What is your attitude to gays and lesbians?

[itsmeJonB]

no one can own anyone, slavery is abolished and illegal

 

[Francis]

Agreed, that shit looks fun...only problem is they destroy your life if you dissent
Can't just be in it for the free snacks and batshit stories, one has to commit till death do us part.

Fixed..

 

[Panacea]

no one can own anyone, slavery is abolished and illegal

Oh I think even Lincoln would agree with this owning.
*cheese*

*cymbal crash*

 

[MainerMikeBrown]

It's odd to me that in today's society, it's considered wrong to discriminate against people due to the color of their skin but it's still OK to dislike homosexuals.

We've come a long way since the days where a person could voice their racist views, and I'm glad for that. But to a point it's still OK in the minds of many to dislike or even hate gays and lesbians.

And that just shows that our society has a long way to go.

 

[Panacea]

It's odd to me that in today's society, it's considered wrong to discriminate against people due to the color of their skin but it's still OK to dislike homosexuals.

We've come a long way since the days where a person could voice their racist views, and I'm glad for that. But to a point it's still OK in the minds of many to dislike or even hate gays and lesbians.

And that just shows that our society has a long way to go.

For sure. Hell, even sexism still exists, and it takes different forms (sexism against men)...we never seem to get it quite right with tolerance, let alone acceptance.

 

[The Doc]

It's odd to me that in today's society, it's considered wrong to discriminate against people due to the color of their skin but it's still OK to dislike homosexuals.

We've come a long way since the days where a person could voice their racist views, and I'm glad for that. But to a point it's still OK in the minds of many to dislike or even hate gays and lesbians.

And that just shows that our society has a long way to go.

You see we are born with our skin color. It is wrong to dislike someone for what they are born with. Homosexuals arent born sick, it gradually occurs and can be cured.

 

[Tim]

You see we are born with our skin color. It is wrong to dislike someone for what they are born with. Homosexuals arent born sick, it gradually occurs and can be cured.

And women aren't born with breasts either, they develop over time due to the release of hormones and chemicals in the brain. Does that mean getting breasts is a sickness?
Men aren't born with a deep voice and facial hair, that also develops over time due to hormones and chemical changes in the brain.

What about sexual attraction to others? Doesn't that come on during puberty as well? Isn't that controlled by the release of hormones and chemicals in the brain?

You keep talking about homosexuality as a sickness, something to be cured. And you keep going back to the lack of evidence of a "gay gene" So where is your proof that it's a sickness? Show me the proof that our sexuality isn't controlled by hormones and chemicals in the brain and not by genes.
You have yet to show any evidence that homosexuality is a sickness.

And before you throw out the "people have been cured" bullshit, let me remind you that it doesn't prove anything.
I could take a group of people who only love chocolate ice cream and convert some of them to only eat vanilla ice cream. It doesn't mean that liking chocolate ice cream was bad to begin with, it only means that I have imposed my preference on them and suppressed their natural affinity to like chocolate ice cream.

 

[itsmeJonB]

You see we are born with our skin color. It is wrong to dislike someone for what they are born with. Homosexuals arent born sick, it gradually occurs and can be cured.

You realize how insane that sounds to rational people right?
Considering science disagrees with your views, its more widely accepted that a person may actually be born homosexual. I'm not saying that you sound like your brainwashed or anything, but unlike science, no one studies religion and reports new findings because the source, the bible, never changes. Its a book with dead authors and no cross references, in high school it wouldn't receive a passing grade!

 

[The Doc]

The gay gene theory is inconclusive, therefore the whole born gay theory is worth as much as a smushed cupcake

 

[itsmeJonB]

And the holy bible is full of contradictions and scientific untruths, so what does that make it worth as much? Whatever it is I bet it tastes worse than a cupcake.

Also if god said let there be light on the first day, but didn't create the sun until the fourth, then who was phone?

