Open letter to Bush on Church and State

[ofiba]

Yeah that might be one.

Or another might be that it's posted on a site which claims to be "A pro-people organization offering Christian support to men and women choosing to leave homosexuality, and equipping the church to minister effectively and compassionately."

 

I'm sure there's no bias and that it must be pure science

 

124020[/snapback]

 

Care to show me a non-biased study that proves homosexuality is genetic?

[Simon]

Oh and by the way, for some reason The Mayo Clinic seems to view the results of Hamer's study slightly differently than your church site.

 

From the Mayo Clinic: "Dean Hamer and colleagues reported at least one gene related to homosexual orientation that appears to reside on the X chromosome and is inherited from the mother."

 

Gee, who could have an agenda here?

Yeah, it must be the Mayo Clinic.......

[Simon]

Care to show me a non-biased study that proves homosexuality is genetic?

 

No study has yet to prove anything conclusively. However, I will avoid referencing a spurious study which is currently being investigated by the scientific community. Neither will I link anything from an anti-gay site which appears intent on interpreting the results with no other intention than to further it's own narrow-minded agenda.

 

Here's a little something from the National Institute of Health in Bethesda:

 

"A DNA transplant made these male fruit flies turn away from females. What does that say about the origins of homosexuality?

 

BY LARRY THOMPSON/BETHESDA

 

Fruit flies are among the most sexually proficient creatures on earth. Their ability to produce a new generation in two weeks has made them the darlings of genetics researchers for nearly a century. Put a male fruit fly into a bottle with a female, and he doesn't waste any time before getting down to business.

 

So it's a bit bewildering to watch the behavior of certain fruit flies at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. There, in the laboratories of biologists Ward Odenwald and Shang-Ding Zhang, strange things are happening inside the gallon-size culture jars. In some experiments, the female flies are cowering in groups at the top and bottom of the jars. The males, meanwhile, are having a party--no, an orgy -- among themselves.

 

With a frenzy usually reserved for chasing females, the males link up end-to-end in big circles or in long, winding rows that look like winged conga lines. As the buzz of the characteristic fruit fly "love song" fills the air, the males repeatedly lurch forward and rub genitals with the next ones in line.

 

What's going on?

 

Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

 

A report of Odenwald and Zhang's findings, to be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to the mounting evidence that homosexuality has genetic origins, and is sure to produce new fireworks in the contentious debate over what it means to be gay. The two scientists are not foolhardy enough to claim that a single gene can make a person homosexual. But they think their studies may yield important new insights into how genetic makeup, through a complex series of biochemical reactions, influences sexual orientation."

 

 

 

Of course, I'm sure NIH/Bethesda has some agenda to undermine American morals....

[Alaska Darin]

No study has yet to prove anything conclusively. However, I will avoid referencing a spurious study which is currently being investigated by the scientific community. Neither will I link anything from an anti-gay site which appears intent on interpreting the results with no other intention than to further it's own narrow-minded agenda.

 

Here's a little something from the National Institute of Health in Bethesda:

 

"A DNA transplant made these male fruit flies turn away from females. What does that say about the origins of homosexuality?

 

BY LARRY THOMPSON/BETHESDA

 

Fruit flies are among the most sexually proficient creatures on earth. Their ability to produce a new generation in two weeks has made them the darlings of genetics researchers for nearly a century. Put a male fruit fly into a bottle with a female, and he doesn't waste any time before getting down to business.

 

So it's a bit bewildering to watch the behavior of certain fruit flies at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. There, in the laboratories of biologists Ward Odenwald and Shang-Ding Zhang, strange things are happening inside the gallon-size culture jars. In some experiments, the female flies are cowering in groups at the top and bottom of the jars. The males, meanwhile, are having a party--no, an orgy -- among themselves.

 

With a frenzy usually reserved for chasing females, the males link up end-to-end in big circles or in long, winding rows that look like winged conga lines. As the buzz of the characteristic fruit fly "love song" fills the air, the males repeatedly lurch forward and rub genitals with the next ones in line.

 

What's going on?

 

Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

 

A report of Odenwald and Zhang's findings, to be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to the mounting evidence that homosexuality has genetic origins, and is sure to produce new fireworks in the contentious debate over what it means to be gay. The two scientists are not foolhardy enough to claim that a single gene can make a person homosexual. But they think their studies may yield important new insights into how genetic makeup, through a complex series of biochemical reactions, influences sexual orientation."

Of course, I'm sure NIH/Bethesda has some agenda to undermine American morals....   

124076[/snapback]

Those doctors are surely flaming pillowbiters.

