homosexuality disproves evolution

[fantome profane]

I tried to procreate with a rabbit once. It didn't work out, but my intentions were good. That is, I wanted to procreate. And isn't that all that matters?

Not, I would suspect, to the rabbit. :bunny:

 

[Autodidact]

I'm well aware of what you're saying. But, that isn't my point in the first place. My point is that there are confused kids out there that have been duped by that jargon when they were just confused about things.

If there are, they are confused into thinking they are or should be heterosexual, when their natural inclination is homosexual. Remember, homosexuals suffer negative consequences. What doesn't happen is that heterosexuals get confused into thinking they are or should be homosexual.

they swallow that faith pill they are on there way to believing everything and then can no longer change after the homosexual orientation develops, especially if people keep shoving "no choice" scientific dictatorship jargon down their throats.

No one's shoving anything down anyone's throat. We're simply stating the facts.
So you see science as imposing a dictatorship? Do you hate science?

That limited view also prevents certain people from changing their orientation, or even attempting and contemplating it any further dispite any other inclination.

WHY SHOULD THEY? Is your limited view preventing you from changing your orientation, or even attempting and contemplating it any further?

Trying to change your natural orientation is damaging to you and the people around you. Why would you want to hurt yourself and others?

There is nothing immoral about a person changing their orientation and choosing to develop those other inherent parts of themselves.

Yes, there is. It hurts themselves and other people.

They are not a liar either-unlike what someone here stated.

Oh really? Do they put ads like this on dating sites:
"Gay till now, interested in trying the straight thing." ? I don't think so.

They have the right to their own body, life, orientation and pursuit of happiness.

No one is denying that. They have the right to make mistakes, lie, live an inauthentic life as a failed heterosexual, have sex with man-whores while snorting meth and go home and lie to their wives about it, while subjecting them to the risk of HIV, but why would they want to?

Many people most likely have the potential for all inherent orientations at first- genetically speaking. Many things develop afterwards, which will make a certain type of orientation the dominant orientation. People change this all the time and bring out the orientation they favor, so there's nothing to argue concerning this..

Actually yes, there is.

unless someone's faith in genetic orientation is somehow threatened by the word, choice.

Tell you what. Go out and work on changing your orientation to gay, then report back to us. After all, there's nothing immoral about developing that capacity, is there?

Fast forward yourself 100-200 years in the future and by the exponential increases in advanced science (i.e. knowledge, development, treatments, technology, etc.) now taking place in all areas of the human being, all orientations are indeed going to become more and more of a choice for those that wish and demand it. This can be embraced and realized or it can represent a threat due to one's own "stagnant scientific faiths." Attacking me and calling me names is not going to help, sorry... :areyoucra

I have no idea what the future holds and neither do you. I hope it holds a world in which gay people don't feel the need to live fake lives as failed lying heterosexuals, because they are accepted as what they are, gay.

 

[Autodidact]

Wizard is not entirely incorrect and moreover I dont believe he has said anything bigoted.

Choices and learning create new neural pathways new connections in your brain...it is possible to reinforces one's sexual orientations by repeated behaviours...repeated experiences.

Choice does have a part to play in the dynamic of the evolution of an individual's sexual identity...and no time is more crucial as wizard has mentioned when the choice maker is young...the choices he/she makes then will have long term implications for their future identities.

Everyone has a capacity for the condition labelled 'homosexuality'...to greater and lesser extents...some never get the chance to express it, some do....its all natural and choice or no choice or bit of both I fail to see how it matters...

Then Wizard should go explore and develop his homosexual capacity and see how that works out for him.

 

[The Wizard]

If there are, they are confused into thinking they are or should be heterosexual, when their natural inclination is homosexual.

This is certainly a factor of individual circumstance here. I think you're lumping everyone in the same pile if I'm not mistaken. I think I have already pointed this out to you before. So, now you're saying that they have no natural inclination to be heterosexual if I'm not mistaken. You seem convinced that a person can only have one type of inherent orientation (i.e. potential), which I highly doubt is the truth.

I think you could be overlooking the possibility that everyone can inherently have the inclination for any orientation if they want to develop that part of themselves further. Relationships, love and affection is an attribute that is quite flexible. If something isn't nurtured, developed or used it can go dormant.

