Have You Noticed That Radical Muslims...

Have You Noticed That Radical Muslims and Gays Are Both Controlled By Their Sex Drives?

There are 253 comments on the Free Republic story from Jul 21, 2013, titled Have You Noticed That Radical Muslims and Gays Are Both Controlled By Their Sex Drives?. In it, Free Republic reports that:

The human sex drive is the third most powerful force that exists in human beings, after thirst and hunger.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Free Republic.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#225 Aug 3, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You invalidated the marriages that don't fail because of the ones that do.
Who says I ignore divorce? You don't know me.
If you want to discuss divorce, go on a discussion site that does so. I will continue to engage this discussion.
Moreover, these issues directly affect marriage and family. I have devoted my life to working in that area. You don't get to choose which are valid, especially for another person.
Neither do you. Who died and made YOU king of marriage, anyway?

What POSSIBLE difference as to what goes on in my house make any impact on YOUR little life? Gee, BUSY BODY much? If your marriage is so weak and easily disturbed by what some other stranger does, then your marriage wasn't that great to being with, was it?

Stop peeking in my windows and muttering "tut tut tut, nasty nasty" and you'll feel all kinds better.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#226 Aug 3, 2013
BEGIN with, not being with....

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#227 Aug 3, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>Neither do you. Who died and made YOU king of marriage, anyway?
What POSSIBLE difference as to what goes on in my house make any impact on YOUR little life? Gee, BUSY BODY much? If your marriage is so weak and easily disturbed by what some other stranger does, then your marriage wasn't that great to being with, was it?
Stop peeking in my windows and muttering "tut tut tut, nasty nasty" and you'll feel all kinds better.
When did I claim marriage kingship?

I'm simply stating the scientific essence of marriage and noting the numerous significant distinctions between ss couples and marriage.

Now you shift to telling me to mind my own business, as if marriage affects no one but the couple. Probably the stupidest statement you've made in an unbroken stream of idiotic comments.

Oh, just a heads up. You will know by the puke outside it when I've peeked in your window.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#228 Aug 3, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I claim marriage kingship?
I'm simply stating the scientific essence of marriage and noting the numerous significant distinctions between ss couples and marriage.
Now you shift to telling me to mind my own business, as if marriage affects no one but the couple. Probably the stupidest statement you've made in an unbroken stream of idiotic comments.
Oh, just a heads up. You will know by the puke outside it when I've peeked in your window.
Your marriage that weak, huh, pity. MINE is strong as steel and has been for almost 20 years. YOU don't scare me, but somehow I scare you to death.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#229 Aug 3, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
When did I claim marriage kingship?
I'm simply stating the scientific essence of marriage and noting the numerous significant distinctions between ss couples and marriage.
Now you shift to telling me to mind my own business, as if marriage affects no one but the couple. Probably the stupidest statement you've made in an unbroken stream of idiotic comments.
Oh, just a heads up. You will know by the puke outside it when I've peeked in your window.
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>Your marriage that weak, huh, pity. MINE is strong as steel and has been for almost 20 years. YOU don't scare me, but somehow I scare you to death.
36 years.

Wrote this for my wife a couple years ago;

ONE
Marriage is a man and woman divinely united as one.
One person guarding your heart more than their own.
One for time and storm weathered strength.
One for the life-long commitment of spirits united.
One that is familiar with my soul secrets.
One that knows the good and bad, and still loves. One enjoying the fruit of familiarity.
One that knows and delights in pleasing
ALL the private and hidden parts of another.

And most powerful?
One intimacy that is shared with no one else.
That is a climax that only happens in real marriage.
Anything less is a sacrilege.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#230 Aug 3, 2013
KiMare wrote:
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
You either have a severe comprehension problem, are extremely dense or both.
I made no such claim about what the article would say. It is an article about evolutionary mating behavior and the implications for marriage. That has been the first thing I've encouraged you to educate yourself with.
You have offered only your immature opinion as valid evidence. You could simply post valid sources that debunk what I say. You don't, because you can't.
<quoted text>
You ignore the evidence I posted while denying you are giving just your opinion. How? By giving your opinion.
If my description of anything is false, post evidence of it.
I back up what I'm saying. You have yet to do so.
The reference I gave addressed marriage and evolutionary mating behavior. Do you have a reference that counters that?
Put up, or shut up.
Your wiki article did nothing to affirm what you claimed. You have no evidence, old man. No one knows why homosexuality exists. That's why so many theories exist.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:10...

http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1086/300145...
wtf

South San Francisco, CA

#231 Aug 3, 2013
have you noticed that gays love muslims and hate the freedom fighters who try a protect this country from the dangers if islam? they dont care that muslims are taking over this country and destroying it from the inside out. they love obama who is a muslim..gays are so f'ed up!!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#232 Aug 3, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Your wiki article did nothing to affirm what you claimed. You have no evidence, old man. No one knows why homosexuality exists. That's why so many theories exist.
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:10...
http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1086/300145...
Ancient history.

