are people born ****

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

[QUOTE="Solid_Snake325"]There's not always a clear reason dude, you can't just have as simple cause of such a life changing experience. You'd have to dig deeply and talk to them about what exactly happened.Solid_Snake325

There is no clear reason why anyone is gay But what is clear is that it's not a choice. Never is, never was.

No.. usually the parents disown them, or make them feel so bad for what their genes caused that they commit suicide as a teenager.

What I'm saying is that people are born gay but they can be forced straight if their parents try really, really hard. Like back then.

Video_Game_King

XD, that's laughable.

No. . .homosexuality comes from hormone imbalances and early psychological issues. It's not genetic.Silver_Dragon17

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]No. . .homosexuality comes from hormone imbalances and early psychological issues. It's not genetic.quiglythegreat

No. . .in other words, no.:|

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]No. . .homosexuality comes from hormone imbalances and early psychological issues. It's not genetic.Silver_Dragon17

No. . .in other words, no.:|

[QUOTE="Video_Game_King"]

What I'm saying is that people are born gay but they can be forced straight if their parents try really, really hard. Like back then.

mentalabc123

XD, that's laughable.

How many gay people were there in 1884? Surely, there's a bit more evidence from back then to infer sexuality. Christian values have diminished, for better or for worse. Better means gay acceptance, worse means a-holes outlawing gay marriage.

Some people probably are, but it really doesn't matter.Hinata237

Yes they are. Being gay isn't a choice, its just how people are. Mumbles527

the reason I asked this is because in my 1st period class I brought up the possibility that homosexuality might be in fact genetic, and this guy said, and I **** you not "People are gay because of sin and they can stop if they turn to God"

Now, I wanted to ask for some sort of evidence, but I didn't for some reason

mig_killer2

:lol: nobody treats gays quite the way christians do.

Anyone who actually believes wholeheartedly that I would EVER choose to exist this way, only personify their own ignorance. I'm getting out of this offensive forum.cannibal127-9

People choose harder lives all the time. Do you think I have it easier from choosing to be a Christian? I am not saying homosexuality is a choice, but that's a poor argument against its being so.

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="quiglythegreat"][QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]No. . .homosexuality comes from hormone imbalances and early psychological issues. It's not genetic.quiglythegreat

No. . .in other words, no.:|

This is why I picked up religion in the first place.

[QUOTE="cannibal127-9"]Anyone who actually believes wholeheartedly that I would EVER choose to exist this way, only personify their own ignorance. I'm getting out of this offensive forum.Silver_Dragon17

People choose harder lives all the time. Do you think I have it easier from choosing to be a Christian? I am not saying homosexuality is a choice, but that's a poor argument against its being so.

Thats if you have something to gain from choosing a harder path. Not so with homosexuality.

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="cannibal127-9"]Anyone who actually believes wholeheartedly that I would EVER choose to exist this way, only personify their own ignorance. I'm getting out of this offensive forum.The_Ish

People choose harder lives all the time. Do you think I have it easier from choosing to be a Christian? I am not saying homosexuality is a choice, but that's a poor argument against its being so.

Thats if you have something to gain from choosing a harder path. Not so with homosexuality.

And how's that? Perhaps they would be wanting a rich spouse, and can only find someone of the same gender. . .we don't know. Again, poor argument.

[QUOTE="cannibal127-9"]Anyone who actually believes wholeheartedly that I would EVER choose to exist this way, only personify their own ignorance. I'm getting out of this offensive forum.Silver_Dragon17

People choose harder lives all the time. Do you think I have it easier from choosing to be a Christian? I am not saying homosexuality is a choice, but that's a poor argument against its being so.

Perhaps, yes, people do choose more difficult lives. However, I have never heard of anyone committing suicide because they CHOSE to be christian. I am telling you all, right now, that I led a completely normal upbringing and am still very close with both of my parents. I never knew anyone else growing up that was gay no one ever talked my into it. I was born this way!

[QUOTE="Silver_Dragon17"]

[QUOTE="cannibal127-9"]Anyone who actually believes wholeheartedly that I would EVER choose to exist this way, only personify their own ignorance. I'm getting out of this offensive forum.cannibal127-9

People choose harder lives all the time. Do you think I have it easier from choosing to be a Christian? I am not saying homosexuality is a choice, but that's a poor argument against its being so.

