You know I still don't understand why everyone is like "Ahhhh you're a bad person because you love another man/woman", but no one points out that there are bad people that do things in the name of a god.

Like our "illustrious" president.

~M~

quote:

---

Noone is BORN gay. It is an active decision. Plain and simple. Acting against God's Word on this matter is a sin, just like any other. Of course, show me one person living today that dosen't sin and I'll show you my church, where some people seem to think they're perfect.

---

Any factual information and sources to back that one up? Why would someone choose to be gay?

Yay, for your God. Contrary to popular belief, not everyone has the same religion. Therefore, in some religions, being gay is not sinning. Simple enough?

I don't really think it's a matter of how you've been brought up or what media you've listened to. I think it's a matter of who you fall in love with.

Since love is the most up in the air and random thing in the world, then it shouldn't matter what gender the person you love is, it should only matter if they love you back.

It's not about being morally deficient or anti-religious or rebellious. Besides, isn't loving all people essentially the main message of most of the major religious scriptures?

~M~

Enjoi could you please support your opinion, or at the least quote evidence already presented by someone else?

~Kitty

Noone is BORN gay. It is an active decision. Plain and simple. Acting against God's Word on this matter is a sin, just like any other. Of course, show me one person living today that dosen't sin and I'll show you my church, where some people seem to think they're perfect.

Is there made a distinct difference in the bible between an abomination and a sin? I honestly don't know, not trying to be sarcastic. Also in certain versions of the Bible eagles, ostriches, hawks, etc. are listed as abominations. In Leviticus 18:19 it says that having sex with a menstruating woman is an abomination, (that sentence does not mention it but 18:27 says that "all of these things" are abominations, that section having included sex with menstruating women and homosexuality). Also women who wear mens clothing and men who wear womens clothing (this would include women wearing pants) are said to be abominations unto the Lord. There are more, and they vary from version to version, but let's just say there are many things that can replace the shellfish comment if you believe their is a discrepancy in equating the two supposed transgressions in the original quote.

~Kitty

"Naked Heaven comes and goes,
Spits out seas and dyes the rose,
Puts on coats of wind and rain,
And simply takes them off again."

quote:

---

Acorrding to the bible, eating shellfish is a sin , not an abomination as having sex with a person of the same gender is.

---

I doubt you even read the bible.

quote:

---

And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: They shall be even an abomination unto you; ye shall not eat of their flesh, but ye shall have their carcases in abomination.
Leviticus 11:10, 11:11

---

Ill just post what I posted in the "For Better or Worse ­- Gay or Nay?" thrread.http://boards.youthnoise.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=742299645&f=7964084503&m=396103781



scientific evidence that shows a strong indication that homosexuality is genetic

The key part that I would like to highlight is this "The 7 pairs (17.5%) of homosexual brothers who did not coinherit all of the Xq28 markers suggest that other factors, including nongenetic ones, play a role in determining sexual orientation." Hey it’s what most sociologists have been saying for the past 20 years and what I have been saying as well. Circumstances along with genetics give a person higher chance of being homosexual, can you say genetic pre-****ing disposition which would indicate it is "natural."


HOMOSEXUALITY: IT'S IN YOUR GENES

(NOT JUST YOUR JEANS!)

Part I

Mitch King

Charlottesville, VA

WASHINGTON, 93 Jul 16—A group of researchers from the National Institutes of Health have discovered statistical evidence that one form of male homosexuality is genetically transmitted from mothers to their sons through the X chromosome. The study involved pedigree and DNA linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men.

Subjects included 76 self-acknowledged homosexual men and their relatives over age 18 recruited through a Washington DC HIV clinic and local homophile organizations, and 38 pairs of homosexual brothers and their relatives recruited through advertisements in local and national homophile publications. Participants were white non-Hispanic (92%), African American (4%), Hispanic (3%), and Asian (1%). Sexual orientation was assessed by the Kinsey scales, and subjects rated themselves on four aspects of their sexuality: self-identification, attraction, fantasy, and behavior. Most of the men (average age 36) reported experiencing their first same-sex attraction by age 10, which was prior to the average age of puberty (age 12).

