Disturbing Picture

[quote]pittbulll wrote:
doogie wrote:
Zeb,

  1. Gay does not equal pedophile.
    true

  2. Wouldn’t gay marriage make gay relationships more stable?
    It would devalue hetero sexual marriage

  3. Do you really not like lesbian porn? I mean come on, man.
    Guilty

  4. Why do you care so much about what other guys do with their dicks?
    I don’t but, I guess unless you are telling me about some hot babe. I don’t want to hear about your sex life.I also understand a moral person not wanting to hear about anyone?s sex life. Or if they want to change the meaning of a word (such as marriage) that has been around more than a millennia.

[/quote]

How will it devalue hetero marriage?

Everybody knows Jesus was gay-- I mean he was always talking about “loving” his fellow man and such… ;p

[quote]ToShinDo wrote:
Here is a study I have posted before:

Lesbian couples raise well-adjusted teenagers

17:25 15 November 2004

NewScientist.com news service
Maggie McKee

Teenagers raised by lesbian mothers show no developmental differences compared to those brought up by heterosexual parents, according to the first large national study in the US.

Previous research has focused mainly on younger children and found no significant disparities in child welfare between same-sex and heterosexual families.

But few studies have been done on adolescents, who some researchers think may be more prone to - or conscious of - discrimination against their families. Others have speculated whether a teens’ own sexuality is affected by that of their parents.

“There’s been this debate about whether being raised by single-sex couples is good or bad for children,” says Stephen Russell, a sociologist at the University of Arizona in Tucson, US. “We would call into question suggestions that growing up with single-sex parents is somehow problematic.”

12,000 interviews
Russell and colleagues Charlotte Patterson and Jennifer Wainright at the University of Virginia in Charlottesville, US, came to this conclusion after sifting through interviews from 1995 with about 12,000 US teenagers and their families. The teens were part of the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health, the largest and most comprehensive study of the age group in the US.

“This is the best available evidence to date about how adolescent children fare in families with single-sex parents,” Russell told New Scientist.

The researchers found 44 teens being raised by two women in a “marriage-like” relationship. Only six teens reported living with two gay men, so male single-sex families were excluded from the study.

Each teen studied was matched with a counterpart from a heterosexual family, who shared the same sex, age, ethnicity, adoption status and family income, among other factors.

Same-sex attractions
The researchers found no differences between the two groups in terms of depression, anxiety, self-esteem and school grades. Exactly the same proportion of both groups also reported having had sex (34%).

But while a previous study suggested children of gay parents were more likely to consider homosexual relationships, this study was unable to provide such information because so few teens reported same-sex attractions and romances.

The single most important predictor of the teens’ well being, the study showed, was their relationship with parents - regardless of family type. ?What’s really important is the quality of the relationship," Russell told New Scientist.

As a result, the authors write that their findings “provide no justification for limitations on child custody or visitation by lesbian mothers” and “do not support the idea that lesbian and gay adults are less likely than others to provide good adoptive or foster homes”.

Russell says future studies could see how the same group of teens fared in young adulthood.

Journal reference: Child Development (vol 75, p 1886)

[/quote]

You have heard what they say about Statistics.

When male dogs hump other male dogs it is a dominance issue. It is not sexual

Now this might be way out in left field, (and I could be waaaay far off knowing how our bodies work) but since many people think that you’re born gay, would the plethora of hormones and leftover chemicals in most food and dairy have anything to do with it? It would make sense that over time these hormones and other chemicals added to make animals and plants grow faster and bigger would build up and maybe over each generation mutate just enough to really mess with our DNA. Is that even possible or just asinine?

[quote]PGA200X wrote:
Professor X wrote:
I wasn’t trying to offend you. Trust me, if that was the goal, it would have been much more blatant. There are cases in the animal kindgdom where reptiles change sex based on the environment. That doesn’t mean that every case of this in prisons is due to the same cause. The point is, this is not as simple as “choice”. It goes deeper than that into the human subconscious. It would have to do that just to initiate the biological response leading to orgasm. You want to believe that people just sit around and decide to be gay. I am taking the stance that it is not that simple and whether this be a deeper mental issue or the culmination of innate genetic markers, it is not as simple as someone making a choice who they are attracted to.

My friend in high school had a gay dog. He would only hump other male dogs. According to you, he CHOSE to be this way. Perhaps there was something in the Alpo.

“My friend in high school had a gay dog. He would only hump other male dogs. According to you, he CHOSE to be this way. Perhaps there was something in the Alpo.”

Ok? Point being? When did I say every instance was choice? O wait, I didnt. Go back a few pages and see what I wrote. I believe some are gay by choice because of environment and some are gay because of biological factors.

In reality there is more pointing to CHOICE rather than biological factors. There is PROOF of people doing it by choice, as I’ve heard it DIRECTLY from people’s mouths. Yet there are only ASSumptions that it can be biological. NOTHING has been identified.

Does a sexual predator who was raped and abused for much of its youth have a genetic predisposition to do the same to others? I would say environment played the role there NOT biology. Its not a choice but the mind was altered in a way to make it seem right. Thats not a genetical influence or a choice but an alteration of chemicals in the brain.[/quote]

PGA, I agree that both factors play a part. But, I disagree with you in where the majority of each lie. I think the majority of homosexuals are born with that desire and sadly for them or more importantly their victims, I think some pedophiles are born with that desire as well.

