Jack Fate
New Member
This is not about insults. This is about political debate. I'm not insulting you like you did me when I first came to this site.
Now. Show me something that backs up your statement the gay people are born that way. Thanks.
the consequences of gay marriage
- Thread starter UncleBuck
- Start date
- Status
This is not about insults. This is about political debate. I'm not insulting you like you did me when I first came to this site.
Now. Show me something that backs up your statement the gay people are born that way. Thanks.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
Jack Fate
New Member
I didn't ask if sheep are born gay. UB said gay PEOPLE are born that way. Please try again. Thanks.
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Now he'll say that the sources are suspect or it doesn't prove a thing.. blah blah blah....
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
Obviously you didn't read the entire article. Did you pop a woody or something and it scared you?
Jack Fate
New Member
LOL. I don't think you really understand what that says. It says environment played a role twice as much as genetics for men and three times as much for women. Doesn't look like they're born that way UB. You might want to check your own facts before you shoot off your mouth on an adult political debate forum, especially when you're the moderator.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
also, asking anyone to 'prove' anything is silly and betrays a lack of understanding about how science works.
science doesn't prove anything, but it can disprove.
in any case, there is lots of evidence. such as in every study, monozygotic twins had a much higher coincidence of homosexuality that dizygotic twins. every time. without fail.
http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/studies.html
science doesn't prove anything, but it can disprove.
in any case, there is lots of evidence. such as in every study, monozygotic twins had a much higher coincidence of homosexuality that dizygotic twins. every time. without fail.
http://www.tim-taylor.com/papers/twin_studies/studies.html
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
and thus you admit there is a genetic component.
Jack Fate
New Member
But the evidence is not conclusive that they were born that way. You need to be careful what you say when you're around adults on an adult political forum. You'll look much more intelligent.
Beansly
RIU Bulldog
Carne Seca
Well-Known Member
First it was no evidence and now it's not conclusive. Keep moving that goal post.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
nothing is conclusive.
if you understood science in the least, you would understand that theories are given credence in accordance with the evidence.
empirical evidence shows that those who share DNA that is more similar are more likely to share the same sexual orientation than those who do not.
how would you explain that (without invoking god, baby jesus, or the bible)?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
good catch, carne.
there is nothing conclusive that smoking causes lung cancer, just a ton of evidence in the form of correlation.
there is nothing conclusive about the theory of evolution, yet we are somehow able to make predictions (and see them verified) using that theory.
there is nothing conclusive about the consistently higher concordance among monozygotic twins rather than dizygotic twins, but it flies directly in the face of what jack says about sexual orientation being a choice.
he can keep moving the goalposts all day, it is just his way of ignoring evidence that does not favor his fundamentalist, bible-based worldview.
Jack Fate
New Member
No, I don't admit anything. The study says that environment plays the biggest role in determining homosexuality. There is no such thing as a "gay gene". If you believe there is then give us the name of the doctor. You can't because it hasn't been discovered. These are results of studies, and not conclusive evidence. You really need to be careful. There are real live adults around here who are educated.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
by choosing to accept the validity of the study, you are choosing to accept that there is a genetic component to sexual orientation.
and i know there are real, live, educated adults around here. and i know who they are and are not
The Ruiner
Well-Known Member
Real live adults?
As opposed to Fake Dead Children?
As opposed to Fake Dead Children?
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
wikipedia said:
by turning a light hearted thread into some trial about the genetic factor involved with sexual orientation, i would say jack met the definition of troll pretty nicely. keep in mind that i like trolls, a good troll is always fun (for me at least).
now, forgiving the trolling, let's step back.
let's grant jack his point and suppose that 100% of people who are gay choose to be gay.
now, just because someone chooses to like someone of the same-sex, is that any reason to discriminate against them? keep certain rights from them? tell them they can't have the liberty to marry the partner of their choice?
here in america, we live under the law of the constitution. generally, unless your freedom is impinging on mine, it is allowed.
so why would we want to deprive someone of their liberties for engaging in a consensual partnership with another adult that has no effect on anyone else?
Filthy Phil
Well-Known Member
To a person set upon believing something else, you can rarely prove to them anything, even with the proof. Here is what the study said"adult": you can be born gay, environment can make you gay, or you can be born straight, or as we have seen, you can be born gay, but be environmentally straight.
If you are looking for some factual information that aids intl the assumption that people can be born gay: roughly 10% of people are gay across all cultures through the world (except iran if you believe their leader). With the variable of culture removed in this way you see that regardless of cultural and environmental factors, the same amount of people are ending up gay. If this were happening in dogs, would you think there is a genetic component? Some of my old psych professors said they think it is possible that all people are born bisexual but due to environmental reasons like reproduction and such are generally heterosexual.... I thought it was an interesting idea
If you are looking for some factual information that aids intl the assumption that people can be born gay: roughly 10% of people are gay across all cultures through the world (except iran if you believe their leader). With the variable of culture removed in this way you see that regardless of cultural and environmental factors, the same amount of people are ending up gay. If this were happening in dogs, would you think there is a genetic component? Some of my old psych professors said they think it is possible that all people are born bisexual but due to environmental reasons like reproduction and such are generally heterosexual.... I thought it was an interesting idea
- Status