What doesn't happen is that heterosexuals get confused into thinking they are or should be homosexual. No one's shoving anything down anyone's throat. We're simply stating the facts..

Again, I wasn't referring to anyone in particular, but it exists out there.. blind faith based dogma and undue sense of importance is everywhere on any side of the fence, plus agendas.

So you see science as imposing a dictatorship? Do you hate science?.

No, people impose dogma in whatever way they prefer. I have no reason to hate science. On the contrary, read my last post again to discover that would be the opposite. You seem to be a rather selective reader attacking your own created strawmen. You are getting me confused with a bunch of other people.

WHY SHOULD THEY?

Why should they what? Are you NOT for people taking more control over their lives if they wish or is that an actual question? If so, why would you ask me? I would have no idea. You would have to go ask all the people that are doing it.

Is your limited view preventing you from changing your orientation, or even attempting and contemplating it any further?.

Use a scenario in third person please....

Trying to change your natural orientation is damaging to you and the people around you. Why would you want to hurt yourself and others?.

This is another broad brush stroke that could not be applied to everyone and their circumstances. Listen, try saying those things to all the people that have did exactly that and are living perfectly happy lives. It just won't fly, sorry.

Yes, there is. It hurts themselves and other people. Oh really? Do they put ads like this on dating sites:.

Their is no reason for me to go into hair splitting details with you on this because it's a given that influences are everywhere and directly going to influence who can be influenced the most- or confused. This stuff only bores me.

They have the right to make mistakes, lie, live an inauthentic life as a failed heterosexual, have sex with man-whores while snorting meth and go home and lie to their wives about it, while subjecting them to the risk of HIV, but why would they want to?

I'm sorry, you're doing the same thing again, which is asking me a question about something I said, but putting you're own spin on the interpretation. You're a selective reader, which makes communication on a forum a taxing venture. Did I not specifically emphasis in one of my posts that the question of "why" is not my point (SEE page-23-#222)? That would depend on the person, obviously.

And, for those who wish to keep accusing me of saying that the orientation is wrong or immoral they can always re-read the thread to discover it is not so. I simply do not have the time to reply to so much misinterpretations and straw men arguments.

Actually yes, there is. Tell you what. Go out and work on changing your orientation to gay, then report back to us. After all, there's nothing immoral about developing that capacity, is there?.

Once again, this a public forum. On such matters it is always better to not direct this subject towards the people you're discussing things with and present, lol.

I have no idea what the future holds and neither do you..

Choice will naturally be more and more abundant in all facets of human life due to advancements of science, application and knowledge. Anyone can clearly deduct that because that is the direction of things in the World. Welcome to the future...

I hope it holds a world in which gay people don't feel the need to live fake lives as failed lying heterosexuals, because they are accepted as what they are, gay.

I'm sure it will get better... IMO. Did I miss something?


　
　

 

[Alceste]

Then Wizard should go explore and develop his homosexual capacity and see how that works out for him.

For Wizard to be so thoroughly convinced that anyone can fall in love with or be attracted to either sex and can freely choose which gender to develop relationships with, it follows that he himself is a bisexual and often finds himself sexually attracted to men. This is a basic rule of human psychology, as far as I've observed. It is normal to project our own world views onto the rest of humanity. It is very uncommon to project psychological capabilities onto others that we don't have ourselves, because (obviously) we can not imagine them. I suspect his conviction that all homosexuals are simply the outcome of poor choices during sexually "confused" teenage years stems from a personal puberty that was confusing for him due to his sexual feelings toward other boys. I don't doubt that these feelings for the most part were not acted upon, and his confusion and turmoil abated when he "chose" to develop his capacity for relationships with women and ignore or repress his feelings toward men. Because he was born with the ability to "choose", in a manner of speaking, and because "choosing" the socially acceptable option allayed his personal confusion and turmoil, he believes this "solution" is workable even for people who are not at all "confused" about their sexuality - they either have no attraction to the opposite sex or their attraction for the same sex is so compelling repression of those desires brings more turmoil and confusion rather than less.