 

[Codrus]

And women aren't born with breasts either, they develop over time due to the release of hormones and chemicals in the brain. Does that mean getting breasts is a sickness?

if thats the case,...we have some women around here who are deathly ill

 

[darkcgi]

saw a chick in high school that had two tits and three nipples
sucks she didnt have the third tit for the nipple however it would have been in a weird place
just below her right tit
new a guy who went to surger to have 1 of his three nuts taken out
he came back with only one they had to take two instead
i would have kept the 3 super nut
kapow

 

[Francis]

The gay gene theory is inconclusive

Your own words are your worst enemy.

 

[The Doc]

if thats the case,...we have some women around here who are deathly ill

No because you see growing breasts are normal, being gay is abnormal.

And the holy bible is full of contradictions and scientific untruths, so what does that make it worth as much? Whatever it is I bet it tastes worse than a cupcake.

Also if god said let there be light on the first day, but didn't create the sun until the fourth, then who was phone?

Thats fine, were arguing gay people here. Im sitting in a room rightnow with now windows but I can see. Thats because i have lights in my room that arent the sun. Therefore logic says God created light before the sun. Which isnt unheard because im sitting in a room with no windows but there is light. I googled your question and in less then 1 minuite found the answer. Please google theese things instead of wasting my time and bandwith. If you want to start a contradictions in the bible thread go ahead and start one and I will gladly argue with you there. Im trying to argue gay people not being born gay here, and keep getting sidetracked with other arguments.

Your own words are your worst enemy.

Someone has yet to show me proof of a gay gene in humans

 

[Francis]

Someone has yet to show me proof of a gay gene in humans

But you have yet to show it's not.. That argument is moot.. In fact there is more proof there is than isn't..

 

[The Doc]

Ok heres my proof. No gay gene has been found. Therefore you cant prove your born that way. Your genes are what your born with aside from the insticts to cry and suck on a nipple.

 

[Francis]

Ok heres my proof. No gay gene has been found. Therefore you cant prove your born that way. Your genes are what your born with aside from the insticts to cry and suck on a nipple.

That's not proof.. That's opinion...

Besides, if you and when you have a baby you will find out it will try to suckle any nipple in sight when it is hungry, man or woman..

 

[The Doc]

That's not proof.. That's opinion...

Besides, if you and when you have a baby you will find out it will try to suckle any nipple in sight when it is hungry, man or woman..

how is it an oppinion? If being gay cant be found in genetics, how else could someone be born gay.

Oh and i agree, a baby would suck on any nipple. Even immitation ones (baby bottles)

 

[Francis]

how is it an oppinion? If being gay cant be found in genetics, how else could someone be born gay.

Oh and i agree, a baby would suck on any nipple. Even immitation ones (baby bottles)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

I have given you this link that gives other links ( because we all know Wiki is not 100% accurate unless it has reference ) but it will do for now..

The basics is in here and seeing there is enough evidence to point to a combination, the proof is now on your to disprove it and all the links you have given have been busted as religious.

Plus current research on animals ( which we are ) has proven you can alter a gene. This would mean someone could well be born without the missing ingredient to be heterosexual..

As indicated before, it will be near impossible to find multiple completely heterosexual people who will be willing to undergo the testing required and alteration to see if the combination will succeed.

Just as you are Straight person, I doubt a Gay person would want to undergo this when they finally come to term with their reality so enough evidence is there to prove a gene exists, just not enough to disprove it..

 

[The Doc]

Theese sites are non-religeous

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Culture/Default.aspx?id=528376 (2009)
http://curtis-cost.newsvine.com/_news/2010/12/23/5700410-doctor-says-no-gay-gene-has-been-found (2010)

Also, i have already posted the link earlier in the thread but the APA no longer stands behind the Gay Gene theory.

Yes human beings are animals. But the difference between us and lab rats its tremendous. Rats have genes that give them tails. We dont. Thats 1 gene they have that we dont. Therefore they could have an extra gene that could make them gay, and we wouldent have it. Is that study only for Lab Rats? Have they dont this with other animals?