-IPS, I'm not sure if you watched Gattaca all the way to the end, but the point was that genetic tinkering for a preferred goal is wrong - for further speculation on the matter read Joe haldemans forever trilogy.

Yes I understand that one of the major human drives is to procreate, racial survival is locked into our genes, but the talk about the human race dying out if homosexuality becomes the standard is soon to be rubbish. Viable mice have already been bred from two male hosts - no cloning, both males are genetic parents to the infants, which can breed naturally. And with our rampant population problem, who's to say that encouraged, even enforced homosexuality won't become a political leaning?