| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"The KPA will resolutely smash the moves of the enemies to weaken the ideological might of the arms of the revolution and mete out merciless punishment to the aggressors and provokers" |
| Date: |
27 Feb 2006 09:24:25 PM |
| Object: |
Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
I was at the post office today and they had a poster featuring the
current stamp series and one coming out next month is a $0.39 "Our
Wedding" stamp, presumably for people celebrating their wedding.
Okay, so there is no comparable civil union stamp. Since gays can't
get married, the wedding stamp discriminates against them because
they have no special stamp to celebrate gay civil unions. The USPS
has long issued hannakuh and now the moozlum eid holiday stamps in
addition to xmas stamps to be inclusive, so they should also issue
civil union stamps to include homosexuals who can't legally marry.
So there should be a protest against this. We can boycott the post
office and bring them to their knees and force them to either issue
a homosexual civil union commemorative stamp or to withdraw the
discriminatory heterosexual marriage stamp.
.
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 06:32:34 PM |
|
|
"The KPA will resolutely smash the moves of the enemies to weaken the
ideological might of the arms of the revolution and mete out merciless
punishment to the aggressors and provokers" <kpa@dprk.com> wrote in message
news:JnPMf.61520$PL5.43002@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
I was at the post office today and they had a poster featuring the
current stamp series and one coming out next month is a $0.39 "Our
Wedding" stamp, presumably for people celebrating their wedding.
Okay, so there is no comparable civil union stamp. Since gays can't
get married, the wedding stamp discriminates against them because
they have no special stamp to celebrate gay civil unions. The USPS
has long issued hannakuh and now the moozlum eid holiday stamps in
addition to xmas stamps to be inclusive, so they should also issue
civil union stamps to include homosexuals who can't legally marry.
So there should be a protest against this. We can boycott the post
office and bring them to their knees and force them to either issue
a homosexual civil union commemorative stamp or to withdraw the
discriminatory heterosexual marriage stamp.
Just another piece of evidence to show how liberals are trying their best to
wreck and ruin whats left of this once great country.
Gays should not be allowed to marry, it is already proved that nobody is
born gay, homosexuality is a choice that doesn't merit special rights and
privileges for those who make that choice.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Boy Toy" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 07:36:10 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
"The KPA will resolutely smash the moves of the enemies to weaken the
ideological might of the arms of the revolution and mete out merciless
punishment to the aggressors and provokers" <kpa@dprk.com> wrote in message
news:JnPMf.61520$PL5.43002@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
I was at the post office today and they had a poster featuring the
current stamp series and one coming out next month is a $0.39 "Our
Wedding" stamp, presumably for people celebrating their wedding.
Okay, so there is no comparable civil union stamp. Since gays can't
get married, the wedding stamp discriminates against them because
they have no special stamp to celebrate gay civil unions. The USPS
has long issued hannakuh and now the moozlum eid holiday stamps in
addition to xmas stamps to be inclusive, so they should also issue
civil union stamps to include homosexuals who can't legally marry.
So there should be a protest against this. We can boycott the post
office and bring them to their knees and force them to either issue
a homosexual civil union commemorative stamp or to withdraw the
discriminatory heterosexual marriage stamp.
Just another piece of evidence to show how liberals are trying their best to
wreck and ruin whats left of this once great country.
Gays should not be allowed to marry, it is already proved that nobody is
born gay, homosexuality is a choice that doesn't merit special rights and
privileges for those who make that choice.
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just more
typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 08:22:40 PM |
|
|
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
"The KPA will resolutely smash the moves of the enemies to weaken the
ideological might of the arms of the revolution and mete out merciless
punishment to the aggressors and provokers" <kpa@dprk.com> wrote in
message
news:JnPMf.61520$PL5.43002@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
I was at the post office today and they had a poster featuring the
current stamp series and one coming out next month is a $0.39 "Our
Wedding" stamp, presumably for people celebrating their wedding.
