Hey... I'm a new user here. I've read through all these forums about homosexuals and how they were born that way, and how people give them crap for they way they are, and i'm really sick of it. So I'm gonna tell it how it is, and maybe people can expand their minds a little bit and start thinking for themselves. Homosexuals may be born with the instincts of feeling the way they do, but just because you are born a certain way doesn't mean you should act upon it. People are born with the gene for alcoholism all the time, but that doesn't give them the right to get plastered every night and come home and beat their children. People need to stop using their heritage as an excuse and stand up for what is right. Homosexuality isn't right, and it's plain and simple (and whoever the ******* was that said it never said the bible doesn't speak against it, look in leviticus). Also, homosexuals need to stop complaining about people being prejudice against them, you do something that's not correct to do in our society, maybe on some other planets it's ok, but here on earth God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
Sorry for stirring the butter. I realize the argument is over but I just...really wanted to get my say in. Pick on me if you must. Interesting about the dead gay duck btw. I'm gay for Jesus. XD. Also I work at a circuis themed haunted house this year...I play the bearded lady. How appropriate.
*started reading new posts but got all pissed off because people don't know ANYTHING about genetics* Recessive genes won't necessarily, given time, be "filtered out" of the gene pool. You are just X times less likely to inherit them. AND HAIR COLOR IS THE SAME TRAIT. The different colors are recessive and dominant. Blonde being the most recessive. *wants to stab people in the eye*
I'm not sure if that's for, or against being Gay. But for some reason, God's intentions scare me. Once again, Gay Necrophiliac Ducks.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
The arguement that homosexuality can not be a reproductive trait, based on the lack of ability for a homosexual couple to reproduce exclusively, is at face value, a legitimate arguement, and while under interrogation, is still may fall apart, it has merit, and is deserving of such.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
You are running completely around what I am saying. I am saying that the arguement has merit, and you have provided an alternative, and that people should stop jumping over the person, because it actually does make sense, if you don't know all the facts.
Now I am throughly confused as to what I am arguing with you about
I am well aware (I've taken biology, and I study evolution and biology as a hobby).
You are running completely around what I am saying. I am saying that the arguement has merit, and you have provided an alternative, and that people should stop jumping over the person, because it actually does make sense, if you don't know all the facts.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
That doesn't mean that their genes are not passed on.
A ressesive gene can be passed from generation to generation but for it to show up it needs to be paired with another ressessive gene. Hence my statement about the punnet square earlier. It is very possible to pass a gay gene on and have it not show up for generations.
By the way this is very basic bio stuff. It gets more complicated.
But two homosexuals can not reproduce exclusively, which is what gives the arguement merit in the first place.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
They do not lack reproductive organs. This is true. What is not true, is that they alone, can reproduce by themselves/
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
I am also saying that your arguement, shows how the arguement is fallicious (based on an incorrect or misleading notion or information; "fallacious hope").
How? Was I not made by 2 heterosexual people or was my friend not made by a lesbian and a heterosexual male. Or do homosexuals lack reproductive organs.
Sorry about the outburst. I am taking out my frustration with this chem problem on you, and thats not right.
Originally posted by LoveTheRainbow: What are you talking about. LOTS OF GAY PEOPLE HAVE THEIR OWN CHILDREN. Stop talking about genetics if you haven't even taken a biology coarse. It is very possible. Make a punnet square. It will prove it.
I would kindly ask that you actually interrogate what I am saying, before another one of your outbursts.
I am saying that the arguement (a fact or assertion offered as evidence that something is true; "it was a strong argument that his hypothesis was true") isn't without merit (any admirable quality or attribute; "work of great merit"). I am also saying that your arguement, shows how the arguement is fallicious (based on an incorrect or misleading notion or information; "fallacious hope").
So, before you scream your head off again, realize I am agreeing with you, but I am saying that it presents a biological arguement, which could appear to be true. You've provided an alternative.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
What are you talking about. LOTS OF GAY PEOPLE HAVE THEIR OWN CHILDREN. Stop talking about genetics if you haven't even taken a biology coarse. It is very possible. Make a punnet square. It will prove it.
Which is a fine arguement for why it won't work, and an exception to the rule.
This doesn't change the fact that the concept of it being genetically impossible, isn't without merit. It simply doesn't have substance. Like String Theory.
Cheated the way from fringe to elite. Clique of stylists, rounded illogic skipping a beat to a dead cert. By lheaving charges and bursting the abscess, with a forked toungue, bloated with courage and spewing self-importance. Drop your sights, aim lower, leave umblemished those with real power.
Topics 