For the first sample, (the 76 men from the Washington DC area), D. H. Hamer, S. Hu, V. L. Magnuson, N. Hu, and A. M. L. Pattatucci found that 13.5% of the brothers, 7.3% of the maternal uncles, and 7.7% of the sons of maternal aunts of homosexual men were self-acknowledged homosexuals--compared to the background rate of 2% which was an estimate obtained from 717 randomly selected males who were the subjects of previous research. Other significant findings were that 5.4% of the sisters of homosexual men were self-acknowledged lesbians (versus a 1% background rate), and 4.7% of the of the brothers of lesbians were self-acknowledged homosexuals (versus a 2% background rate). Homosexuality among fathers and all other types of paternally related relatives of the homosexual subjects was not significantly greater than the background rate.

Although higher than the background rates, the observed rates of homosexuality in the maternally derived uncles and male cousins of gay men in the first sample were lower than would be expected for a simple Mendelian trait, so the researchers hypothesized that there might be at least two types of male homosexuality--one which was male-limited and maternally inherited versus one which was sporadic, not sex-limited, or not maternally transmitted. To test this hypothesis, Hamer et al. recruited the second sample--the 38 families in which there were two homosexual brothers.

If their hypothesis concerning the existence of two types of homosexuality was correct, one would expect to see higher rates of male homosexuality in the maternally derived relatives of the second sample than in the first, and indeed, this is what was observed: 10.3% of the maternal uncles and 12.9% of the sons of maternal aunts of the homosexual brothers were, themselves, self-acknowledged homosexuals. Rates of homosexuality among the paternally derived male relatives were unchanged, or decreased compared to the first sample.

For the linkage analysis, DNA from 40 pairs of homosexual brothers (38 from the sib- pair pedigree study, and 2 from the random sample) and from their available mothers and siblings was studied and typed for a series of 22 markers that span the X chromosome. A significant linkage between homosexual orientation and markers in a region of the X chromosome known as Xq28 was detected--33 sib-pairs (82.5%) had inherited the same genetic information at all five markers within this region, whereas 7 pairs (17.5%) showed differences at one or more markers. The probability that such coinheritance could occur by chance alone is much less than 1.0%. As the research report states, "it appears that Xq28 contains a gene that contributes to homosexual orientation in males".

The 7 pairs (17.5%) of homosexual brothers who did not coinherit all of the Xq28 markers suggest that other factors, including nongenetic ones, play a role in determining sexual orientation. There was no significant evidence for linkage between sexual orientation and markers lying outside of Xq28, however, the researchers acknowledge that a much larger sample would be required to stringently eliminate all other regions from playing a role in sexual development in a small proportion of families.

Reference: Hamer, D. H., Hu, S., Magnuson, V. L., Hu, N., and Pattatucci, A. M. L. "A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation", Science, Vol 261, 321-327, 16 Jul 93. Science is published weekly by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, DC.

Unrestricted reproduction or electronic transmission is authorized when due credit is given to the author.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOMOSEXUALITY: IT'S IN YOUR GENES

(NOT JUST YOUR JEANS!)

Part II

Mitch King

Charlottesville, VA

WASHINGTON, 94 Dec--Two Canadian researchers have discovered a statistical relationship between the number of ridges on men's fingertips and homosexuality, contributing additional evidence to the theory that sexual orientation can be influenced by biological events that occur at conception or early in fetal life. Specifically, J. A. Y. Hall and D. Kimura of the University of Western Ontario examined the fingerprints of 66 homosexual and 182 heterosexual men, comparing the number of ridges on the index finger and thumb of the left hand with the number of ridges on the index finger and thumb of the right hand.

If the number of ridges on the index finger and thumb of the left hand exceeds the number of ridges on the index finger and thumb of the right hand, one's fingerprints are said to exhibit leftward directional asymmetry. Hall and Kimura found such leftward directional asymmetry in the fingerprints of 30% of their homosexual subjects versus 14% of their heterosexuals.

Sexual orientation was measured by having all subjects rank themselves, in terms of fantasy and experience, via the Kinsey scale.