Perhaps, yes, people do choose more difficult lives. However, I have never heard of anyone committing suicide because they CHOSE to be christian. I am telling you all, right now, that I led a completely normal upbringing and am still very close with both of my parents. I never knew anyone else growing up that was gay no one ever talked my into it. I was born this way!

You are aware that there is no evidence for a gay gene". . .right?

There is, however, evidence for it being hormonal.

Who said anything about needing evidence? You're a christian right?

And how's that? Perhaps they would be wanting a rich spouse, and can only find someone of the same gender. . .we don't know. Again, poor argument.

Silver_Dragon17

That just proves that the person isn't homosexual, they are just greedy.

And what about the spouse, we would have to assume that the spouse is genuinely homosexual.

You argument has flaws, and depends on homosexuals being degenerates if thats the only kind of reason it would be considered a choice.

[QUOTE="gs_gear"]

So how can one of you be heterosexual and the other one be gay when you are genetically identical?

The_Ish

Because we are not clones. Identical, not the same. Sure, most twins are either both homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual, but instances where twins are born with different sexualities happen more often than you think. Your example fails because twins are usually brought up in the exact same environment, and it's just as likely that there can be homosexual twins in a normal family as it can be in any other kind.

I really don't see how the point of the study can escape you. The study says the strength of the gene decides whether or not a kid is gay just like if the abundance of a chromosome decides if a child is a boy or a girl.

lol And what are you saying, that now it's because of the environment? What does environment have to do with being gay Didn't you say that it's genetic?

And now to the study, again. I really don't understand how can it escape you so many times that the study doesn't prove what you've said that homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice. Where does it say that? It says "... it would take 11 older brothers to have a 50-50 chance of being gay ". A 50% chance doesn't prove that. There could be a study that says that you have a 50% chance of being struck by lightning. Does that mean or is that a 100% sure that you will be struck by lightning? No. You could live your whole life without being struck by lightning.

So I think you either don't understand that or you don't want to understand. It seems to me that you state your opinion as fact based only on your personal experiences. Just because all the gay people you've met have told you that they didn't choose to be gay that doesn't prove homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice.

There has never EVER been a case of identical twins that one was gay and one was straight. There have been multiple cases of both being straight, and both being gay but NEVER opposite.cannibal127-9

Really?:o Proof please. But I suggest you do a little research before.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="gs_gear"]

So how can one of you be heterosexual and the other one be gay when you are genetically identical?

gs_gear

Because we are not clones. Identical, not the same. Sure, most twins are either both homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual, but instances where twins are born with different sexualities happen more often than you think. Your example fails because twins are usually brought up in the exact same environment, and it's just as likely that there can be homosexual twins in a normal family as it can be in any other kind.

I really don't see how the point of the study can escape you. The study says the strength of the gene decides whether or not a kid is gay just like if the abundance of a chromosome decides if a child is a boy or a girl.

lol And what are you saying, that now it's because of the environment? What does environment have to do with being gay Didn't you say that it's genetic?

And now to the study, again. I really don't understand how can it escape you so many times that the study doesn't prove what you've said that homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice. Where does it say that? It says "... it would take 11 older brothers to have a 50-50 chance of being gay ". A 50% chance doesn't prove that. There could be a study that says that you have a 50% chance of being struck by lightning. Does that mean or is that a 100% sure that you will be struck by lightning? No. You could live your whole life without being struck by lightning.

So I think you either don't understand that or you don't want to understand. It seems to me that you state your opinion as fact based only on your personal experiences. Just because all the gay people you've met have told you that they didn't choose to be gay that doesn't prove homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice.

Never said that, I said it was never a choice. Whether it's genetic or not requires more study, but according to the study we are talking about, it's because of genetics that it isn't a choice.

Once again, you've got it all wrong.

If there wasa 50% chance that you were to be hit by lightning, it's not your fault, it's not your choice to be hit by lightning.

Just as having a 50% chance that you will turn out to be homosexual is not your fault/choice.