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

For Wizard to be so thoroughly convinced that anyone can fall in love with or be attracted to either sex and can freely choose which gender to develop relationships with, it follows that he himself is a bisexual and often finds himself sexually attracted to men. This is a basic rule of human psychology, as far as I've observed. It is normal to project our own world views onto the rest of humanity. It is very uncommon to project psychological capabilities onto others that we don't have ourselves, because (obviously) we can not imagine them. I suspect his conviction that all homosexuals are simply the outcome of poor choices during sexually "confused" teenage years stems from a personal puberty that was confusing for him due to his sexual feelings toward other boys. I don't doubt that these feelings for the most part were not acted upon, and his confusion and turmoil abated when he "chose" to develop his capacity for relationships with women and ignore or repress his feelings toward men. Because he was born with the ability to "choose", in a manner of speaking, and because "choosing" the socially acceptable option allayed his personal confusion and turmoil, he believes this "solution" is workable even for people who are not at all "confused" about their sexuality - they either have no attraction to the opposite sex or their attraction for the same sex is so compelling repression of those desires brings more turmoil and confusion rather than less.

That may be so.

But the fact remains human sexuality is not entirely genetic...neither is criminal behaviour...neither is musical ability...all these 'aspects' of the genetically expressed human brain can be influenced by environmental factors, to varying degrees, in differing directions.

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

Then Wizard should go explore and develop his homosexual capacity and see how that works out for him.

Who hasnt?

 

[Autodidact]

This is certainly a factor of individual circumstance here. I think you're lumping everyone in the same pile if I'm not mistaken. I think I have already pointed this out to you before. So, now you're saying that they have no natural inclination to be heterosexual if I'm not mistaken. You seem convinced that a person can only have one type of inherent orientation (i.e. potential), which I highly doubt is the truth.

No, you seem to be convinced of that. Most people are somewhere on a spectrum, neither completely heterosexual nor completely homosexual. However, my point is that people are much more likely to be pressured over to the heterosexual direction, than vice versa. All of society, including you, is set up to push people that way, with almost no pressure the other way.

I think you could be overlooking the possibility that everyone can inherently have the inclination for any orientation if they want to develop that part of themselves further.

This does not in fact appear to the be the case. Again, do you have an incliniation for homosexual relationships if you wanted to develop that part of yourself further?

Relationships, love and affection is an attribute that is quite flexible. If something isn't nurtured, developed or used it can go dormant.

This does not appear to be the case among men. It is to a certain extent with some women.

Again, I wasn't referring to anyone in particular, but it exists out there.. blind faith based dogma and undue sense of importance is everywhere on any side of the fence, plus agendas.

I know. It's so hard trying to reason with religionists.

No, people impose dogma in whatever way they prefer. I have no reason to hate science. On the contrary, read my last post again to discover that would be the opposite. You seem to be a rather selective reader attacking your own created strawmen. You are getting me confused with a bunch of other people.

You're the one who called science a dictatorship. Of course, it is. It's a dictatorship of the truth. Some people have a problem with that.

Why should they what? Are you NOT for people taking more control over their lives if they wish or is that an actual question? If so, why would you ask me? I would have no idea. You would have to go ask all the people that are doing it.

You're the one advocating it. If it's not a good idea, then why are you so hung up on it?

Use a scenario in third person please....

Why? You're the one clamoring for it. I say it's destructive. Since it does no harm, and only allows individuals to develop themselves, I think you should be the first to sign up for it. Right after you do it, and succeed, you'll have a lot more credibility around here.

This is another broad brush stroke that could not be applied to everyone and their circumstances. Listen, try saying those things to all the people that have did exactly that and are living perfectly happy lives. It just won't fly, sorry.

There aren't any. Read the research. Oops, there's that dictatorship of the truth again. I know you hate that.

Their is no reason for me to go into hair splitting details with you on this because it's a given that influences are everywhere and directly going to influence who can be influenced the most- or confused. This stuff only bores me.

Cool. So shut up and go away then.

I'm sorry, you're doing the same thing again, which is asking me a question about something I said, but putting you're own spin on the interpretation. You're a selective reader, which makes communication on a forum a taxing venture. Did I not specifically emphasis in one of my posts that the question of "why" is not my point (SEE page-23-#222)? That would depend on the person, obviously.