The number of ridges on the fingertips is largely determined at the moment of conception by genetics, subject to modification by local environmental factors (local hormone levels, etc.) up to the 16th week of fetal life. Only extensive mechanical damage alters the number of ridges after this time. According to Hall and Kimura, a significant statistical correlation between a prenatally determined characteristic such as one's fingerprints and an adult behavioral trait such as one's sexual orientation is consistent with previous research suggesting an early biological contribution to adult sexual orientation.

Reference: Hall, J. A. Y. and Kimura, D. "Dermatoglyphic Asymmetry and Sexual Orientation in Men", Behavioral Neuroscience, Vol. 108, No. 6, 1203-1206, Dec 94. Behavioral Neuroscience is published bimonthly by the American Psychological Association, Washington, DC.

Unrestricted reproduction or electronic transmission is authorized when due credit is given to the author.

oh, and also...
KissOfShadows216:

quote:

---

"If you can eat shellfish, I can eat c*ck." -***** as Folk on people saying the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination (it says the same of eating shellfish).

---

Acorrding to the bible, eating shellfish is a sin , not an abomination as having sex with a person of the same gender is.

quote:

---

what do you know about being gay??? nothing. all you think you know is what the bible has told you.

---

how can you assume that?

quote:

---

You people really need to talk to actual homosexuals.

---

belive me, i have.

I think a person can be gay... However, a person who is gay is acting like that because of several factors.... one, his environment... What if people around him, at home or in school are acting like that and he thinks that he must act that way? two, genetic problems, not necessarily that he is born gay but maybe there are problems in his genes and maybe one trait or character from his ancestors are passed on to him. three, there is intrapersonal turmoil inside him whether he should act feminine or act like a man... There is conflict inside him, his feeling or whatever... I dont hate gays... in fact i have friends who are gays... The only thing that i dislike is gay marriages.

quote:

---

can't stand em

---

Then don't worry about them.

Whoops, almost forgot, I wanted to respond to someones question about there being fewer homosexuals in the 1800's, which goes along with people saying the more accepting culture makes more people become gay. Has anyone thought that perhaps more of them are just coming out now? Some people are still scared to come out today, imagine the 1800's. Also, there are ancient groups of homosexuals, homosexuality in Pre-Christian Rome was practically a means of contraception and Alexander the Great himself was gay. Please tell me if there are any key points you have on that subject I did not address (it's kind of hard to come in late and try to wade through all of the posts).

~Kitty

"Wandering between two worlds, one dead,
The other powerless to be born."

It has been shown that the chances of homosexuality in a child rise when the mother is exposed to life-changing stressful events during pregnancy, they don't know why, but that shows that things that happen before birth can contribute to the outcome, not just socio-cultural factors and such. Also, even if it is not because of something that happens chemically as a result of the stress (perhaps most of these women treat their children differently because of what happened during the pregnancy), it would still probably be psychological. Also, their are differences in certain parts of the brain structure making the gay brain typically more effeminate in nature than the male heterosexual brain. The main difference is in the size of the corpus callosum, though if I remember correctly there may also be a difference in the hypothalamus as well. So I believe some people are born that way, or at least with a leaning towards it if no traumatic events subconciously lead to repression, while others simply repress heterosexual tendencies and are not truly homosexual, and either way this means that they do not choose, if they do choose to do so as a defense mechanism but don't truly feel it then they aren't gay, they are playing pretend.

~Kitty

"If you can eat shellfish, I can eat c*ck." -***** as Folk on people saying the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination (it says the same of eating shellfish).

quote:

---

Also,
to all of you who said all people who are gay, are born that way i say this: How come some people realize their error and become straight? How come Gay people just came out of nowhere. I why weren't there any gay people in the 1800's?

---

as i said before only most people are born with it, not all people. thou, i don't know what the accual persentage is.

quote:

---

This is the most ridiculus topic being discused on the boards! OF COURSE people aren't born gay! Are people born appreciating art? Appreciating science? Are people born wanting to steal? Wanting to kill? Wanting to help? Of course not! When a child is born, they are pure, innocent and completely oblivious to the outside world.