The study proves that a gene decides how big is the percentage, not anyone else. So no, it's not a choice. And according to the study, it is genetic. The study even states that there is a 2% chance for the first born.

That is why your analogy fails, being hit by lightning or becoming homosexual is not the fault of the person.

And honestly, if you think millions of homosexuals are all either lying or are delusional then you are comepletely wrong in that case too.

Who said anything about needing evidence? You're a christian right?

cannibal127-9

You always need evidence. Otherwise, your claims are completely meaningless.

[QUOTE="gs_gear"][QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="gs_gear"]

So how can one of you be heterosexual and the other one be gay when you are genetically identical?

The_Ish

Because we are not clones. Identical, not the same. Sure, most twins are either both homosexual, bisexual, or heterosexual, but instances where twins are born with different sexualities happen more often than you think. Your example fails because twins are usually brought up in the exact same environment, and it's just as likely that there can be homosexual twins in a normal family as it can be in any other kind.

I really don't see how the point of the study can escape you. The study says the strength of the gene decides whether or not a kid is gay just like if the abundance of a chromosome decides if a child is a boy or a girl.

lol And what are you saying, that now it's because of the environment? What does environment have to do with being gay Didn't you say that it's genetic?

And now to the study, again. I really don't understand how can it escape you so many times that the study doesn't prove what you've said that homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice. Where does it say that? It says "... it would take 11 older brothers to have a 50-50 chance of being gay ". A 50% chance doesn't prove that. There could be a study that says that you have a 50% chance of being struck by lightning. Does that mean or is that a 100% sure that you will be struck by lightning? No. You could live your whole life without being struck by lightning.

So I think you either don't understand that or you don't want to understand. It seems to me that you state your opinion as fact based only on your personal experiences. Just because all the gay people you've met have told you that they didn't choose to be gay that doesn't prove homosexuality is genetic or that it's not a choice.

Never said that, I said it was never a choice. Whether it's genetic or not requires more study, but according to the study we are talking about, it's because of genetics that it isn't a choice.

Once again, you've got it all wrong.

If there wasa 50% chance that you were to be hit by lightning, it's not your fault, it's not your choice to be hit by lightning.

Just as having a 50% chance that you will turn out to be homosexual is not your fault/choice.

The study proves that a gene decides how big is the percentage, not anyone else. So no, it's not a choice. And according to the study, it is genetic. The study even states that there is a 2% chance for the first born.

That is why your analogy fails, being hit by lightning or becoming homosexual is not the fault of the person.

And honestly, if you think millions of homosexuals are all either lying or are delusional then you are comepletely wrong in that case too.

If you don't know for sure if it's genetic or not, how can you state as a fact that it is or thatthe study proves it.

And now I see that you don't understand. I gave you that example to show you that if there's a 50%chance that you won't become gay then it can't be genetic. Why do you think I gave you the example with the identical twins? In order for homosexuality to be geneticit has to be a 100%, 50% is just not enough.

And about that study,again, where does it say that homosexuality is not a choice or that it is genetic? A 2% chance or a 50% chance doesn't and can't prove that it's genetic. That's just what you've understood from it.

And just because millions of homosexuals say or think that, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

I will not bother to reply to you again because I'm really tired of repeating the same things over and over again.

the reason I asked this is because in my 1st period class I brought up the possibility that homosexuality might be in fact genetic, and this guy said, and I **** you not "People are gay because of sin and they can stop if they turn to God"

Now, I wanted to ask for some sort of evidence, but I didn't for some reason

mig_killer2

If religion = Not gay whats up with all these priests molesting little boys? :?

You missed the part " it seems to me that you state your opinion as fact based only on your personal experiences " , because in one of your previous posts you've said " no one chooses to be gay Ask anyone who is gay " that's why I assumed that and what I've said after, otherwise how would you know that?

If you don't know for sure if it's genetic or not, how can you state as a fact that it is or thatthe study proves it.

And now I see that you don't understand. I gave you that example to show you that if there's a 50%chance that you won't become gay then it can't be genetic. Why do you think I gave you the example with the identical twins? In order for homosexuality to be geneticit has to be a 100%, 50% is just not enough.