It's not your point. It's mine. There is no reason to do this. So why are we discussing it?

And, for those who wish to keep accusing me of saying that the orientation is wrong or immoral they can always re-read the thread to discover it is not so. I simply do not have the time to reply to so much misinterpretations and straw men arguments.

In that case, you should have no problem with joining the gay team. Let me know how that works out for you.

Once again, this a public forum. On such matters it is always better to not direct this subject towards the people you're discussing things with and present, lol.

I beg to differ, as this thread has demonstrated.

Like many people, you're quick to tell other people what they should do, but not happy to try it yourself.

Choice will naturally be more and more abundant in all facets of human life due to advancements of science, application and knowledge. Anyone can clearly deduct that because that is the direction of things in the World. Welcome to the future...

Really? Cite source?

I'm sure it will get better... IMO. Did I miss something?

Unless it gets worse, as it is in some parts of the world as I type.


　
　[/quote]

 

[Autodidact]

That may be so.

But the fact remains human sexuality is not entirely genetic...neither is criminal behaviour...neither is musical ability...all these 'aspects' of the genetically expressed human brain can be influenced by environmental factors, to varying degrees, in differing directions.

but interestingly, both of these have a heritable component, though not as strong as sexual preference.

 

[Primordial Annihilator]

but interestingly, both of these have a heritable component, though not as strong as sexual preference.

Homosexuality or the capacity for it is latent in almost all humans to varying degrees of expression. (I believe)
There are brain structure differences however...for example statistically male homosexuals tend to be on average 5 points higher on the IQ scale than their heterosexual counterparts.

So clearly sexuality is related to brain structure & chemistry at the fundamental level.

I contend of course that brain structure is partly a product of choice and environmental influence and partly a result of genetics...ol mother nature.

I have no idea what the ratio is but I wildly speculate that homosexuals who are exclusively homosexual of whatever gender are around 1:9 choice/env : genetics.

 

[Alceste]

That may be so.

But the fact remains human sexuality is not entirely genetic...neither is criminal behaviour...neither is musical ability...all these 'aspects' of the genetically expressed human brain can be influenced by environmental factors, to varying degrees, in differing directions.

Doesn't matter. Nobody but Wizard is banging on about homosexuality being entirely genetic. The fact remains we can not choose when to be turned on and when not to be turned on.

 

[andys]

"...according to natural selection gays will die out. evolutionists have been stumped there is nothing natural about gays.

The fact that homosexuality is observed to occur (and reoccur) throughout nature, contradicts your assertion that homosexuality is not natural. (Suggested reading: "An Introduction to Logic" by Irving Copi.)

I do grant that homosexuality could cause the extinction of our species, but only if every person on Earth were homosexual. And I do mean every member of both sexes, since it actually only takes one to tango. (Such an extinction scenario is so improbable that it, itself, might warrant the descriptor "unnatural".) But let's suppose that the demise of our species were to occur this way; wouldn't this unfortunate extinction best be described as "natural"?

Science is replete with examples of genetic (i.e., natural) causes that prohibit sexual propagation of our species:

"Disorders of reproduction represent a significant social, medical, and economic burden for individuals and society. Approximately 1 in 10 couples in the United States are infertile, and each partner is equally likely to be affected. Although many causes of infertility can now be determined in both men and women, most couples still receive a diagnosis of idiopathic infertility. A subset of these patients is likely to have an underlying genetic disorder that is either inherited (germline) or acquired (somatic). (Genetic Causes of Human Reproductive Disease -- Achermann et al. 87 (6): 2447 -- Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism)

Homosexuality poses no greater threat than common genetically caused states of infertility, which are clearly part of nature.

Therefore, what may appear, at first glance, to be counterproductive (or should I say counter-reproductive) is nevertheless, undeniably part of nature. We are free to question nature's "rationale" for homosexuality having evolved, but our inability to answer this question does not warrant the wholesale denial of the readily observable fact that it is, most certainly, part and parcel of our natural world.

