Honesty very much appreciated by all. There's lots of reading to do, if you're interested, including scientific stuff. There was even an interesting New York Times article in recent weeks about a gay couple of penguins at a zoo there who have adopted an orphaned penguin and are raising it. I suppose you could say animals get traumatized or something also, (to take your line of guessing), but they strangely get traumatized at the same percentage of the population as humans, regardless of all environmental factors. Hmmm... And Sane, as for me and why no interest in kids... Does it really matter? 6 billion looks to be more than enough, according to world poverty, starvation, and supplies of drinking water. Also, we're into too many projects, work-related and otherwise, that we never want to give up. Do you think mine and Mrs. B-Bob's unprocreative sex is a sin? Are oldsters who have post-menopausal sex committing a sin right before they meet St. Peter at the gates. "Sorry, granny, but that last nookie's gonna cost you! Heh heh."
Does this padget guy ever post about anything else? He's obsessed. Seems like he starts another anti-gay thread every week. Is this his only interest?
No B-Bob, ofcouse unprocreative sex is not a sin. Humans NEED sex, they will reach a certain point where the frustration of NOT having sex will not allow them to function properly. These are just facts. If you need sex, then who else are you going to get it from when you're married? The thing that I'm wondering about is why you got married in the first place - why not just live together? What IS marriage exactly to you? Do your projects mean more to you than having kids? If you wouldn't be able to afford a comfortable life for the kids, then that's an excellent reason, but to say that you have projects... Isn't that a bit ~~~ (dunno the word, but you know what i mean)? As for the penguins, just the fact that they're penguins should say a lot. They can't rationalize as much as we can, heck, they may not even know if it's a guy or girl. Maybe there's a defect in their brain? Who knows? But they're animals, and we're humans. We should be judging ourselves on a tiny scale like penguins, if there were any mentally superior beings though, that would be a good place to compare. If my dog licks himself, does that make it okay for me to do the same? I hope you see where I'm getting at with that one.
This is exactly why so many people rarely post anything personal about themselves. Sane, why is this any of your ****ing business? Are you trying to become "Trade_Jorge Light" or something? The part of your post about whether it's OK for you to lick yourself like your dog is important, though. You have my permission. It's OK. Love your dog. Dogs are good creatures. Hell, while we're at it, let's hear it for the rights of dogs!
So, are you saying penguins/primates/birds/etc. don't choose their gay lifestyle? Shocking. Oh yeah, you're comments to B-Bob regarding children are disturbing.
Do these [insert 95% of D&D posters' names here] ever post about anything else? They're obsessed. Seems like they start another (choose one of the following: anti-Bush, anti-capitalism, anti-achievement, pro-welfare state, pro-Welfare Nation, anti-wealthy people, pro-reverse racism, anti-business, pro-calling people names, anti-nationalistic, pro-heavy tax burden, anti-competitive, or insert own utopian/idealist generic notion) thread every week. Are these their only interests?
To answer your question, yes, yes, yes, ad-nauseum. I just come back for the entertainment value and the rule that says "know thine enemy."
If you don't accept the premise . ..then what Gay is the a CHOICE IT is a reaction to a series of Life instances . . .PERIOD Rocket River
Impossible goal the way our world is structured. Suffering is a consequence of poor decision-making, be it by yourself or sometimes others. Life isn't fair, get over it.
Wrong, genetically determined - new evidence is presented all the time. You should check out the 21st century some time... Brain Changes Seen in Gay Sheep, U.S. Study Finds WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Researchers who found homosexual rams in a herd of sheep said they had found changes in the brains of the "gay" animals. The results, published in the latest issue of the Journal Endocrinology, tend to support studies in humans that have found anatomical differences between the brains of heterosexual men and homosexual men. "There's a difference in the brain that is correlated with sexual partner preference rather than gender of the animal you're looking at," said Kay Larkin, an OHSU electron microscopist who worked on the study. "This particular study, along with others, strongly suggests that sexual preference is biologically determined in animals, and possibly in humans," added Charles Roselli, a professor of physiology and pharmacology who led the research team. Animal experts have found that about 8 percent of domestic rams display preferences for other males as sexual partners. "Same-sex attraction is widespread across many different species," said Roselli, who worked with a team at Oregon State University and the U.S. Department of Agriculture's U.S. Sheep Experiment Station in Dubois, Idaho. Full: http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=585&e=1&u=/nm/20040308/sc_nm/science_sheep_dc
Thanks KC, for that find. There are many studies like this, folks. The sheep research is not at all an isolated set of data. I quote the sentence above to drive home the point that, um, I guess sheep are traumatized at exactly the same rate as humans. Who'd have guessed! It must be that both sheep and humans live near highways or something like that. But seriously, for those saying it is a choice, why do sheep and humans have almost precisely the same % of homosexual members in their flocks? By the way, KC, thanks for the kind thoughts concerning B-babies. Thanks too to those defending my cherished relationship with Mrs. B-Bob... Sane, I don't know what you mean by "~~~~," and I don't want to know.
While it's true that there are roughly 100 male births for every 100 female births, it is a demographic fact that among developed countries, there tends to be around 105 women for every 100 men. The rationale behind this is that female babies are less susceptible to fatal disease between the ages of 0-5 (for a variety of reasons, most of which are way over my head as I'm not a biologist). If children are treated equally, with equal access to food and health care, then in the population at large, we'd see more women than men (105-100 is roughly accurate). Many European nations are approaching the 105-100 ratio, as is Japan and the United States. On balance, the world still has more males than females. This doesn't have to do with infantacide rates (though they are higher for female babies than male babies, the numbers are incredibly small) but instead has to do with unequal access to food and care within the family unit in many high population third world countries such as China, India and Pakistan. If you want to learn mroe about these "missing women," you should read Amartya Sen's paper on missing women. Intriguing research, and conducted by a Nobel prize winning economist to boot.
QUESTION: Are these changes at birth OR are they the result of a life lead toward that particular choice? [Opening a Can or Worms] I will be open to the Idea that such a thing *IS* possible [most things are POSSIBLE] not unlike children being born with 8 fingers, 14 toes, etc But I think the proliferation of the lifestyle as we see it is NOT genetic. [/Closing Can of worms] Science is just not THERE . . . . things that need to be proven are 1. we need to see where the SONS and DAUGHTERS of homosexual have the gene. [the children of two homosexulas should have a high risk of being homosexual. . . this would esp effect if they grow up in a non homosexual home . . .therefore social effects could be discounted.] 2. They will need to find the brain changes in over 90% of homosexuals. there is a HOST of work before this research can become canon and MY FRIENDLY Cheetad .. . IT JUST ISN'T *NEAR* there ever heard of the Scientific Method? Rocket River
The full paper is in the latest issue of The Journal Endocrinology you should check there for a full report on the findings. Backtracking and comparing homosexuality to birth defects. Ouch. Everyone is entitled to an opinion right or wrong - remember you have shown nothing but your opinion. The opposing sides science is what - the bible? How would two homosexuals have offspring? Well I guess a lesbian and a gay man COULD get together, hey ANYTHING is possible. The scientific community is finding new evidence all the time - while the opposition does what thump bibles? I would imagine the researchers from the Oregon health and Science school of Medicine would follow scientific method when publishing a report for the Journal Endocrinology. Thanks for your time studawg.