Okay, so there is no comparable civil union stamp. Since gays can't
get married, the wedding stamp discriminates against them because
they have no special stamp to celebrate gay civil unions. The USPS
has long issued hannakuh and now the moozlum eid holiday stamps in
addition to xmas stamps to be inclusive, so they should also issue
civil union stamps to include homosexuals who can't legally marry.
So there should be a protest against this. We can boycott the post
office and bring them to their knees and force them to either issue
a homosexual civil union commemorative stamp or to withdraw the
discriminatory heterosexual marriage stamp.
Just another piece of evidence to show how liberals are trying their best
to
wreck and ruin whats left of this once great country.
Gays should not be allowed to marry, it is already proved that nobody is
born gay, homosexuality is a choice that doesn't merit special rights and
privileges for those who make that choice.
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just more
typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 08:46:28 PM |
|
|
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just more
typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies have
shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the other one
is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and lower still
for siblings.
Genetics is obviously an important factor but not the only factor, and
in any case genes do not always act like simple on/off switches for
some trait. For example, a gene may modify the structure of some
enzyme in a way that effects its reaction rate but not its basic
function. What goes on is complex and not necessarily deterministic.
So, to assume you need a 100% correlation in a twin study to show a
genetic component is simply wrong.
You can post all the links you want, but if they are to the rantings
of wingnuts with an ax to grind, don't be surprised if nobody takes it
seriously. If you want to post some links, try ones to respectable
sources - ones that the scientific community would take seriously.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 09:02:24 PM |
|
|
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just more
typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody
is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any
and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that
with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for
you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies have
shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the other one
is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and lower still
for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins studies would
show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not even close to 100% .
Genetics is obviously an important factor but not the only factor, and
in any case genes do not always act like simple on/off switches for
some trait. For example, a gene may modify the structure of some
enzyme in a way that effects its reaction rate but not its basic
function. What goes on is complex and not necessarily deterministic.
So, to assume you need a 100% correlation in a twin study to show a
genetic component is simply wrong.
Nope, I am absolutely correct, are you still having trouble understanding
what the word "identical" means?
If genetics was not the only factor then whatever other factors involved
would be replicated with 100% consistency with the other twin.
You can post all the links you want, but if they are to the rantings
of wingnuts with an ax to grind, don't be surprised if nobody takes it
seriously. If you want to post some links, try ones to respectable
sources - ones that the scientific community would take seriously.
You have already agreed that 50% is the number which means you understand
that it is not 100% so nothing needs to be posted, I don't argue with the
50% but it still needs to be 100% and it's not even close thus proving I am
correct.
.
|
|
|
| User: "No One" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 10:04:56 PM |
|
|
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just more
typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody
is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any
and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that
with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for
you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies have
shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the other one
is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and lower still
for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins studies would
show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not even close to 100% .
Wrong. The term "Identical twins" means that they share the same
genes. It does not mean that there are not differences between the
two. Some events are triggered by chemicals provided by the mother
during prenatal development and the two don't get treated identically.
So of course there are differences, although typically very subtle
differences.
Many genes also simply encode when various processs start or stop, based
on when various enzymes are generated or based on how proteins respond
to those enzymes, there is some randomness invovled in how things grow
and when various events occur, and that randomness will cause subtle
differences between two individuals with exactly the same genes.
If you were right, then the statistics for identical versus fraternal
twins should be the same, but instead they differ by a factor of two.
Also, you might be hard pressed to explain differences in homosexual
versus heterosexual males' reactions when smelling a
testosterone-based chemical.
Also see <http://www.livescience.com/humanbiology/ap_050510_pheremones.html>,
where a researcher states the obvious:
"It is one more piece of evidence ... that is showing that
sexual orientation is not all learned,'' said Sandra Witelson,
an expert on brain anatomy and sexual orientation at the
Michael G. DeGroote School of Medicine at McMaster University
in Ontario, Canada.
So it seems your hypothesis has some real problems. It doesn't fit the
data. And the experts working in this area don't agree with you.
