|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
1) You are being a hypocrite. First you slam my link to family.org, then you link to gaycity.com, errr, I mean sfgate.com.
That was, quite obviously, his point.
Quote:
2) One of the articles I listed simply states that the study linking genetics to homosexuality was wrong, and it gave facts supporting the article. There was no bias to it. Since homosexuality is NOT genetic, then the gay activists have no basis for marriage.
It's not?
According to whom?
Oh yeah, "family.org". A wholly biased website. Meanwhile the majority of modern scientists (whom are largely heterosexual mind you) believe it is genetic.
Again, that was his point.
Quote:
3) The other article I linked to gives specific examples of how homosexuality is social, not genetic. Yes, the title may turn a you away, but the arguments in the article are real.
Again, a very biased source.
And what exactly is a "real" argument? I mean, what I'm saying now is real isn't it. My argument is real.
Hell, I could write an article and give it to family.org and you'd mindlessly believe that one too, wouldn't you?
Quote:
4) In your article, it lists specific instances of same sex marriages. I'm sorry, but it is not a "sanctified" or "Christian" marriage if it is same-sex. I don't care what the anthropologist says. The second example is hardly a good one, either. Are the Romans around today? I didn't think so. Why aren't they? They became obsessed with overindulgence.
All I've got to say is Go read a history book if you really think that's what caused the fall of the Roman Empire.
A combination of internal problems caused by Christianity (that's ironic, isn't it) and external problems caused by enemies caused the downfall of the Roman Empire. Not Orgies.
EDIT: And just to give you an idea, of how biased family.org is, my web filter at work BLOCKS IT on the pretenses of "Discriminatory Content" -- and the railroad is a pretty damn conservative workplace.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445 |
marriage is a trait of society, so therefore it should not be codified into law.
What? There is no genetic predisposition towards marriage?
SHOCK! AWE!
Oh, and <sarcasm>
2000 Contour SE Sport
Originator of the Beowulf Headlight Mod and the Beowulf CAI
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270 |
Ok, slamming the article/website won't make its points any less valid. Quoted from the article: Quote:
Science (the magazine) revisited the topic this year, publishing two articles questioning supposed links to a gay gene. Both articles reference an independent genetic study conducted in Canada in 1989 with research continuing today by four researchers from the University of Western Ontario and Stanford Medical School. This study used 52 pairs of gay siblings from 48 families æHamer??s research used 40 homosexual brother pairs. The study concluded, ??It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer??s original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al., we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as was reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28.?
Quote:
What can we conclude about the biology of homosexuality? Consider a comprehensive review article, ??Human Sexual Orientation: The Biological Theories Reappraised,? written by William Byne and Bruce Parsons from Columbia University in 1993.
The article reviews 135 research studies, prior reviews, academic summaries, books, and chapters of books??in essence the entire literature on homosexuality, of which only a small portion is actual research. The abstract summarized in its findings that there is no evidence at present to substantiate that biological factors are the primary basis for sexual orientation.
Whatever genetic contribution to homosexuality exists, it probably contributes not to homosexuality per se, but rather to some other trait that makes the homosexual ??option? more readily available to some than others.
So if y'all have any scientific proof THAT IS VALID, please provide it.
The point is this: if homosexuality isn't genetic, then marriage is out of the question. The government should not allow marriage based on a deviant behavior.
Chad Purser
2002 Lexus IS300
5-speed manual
formerly '98 Silver SVT
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
Ok, slamming the article/website won't make its points any less valid.
Of course it does!
I can provide you with an article saying whatever the hell I want it to say if you don't think that where it came from is valid.
Come on now, your profile says you're an Engineer. We're not talking brain surgery here. That's basic high-school education stuff there -- Check your source.
If your source is blocked by a web filter, it's pretty safe to assume that it's pretty damned biased.
Quote:
The point is this: if homosexuality isn't genetic, then marriage is out of the question.
Why is that the point?
My point is this: Marriage is an agreement (the terms of which are your vows) between 2 consenting individuals.
Of course there's more to it than that; but those are more religious/belief details and aren't of any concern of the goverment.
If what you say is the point, is indeed the point, then what about Hermaphrodites? They're not born genetically man nor woman, yet are allowed to claim themselves to be one or the other and legally marry as such.
Quote:
So if y'all have any scientific proof THAT IS VALID, please provide it.
I can't provide valid proof, because no such proof exists. Scientists have determined that homosexuality is likely determined by markers on the X chromosome, but a specific gene has not yet been found, with the exception of Xq28, which seems to be only valid within male homosexuals. That sort of research takes a very long time to conclude so we won't see a final conclusion on what gene causes what behaviors for likely decades.
But if you want some actual valid sources, i can provide that for you? Try things like
The American Journal of Psychiatry:
Bailey, J. M. and D. S. Benishay (1993). "Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation." American Journal of Psychiatry 150(2): 272-277
Or maybe something a little more "popular" like Science:
LeVay, S. (1991). "A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men." Science 253: 1034-1037.
Or maybe you want something from overseas, in case only American scientists want to prove Gays are born that way
British Medical Journal:
Baron, M. "Genetic Linkage and Male Homosexual Orientation", British Medical Journal , August 7, 1993.