And about that study,again, where does it say that homosexuality is not a choice or that it is genetic? A 2% chance or a 50% chance doesn't and can't prove that it's genetic. That's just what you've understood from it.

And just because millions of homosexuals say or think that, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

I will not bother to reply to you again because I'm really tired of repeating the same things over and over again.

gs_gear

I didn't, because that has little to do with it.

Homosexuality is not a choice, if it was, I'd be bisexual in an instant.

If you're going to throw in the enviornmental factors, that wouldn't mean its a choice either. There is very little evidence to say its enviornmental.

The study says it's genetic because the 50% is caused by a gene. Meaning it's not a choice, according to the study.

No, you are wrong. Millions of people and hundred of organizations with much greater credibility also would agree. I'm sure you never chose your sexuality either.

No, the reason you don't want to bother replying is because you won't face these facts because you can't rebuke the arguments.

Hi,

I didnt' read the 12 pages, but I wanted to toss my 2 cents in. Nobody chooses to be gay I don't know if it is biological, psychological, or a combination. Why would anyone choose it when there is so much fear an ignorance against homosexuality? We all need to understand each other. That is the bottom line. Fear and ignorance = teh suck.

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]

the reason I asked this is because in my 1st period class I brought up the possibility that homosexuality might be in fact genetic, and this guy said, and I **** you not "People are gay because of sin and they can stop if they turn to God"

Now, I wanted to ask for some sort of evidence, but I didn't for some reason

Shrapnel99

If religion = Not gay whats up with all these priests molesting little boys? :?

nobody expects the preist is gay

[QUOTE="mig_killer2"]

the reason I asked this is because in my 1st period class I brought up the possibility that homosexuality might be in fact genetic, and this guy said, and I **** you not "People are gay because of sin and they can stop if they turn to God"

Now, I wanted to ask for some sort of evidence, but I didn't for some reason

Shrapnel99

If religion = Not gay whats up with all these priests molesting little boys? :?

Please differentiate between pedophiles and people who happen to be gay The majority of gay people are not pervs. There are gay/straight/bi pervs in this world. It is horribly unfair to lump gay people in with pervs. Fact: there are plenty of married men with kids, priests....etc who are gay Pervs are on another planet.

[QUOTE="gs_gear"]

You missed the part " it seems to me that you state your opinion as fact based only on your personal experiences " , because in one of your previous posts you've said " no one chooses to be gay Ask anyone who is gay " that's why I assumed that and what I've said after, otherwise how would you know that?

If you don't know for sure if it's genetic or not, how can you state as a fact that it is or thatthe study proves it.

And now I see that you don't understand. I gave you that example to show you that if there's a 50%chance that you won't become gay then it can't be genetic. Why do you think I gave you the example with the identical twins? In order for homosexuality to be geneticit has to be a 100%, 50% is just not enough.

And about that study,again, where does it say that homosexuality is not a choice or that it is genetic? A 2% chance or a 50% chance doesn't and can't prove that it's genetic. That's just what you've understood from it.

And just because millions of homosexuals say or think that, that doesn't mean I'm wrong.

I will not bother to reply to you again because I'm really tired of repeating the same things over and over again.

The_Ish

I didn't, because that has little to do with it.

Homosexuality is not a choice, if it was, I'd be bisexual in an instant.

If you're going to throw in the enviornmental factors, that wouldn't mean its a choice either. There is very little evidence to say its enviornmental.

The study says it's genetic because the 50% is caused by a gene. Meaning it's not a choice, according to the study.

No, you are wrong. Millions of people and hundred of organizations with much greater credibility also would agree. I'm sure you never chose your sexuality either.

No, the reason you don't want to bother replying is because you won't face these facts because you can't rebuke the arguments.

Again, you can't state that as a fact based on personal experience. Nothing stops you from doing that, it only means that you really don't want to do it not that you can't do it. Just because people don't say it loud or sign a document, that doesn't mean they didn't make a choice.

I din't mention anything about environmental factors or that being gay is because of the environment. You've mentioned about it when I gave you the example with the identical twins.