Genetics is obviously an important factor but not the only factor, and
in any case genes do not always act like simple on/off switches for
some trait. For example, a gene may modify the structure of some
enzyme in a way that effects its reaction rate but not its basic
function. What goes on is complex and not necessarily deterministic.
So, to assume you need a 100% correlation in a twin study to show a
genetic component is simply wrong.
Nope, I am absolutely correct, are you still having trouble understanding
what the word "identical" means?
Nope, you are simply clueless.
You have already agreed that 50% is the number which means you understand
that it is not 100% so nothing needs to be posted, I don't argue with the
50% but it still needs to be 100% and it's not even close thus proving I am
correct.
As I said, you don't have a clue. And worse, you are showing your
biases and incompetence by ignoring most of the data - the
corresponding results for fraternal twins and siblings.
.
|
|
|
| User: "geltab" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
10 Mar 2006 10:42:27 PM |
|
|
No One wrote...
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins studies would
show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not even close to 100% .
Wrong. The term "Identical twins" means that they share the same
genes. It does not mean that there are not differences between the
two. Some events are triggered by chemicals provided by the mother
during prenatal development and the two don't get treated identically.
So of course there are differences, although typically very subtle
differences.
And don't forget that each time DNA replicates there are errors. So
even though the twins share an identical DNA sequence when the
original blastocyst splits, each successive cell division in the
developing embryos results in an increasing divergence in DNA. So
identical twins may wind up sharing 99.99999% of the same nucleic
acid sequances compared to 99.999% of fraternal twins and 99.9% of
the general population, but they are never absolutely identical. The
same applies to clones. While both identical twins and clones are
ideal for organ transplants, they are never completely identical in
terms of DNA.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
02 Mar 2006 09:18:24 PM |
|
|
In News 120fcdtt3n370c1@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just
more typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that
nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond
any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay
twin, the incidence would be 100% but the reality is that it is
nowhere close to 100%. The studies are all over the web, if you like I
can post some links
for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies have
shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the other one
is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and lower still
for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins studies
would show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not even close
to 100% .
No, there are several differences in identical twins. They are considered
identical because the share the same DNA. However, in identical twins there
are slight variations in their fingerprints, their voice prints, their
retina arterial configuration, and several other points. These differences
occur even when they have identical DNA because of various environmental
factors. So there is a genetic component, and an environmental component.
The fact that 50% of identical twins share the same sexual orientation as
their genetically identical twin where non-identical twins and sibs are far
lower strongly suggests a genetic component, with an environmental factor
that acts the same as environmental factors for the other variations. It
doesn't need to be 100% to show a genetic component.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. – Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:33:03 PM |
|
|
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:4AONf.5973$S25.2796@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120fcdtt3n370c1@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just
more typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up. ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that
nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond
any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay
twin, the incidence would be 100% but the reality is that it is
nowhere close to 100%. The studies are all over the web, if you like I
can post some links
for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies have
shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the other one
is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and lower still
for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins studies
would show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not even close
to 100% .
No, there are several differences in identical twins. They are considered
identical because the share the same DNA. However, in identical twins
there are slight variations in their fingerprints, their voice prints,
their retina arterial configuration, and several other points. These
differences occur even when they have identical DNA because of various
environmental factors.
Thank you for understanding that nobody is born gay by admitting that
environmental factors are involved.
You didn't need all the semantics though, the truth was right in front of
you the entire time.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:58:03 PM |
|
|
In News 120umsv3pltao33@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:4AONf.5973$S25.2796@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120fcdtt3n370c1@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just
more typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up.
ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that
nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond
any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality was in the genes then every gay twin would have a
gay twin, the incidence would be 100% but the reality is that it
is nowhere close to 100%. The studies are all over the web, if
you like I can post some links
for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by
facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies
have shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the
other one is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and
lower still for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins
studies would show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not
even close to 100% .
No, there are several differences in identical twins. They are
considered identical because the share the same DNA. However, in
identical twins there are slight variations in their fingerprints,
their voice prints, their retina arterial configuration, and several
other points. These differences occur even when they have identical
DNA because of various environmental factors.