In my opinion, and this isn’t coming from a religious perspective, the male to female desire is what’s natural. It after all ensures the survival of the species and is what the human body is designed for procreation. However, just like one can be born with a birth defect or other abnormality, I think one can be born with wires so to speak crossed and have unnatural desires or urges.

I don’t think I’m going to win any gay friends by comparing it to a birth defect but right or wrong that is my opinion.

And, it’s not to say that I don’t think a percentage can be influenced by environmental factors such as abuse or even societal influences.

But, as someone else said whatever it stems from innate or choice if two people otherwise are productive law abiding citizens don’t they deserve the same respect and rights as others if they themselves afford them to others?

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

My friend in high school had a gay dog. He would only hump other male dogs. According to you, he CHOSE to be this way. Perhaps there was something in the Alpo.

When male dogs hump other male dogs it is a dominance issue. It is not sexual

[/quote]

Being a pittbull you would know. (jk)

[quote]DeadSexy wrote:
Now this might be way out in left field, (and I could be waaaay far off knowing how our bodies work) but since many people think that you’re born gay, would the plethora of hormones and leftover chemicals in most food and dairy have anything to do with it? It would make sense that over time these hormones and other chemicals added to make animals and plants grow faster and bigger would build up and maybe over each generation mutate just enough to really mess with our DNA. Is that even possible or just asinine?

[/quote]

Seems unlikely - homosexuality has been around for millenia, long before hormone manipulation and the like.

Not a terrible idea, though - there are a lot of environmental factors that go into mutating genes. Radiation’s gonna rank higher than hormonal stuff, though.

-Dan

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

  1. Wouldn’t gay marriage make gay relationships more stable?
    It would devalue hetero sexual marriage

[/quote]

That’s silly. Are heterosexual couples just going to say,“Ah, fuck it. If gays can be married, I don’t want to be”? No one outside of my marriage can devalue it.

[quote]JeffR wrote:
marmadogg wrote:

“They ALL vote Republican.”

Most people do.

JeffR

[/quote]

ROTFLMFAO!

I posted that to see if you would comment.

I am just surprised it took you this long.

The only way you could have found that post was if you were stalking me.

You have serious issues.

[quote]yoi wrote:
Many former homosexuals are heteros now, but you don’t here alot about it because the powerful Gays want homosexuality to be ACCEPTED not just tolerated.
mike
[/quote]
Damn, those powerful Gays. Damn, them all!!!

Divorce rates are highest in the ‘bible belt’.

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

My friend in high school had a gay dog. He would only hump other male dogs. According to you, he CHOSE to be this way. Perhaps there was something in the Alpo.

When male dogs hump other male dogs it is a dominance issue. It is not sexual

[/quote]

This had nothing to do with dominance. This mutt would try to hump my german shepherd. Mind you, he was a border terrier. The size difference alone plus the damage my shepherd could do to him had nothing to do with dominance. He wouldn’t screw other female border terriers (he had one male one female).

I think the majority of homosexuals are born with that desire and sadly for them or more importantly their victims, I think some pedophiles are born with that desire as well.

Correction, I meant victims of pedophiles not homosexuals. Before someone jumps on that.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
The size difference alone plus the damage my shepherd could do to him had nothing to do with dominance.
[/quote]

Because your german shepard was bigger means that the little dog was not trying to dominate him?

[quote]Elkhntr1 wrote:
I think the majority of homosexuals are born with that desire and sadly for them or more importantly their victims, I think some pedophiles are born with that desire as well.

Correction, I meant victims of pedophiles not homosexuals. Before someone jumps on that. [/quote]

Yeah you messed that one up a bit! I understood it though. LOL! Sometimes the mind moves faster than the fingers!

[quote]PGA200X wrote:
Professor X wrote:
The size difference alone plus the damage my shepherd could do to him had nothing to do with dominance.

Because your german shepard was bigger means that the little dog was not trying to dominate him?[/quote]

I guess I have to type slower.

He

would

not

have

sex

with

bitches.

Whew, and me without my Crayola markers.

[quote]Jersey5150 wrote:
Alright I really am curious thats why I keep asking this question.

For all you straight guys who think its a choice. Could you choose to have sex with a man? No one seems to want to say they can/can’t and I can see why.

If you say you can’t then the choice theory has trouble, if you say you could then well thats very a interesting fact about this topic.

My answer to the question is no, I could not chose to have sex with a man.

I dont mean this to anotgonize anyone I respect all your beliefs and your right to have them (unless you believe its ok to kill gays or anyone else you dont agree with)

It is a personal question but I feel it relates to the matter very well.

Have a good day and good training!

[/quote]

Check out Shugart’s weblog and the entry with the Richard Simmons pic regarding “Gay for pay.”

There’s a large difference between behavior, which is pretty much always a choice, and any “programmed” (it seems to me that “feelings of attraction” – undefined as I lack a better terminology – seem to be influenced by some combination of genetic factors and environmental factors) physiological attraction.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
JeffR wrote:
marmadogg wrote:

“They ALL vote Republican.”

Most people do.

JeffR

ROTFLMFAO!

I posted that to see if you would comment.

I am just surprised it took you this long.

The only way you could have found that post was if you were stalking me.

You have serious issues.

[/quote]

Don’t flatter yourself.

It’s like walking along and getting some dogshit (you) on your shoe. It’s only natural to brush it off.

JeffR

Who would choose to be gay? It has to be a rough life being gay.

According to a lot of people the bible claims gay sex is a sin. Who knows what the truth is.

I know Jesus spent much of his time hanging out with the troubled members of society trying to save them so I doubt Jesus is on Fred Phelps’s side of the argument.