You've said in your previous post that you don't know for sure if homosexuality is genetic but then you state it as a fact that it is genetic. What will yo do after this post, will you change your opinion again and say that you also don't know if homosexuality is a choice? lol

Since you don't want to believe anything from what I say, here are some interesting things if you want to read about some studies regarding homosexuality link

And about changing your sexual orientation link

Well you don't see male lions trying to mate with eachother do you?NicktehImperial

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

I really didn't want to reply but since you've wanted it so bad I will.

Again, you can't state that as a fact based on personal experience. Nothing stops you from doing that, it only means that you really don't want to do it not that you can't do it. Just because people don't say it loud or sign a document, that doesn't mean they didn't make a choice.

Then plenty of people can become Bisexual if they want, like me. Or hey, why don't you try to become bisexual. If you really can by saying "Ithink I can, I think I can", over and over to yourself, then this might be considered a valid argument.Until then, you have no place saying whether these people are lying or delusional.

I din't mention anything about environmental factors or that being gay is because of the environment. You've mentioned about it when I gave you the example with the identical twins.

You've said in your previous post that you don't know for sure if homosexuality is genetic but then you state it as a fact that it is genetic. What will yo do after this post, will you change your opinion again and say that you also don't know if homosexuality is a choice? lol

Never said it's genetic, I said the study says it's genetic. I know, wording your sentences is amazing. :roll:

Since you don't want to believe anything from what I say, here are some interesting things if you want to read about some studies regarding homosexuality link

This little except you brought up lists homosexuality as a disorder and something thats caused primarily by enviormental factors. It's been largely discredited.

And about changing your sexual orientation link

NARTH is the most biased organization when it comes to homosexuality. Their research and studies have been dicredited because of their half-assed methods and they have a biased agenda aimed at profiting from people who think they can change their sexuality. Perhaps they don't mention this on the site, but most people who undergo "homosexual therapy" commit suicide. I'm sure that makes their therapy real effective. Then plenty of people can become Bisexual if they want, like me. Or hey, why don't you try to become bisexual. If you really can by saying "Ithink I can, I think I can", over and over to yourself, then this might be considered a valid argument. :roll:

gs_gear

Replies in bold.

Actually, it is genetics. It's been proven.Alpha-909

OK, so if being gay is a choice as you say. Choose to be gay for 1 month. Don't be attracted to the opposite sex at all, and the attractions that you normally had for the opposite sex have for the same sex. Don't notice the opposite sex when they walk by and have that amazing smell, don't check out their arse, their chest, face or anything, but when someone of the same sex walks by, notice their smell, arse, chest, face, everything you normally would notice about the opposite sex.

When your done let me know how it worked out for you.

Not to mention that homosexuality and bisexuality have both been documented in the Animal Kingdom, wait aren't humans in the Animal Kingdom.....oh yea they are.

I'll jump on the proverbial handgrenade here, as this seems to have (to the surprise of nobody) devolved into a petty choice discussion.

One cannot select what they are sexually attracted to. That's positively ridiculous.

I'm homosexual, take my word for it. (Though you honestly shouldn't have to... your heterosexuality should be proof enough for you to comprehend homosexuality. As you heterosexuals know you never chose to be attracted to the opposite sex, you just are. Same thing with us, but with the same sex, fairly simple concept, it's not rocket science... which is why it baffles me as to why a topic even needs to be discussed here.)

As for the thread, born that way? Maybe. Who can say? Maybe some are and others are nurtured into it somehow. I can only speak for myself, by saying as long as I have been sexually interested in others, it has been to the same sex. But that's just me, perhaps other homosexuals think differently.

I'll jump on the proverbial handgrenade here, as this seems to have (to the surprise of nobody) devolved into a petty choice discussion.

One cannot select what they are sexually attracted to. That's positively ridiculous.

I'm homosexual, take my word for it. (Though you honestly shouldn't have to... your heterosexuality should be proof enough for you to comprehend homosexuality. As you heterosexuals know you never chose to be attracted to the opposite sex, you just are. Same thing with us, but with the same sex, fairly simple concept, it's not rocket science... which is why it baffles me as to why a topic even needs to be discussed here.)