Thank you for understanding that nobody is born gay by admitting that
environmental factors are involved.
So are genetic factors. Since our genes determine what direction the
environmental factors will take us. Hence, identical twins have a far
higher instance of both sibs being gay than do fraternal twins, or just
sibs.
You didn't need all the semantics though, the truth was right in
front of you the entire time.
We're still trying to present it to a few morons though. You'll get it
eventually.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. – Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 07:59:45 PM |
|
|
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:%jJPf.1646$k75.273@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120umsv3pltao33@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:4AONf.5973$S25.2796@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120fcdtt3n370c1@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just
more typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up.
ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that
nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond
any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality was in the genes then every gay twin would have a
gay twin, the incidence would be 100% but the reality is that it
is nowhere close to 100%. The studies are all over the web, if
you like I can post some links
for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by
facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies
have shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the
other one is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%, and
lower still for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins
studies would show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not
even close to 100% .
No, there are several differences in identical twins. They are
considered identical because the share the same DNA. However, in
identical twins there are slight variations in their fingerprints,
their voice prints, their retina arterial configuration, and several
other points. These differences occur even when they have identical
DNA because of various environmental factors.
Thank you for understanding that nobody is born gay by admitting that
environmental factors are involved.
So are genetic factors. Since our genes determine what direction the
environmental factors will take us. Hence, identical twins have a far
higher instance of both sibs being gay than do fraternal twins, or just
sibs.
If genetics were responsible for homosexuality then the cases of gay twins
would be 100%, no less.
You didn't need all the semantics though, the truth was right in
front of you the entire time.
We're still trying to present it to a few morons though. You'll get it
eventually.
Insults in the face of facts that you can't refute, I love it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andrealphus" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 08:05:16 PM |
|
|
In News 120v30ftngmq41d@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:%jJPf.1646$k75.273@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120umsv3pltao33@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"Andrealphus" <NOREALEMAIL11@THISADDRESS.FOAD> wrote in message
news:4AONf.5973$S25.2796@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net...
In News 120fcdtt3n370c1@corp.supernews.com,, David Szandor at
DLS3332@forteinc.com, typed this:
"No One" <noone@nospam.pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:m3wtfcgsdn.fsf@nospam.pacbell.net...
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> writes:
"Boy Toy" <BoyToy@Toyz4Boyz.com> wrote in message
news:q67f029t08judo7pchmdoj12qb660slqop@4ax.com...
On Thu, 2 Mar 2006 19:32:34 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
<120f3l0a7jrj6cc@corp.supernews.com>
Let's see some proof for ANY of your assertions. Or is it just
more typical rightard blustering with no facts to back you up.
ROFL!
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear
that nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves
beyond any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins
show that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality was in the genes then every gay twin would have a
gay twin, the incidence would be 100% but the reality is that it
is nowhere close to 100%. The studies are all over the web, if
you like I can post some links
for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by
facts.
You failed genetics 101 on that one. :-) Identical twin studies
have shown that if one of the twin is gay, the chances that the
other one is gay is 50%. For fraternal twins, it is about 25%,
and lower still for siblings.
Seems you are having great difficulty understanding what the word
"identical" means.
Identical: Exactly equal and alike.
So, with that in mind, if people were born gay then the twins
studies would show 100% but, and even you pointed it out, it's not
even close to 100% .
No, there are several differences in identical twins. They are
considered identical because the share the same DNA. However, in
identical twins there are slight variations in their fingerprints,
their voice prints, their retina arterial configuration, and
several other points. These differences occur even when they have
identical DNA because of various environmental factors.
Thank you for understanding that nobody is born gay by admitting
that environmental factors are involved.
So are genetic factors. Since our genes determine what direction
the environmental factors will take us. Hence, identical twins have
a far higher instance of both sibs being gay than do fraternal
twins, or just sibs.