And, if you really want a web-link, here's a link for the NCBI, probably the single best source for information on genetics research.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=306995
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445 |
Quote:
The point is this: if homosexuality isn't genetic, then marriage is out of the question. The government should not allow marriage based on a deviant behavior.
Deviant? Deviant? DEVIANT?
Says who? You? If you found that splitting your Oreo's in half was deviant, does that mean anything?
You are making a MORAL judgement based upon your own moral code. I don't find homosexuality deviant in any way and I am insulted by this idiotic regression into whether or not homosexuality is a genetic or learned behavior.
What does it matter anyway? Marriage is a societal custom. I was being sarcastic before, but let me ask you seriously a few questions. Why do we have any legal protections for the societal custom of marriage? Is there a genetic predisposition towards marriage in the human genome? Where in the human genome does it specify man + woman = marriage?
If we want to look at this from a physological standpoint, the human male is genetically equipped for bigamy and polyandry. Scientific studies have shown that male ejaculatory fluid aggresively creates a environment detrimental to any other semen in the female body. Or let us discuss that the uncircumcised male penis acts as a suctioning devide to remove any already deposited semen from the female. of course, this is not to fit some moral code, this is just to propigate the males's DNA to another generation.
Shall we move on how women are equiped by nature to handle multiple male parters in a short time so as to increase the chances of impregnation?
2000 Contour SE Sport
Originator of the Beowulf Headlight Mod and the Beowulf CAI
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 4,220 |
Quote:
Or let us discuss that the uncircumcised male penis acts as a suctioning devide to remove any already deposited semen from the female.
Learn something new everyday.... disgusting.... but new.
2003 Mazda6s 3.0L MTX
Webpage
2004 Mazda3s 2.3L ATX
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,445 |
It is just nature. Sure, a little shocking you aren't prepared for it, but I am more disgusted by the rampant homophobia and judgements being lain down by those who consider themselves morally superior.
2000 Contour SE Sport
Originator of the Beowulf Headlight Mod and the Beowulf CAI
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,489
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,489 |
Originally posted by cpurser:
2) One of the articles I listed simply states that the study linking genetics to homosexuality was wrong, and it gave facts supporting the article. There was no bias to it. Since homosexuality is NOT genetic, then the gay activists have no basis for marriage.
right, and i can link you to ANOTHER article that states that homosexuality IS genetic. the point is that you can't make any positive conclusions, but from common sense, its pretty obvious that there are not JUST social factors involved in the homo/hetero sexuality of someone. and, assuming homosexuality is not genetic, which is HIGHLY doubtful, why do gay activists have no basis for marriage? you guys against gay marriage are all over the place.
1998 T-Red CSVT 3.0L
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270 |
Originally posted by Beowulf:
Quote:
The point is this: if homosexuality isn't genetic, then marriage is out of the question. The government should not allow marriage based on a deviant behavior.
Deviant? Deviant? DEVIANT?
Says who? You? If you found that splitting your Oreo's in half was deviant, does that mean anything?
Yes, DEVIANT!
Originally posted by dictionary.com:
de·vi·ant
adj.
Differing from a norm or from the accepted standards of a society.
n.
One that differs from a norm, especially a person whose behavior and attitudes differ from accepted social standards.
Originally posted by Beowulf:
Where in the human genome does it specify man + woman = marriage?
That's a good question (even though it was loaded). I don't know, but men and women have been getting married for millenia, in all societies. I wonder why that is?
Originally posted by Beowulf:
If we want to look at this from a physological standpoint, the human male is genetically equipped for bigamy and polyandry. Scientific studies have shown that male ejaculatory fluid aggresively creates a environment detrimental to any other semen in the female body. Or let us discuss that the uncircumcised male penis acts as a suctioning devide to remove any already deposited semen from the female. of course, this is not to fit some moral code, this is just to propigate the males's DNA to another generation.
Shall we move on how women are equiped by nature to handle multiple male parters in a short time so as to increase the chances of impregnation?
All your points lend themselves to heterosexuality. Interesting.....
Chad Purser
2002 Lexus IS300
5-speed manual
formerly '98 Silver SVT
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270
CEG\'er
|
|
CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 270 |
Originally posted by sigma:
Scientists have determined that homosexuality is likely determined by markers on the X chromosome, but a specific gene has not yet been found, with the exception of Xq28, which seems to be only valid within male homosexuals.
Uhmm, the Xq28 is the study that my article was disputing. INVALID STUDY!
Originally posted by sigma:
But if you want some actual valid sources, i can provide that for you? Try things like
The American Journal of Psychiatry:
Bailey, J. M. and D. S. Benishay (1993). "Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation." American Journal of Psychiatry 150(2): 272-277
Or maybe something a little more "popular" like Science:
LeVay, S. (1991). "A Difference in Hypothalamic Structure Between Heterosexual and Homosexual Men." Science 253: 1034-1037.
Or maybe you want something from overseas, in case only American scientists want to prove Gays are born that way
British Medical Journal:
Baron, M. "Genetic Linkage and Male Homosexual Orientation", British Medical Journal , August 7, 1993.
And, if you really want a web-link, here's a link for the NCBI, probably the single best source for information on genetics research.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/dispomim.cgi?id=306995
Thanks, I'll look into them.
Chad Purser
2002 Lexus IS300
5-speed manual
formerly '98 Silver SVT
|
|
|
|
|