As for the thread, born that way? Maybe. Who can say? Maybe some are and others are nurtured into it somehow. I can only speak for myself, by saying as long as I have been sexually interested in others, it has been to the same sex. But that's just me, perhaps other homosexuals think differently.

dhyce

Some people probably are, but it really doesn't matter.Hinata237

agreed

[QUOTE="gs_gear"]

I really didn't want to reply but since you've wanted it so bad I will.

Again, you can't state that as a fact based on personal experience. Nothing stops you from doing that, it only means that you really don't want to do it not that you can't do it. Just because people don't say it loud or sign a document, that doesn't mean they didn't make a choice.

Then plenty of people can become Bisexual if they want, like me. Or hey, why don't you try to become bisexual. If you really can by saying "Ithink I can, I think I can", over and over to yourself, then this might be considered a valid argument.Until then, you have no place saying whether these people are lying or delusional.

I din't mention anything about environmental factors or that being gay is because of the environment. You've mentioned about it when I gave you the example with the identical twins.

You've said in your previous post that you don't know for sure if homosexuality is genetic but then you state it as a fact that it is genetic. What will yo do after this post, will you change your opinion again and say that you also don't know if homosexuality is a choice? lol

Never said it's genetic, I said the study says it's genetic. I know, wording your sentences is amazing. :roll:

Since you don't want to believe anything from what I say, here are some interesting things if you want to read about some studies regarding homosexuality link

This little except you brought up lists homosexuality as a disorder and something thats caused primarily by enviormental factors. It's been largely discredited.

And about changing your sexual orientation link

NARTH is the most biased organization when it comes to homosexuality. Their research and studies have been dicredited because of their half-assed methods and they have a biased agenda aimed at profiting from people who think they can change their sexuality. Perhaps they don't mention this on the site, but most people who undergo "homosexual therapy" commit suicide. I'm sure that makes their therapy real effective. Then plenty of people can become Bisexual if they want, like me. Or hey, why don't you try to become bisexual. If you really can by saying "Ithink I can, I think I can", over and over to yourself, then this might be considered a valid argument. :roll:

The_Ish

Replies in bold.

You never said it's genetic, the study says it. Really? So? It's not like you never agreed with it. So it's according to the study that it's because of genetics that it's not a choice. But still, how ca you say "whether it's genetic or not requires more study" and then say " it's because of genetics that it's not a choice " ? lol How can you agree with this? You're contradicting yourself.

It' doesn't list homosexuality as a disorder and it doesn't say it's caused primarily by environmental factors. Where does it say that, because it seemes I've missed it? The study proves that homosexuality is not biological, is not genetic. That wasn't and can't be discredited.

Did you bother to check the second link? I think you did but you digressed from it because you didn't have a clear answer to reply with, otherwise why wouldn't you reply since it's about changing the sexual orientation. Sexual orientation which you've stated as a fact that it cannot be changed. So you had to talk about how biased NARTH is. Who cares about them? Just because I've posted the link from their site it doesn't mean that the people who have done the study(from the first link) were biased or that the study was biased. How can a study made on over 14000 people be biased? I could post links about the same study from other sites too. So this is your valid argument? lol Your argument is laughable.

And by posting the study from the second link, did I base my statement about changing your sexual orientation only on people who were therapeutically assisted. No. Because then it could have been said that they were somehow forced to change their sexuality. The examples from the study show and prove that sexual orientation is changeable. They show people who were exclusively heterosexual before and then became bisexual and there are many other examples. Oh, and I hope you won't say that " these people are lying or delusional ". ;)

" One of the strongest arguments against homosexuality as an inborn, unalterable condition is change in sexual orientation. In this chapter we describe how the scientific literature shows that sexual orientation is anything but fixed and unalterable; rather, it shows that sexuality is fluid. People move around on the homosexual-heterosexual continuum to a surprising degree in both directions, but a far greater proportion of homosexuals become heterosexual than heterosexuals become homosexual. Some of the change is therapeutically assisted, but in most cases it appears to be circumstantial. Life itself can bring along the factor that makes the difference."

