nemafakei Posted June 23, 2004 Posted June 23, 2004 Sorry, I shopuld have been clearer: the daughters were just a sidenote to help show how the gene works. The point is that the gene is passed on through the sisters, for which the brother's genetic suitability is mostly sacrificed.
danielsh Posted June 23, 2004 Posted June 23, 2004 "If you can't logically deny it, throw insults at it in the hope that it will go away."You live your life by this motto, don't you Gunwounds? As far as I can tell, it's much simpler. He aims to antagonize his opponents, reducing them to enraged sputtering. Then his arguments look almost reasonable by comparison.Almost.
Dunenewt Posted June 25, 2004 Posted June 25, 2004 Ok, that Genetic stuff Gunwounds said is rubbish. I'm right handed but left footed however I can now write with either hand. Explain that.
Dante Posted June 25, 2004 Posted June 25, 2004 He also mentioned trauma and the like. I think he also specifically mentioned someone being 'forced' to write with both hands and thus becoming ambidextrous. I'm not saying I agree, I'm just repeating what I think he said.
Dunenewt Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 I wasn't forced though, it's just something that happened when you finish all your exams way too early and have nothing to do.
Dante Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 Exactly. On the other hand, it could be practice. I'm not entirely sure what the point was....And neither do I care, since it wasn't mine anyway. :)
GUNWOUNDS Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 newt .. i said writing with both hands could be forced by parent at young age OR you could voluntarily choose to practice it.
TMA_1 Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 to me, there is no doubt that homosexuality (more than lesbianism, as I have studied about it, and lesbianism seems to be more mental than physiological) is genetic. Does that make it correct then? Lately i have been studying about pedophilia, and right now bills are being passed now to label it as a "disease" that is carried through the genes of a person. Universities like Johns-Hopkins are studying this, and I find that tehre is merit in it, and have studied how hard life can be for individuals that suffer from pedophilia. Does that make it correct though? Does that make it okay to fulfill your physical desires? I know a person with homosexual tendancies, and he does not give in to the desire for having intercourse with another male. (by the way he is not a christian, and he doesnt do it because of any moral belief, simply he believes it isnt natural). See, just because we have genetic disorders that give us any sort of tendancy, does that require us to act on them? no it doesnt, it also doesnt make it correct. but that is my opinion on it's correctness. Also you should have more compassion gunwounds, there are some homosexuals who really dont want this, and like my friend dont act on it because they feel it is not correct, but still suffer from it nonetheless. It is hard and you should have more compassion. I myself dont think it is correct, but understand the pain that is involved.
Dante Posted June 26, 2004 Posted June 26, 2004 Also you should have more compassion gunwounds, there are some homosexuals who really dont want this, and like my friend dont act on it because they feel it is not correct, but still suffer from it nonetheless. It is hard and you should have more compassion. I myself dont think it is correct, but understand the pain that is involved.That's sad... sad sad sad...
TMA_1 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 look, I just read many articles about the genetics involving homosexuality. Many studies show that the genetic predisposition lies with homosexuality, while to this day none of been found for lesbianism.These are my opinions, and why do you feel bad when the same opinions you have effect me the same way as my opinions effect you? Do you think I like seeing what I see involving these issues? no I dont it makes me really sad. Also you dont know me too well dust, and this is a touchy issue, I mean you havent upset me at all, but there are things about this whole situation that are pretty sensitive. what I have said isnt trying to offend you, but if it does I am sorry these are just my opinions, just like you have your opinions. Maybe it would help you to realize though that your opinions effect people just like my opinions do as well. There is no right or wrong in this subjective world we live in, so taking offense would be silly. dont you see what I mean dust?also about the pedophilia thing. Why do you brand that as wrong? by your statements you say you dont like them compared so you have some disliking towards it. If it itself can potentially be genetic, than it is a good example of how many, including many of the gay community cast it as "evil". This is a hipocracy in my opinion. You are morally subjective at one point, then objective another. I mean what are you getting at exactly?
TMA_1 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 hmm somehow I think the issue at hand is a bit more important than "the man" hindering your ambidextrous skills.lol still though see your point. :)
shygirl4 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 I agree, thats why I said the ambidextrous stuff as a after thourt, the main part of my post was the top section.Shy ::)
alchemi2 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 Why is sexuality in humans always linked to repoduction?Many primitive cultures made no connection between sex and reproduction. women can indulge in sex numerous times without concieving or just once and concieve.Sexual attraction is different to procreation.Homosexuality has been around for centurys and has not always been seen as anti social or unacceptable.pedophilla is socially unacceptable nowadays but wasnt always.Standards change as do morals.