If genetics were responsible for homosexuality then the cases of gay
twins would be 100%, no less.
Nonsense. There are numerous genetic components, such as arterial
configuration in the retina, that is influenced by environmental factors.
There is a genetic component, and an environmental component to sexuality.
If either one or the other weren't true, there would be no more corelation
between identical twins that there were fraternal twins or sibs. The fact
that there is a far higher corelation for identical twins proves
conclusively that a genetic component exists.
You didn't need all the semantics though, the truth was right in
front of you the entire time.
We're still trying to present it to a few morons though. You'll
get it eventually.
Insults in the face of facts that you can't refute, I love it.
You started the insults bub, can't take it, don't dish it out.
--
Question with boldness even the existence of god; because if there be
one, he must more approve the homage of reason than that of blindfolded
fear. – Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dennis Kemmerer" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 09:22:14 PM |
|
|
[flame groups trimmed]
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
news:120v30ftngmq41d@corp.supernews.com...
[snip]
If genetics were responsible for homosexuality then the cases of gay twins
would be 100%, no less.
Keep your day job (which obviously doesn't involve genetics).
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jude Alexander Jude_" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 07:58:02 AM |
|
|
"Dennis Kemmerer" <dk@suespammers.org> wrote in message
news:GbNPf.74588$PL5.28716@newssvr11.news.prodigy.com...
[flame groups trimmed]
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
news:120v30ftngmq41d@corp.supernews.com...
[snip]
If genetics were responsible for homosexuality then the cases of gay
twins would be 100%, no less.
Keep your day job (which obviously doesn't involve genetics).
Truly, because twins aren't 100% alike. Genetists believe that the
differences between so-called "identical twins" is due to the environment in
the womb which affect each fetus differently, but I believe (I admit that I
have nothing to back up my belief) that they haven't discovered all the
elements of DNA, that there is a deeper sub-element to DNA, and that's why
"identical twins" are two different people instead of complete clones.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie Bitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 05:00:51 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:33:03 -0500, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "David
Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
Thank you for understanding that nobody is born gay by admitting that
environmental factors are involved.
And thank you for refuting your own claim by admitting that
homosexuality manifests as a phenotype.
Next time, bring your own hand towel to wipe that egg off your face.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "geltab" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 01:37:23 AM |
|
|
David Szandor wrote...
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody is
born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any and
all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that with
100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for you
but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
I've got an idea how it works, but it's hard to explain. There is no specific
gene for homosexuality. Not all DNA codes for proteins, some sequences are
control commands that organize how genes express their proteins. The control
sequences are inherited but for some reason don't always activate and thus
an identical twin of a gay might be straight. Or something like that, so it
is partly genetic but then also might require some unknown environmental
trigger. It is not a genetic defect but rather something Nature has designed
for some unknown purpose to benefit the species as a whole. If it were
harmful it would have run itself out of our gene pool a long time ago, and
something neutral would seem unlikely to spread to the entire human race;
only something beneficial would perpetuate itself in the gene pool for so long.
One possible theory is that gay cavemen invented fur clothing, and that
every tribe that treated its resident faggots well got well-designed clothing
that allowed them to survive ice-age winters. Or maybe food, only the fags
could turn roots and mammoth into something palatable (add some basalmic
vinegar and shitake mushrooms and a bit of tarragon...). Or I saw a show on
ancient celt king mummies they found with elaborate hairstyles, surely the
tribal fags were hairdressers to the elite just as they are today.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:34:42 PM |
|
|
"geltab" <lsd@trip.com> wrote in message
news:TQvPf.43555$F_3.13392@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
David Szandor wrote...
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody
is born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any
and all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with 100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for
you but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
I've got an idea how it works, but it's hard to explain. There is no
specific
gene for homosexuality.
Exactly, thank you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bernard Hubbard" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 12:44:56 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:34:42 -0500, "David Szandor"
<DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote:
"geltab" <lsd@trip.com> wrote in message
news:TQvPf.43555$F_3.13392@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
David Szandor wrote...