[Simon]

And here I was waiting for the "fruit" fly joke

 

[Alaska Darin]

And here I was waiting for the "fruit" fly joke

 

124092[/snapback]

I was saving it.

[GG]

And here I was waiting for the "fruit" fly joke

 

124092[/snapback]

 

So, a fruit fly walks into a bar...

[ofiba]

No study has yet to prove anything conclusively. However, I will avoid referencing a spurious study which is currently being investigated by the scientific community. Neither will I link anything from an anti-gay site which appears intent on interpreting the results with no other intention than to further it's own narrow-minded agenda.

 

Here's a little something from the National Institute of Health in Bethesda:

 

"A DNA transplant made these male fruit flies turn away from females. What does that say about the origins of homosexuality?

 

BY LARRY THOMPSON/BETHESDA

 

Fruit flies are among the most sexually proficient creatures on earth. Their ability to produce a new generation in two weeks has made them the darlings of genetics researchers for nearly a century. Put a male fruit fly into a bottle with a female, and he doesn't waste any time before getting down to business.

 

So it's a bit bewildering to watch the behavior of certain fruit flies at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. There, in the laboratories of biologists Ward Odenwald and Shang-Ding Zhang, strange things are happening inside the gallon-size culture jars. In some experiments, the female flies are cowering in groups at the top and bottom of the jars. The males, meanwhile, are having a party--no, an orgy -- among themselves.

 

With a frenzy usually reserved for chasing females, the males link up end-to-end in big circles or in long, winding rows that look like winged conga lines. As the buzz of the characteristic fruit fly "love song" fills the air, the males repeatedly lurch forward and rub genitals with the next ones in line.

 

What's going on?

 

Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

 

A report of Odenwald and Zhang's findings, to be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to the mounting evidence that homosexuality has genetic origins, and is sure to produce new fireworks in the contentious debate over what it means to be gay. The two scientists are not foolhardy enough to claim that a single gene can make a person homosexual. But they think their studies may yield important new insights into how genetic makeup, through a complex series of biochemical reactions, influences sexual orientation."

Of course, I'm sure NIH/Bethesda has some agenda to undermine American morals....   

124076[/snapback]

 

I also read about a study where scientists altered a part of a rat's brain and made it very aggressive. If that rat killed another rat, would that prove that people can be natural born murderers? Just because you can manipulate an animal, that does not give evidence to say humans are born gay.

[Arondale]

Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

 

A report of Odenwald and Zhang's findings, to be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to the mounting evidence that homosexuality has genetic origins, and is sure to produce new fireworks in the contentious debate over what it means to be gay. The two scientists are not foolhardy enough to claim that a single gene can make a person homosexual. But they think their studies may yield important new insights into how genetic makeup, through a complex series of biochemical reactions, influences sexual orientation."

Of course, I'm sure NIH/Bethesda has some agenda to undermine American morals....   

124076[/snapback]

 

So basically, they have no evidence this behavior can be translated to humans. They also can't claim that a single gene makes a person homosexual. They believe homosexuality has genetic origins, but it only influences sexual orientation.

 

I'm sure you can find a lot more of these studies but they prove nothing about homosexuality being genetically pre-determined. They prove nothing that would equate homosexuality with genetics that determine whether we are male, female, black, white, short, tall, blue eyes, brown eyes, etc. These are genetic traits that cannot be changed. You can't be born white and then choose to become black. You can't be born 5'-6" and choose to change your height to 6'-2".

 

You can be born heterosexual and choose to be homosexual and there is no scientific study that supports anything but that. Anger has genetic origins, but you can choose to control it and change it. Just because some gene may predispose someone to display more anger, does that excuse him from any consequences of that anger? A person may be born with a gene giving them homosexual tendencies, but just as in anger management they have the choice of whether to follow that tendency or to work to control it and eliminate its effect.

[ExiledInIllinois]

So basically, they have no evidence this behavior can be translated to humans.  They also can't claim that a single gene makes a person homosexual.  They believe homosexuality has genetic origins, but it only influences sexual orientation.

 

I'm sure you can find a lot more of these studies but they prove nothing about homosexuality being genetically pre-determined.  They prove nothing that would equate homosexuality with genetics that determine whether we are male, female, black, white, short, tall, blue eyes, brown eyes, etc.  These are genetic traits that cannot be changed.  You can't be born white and then choose to become black.  You can't be born 5'-6" and choose to change your height to 6'-2".

