gay people in WROL

[crudos]

i agree, alsong as we can acknowledge that homosexuality is a defect and isnt something one should hope to become im fine with it. i dont think i agree with the "gay pride" festivals and all that. you dont see people having festivals about how proud they are they got cancer. they hold charity events to raise money to help people get rid of the disease. some gays treat it as though they are happy they are defected. It is a human defect and isnt something to be happy you got. beyond that even with defects they still have rights.

@TG i hope my factual opinion dosent cause the thread to be deleted.

Defect? Wow..... just.... wow  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at
Ken, no offense, but that is THE MOST ASININE statement I've read here, or just about any other forum ever.

[Kentactic]

i agree, alsong as we can acknowledge that homosexuality is a defect and isnt something one should hope to become im fine with it. i dont think i agree with the "gay pride" festivals and all that. you dont see people having festivals about how proud they are they got cancer. they hold charity events to raise money to help people get rid of the disease. some gays treat it as though they are happy they are defected. It is a human defect and isnt something to be happy you got. beyond that even with defects they still have rights.

@TG i hope my factual opinion dosent cause the thread to be deleted.

Defect? Wow..... just.... wow  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at
Ken, no offense, but that is THE MOST ASININE statement I've read here, or just about any other forum ever.

haha so im guessing you think the world was designed to thrive with organisms that are unable to reproduce?

[sledge]

After thinking about it I'm having a hard time disagreeing with Ken's logic.  None the less, if their trigger finger still works and they have other uses I have no problem with them in the group.

One less lion to compete against for the pride of lionesses for those who do like the idea of passing on their DNA..

[crudos]

Gay people can reproduce just fine, just not when paired with the same sex. The only real defect I see is the inordinate fear of gayness by supposedly straight people. Besides, the hot lesbians in my WROL group trump whatever anyone else has, so there.
 

[hjmoosejaw]

I will allow this thread provided that it remains positive. References to sexual preference as a handicap are below us, even if intended as humor.

Let's not stoop nor bow gentlemen.

Damn it TG, I had a pretty good one. Kill Joy. LOL

[Alex1992]

Sledge you made my day with that comment hehehe 

[thatGuy]

You said "factual" Ken, cite your sources or zip it.

[Colombo]

Being kinda involved here (quoted earlier) I'll toss some thoughts in the ring. First off if I make a personal attack it will be announced, sarcasm flows and I also usually have a smirk on my face that you can't see. It may be that I know something you do not know...  or I'm just old and crazy.

Strictly from a cold hearted darwinian point of view any behavioral or physical condition that detracts from a species or one of its subgroups survival or propagation is in fact a defect or  handicap. Physical capability means nothing without the mental capability in nature, having bypassed this thru our use of tools and technology we may have actually removed some element of natural selection of non viable aberrations, some examples of the species simply would not survive without the protective environment created by society (

Matt Damon in Team America

)
Add in the element of political correctness now scouring creative or independent thoughts of all traces of originality or the slightest controversy in this country like a sirocco and the actual cause or causes of homosexuality will probably never be known. To actually point to a cause would in itself imply a "cure" or "prevention" either of which would indicate a very politically offensive statement to start with. Only an insensitive knuckle draging lout would be so uncouth as to even suggest a cure or treatment for what is not a problem (

Monty Python's Military Fairy

)

You said "factual" Ken, cite your sources or zip it.

Personal opinion here... An argument using logic should not require any source or credit be assigned but rather should simply be evaluated and considered on its own merit or logically dismembered (

Monty Python-The Black Knight

)

[Kentactic]

You said "factual" Ken, cite your sources or zip it.

i didnt click around much i hope this article covers me enough.

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gay-brain-science-homosexuality-a-birth-defect/

like columbo said... natural selection has been bypassed in humans through modern science. i do beleive the same gay traits may also occur in nature with other organisms from time to time but obviously the defect stops immediatly with no further breeding from the defected organism. It can only be obvious something IS wrong with a homosexual.... its silly to deny it... like all mammals were suppose to breed with the oposite sex. if an organism wishes only to try and breed with the same sex only failure will occur and eventually they will die with no children to carry the gene. unfourtunatly humans realise WHY they wont have kids mateing with the same sex so they some times will involve a member of the opposite sex or atleast their egg or sperm. essentially they are using a loop hole in nature. something that isnt suppose to happen. now im not saying if a homosexual has a kid the kid will be a homosexual too...but... im sure the percentage of that happening goes way up. its only would make sense if its a physical defect that the odds of a child born from one with that defect will be greater to also have the defect then a child born from two parents without the defect. im taller then average because my parents were. my sister is very short born from the same parents.. no gaurantees but the odds are higher. my brother also is bigger then the average male like me.