" But, as we saw above, gay/lesbian orientation is much less stable than heterosexual orientation, so suggestions that change is possible naturally stir up considerable anxiety.
The best summary of this section would be that there is a large degree of spontaneous change, admitted by all researchers except the extremely ideologically driven."

just a few quotes from the studies

People can learn new things everyday. And you know what, I think you've learned something new today.:)

And now I really don't have to bother replying to you again.:)

damn I know alot of people ain't got time to read all that. in short...

if there's a chromosome tellingsomeone if they're gay or not, then there must be a chromosome tellingsomeone that they like brunetts orredheads. DNA isn't advanced enoughto deal with personal preference. Personality ismostly environmental (the small variable being the abilities your genetics allow for that environment).

no one is born knowing they like the colour green. That's just stupid.

Don't relate other people to you. You can't give yourself as an example and then generalize. You just keep asking me to try and become homosexual or bisexual so you can prove that I'm wrong. What kind of an argument is this? As I said before, just because I don't want to it doesn't mean I can't.

gs_gear

Then do it. Otherwise you don't have any place to say the opposite.

You never said it's genetic, the study says it. Really? So? It's not like you never agreed with it. So it's according to the study that it's because of genetics that it's not a choice. But still, how ca you say "whether it's genetic or not requires more study" and then say " it's because of genetics that it's not a choice " ? lol How can you agree with this? You're contradicting yourself.

gs_gear

:roll: It's called wording. Do you actually pay attention to my posts? It's all according to the study.

It' doesn't list homosexuality as a disorder and it doesn't say it's caused primarily by environmental factors. Where does it say that, because it seemes I've missed it? The study proves that homosexuality is not biological, is not genetic. That wasn't and can't be discredited.

gs_gear

It lists it as something curable and says it's a disorder, something that every other major medical community has debunked over and over again, all over the world.

Did you bother to check the second link? I think you did but you digressed from it because you didn't have a clear answer to reply with, otherwise why wouldn't you reply since it's about changing the sexual orientation. Sexual orientation which you've stated as a fact that it cannot be changed. So you had to talk about how biased NARTH is. Who cares about them? Just because I've posted the link from their site it doesn't mean that the people who have done the study(from the first link) were biased or that the study was biased. How can a study made on over 14000 people be biased? I could post links about the same study from other sites too. So this is your valid argument? lol Your argument is laughable.

And by posting the study from the second link, did I base my statement about changing your sexual orientation only on people who were therapeutically assisted. No. Because then it could have been said that they were somehow forced to change their sexuality. The examples from the study show and prove that sexual orientation is changeable. They show people who were exclusively heterosexual before and then became bisexual and there are many other examples. Oh, and I hope you won't say that " these people are lying or delusional ". ;)

gs_gear

So that means they were always bisexual. That still doesn't prove they had a choice, they just realized their feelings later.

1. No scientist believes genes by themselves infallibly make us behave in specified ways. Genes create a tendency, not a tyranny.

2. Identical twin studies show that neither genetic nor family factors are overwhelming.

3. Conclusion 2 will not be altered by any research in the future.

4. We can foster or foil genetic or family influences.

5. Change is possible.

That is the summary of the article. Out of all of them, only 1 and 4 have been proven to be correct. 5 goes against pretty much every study by every reputable medical organization in this country and the world, so not only is your source and article biased, it's not reputable.

People can learn new things everyday. And you know what, I think you've learned something new today.:)

gs_gear

Oh yes, I learned that you rely on discredited articles and bold claims from unreputable sources like NARTH. :lol:

And now I really don't have to bother replying to you again.:)

gs_gear

ok see you after you've bumped this again to get the last word. :)

[QUOTE="gs_gear"]

Don't relate other people to you. You can't give yourself as an example and then generalize. You just keep asking me to try and become homosexual or bisexual so you can prove that I'm wrong. What kind of an argument is this? As I said before, just because I don't want to it doesn't mean I can't.

The_Ish

Then do it. Otherwise you don't have any place to say the opposite.

You never said it's genetic, the study says it. Really? So? It's not like you never agreed with it. So it's according to the study that it's because of genetics that it's not a choice. But still, how ca you say "whether it's genetic or not requires more study" and then say " it's because of genetics that it's not a choice " ? lol How can you agree with this? You're contradicting yourself.

gs_gear

:roll: It's called wording. Do you actually pay attention to my posts? It's all according to the study.