 

You can be born heterosexual and choose to be homosexual and there is no scientific study that supports anything but that.  Anger has genetic origins, but you can choose to control it and change it.  Just because some gene may predispose someone to display more anger, does that excuse him from any consequences of that anger?  A person may be born with a gene giving them homosexual tendencies, but just as in anger management they have the choice of whether to follow that tendency or to work to control it and eliminate its effect.

124340[/snapback]

 

Arondale... On another note... What do you think of the notion that all humans are conceived female?

 

??

[Simon]

If that rat killed another rat, would that prove that people can be natural born murderers?

Now you're comparing homosexuals to murderous rats?

Quit hiding behind the science and just admit there is hate in your heart. Maybe your God will grant you the compassion you seek.

 

You can be born heterosexual and choose to be homosexual and there is no scientific study that supports anything but that.

Nice try, but no matter how much you wish it was true there is no scientific evidence to support that either. Since genetics is such a relatively young science there is really no definitive evidence to support any particular theory although its becoming clearer that there is some sort of link between genetics and homosexuality. My guess is that at some point in the not-too-distant future somebody will discover that definitive link and at that point you will have 3 choices: admit that God creates homosexuals, recognize that God is not infallible, find a different reason to discriminate against somebody because they're different from you.

Geee, I wonder which you'll choose.....

[ofiba]

Now you're comparing homosexuals to murderous rats? 

Quit hiding behind the science and just admit there is hate in your heart. Maybe your God will grant you the compassion you seek.

124384[/snapback]

 

You compared homosexuals to fruit flies. I was simply making the point that trying to control an animal doesn't prove anything about homosexual humans.

 

Also, why is it that whevever there is a homosexuality debate, the people that support homosexuality always make claims that the people that don't support it HATE homosexuals, and then maybe make a quick little jab about "our" God. You can disapprove of something and still not hate it. If your son was cheating on his wife, you probably would not support that action. Does that mean you would hate him? No. You would just rather them not do thatl. It is quite ironic that a person telling me be compassionate thinks it's kind to mock my faith simply because they do not believe the same thing.

 

You showed a study that basically showed nothing. The people made a HUGE leap from fruit flies to homosexuals and even admitted that their study didn't prove anything.

[MichFan]

Also, why is it that whevever there is a homosexuality debate, the people that support homosexuality always make claims that the people that don't support it HATE homosexuals

Libs have a hard time arguing the case for gay marriage, therefore they just make an emotional argument and part of that process is callling anyone who disagrees with them haters, bigots, and religious zealots on par with those who disagreed with equal rights for African Americans and women. Gays are not systematically being deprived freedoms and equal rights in our society the way that African Americans and women were. They have in fact only two niche issues -- civil unions and marriage. Morality is the key barrier to success in these issues, and in the libs' desperation they have sunken to the level of attempting to make people feel bad about their morals and values. As the past election shows, this is pissing a lot of people off and causing normally silent people to particpate in the democratic process to ensure morality is an issue that the libs can't conveniently bury.

[GG]

They have in fact only two niche issues -- civil unions and marriage.  Morality is the key barrier to success in these issues, and in the libs' desperation they have sunken to the level of attempting to make people feel bad about their morals and values.  As the past election shows, this is pissing a lot of people off and causing normally silent people to particpate in the democratic process to ensure morality is an issue that the libs can't conveniently bury.

124707[/snapback]

 

But that is the key issue, you cannot make a persuasive argument for morality in banning civil unions, without introducing the Church into the State.

[OnTheRocks]

No study has yet to prove anything conclusively. However, I will avoid referencing a spurious study which is currently being investigated by the scientific community. Neither will I link anything from an anti-gay site which appears intent on interpreting the results with no other intention than to further it's own narrow-minded agenda.

 

Here's a little something from the National Institute of Health in Bethesda:

 

"A DNA transplant made these male fruit flies turn away from females. What does that say about the origins of homosexuality?

 

BY LARRY THOMPSON/BETHESDA

 

Fruit flies are among the most sexually proficient creatures on earth. Their ability to produce a new generation in two weeks has made them the darlings of genetics researchers for nearly a century. Put a male fruit fly into a bottle with a female, and he doesn't waste any time before getting down to business.

 

So it's a bit bewildering to watch the behavior of certain fruit flies at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda, Maryland. There, in the laboratories of biologists Ward Odenwald and Shang-Ding Zhang, strange things are happening inside the gallon-size culture jars. In some experiments, the female flies are cowering in groups at the top and bottom of the jars. The males, meanwhile, are having a party--no, an orgy -- among themselves.

 

With a frenzy usually reserved for chasing females, the males link up end-to-end in big circles or in long, winding rows that look like winged conga lines. As the buzz of the characteristic fruit fly "love song" fills the air, the males repeatedly lurch forward and rub genitals with the next ones in line.