[CrookedSights]

There is no gay gene Ken. Though both pro and anti-gay's have tried to find it time and time again it's just not there. So the notion that homosexuality is passed on to any offspring is just ridiculous.

[Kentactic]

There is no gay gene Ken. Though both pro and anti-gay's have tried to find it time and time again it's just not there. So the notion that homosexuality is passed on to any offspring is just ridiculous.

science aside ask any gay if he/she was born gay....they ALL say yes... if your born that way then its genetic. no one decides to be gay or has life experiences that turns them gay... if your born gay your gay. most know theyre gay very early in childhood even before puberty. if its not phsycological its physical. in the link i provided it says they notice a certain area of the brain in gay men is smaller like that of a straight woman... sounds pretty genetic to me.

Would hormonal intervention work in humans? Should we try it? Some thinkers are intrigued. Last year, the Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, wrote: ?If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use.? Mohler told the Associated Press that morally, this would be no different from curing fetal blindness or any other ?medical problem.? The Rev. Joseph Fessio, editor of the press that publishes the pope?s work, agreed: ?Same-sex activity is considered disordered. If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb ? that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science.?

So what do YOU call something your BORN with if not genetic? does it happen when the mother smokes while pregnant?... they are coming out gay one way or another. either its genetics or trauma durring pregnancy.

[NOLA556]

while I don't agree with Ken that the tendency to be gay is genetic, I will concur that children raised by gays probably have a higher probability of being gay in their adult lives.

i guess the big difference is that I don't view it as the epidemic that some people view it as. even gay people will feel the need to carry on their name into the next generation, and if they can't do it through the natural means, surely someone will offer their services. so the whole "gay people will kill civilization" argument goes right out the window. IF we lived in a world where there was NO POSSIBLE WAY to conceive a child outside of a man and woman who were in love/lust/committed relationship, then that whole argument might hold water, but we don't live in that fictional world.  there's a million different ways to have surrogate pregnancies and have that child delivered to you on voluntary terms.

is it unnatural? yes. of course it is. but is it going to bring down society? the Darwinian demise of mankind? no. of course it's not.  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at

[crudos]

Summed up....
Ken thinks being gay as a genetic defect, while most sane people do not.

You tried NOLA, but you know how this thread was going to turn out before you posted, right?

[Kentactic]

while I don't agree with Ken that the tendency to be gay is genetic, I will concur that children raised by gays probably have a higher probability of being gay in their adult lives.

i guess the big difference is that I don't view it as the epidemic that some people view it as. even gay people will feel the need to carry on their name into the next generation, and if they can't do it through the natural means, surely someone will offer their services. so the whole "gay people will kill civilization" argument goes right out the window. IF we lived in a world where there was NO POSSIBLE WAY to conceive a child outside of a man and woman who were in love/lust/committed relationship, then that whole argument might hold water, but we don't live in that fictional world.  there's a million different ways to have surrogate pregnancies and have that child delivered to you on voluntary terms.

is it unnatural? yes. of course it is. but is it going to bring down society? the Darwinian demise of mankind? no. of course it's not.  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at

im not sure if the whole "bring an end to mankind" comment was towards me or not so ill just clearify i dont have any concerns about gays slowing down the reproduction of mankind at all.

[NOLA556]

while I don't agree with Ken that the tendency to be gay is genetic, I will concur that children raised by gays probably have a higher probability of being gay in their adult lives.

i guess the big difference is that I don't view it as the epidemic that some people view it as. even gay people will feel the need to carry on their name into the next generation, and if they can't do it through the natural means, surely someone will offer their services. so the whole "gay people will kill civilization" argument goes right out the window. IF we lived in a world where there was NO POSSIBLE WAY to conceive a child outside of a man and woman who were in love/lust/committed relationship, then that whole argument might hold water, but we don't live in that fictional world.  there's a million different ways to have surrogate pregnancies and have that child delivered to you on voluntary terms.

is it unnatural? yes. of course it is. but is it going to bring down society? the Darwinian demise of mankind? no. of course it's not.  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at

im not sure if the whole "bring an end to mankind" comment was towards me or not so ill just clearify i dont have any concerns about gays slowing down the reproduction of mankind at all.