As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody
is born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any
and all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with 100% accuracy.
Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for
you but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
I've got an idea how it works, but it's hard to explain. There is no
specific
gene for homosexuality.
Exactly, thank you.
Exactly nothing. The probable cause according to current scientific
thought is that a combination of genes exist but do not switch on
unless some environmental factor switches on. As for the identical
twin scenario, identical twins are not totally identical. Their DNA
is identical but finger prints are different, their teeth grow at
different rates and baldness occurs at different times just to mention
three unidentical factors in identical twins. They also don't mature
sexually on the same day at the same hour.
--
"Genius may have its limitations, but stupidity is not thus
handicapped."~Elbert Hubbard to quote a relative of mine.
Bernard Hubbard
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:54:47 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
<lsd@trip.com>
<TQvPf.43555$F_3.13392@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
| David Szandor wrote...
| > As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that nobody is
| > born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any and
| > all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show that with
| > 100% accuracy.
| > Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if homosexuality
| > was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the incidence
| > would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
| > The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links for you
| > but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
|
| I've got an idea how it works, but it's hard to explain. There is no specific
| gene for homosexuality. Not all DNA codes for proteins, some sequences are
| control commands that organize how genes express their proteins. The control
| sequences are inherited but for some reason don't always activate and thus
| an identical twin of a gay might be straight. Or something like that, so it
| is partly genetic but then also might require some unknown environmental
| trigger. It is not a genetic defect but rather something Nature has designed
| for some unknown purpose to benefit the species as a whole. If it were
| harmful it would have run itself out of our gene pool a long time ago, and
| something neutral would seem unlikely to spread to the entire human race;
| only something beneficial would perpetuate itself in the gene pool for so long.
You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
Now explain bisexuality.
| One possible theory is that gay cavemen invented fur clothing, and that
| every tribe that treated its resident faggots well got well-designed clothing
| that allowed them to survive ice-age winters. Or maybe food, only the fags
| could turn roots and mammoth into something palatable (add some basalmic
| vinegar and shitake mushrooms and a bit of tarragon...). Or I saw a show on
| ancient celt king mummies they found with elaborate hairstyles, surely the
| tribal fags were hairdressers to the elite just as they are today.
How about this scenario.
The gay cavemen were needed to provide food, shelter and clothing
while the breeding cavemen were too busy fucking their brains out.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:35:20 PM |
|
|
"Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
<lsd@trip.com>
<TQvPf.43555$F_3.13392@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> wrote:
| David Szandor wrote...
| > As I have already demonstrated in another thread it is clear that
nobody is
| > born gay, one look at the studies on identical twins proves beyond any
and
| > all doubt that being gay is not genetic, the studies on twins show
that with
| > 100% accuracy.
| > Twins share everything including (and especially) genes, if
homosexuality
| > was in the genes then every gay twin would have a gay twin, the
incidence
| > would be 100% but the reality is that it is nowhere close to 100%.
| > The studies are all over the web, if you like I can post some links
for you
| > but somehow I doubt you would allow yourself to be swayed by facts.
|
| I've got an idea how it works, but it's hard to explain. There is no
specific
| gene for homosexuality. Not all DNA codes for proteins, some sequences
are
| control commands that organize how genes express their proteins. The
control
| sequences are inherited but for some reason don't always activate and
thus
| an identical twin of a gay might be straight. Or something like that,
so it
| is partly genetic but then also might require some unknown environmental
| trigger. It is not a genetic defect but rather something Nature has
designed
| for some unknown purpose to benefit the species as a whole. If it were
| harmful it would have run itself out of our gene pool a long time ago,
and
| something neutral would seem unlikely to spread to the entire human
race;
| only something beneficial would perpetuate itself in the gene pool for
so long.
You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
Now explain bisexuality.
It is a choice just like homosexuality.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 05:19:34 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
<120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
|
| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
[snip]
| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| > Now explain bisexuality.
|
| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
also be a choice.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 08:06:59 PM |
|
|
"Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ekpu02hnocss0r64pts1iouubnhhcbnhr7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
<120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
|
| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
[snip]
| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| > Now explain bisexuality.
|
| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
also be a choice.