 

[Vendetta]

Wizard has somewhat of a point. There are adolescent teens that are "bi-curious" or are "homo-curious" since homosexuality is increasigly becoming an accepted reality for many. Some adolescent kids I've physically observed in a logitudinal study, one moment an adolescent is expressing homosexual and/or bi sexual tendencies and the next time they're exhibiting heterosexual tendencies. Now some may call it confusion off the back, some call it experimenting through sexual maturity. In studies in which I've examined sexual behavior as it relates to the brain I've seen a wide range of variables as to why a person may switch between sexual orientation.

However, regardless of that fact that is not an argument that someone who is actually gay can change their behavior and to even suggest such things is discriminatory in nature. There are real brain difference between homosexual males and straight females (we compare homo male brains to straight female brains because of similarity).

The hypothalmalus of the homosexual male is larger than that of a straight male please look at Suprachiasmatic nucleus. If you must know the hypothalamus is apart of the endocrine system which helps regulate testosterone and estrogen out out as well as influencing sexual orientation. In essence, because of our biology to be place in an environment to where we are influenced (or forced) to change our sexual orientation is inherently wrong and even if there are gays that do change their sexual orientation we see that those changed are indeed temporary. These groups that try to "cure" homosexual tendencies use repressive techniques which inherently makes the person feel guilty for being gay which is a homophobic practice in it of itself.

 

[Autodidact]

Wizard has someone of a point. There are adolescent teens that are "bi-curious" or are "homo-curious" since homosexuality is increasigly becoming an accepted reality for many. Some adolescent kids I've physically observed in a logitudinal study, one moment an adolescent is expressing homosexual and/or bi sexual tendencies and the next time they're exhibiting heterosexual tendencies. Now some may call it confusion off the back, some call it experimenting through sexual maturity. In studies in which I've examined sexual behavior as it relates to the brain I've seen a wide range of variables as to why a person may switch between sexual orientation.

Whatever it is, it's fine. Young people should be learning about who they are and should feel free to explore all of these options without penalty, repercussion or societal rejection. What they should not do, what no one should do, is to try to repress their own nature to conform with societal expectations, which is completely different from this.

These groups that try to "cure" homosexual tendencies use repressive techniques which inherently makes the person feel guilty for being gay which is a homophobic practice in it of itself.

Exactly.

 

[Vendetta]

I again apologize for my grammar and mispelling. I am on my droid X phone and it auto corrects everything.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

But the fact remains human sexuality is not entirely genetic

How do you know? How is this fact? You may be absolutely correct, I'd just like to hear your reasoning.

...neither is criminal behaviour...neither is musical ability...all these 'aspects' of the genetically expressed human brain can be influenced by environmental factors, to varying degrees, in differing directions.

While I will agree that criminal behavior is not genetic(IMO), I would have to disagree with musical ability in say the ability to sing. Now of course everyone has this ability, just some better than others. I however do not believe it is something that can be taught or influenced by environmental factors. In my experience, and this is just that, my experience, every person I know that is able to sing well, has at least one parent that has the same ability. Now they can be taught through exercises to control their voice, but this is something that is unique to the individual and is part of their makeup. I have a terrible singing voice, and not even Celine Dion could teach me to sing better.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

I again apologize for my grammar and mispelling. I am on my droid X phone and it auto corrects everything.

HTC Evo > Droid X

 

[Vendetta]

HTC Evo > Droid X

Lol is that a 4G?

 

[Autodidact]

While I will agree that criminal behavior is not genetic(IMO),.

Actually, and surprisingly, there is a heritable component to criminality. Years ago I read of a Scandinavian study in which the tendency to criminality was more alike between adopted children and their biological parents than their adoptive parents. This shocked me.

I think what's going on is not so much criminality itself, but IQ, impulse control and tendencies like that, which lead to criminality.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Actually, and surprisingly, there is a heritable component to criminality. Years ago I read of a Scandinavian study in which the tendency to criminality was more alike between adopted children and their biological parents than their adoptive parents. This shocked me.

I think what's going on is not so much criminality itself, but IQ, impulse control and tendencies like that, which lead to criminality.

I had not heard of that. Interesting to know. Thanks for the info