I suppose that one was just in reference to alot of the anti-gay arguments that I've heard in the past. you didn't say that directly but what you were saying was starting to remind me of that. anyway, all is well. nbd. (not sarcastic)

[Kentactic]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

[NOLA556]

Summed up....
Ken thinks being gay as a genetic defect, while most sane people do not.

You tried NOLA, but you know how this thread was going to turn out before you posted, right?

I thought i knew but actually the response has be unexpectedly positive.

[Kentactic]

while I don't agree with Ken that the tendency to be gay is genetic, I will concur that children raised by gays probably have a higher probability of being gay in their adult lives.

i guess the big difference is that I don't view it as the epidemic that some people view it as. even gay people will feel the need to carry on their name into the next generation, and if they can't do it through the natural means, surely someone will offer their services. so the whole "gay people will kill civilization" argument goes right out the window. IF we lived in a world where there was NO POSSIBLE WAY to conceive a child outside of a man and woman who were in love/lust/committed relationship, then that whole argument might hold water, but we don't live in that fictional world.  there's a million different ways to have surrogate pregnancies and have that child delivered to you on voluntary terms.

is it unnatural? yes. of course it is. but is it going to bring down society? the Darwinian demise of mankind? no. of course it's not.  [img]http://www.arrse.co.uk/at

im not sure if the whole "bring an end to mankind" comment was towards me or not so ill just clearify i dont have any concerns about gays slowing down the reproduction of mankind at all.

I suppose that one was just in reference to alot of the anti-gay arguments that I've heard in the past. you didn't say that directly but what you were saying was starting to remind me of that. anyway, all is well. nbd. (not sarcastic)

Gotcha thanks for clearifying sir  [URL=http://www.smileyvault.co

[NOLA556]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

well it's the same way religious people (of ALL different persuasions) KNOW that their faith is THE ONE TRUE FAITH.

let me throw you a curveball here. ok, the majority of crime is committed by blacks, even though blacks only make up less than 20% of the population. so does that mean that blacks' brains are less developed, therefore more proned to criminal activity? or does it mean that poor standards of living breeds criminal behavior? I choose the latter.

so basically your theory that homosexuality is genetic, is no different from saying that criminal behavior among blacks is genetic. it doesn't make sense. if it were genetic, you'd have the same gay demographic per capita within rural Christian communities as you do in heavy libturd communities like L.A. and SanFran... just the same as you'd have the same demographic of criminality amongst wealthy blacks living in quiet neighborhoods.

it's environmental, not genetic.

[crudos]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

Dude, you dug a impossible hole when you said being gay was a defect. Is being white a defect? How about black? How about high IQ people? Here are your exact words....

i agree, alsong as we can acknowledge that homosexuality is a defect and isnt something one should hope to become im fine with it.

My feelings have little to do with anything in this thread.

[Kentactic]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

well it's the same way religious people (of ALL different persuasions) KNOW that their faith is THE ONE TRUE FAITH.

let me throw you a curveball here. ok, the majority of crime is committed by blacks, even though blacks only make up less than 20% of the population. so does that mean that blacks' brains are less developed, therefore more proned to criminal activity? or does it mean that poor standards of living breeds criminal behavior? I choose the latter.

so basically your theory that homosexuality is genetic, is no different from saying that criminal behavior among blacks is genetic. it doesn't make sense. if it were genetic, you'd have the same gay demographic per capita within rural Christian communities as you do in heavy libturd communities like L.A. and SanFran... just the same as you'd have the same demographic of criminality amongst wealthy blacks living in quiet neighborhoods.

it's environmental, not genetic.

the main error in the example your giving is that if you ask a black male who just robbed a liquor store why he did it youll 99% of the time not get the answer "ive known i would rob that liquor store since i was 4 years old". Gays almost ALL claim they were BORN gay... youll never find a black man who claims he was born to be a criminal litterally.

Next thing is your saying that youd have the same gay ratio in all communities if it was genetic...but why? theres more mexicans in a certain area of the country and theres more gays in particular areas aswell.. thats just how the breeding happened.