Being heterosexual is vital for the survival of the human race, it is not a
choice, unlike homosexuality and bisexuality.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dysperdis" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 01:14:23 AM |
|
|
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
news:120v3e2m2l68u98@corp.supernews.com...
"Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ekpu02hnocss0r64pts1iouubnhhcbnhr7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
<120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
|
| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
geltab
[snip]
| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| > Now explain bisexuality.
|
| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
also be a choice.
Being heterosexual is vital for the survival of the human race, it is not
a choice, unlike homosexuality and bisexuality.
You DO realize that there are biological differences between heterosexuals
and homosexuals, right?
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7358
http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/bulgarians/nature-nurture/levay.html
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 02:47:59 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 07:14:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"Dysperdis" <dysperdis@gmail.com>
<jBQPf.127140$H%4.39132@pd7tw2no> wrote:
| "David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote in message
| news:120v3e2m2l68u98@corp.supernews.com...
| >
| > "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| > news:ekpu02hnocss0r64pts1iouubnhhcbnhr7@4ax.com...
| >> On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
| >> "David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
| >> <120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
| >>
| >>>|
| >>>| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| >>>| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| >>>| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality
| >>>geltab
| >>
| >> [snip]
| >>
| >>>| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| >>>| > Now explain bisexuality.
| >>>|
| >>>| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
| >>
| >> If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
| >> also be a choice.
| >
| >
| > Being heterosexual is vital for the survival of the human race, it is not
| > a choice, unlike homosexuality and bisexuality.
| >
| You DO realize that there are biological differences between heterosexuals
| and homosexuals, right?
| http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn7358
| http://www.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/user/scotts/bulgarians/nature-nurture/levay.html
Please don't confuse the poor dear even further.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bock" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 06:00:38 AM |
|
|
David Szandor wrote:
"Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:ekpu02hnocss0r64pts1iouubnhhcbnhr7@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
<120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
|
| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
[snip]
| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| > Now explain bisexuality.
|
| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
also be a choice.
Being heterosexual is vital for the survival of the human race, it is not a
choice, unlike homosexuality and bisexuality.
The world is over populated. Examples are - there is little fish left
in the sea. Drinking water is scarce. Oil is scarce. Livable land is
scarce.
Millions of men and women remain married to their spouse but have long
lost or never really loved their spouse. They may have faked love, had
extra or another lover of either sex on the side.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jeff North" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 02:45:59 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:06:59 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
"David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
<120v3e2m2l68u98@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| news:ekpu02hnocss0r64pts1iouubnhhcbnhr7@4ax.com...
| > On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, in alt.politics.homosexuality
| > "David Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
| > <120un179l825g63@corp.supernews.com> wrote:
| >
| >>| "Jeff North" <jnorthau@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
| >>| news:ntdt02hoe2ec7464dod8jsms25ekt4ummm@4ax.com...
| >>| > On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 07:37:23 GMT, in alt.politics.homosexuality geltab
| >
| > [snip]
| >
| >>| > You put forward a reasonable hypothesis.
| >>| > Now explain bisexuality.
| >>|
| >>| It is a choice just like homosexuality.
| >
| > If homosexuality and bisexuality is a choice then heterosexual must
| > also be a choice.
|
| Being heterosexual is vital for the survival of the human race, it is not a
| choice, unlike homosexuality and bisexuality.
Some homosexuals and all bisexuals do have sex with the opposite sex
and therefore do procreate. Heterosexuality is not a must have factor
as there would be enough offspring between these two groups to ensure
the survival of the race.
---------------------------------------------------------------
jnorthau@yourpantsyahoo.com.au : Remove your pants to reply
---------------------------------------------------------------
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie Bitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 04:58:54 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "David
Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
It is a choice just like homosexuality.
Feel free to tell everyone here exactly how you came to choose your
heterosexuality (i.e., your innate emotional/erotic/romantic
attraction to the opposite gender).
