Rainbow Laces? - When in Rome I say

[Lady Murasaki]

But it's never been like the human race are about to die out because some people don't wish to procreate has it?

I meant to come back on this last night but got sidetracked or tired or both.

You see this is where the danger really lays. Birth rates in the developed countries are falling rapidly, look at Japan for a perfect example. If they continue to do so, you might find a complete change in not only people's perceptions but governments also.

If homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, then certainly the promotion of it and soon after the practising of it, will at the very least become illegal once again.

This is what they have in Russia, their post Soviet dictates have taken it off the most wanted list, but they believe it's a lifestyle choice and restrictions are still in place.

One day people might be begging others to accept that it is a disorder which they have no control over.

But isn't this just what homophobic people have been saying for centuries? That it's a choice, so they can be 're-wired'.
Or have you now moved to agreeing with your last sentence?

[Trapper John]

There is good research to show that genetic factors play a role in sexual orientation. It's not the full story, indeed the full story isn't clear yet. But if science proves us wrong on these things we should accept it. I've always thought transsexualism was a mental disorder but a cursory search on it shows that I'm almost certainly wrong.

The Human Genome Project, which has been researching genes for years, have concluded there is no correlation between genes and sexual orientation, for some reason it hasn't been publicised.
So that would mean being gay is not TJs version of an abberation of nature at all.

You made the same mistake as Hobbitfeet whi has yet to return to admit it. I never said it was genetic, in fact look up a few posts and you'll see I said the exact opposite.

[Lady Murasaki]

There is good research to show that genetic factors play a role in sexual orientation. It's not the full story, indeed the full story isn't clear yet. But if science proves us wrong on these things we should accept it. I've always thought transsexualism was a mental disorder but a cursory search on it shows that I'm almost certainly wrong.

The Human Genome Project, which has been researching genes for years, have concluded there is no correlation between genes and sexual orientation, for some reason it hasn't been publicised.
So that would mean being gay is not TJs version of an abberation of nature at all.

You made the same mistake as Hobbitfeet whi has yet to return to admit it. I never said it was genetic, in fact look up a few posts and you'll see I said the exact opposite.

You said it was an abberation of nature originally. Have you actually moved from your rock hard stance for once?

[Trapper John]

You said it was an abberation of nature originally. Have you actually moved from your rock hard stance for once?

Are you on something? only you don't appear to be making much sense today.

This is what I said:

Homosexuality is unlikely to be genetic trait, it is however a mental disorder in so much as at some point during the brains development that part which makes us attracted to the opposite sex 'for procreation reasons' went awry.

What in that makes you think I might have changed my stance?

[Lady Murasaki]

You said it was an abberation of nature originally. Have you actually moved from your rock hard stance for once?

Are you on something? only you don't appear to be making much sense today.

This is what I said:

Homosexuality is unlikely to be genetic trait, it is however a mental disorder in so much as at some point during the brains development that part which makes us attracted to the opposite sex 'for procreation reasons' went awry.

What in that makes you think I might have changed my stance?

Different thread, but you've said it quite a few times:

.

Homosexuality is not the 'default setting' for the human race, hetrosexuality is and it doesn't matter how many minorities gang together to make it appear there is a concensus on the normality of homosexuality, people know in their hearts that it is an abberation of nature.

Changed your mind, or were you on something?

[Guest]

tj, it would help if you understood what a mental disorder actually is. people used to say epilepsy was a mental disorder.

[Trapper John]

You said it was an abberation of nature originally. Have you actually moved from your rock hard stance for once?

Are you on something? only you don't appear to be making much sense today.

This is what I said:

Homosexuality is unlikely to be genetic trait, it is however a mental disorder in so much as at some point during the brains development that part which makes us attracted to the opposite sex 'for procreation reasons' went awry.

What in that makes you think I might have changed my stance?

Different thread, but you've said it quite a few times:

.

Homosexuality is not the 'default setting' for the human race, hetrosexuality is and it doesn't matter how many minorities gang together to make it appear there is a concensus on the normality of homosexuality, people know in their hearts that it is an abberation of nature.

Changed your mind, or were you on something?

Sorry you lost me again, an aberration of nature doesn't just mean a 'genetic aberration' it means anything where nature doesn't do what it normally does, in this case, wire up the brain in the normal way it does for the human species.

[McAz]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

[Trapper John]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Red hair is a genetic trait unless I'm very much mistaken, homosexuality isn't, so what's your point?

[McAz]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Red hair is a genetic trait unless I'm very much mistaken, homosexuality isn't, so what's your point?

Just saying it doesn't make it so - there is much evidence that indicates that homosexuality has a genetic component, just as there is supplementary evidence such as fetal infection, hormonal resistance and much more.

All arise from nature as does red hair, that's the point - whether or not something is wholly genetic is irrelevant. So yes, you are very much mistaken.

[Dean]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Be fair McAz, you can’t really compare the two. It’s just not natural, I don’t care what anyone says. If I’m being honest I find them actually disgusting, why do they have to flaunt it in public for all to see? There can’t be a God if he created things like that, it’s just not normal.

But, enough about those Gingers, homosexuals are fine in my book...

[McAz]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Be fair McAz, you can’t really compare the two. It’s just not natural, I don’t care what anyone says. If I’m being honest I find them actually disgusting, why do they have to flaunt it in public for all to see? There can’t be a God if he created things like that, it’s just not normal.

But, enough about those Gingers, homosexuals are fine in my book...

But God's a carrot-top - well known fact - why else are there Orangemen?

[Trapper John]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Red hair is a genetic trait unless I'm very much mistaken, homosexuality isn't, so what's your point?

Just saying it doesn't make it so - there is much evidence that indicates that homosexuality has a genetic component, just as there is supplementary evidence such as fetal infection, hormonal resistance and much more.

All arise from nature as does red hair, that's the point - whether or not something is wholly genetic is irrelevant. So yes, you are very much mistaken.

Look if you gonna jump in a thread and start making comments, at least have the courtesy to read the 115 posts which came before your ill informed attempts to contradict me. I've spent half those posts trying to convince others that homosexuality isn't a lifestyle choice but an aberration of nature.

[McAz]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Red hair is a genetic trait unless I'm very much mistaken, homosexuality isn't, so what's your point?

Just saying it doesn't make it so - there is much evidence that indicates that homosexuality has a genetic component, just as there is supplementary evidence such as fetal infection, hormonal resistance and much more.

All arise from nature as does red hair, that's the point - whether or not something is wholly genetic is irrelevant. So yes, you are very much mistaken.

Look if you gonna jump in a thread and start making comments, at least have the courtesy to read the 115 posts which came before your ill informed attempts to contradict me. I've spent half those posts trying to convince others that homosexuality isn't a lifestyle choice but an aberration of nature.

I know - but it it isn't any more an aberration than red hair.

[Text]

The incidence of homosexuality is greater than that of people with red hair - nothing abnormal about it.

Red hair is a good example for biology teachers to use to teach about the recessive gene.
More interesting and more relevant than droning on about Mendel's peas.