It' doesn't list homosexuality as a disorder and it doesn't say it's caused primarily by environmental factors. Where does it say that, because it seemes I've missed it? The study proves that homosexuality is not biological, is not genetic. That wasn't and can't be discredited.

gs_gear

It lists it as something curable and says it's a disorder, something that every other major medical community has debunked over and over again, all over the world.

Did you bother to check the second link? I think you did but you digressed from it because you didn't have a clear answer to reply with, otherwise why wouldn't you reply since it's about changing the sexual orientation. Sexual orientation which you've stated as a fact that it cannot be changed. So you had to talk about how biased NARTH is. Who cares about them? Just because I've posted the link from their site it doesn't mean that the people who have done the study(from the first link) were biased or that the study was biased. How can a study made on over 14000 people be biased? I could post links about the same study from other sites too. So this is your valid argument? lol Your argument is laughable.

And by posting the study from the second link, did I base my statement about changing your sexual orientation only on people who were therapeutically assisted. No. Because then it could have been said that they were somehow forced to change their sexuality. The examples from the study show and prove that sexual orientation is changeable. They show people who were exclusively heterosexual before and then became bisexual and there are many other examples. Oh, and I hope you won't say that " these people are lying or delusional ". ;)

gs_gear

So that means they were always bisexual. That still doesn't prove they had a choice, they just realized their feelings later.

1. No scientist believes genes by themselves infallibly make us behave in specified ways. Genes create a tendency, not a tyranny.

2. Identical twin studies show that neither genetic nor family factors are overwhelming.

3. Conclusion 2 will not be altered by any research in the future.

4. We can foster or foil genetic or family influences.

5. Change is possible.

That is the summary of the article. Out of all of them, only 1 and 4 have been proven to be correct. 5 goes against pretty much every study by every reputable medical organization in this country and the world, so not only is your source and article biased, it's not reputable.

People can learn new things everyday. And you know what, I think you've learned something new today.:)

gs_gear

Oh yes, I learned that you rely on discredited articles and bold claims from unreputable sources like NARTH. :lol:

And now I really don't have to bother replying to you again.:)

gs_gear

ok see you after you've bumped this again to get the last word. :)

Oh, I did pay attention to your posts. This is what you've said "whether it's genetic or not requires more study" and this isn't and cannot be according to the study because according to it " it's because of genetics that it's not a choice " .You cannot agree with the study if you're not sure homosexuality is genetic. So homosexuality could not be genetic (according to you) but it's because of genetics that homosexuality is not a choice (according to the study).:| Then how can you be sure that homosexuality is not a choice and state that as a fact but not be sure that homosexuality is genetic? It looks like you din't pay attention to what you've said.

Again, it doesn't list homosexuality as something curable, or says it's a disorder or anything. Where doesit say that? Give me the quote from the article. Don't make things up. I'm not saying that what you've said hasen't been debunked, that homosexuality is a disorder or that it's something curable, but that homosexuality is not genetic hasen't been debunked. That's not even the point of the study, to prove what is homosexuality, it's to prove that it's not biological, that it's not caused by the genes.

So they were always bisexual. You know that as a fact. Unless you prove that all "those people are lying or delusional" you can't say that.;)

So 1 and 4 have been proven and 5 (that change is possible) hasen't? And you rely on what when you say this? I gave you a link to the study that shows and proves that sexual orientation is changeable. Give me a link from all your reputable sources to an article or study that says that it has been proven (not something like scientists think or they believe that you cannot change it type) and it is a fact that you cannot change your sexuality.

So my source and article is biased and discredited because you say it's from NARTH. NARTH didn't make those studies, so don't make things up. At least I rely on articles and studies made by scientists to back up my statement. Of course you on the other hand, rely on much more reputable and not biased sources like your personal experience "no one chooses to be gay ask any homosexual if they ever chose to be gay" , and of course you've stated that as a fact because you've known or met every homosexual person on the planet. Yet another one of your valid arguments.lol

So yeah, keep replying and repeating the same things over and over again, maybe eventually you will be able to also prove and not just say that what I've said is wrong. lol And yes, I really wanted to have the last word.:)