Do you deny my claim that most gays say they were born gay? the people in question are saying it... how can you dispute that? its like asking a guy with one leg where his other leg went and he says he was born with only one leg and then you say no your environment made you lose that leg... i think the guy knows if he had a darn leg when he was born.

[Kentactic]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

Dude, you dug a impossible hole when you said being gay was a defect. Is being white a defect? How about black? How about high IQ people? Here are your exact words....

i agree, alsong as we can acknowledge that homosexuality is a defect and isnt something one should hope to become im fine with it.

My feelings have little to do with anything in this thread.

Do most gays say they were born gay?

Im not in any hole.....

being white is genetic. if i was black and lost my skin tone from vitilgo (loss of pigmintation) then yes that would be a defect. having blue eyes isnt a defect but being born blind in one eye is. your crossing a distinct line that cant be comparable to the discussion. In your rational being born blind isnt a defect. in your rational being born with three eyes isnt a defect.

[Kentactic]

In a debate one guy says some thing and then the other guy talks on what he said and comes back with his own points. in this debate id just continue to repeat "almost all gays claim they were born gay" on each turn until i got a response to it. but i have a feeling i may never get one.

[NOLA556]

It seems as though people have more FEELINGS on the subject then logical thinking. if some one wishes to explain how being born gay and it not being genetic can be possible please by all means speak up. as far as i can see theres only one side to this debate. zero evidence has been provided to support the contrary except FEELINGS about what peoplethink i spolitically correct. i just wish there was a gay person on here to back me up. saying Gays are born gay isnt like the "N" word guys its ok i swear. just like the "N" word even THEY say it.

well it's the same way religious people (of ALL different persuasions) KNOW that their faith is THE ONE TRUE FAITH.

let me throw you a curveball here. ok, the majority of crime is committed by blacks, even though blacks only make up less than 20% of the population. so does that mean that blacks' brains are less developed, therefore more proned to criminal activity? or does it mean that poor standards of living breeds criminal behavior? I choose the latter.

so basically your theory that homosexuality is genetic, is no different from saying that criminal behavior among blacks is genetic. it doesn't make sense. if it were genetic, you'd have the same gay demographic per capita within rural Christian communities as you do in heavy libturd communities like L.A. and SanFran... just the same as you'd have the same demographic of criminality amongst wealthy blacks living in quiet neighborhoods.

it's environmental, not genetic.

the main error in the example your giving is that if you ask a black male who just robbed a liquor store why he did it youll 99% of the time not get the answer "ive known i would rob that liquor store since i was 4 years old". Gays almost ALL claim they were BORN gay... youll never find a black man who claims he was born to be a criminal litterally. it doesn't matter what bullshit answer THEY give you. people who are raised in anti-gay environments turn out anti-gay. people who are raised in comfortable environments generally don't turn to crime. the actually people involved will offer all kinds of silly reasons, but as a third party looking in, the true answer is obvious.

Next thing is your saying that youd have the same gay ratio in all communities if it was genetic...but why? theres more mexicans in a certain area of the country and theres more gays in particular areas aswell.. thats just how the breeding happened. so you're saying that it has NOTHING to do with the politics of the area? NOTHING to do with geographical proximity to Mexico?... lol. cmon bro. there's more Mexicans out your way because you're right next to Me-hee-co, *sensing opportunity to make auxiliary point!!*... hence the larger number of sympathizers of illegal aliens, and people who oppose border protection. like I stated before, environment, not genetics.

Do you deny my claim that most gays say they were born gay? the people in question are saying it... how can you dispute that? its like asking a guy with one leg where his other leg went and he says he was born with only one leg and then you say no your environment made you lose that leg... i think the guy knows if he had a darn leg when he was born. complete and totally different story bro. being born with or without physical deformities has completely and totally outside of what we're talking about. if a little boy decided that he liked to play with barbie dolls when he was a toddler, and the parents took the barbies away from him, odds are he'd turn out just like every other man. but if they allowed him to obsess over the barbies, he may adopt a more feminine demeanor. again, not genetics, environment, and (here's a new one) EXPOSURE

[crudos]

Ken, I suggest you find some gay folks and have this discussion with them on your factual opinion that being gay is a defect. Your just using a circular argument as far as I can see. Going to bed now.