Did you, perhaps, take the other available orientations for a "test
drive"? How much first-hand empirical research did you engage in?
Did you have a "control group" on stand-by for immediate comparison?
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Szandor" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
08 Mar 2006 08:05:45 PM |
|
|
"Bonnie *****" <bonnieb@fifismaxi.pad> wrote in message
news:a8ou02d3pkeh4bdbb17oq2knde74b7vk6q@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "David
Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
It is a choice just like homosexuality.
Feel free to tell everyone here exactly how you came to choose your
heterosexuality (i.e., your innate emotional/erotic/romantic
attraction to the opposite gender).
Did you, perhaps, take the other available orientations for a "test
drive"? How much first-hand empirical research did you engage in?
Did you have a "control group" on stand-by for immediate comparison?
More semantics and non sequiturs, this seems to be common with those who are
unable to refute the facts that nobody is born gay.
If you had any valid proof that people are born gay then you would have
trounced me long ago with it but instead you continue to resort to
semantics.
The is no evolutionary significance to homosexuality, man is born straight,
the choice of being gay is available to anyone and everyone but you are born
straight first.
Those of us who have moral values don't even consider being gay, not even
for a "test drive".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bonnie Bitch" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 03:36:42 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 21:05:45 -0500, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "David
Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
"Bonnie *****" <bonnieb@fifismaxi.pad> wrote in message
news:a8ou02d3pkeh4bdbb17oq2knde74b7vk6q@4ax.com...
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006 17:35:20 -0500, the faaaaabulous supreme deity
Tlahuizcalpantecuhtli, Ruler of the heavens and host of fab parties,
opened the heavens and shone his light upon the wisdom of "David
Szandor" <DLS3332@forteinc.com>
It is a choice just like homosexuality.
Feel free to tell everyone here exactly how you came to choose your
heterosexuality (i.e., your innate emotional/erotic/romantic
attraction to the opposite gender).
Did you, perhaps, take the other available orientations for a "test
drive"? How much first-hand empirical research did you engage in?
Did you have a "control group" on stand-by for immediate comparison?
More semantics and non sequiturs,
No, just your dodging of straight-forward questions, based upon your
line of thought.
Now, let's try again:
You claim that sexual orientation is a choice, using homosexuality
(one of the four sexual orientations) as an example.
I merely asked you how you chose to be a heterosexual? Did you choose
after trying out the other orientations?
It's a simple question, and one which you should be able to answer,
given your statement above.
I look forward to your impending, cogent and meaningful response to a
sensible, well-written, easy-to-grasp question, based on your own
reasoning.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "curtsybear" |
|
| Title: Re: Anti-gay U.S. postage stamp |
09 Mar 2006 08:08:20 AM |
|
|
["Followup-To:" header set to alt.politics.homosexuality.]
On 2006-03-09, David Szandor <DLS3332@forteinc.com> wrote:
More semantics and non sequiturs, this seems to be common with those who are
unable to refute the facts that nobody is born gay.
If you had any valid proof that people are born gay then you would have
trounced me long ago with it but instead you continue to resort to
semantics.
The is no evolutionary significance to homosexuality, man is born straight,
the choice of being gay is available to anyone and everyone but you are born
straight first.
If there's genetic evolutionary strength in being heterosexual,
then it certainly makes it very hard for you to argue that the
absence of that genetic will towards procreation is not genetic.
How else do you plan on convincing people that a strong evolutionary
genetic trait is missing, except by explaining it on the basis of
differing genetics?
If you think that heterosexuality is NOT genetic, then there's no
evolutionary argument to be made.
Those of us who have moral values don't even consider being gay, not even
for a "test drive".
So your heterosexuality is a choice. Thanks for coming out as bisexual.
--
"It could if rogue nations like North Korea stopped spending their
entire gross national product on nuclear technology and hair gel for
their imp of a dictator." -- Bernadette explains Vidal Sassoon's new
"if you don't look good, you can't hardly blow up people very well" motto
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