 

What's going on?

 

Without a wink or a chuckle, Odenwald claims that these male fruit flies are gay -- and that he and Zhang made them that way. The scientists say they transplanted a single gene into the flies that caused them to display homosexual behavior. And that's very interesting, they assert, because a related gene exists in human beings, although there is no evidence yet that the human gene has an effect on sexual preference.

 

A report of Odenwald and Zhang's findings, to be published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, adds to the mounting evidence that homosexuality has genetic origins, and is sure to produce new fireworks in the contentious debate over what it means to be gay. The two scientists are not foolhardy enough to claim that a single gene can make a person homosexual. But they think their studies may yield important new insights into how genetic makeup, through a complex series of biochemical reactions, influences sexual orientation."

Of course, I'm sure NIH/Bethesda has some agenda to undermine American morals....   

124076[/snapback]

 

 

 

just who is paying for all this research ??

[MichFan]

But that is the key issue, you cannot make a persuasive argument for morality in banning civil unions, without introducing the Church into the State.

 

How about:

- society for at least the last couple of thousand years has defined marriage as a relationship between a man and a woman

- a man and a woman are the only two that can come together naturally and make a family

- approx. 70% of those given the opportunity to vote on gay marriage have voted against it

- the act of anal sex is unnatural, unhealthy, and in many cases both physically and psychologically abusive to those who succumb to it

- homosexuality (followed by bisexuality) ignited the spread of one of the largest public health disasters of our time (HIV/AIDS)

 

Huh, I guess I can.

[Simon]

You compared homosexuals to fruit flies.

No, I simply posted info from a famous scientific study. You created your very own hypothetical which compared homosexuality to killer rats.

 

 

Also, why is it that whevever there is a homosexuality debate, the people that support homosexuality always make claims that the people that don't support it HATE homosexuals, and then maybe make a quick little jab about "our" God.

I don't support homosexuality, I support equality for all people, not just those whom I identify with. You know, that whole American thingie........

And you are the one who brought god into the issue when you posted the link to that "church".

 

It is quite ironic that a person telling me be compassionate thinks it's kind to mock my faith simply because they do not believe the same thing.

I have no intention of mocking your faith; quite to the contrary. I find the tenets of compassion and understanding in your faith to be intriguing and admirable. What I do not find admirable and will continue to mock is those who ignore those basic tenets of their very own faith and instead choose to hide behind that faith while using it as a shield to bash those with whom they differ.

 

 

 

 

But that is the key issue, you cannot make a persuasive argument for morality in banning civil unions, without introducing the Church into the State.

And here we come to, what for me, is the entire crux of this whole ridicuous debate. No matter how many times I turn it over in my head, I simply cannot figure out what in the hell our state and/or federal government has to do with church sanctioned activities. Every time I see this issue raised, it is totally ignored just like it will be this time. That tells me that nobody has an answer, and the reason for that is that there isn't one.

If gay marriage is to be debated, the debate should take place in churches, not statehouses.

[JoeFerguson]

- the act of anal sex is unnatural, unhealthy, and in many cases both physically and psychologically abusive to those who succumb to it

125112[/snapback]

 

Can you provide a scientific study to prove that it is physically and psychologically abusive? Don't people volunteer to do it? Have you ever engaged in anal sex?

[ofiba]

I don't support homosexuality, I support equality for all people, not just those whom I identify with. You know, that whole American thingie........

And you are the one who brought god into the issue when you posted the link to that "church".

 

125125[/snapback]

 

I didn't post a link to a church. I posted a link to a study that happened to be done by a religous group. I didn't say there was no bias. I was simply showing a study that showed that it is not fact that homosexuality is in born.

[MichFan]

Can you provide a scientific study to prove that it is physically and psychologically abusive? Don't people volunteer to do it? Have you ever engaged in anal sex?

I'm glad you can only refute this one point, it goes to show that I was dead on with my previous post. I'm not going to provide links to that information. A master debater like you surely knows how to use google or yahoo. There are plenty of sites that discuss the damage that can be done by anal sex. As for the attack on me, it goes to show that you are threatened by a rational argument against gay marriage. It's probably because you have yet to be able to do anything but challenge what I'm saying. I have no personal experience with the subject matter other than having been frequently woken up by the violent sound of gay "love" between neighbors at a prior residence.

 

JF's master debating skills = Waaah! MichFan called me a lib. Waah! MichFan said anal sex is abusive. Waah! Where's the study? Waah, waah, waah!