---

no but you are born with a set personality and what you do and don't like is part of that.

quote:

---

Who they are destined to love and have sexual tendencies to is determined by their childhood. Throughout a child's upbringing they may see or feel certain things that may make them want to appreciate certain things, make them have the tendency to kill, make them have the tendency to help, or even make them pysically and emotionally atracted to the same gender as themselves. No, people don't choose to be gay, but it is a part of who they have become through the many years of their rearing. And once someone has become a certain way, or developed certain characteristics, it is very hard to change them; especially if these traits were developed from childhood.

---

if that was true then there would be obvios similarities in gay peoples' early childhood. but if you accually research the subject you'll find out that you can find two peole, put in seprate situations and they'll both be gay, and two people in the same situation where only one is gay. gay peoples' life's dont become similiar till after they reolize they are gay. thier early childhood are different as often as they are similiar.

quote:

---

there are so many gay individuals now compared to the 1800's...but why
i think tht since society is becomign more acceptaible to homosexuality, if an individual finds themselves looking in 'that' way at the same sex ...tehy automatically assume they are gay or bi. i for one can not defintly say that since i am straight. but i think since the acceptability has risen, so has the numbers, which i yes do think is a bad thing. there are always going to be a small percentage of peopel that are attracted to the same sex, its in their genetics, they can't help it and they didn't ask for it,

---

actually, that's a myth, there wern't that many more gay people in the 1800s and your life bringing of you country dosn't seem to change the number much either so i guess i'll bring this little bit of evidence back in

quote:

---

"Research suggests that the homosexual orientation is in place very early in the life cycle, possibly even before birth. It is found in about ten percent of the population, a figure which is surprisingly constant across cultures, irrespective of the different moral values and standards of a particular culture." Statement on Homosexuality, American Psychological Association, 1994-JUL. ",

---

-evil
you know i'm right. so why are you arguing?

[This message was edited by rootofevil on July 16, 2004 at 12:59 AM.]

i mean its really quite simple, homosexuality is not the 'normal' behavior when it comes to mating. but is it necessarily wrong is the question. b4 swares, and accusations come pouring out, i must say im a a democrat and a liberal, but believe that being gay is wrong. do i think that they should be shot down, no i have enough respect for people that i see that this is how they want to live their life, who are u ( chrisitan conservatives ) to say that they are going to burn in hell, who are u to say that they dont desrve life, and that they are immoral. i think if eveyrone has a line of respect a lot of these issues wouldn't evn exsist. since when is it up to the government who we decide to marry, i mean who are they to say. but if u look statistics wise, there are so many gay individuals now compared to the 1800's...but why
i think tht since society is becomign more acceptaible to homosexuality, if an individual finds themselves looking in 'that' way at the same sex ...tehy automatically assume they are gay or bi. i for one can not defintly say that since i am straight. but i think since the acceptability has risen, so has the numbers, which i yes do think is a bad thing. there are always going to be a small percentage of peopel that are attracted to the same sex, its in their genetics, they can't help it and they didn't ask for it, but i dont think todays number are accurate, and there are lots of hoax 'diagnosises'

quote:

---

Quoted by EarthGoddess

actual homosexuals.

---

can't stand em

TallyWhack
Vice Commandant of the Patriot Mullisha
Conservative Member

i don't think that you can be born gay or strait. i think that when u are born, you dont even know about sex or gender. all you do is exist. nobody cares what sex you are, you can even go into the opposite sex's bathroom and not be ridiculed. as you grow, your environment tells you what you are.

quote:

---

OF COURSE people aren't born gay!

---

You people really need to talk to actual homosexuals. That's exactly how I felt until I met Dan. A homosexual male who told me how he felt. I listened open-mindedly because in this debate his opinion is what matters most. He is my best buddy and I love him dearly and I know he wouldn't lie to me. He says he doesn't remember being a heterosexual. At all. That should be the end of the discussion, but for some reason it isn't.

what do you know about being gay??? nothing. all you think you know is what the bible has told you.