TMA_1 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 sex goes along with reproduction because well the male carries sperm in his semen, and females likewise have the counterpart egg. Generally people have sex in order to spark this reproduction. duh? lol ;)Of course I see nothing wrong with couples having sex for recreation, but generally it is for a man and a women who naturally fit eachother. (no pun intended ... that was gross.lol) anyways I hope you see what I am getting at.
GUNWOUNDS Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 in addition to what TMA just said .. Men and women also release phermones and such to attract each other, and a man's musk ordor can actually alter a woman's menstral cycle if she isnt on the pill.
Dante Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 look, I just read many articles about the genetics involving homosexuality. Many studies show that the genetic predisposition lies with homosexuality, while to this day none of been found for lesbianism.Show me the links, show me the evidence...also about the pedophilia thing. Why do you brand that as wrong? by your statements you say you dont like them compared so you have some disliking towards it. If it itself can potentially be genetic, than it is a good example of how many, including many of the gay community cast it as "evil". This is a hipocracy in my opinion. You are morally subjective at one point, then objective another. I mean what are you getting at exactly? I am completely subjective and I detect nothing in my previous post to suggest otherwise. I have no particular hatred for paedophiles, nor do I think they do what they do because of genetics. The reason I complain about people discussing the two together is because everyone who does think objectively will automatically link them as the same cause. One will taint the other. They are different, they are not the same. It's like discussing cats and dogs. Sure, they're both pets, but are they the same species?I think it is more environmental/cognitive ... i mean sexuality is learned in a way.... think about all your first sexual talks (info from parents, friends), sexual experiences, your first porn you ever saw, ... these things shape and mold your mind and i bet people take it for granted. Rather large flaw in your argument there.... People who have had nothing but heterosexuality thrown at them since they were born can still turn out gay. I did. And gay parents will not necessarily produce gay offspring (I mean they have to get the kid from somewhere).
nemafakei Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 Dust: Does not the genetic model (I have no link: I did not read this on the 'net) I suggested before give a possible answer to your question over genetic origin of homosexuality?In general: Note that I don't deny that deviance from your genetic prescription (whichever way it is) can occur.
danielsh Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 in addition to what TMA just said .. Men and women also release phermones and such to attract each other, and a man's musk ordor can actually alter a woman's menstral cycle if she isnt on the pill.
nemafakei Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 "Rather, it would be, "Holy Jesus..." ff.Dan, a tad crude.
danielsh Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 "Rather, it would be, "Holy Jesus..." ff.Dan, a tad crude.Edited. Didn't intend it to be offensive.
TMA_1 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 hehe its okay dan, and though I agree with you to a certain extent, I see that there are relatively few homosexuals who really have the genetic disposition. In reality a lot of it has to do with how one grows up and how one is raised, but there are times when a person will grow up in a "normal WASPish" household and will still turn out to have homosexual tendancies. I think this is because of genetics, and some that really do have these feelings really dont want to have them. I can totally sympathize, because that kind of position is hard to be put through. Nobody likes anything put on them against their want or desire.
danielsh Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 But what you have to realize is that no one chooses his sexuality. The situation is certainly less serious now, but for a long time homosexuals were incredibly marginalized. No one would roll out of bed and think, "It's a gay day today," even if he could. Some people who are inclined to be naturally bisexual might swing both ways, or choose to swing only one way, but that's about the only choice involved.(When I say "naturally," I don't mean "genetically." If a person's life experiences---not necessarily abuse, but any experience capable of triggering change in psyche---lead him in one direction or the other, that's just as natural as if he was born that way to begin with.)
TMA_1 Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 just because something is biologically natural, doesnt mean that it is biologically correct. My sis has a bunch of disabilities, but is that biologically correct? no it isnt. I believe that many cases of homosexuality are genetic. Because of this I think that you dont have to give in to your feelings. That is my opinion though so I think it is silly to argue about my opinions.
Wolf Posted June 27, 2004 Posted June 27, 2004 That's true, TMA. Homosexuality is natural in occurance, yes, but is it the intent of nature for homosexuality to be practiced? In terms of evolution, which requires heterosexual intercourse, it seems as if homosexuality is precluded by nature, at the same time as it is caused by nature. This, however, is easily resolved. The dinosaurs were created by nature, too.
Recommended Posts