Look up epi-genetics.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#233 Aug 3, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Ancient history.
Look up epi-genetics.
I did. Not a mention of homosexuality being deemed a defect to be seen. Ask one of your grandkids to fetch you some reading glasses.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#234 Aug 4, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
I did. Not a mention of homosexuality being deemed a defect to be seen. Ask one of your grandkids to fetch you some reading glasses.
"Such epi-marks are typically accrued early in development, as cells are programmed to become specific adult cell types. But, the researchers speculate, perhaps they could be inherited from a parent. Most epigenetic modifications are erased during development of germ cells and soon after fertilization so that cell lineages can be programmed with new epigenetic modifications. But if epi-marks that direct sexual development ARE NOT ERASED CORRECTLY (emphasis added), a mother could pass down epi-marks that direct female development to her son, resulting in an attraction to men, and vice versa for a father and his daughters, the researchers theorize."

http://www.the-scientist.com/
?articles.view/articleNo/33773 /title/Can-Epigenetics-Explain -Homosexuality-/

“ reality, what a concept”

Since: Nov 07

this one

#236 Aug 4, 2013
On the other hand, there is likely a reason necessitated by evolution, as to why the epi-marker isn't being erased and the whole notion of it not being "erased correctly" goes right out the window. As far as we know, nature has been making the gay folk as long as it has been making the folk, it clearly has a reason for us being here, even if we can't exactly figure it out.

Since: Mar 09

Location hidden

#237 Aug 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
"Such epi-marks are typically accrued early in development, as cells are programmed to become specific adult cell types. But, the researchers speculate, perhaps they could be inherited from a parent. Most epigenetic modifications are erased during development of germ cells and soon after fertilization so that cell lineages can be programmed with new epigenetic modifications. But if epi-marks that direct sexual development ARE NOT ERASED CORRECTLY (emphasis added), a mother could pass down epi-marks that direct female development to her son, resulting in an attraction to men, and vice versa for a father and his daughters, the researchers theorize."
http://www.the-scientist.com/
?articles.view/articleNo/33773 /title/Can-Epigenetics-Explain -Homosexuality-/
A question still goes un-posed: Who is requiring an explanation ... and why?
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#238 Aug 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
"Such epi-marks are typically accrued early in development, as cells are programmed to become specific adult cell types. But, the researchers speculate, perhaps they could be inherited from a parent. Most epigenetic modifications are erased during development of germ cells and soon after fertilization so that cell lineages can be programmed with new epigenetic modifications. But if epi-marks that direct sexual development ARE NOT ERASED CORRECTLY (emphasis added), a mother could pass down epi-marks that direct female development to her son, resulting in an attraction to men, and vice versa for a father and his daughters, the researchers theorize."
http://www.the-scientist.com/
?articles.view/articleNo/33773 /title/Can-Epigenetics-Explain -Homosexuality-/
Your brain is officially Swiss cheese.

http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploa...

Nowhere in the actual, scientific paper did it use that sort of language, and nowhere did it suggest that homosexuality was a genetic defect. You're abusing research to promote your douchy agenda, you old goat. Also, this paper doesn't even provide definitive proof. They're just mathematical projections on their interpretation of the data. It's a hypothesis in the works, and the team of researchers actually pride themselves on how their work can be easily disproved if new data arrives to do so.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#239 Aug 4, 2013
snyper wrote:
<quoted text>
A question still goes un-posed: Who is requiring an explanation ... and why?
Perhaps because every culture in all of human history has interpreted homosexuality as a sexual defect...

You don't want to understand?

Now why would that be the case??? THAT'S a question!

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#240 Aug 4, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Your brain is officially Swiss cheese.
http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploa...
Nowhere in the actual, scientific paper did it use that sort of language, and nowhere did it suggest that homosexuality was a genetic defect. You're abusing research to promote your douchy agenda, you old goat. Also, this paper doesn't even provide definitive proof. They're just mathematical projections on their interpretation of the data. It's a hypothesis in the works, and the team of researchers actually pride themselves on how their work can be easily disproved if new data arrives to do so.
I never said it was proved.

The article and the researchers said it was pending.

I didn't write the article. When a epi-marker is normally erased, and the marker is originally meant for the other sex, most people don't need much clarification to understand...

But you are not most people right now, are you?

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#241 Aug 4, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Your brain is officially Swiss cheese.
http://scottbarrykaufman.com/wp-content/uploa...
Nowhere in the actual, scientific paper did it use that sort of language, and nowhere did it suggest that homosexuality was a genetic defect. You're abusing research to promote your douchy agenda, you old goat. Also, this paper doesn't even provide definitive proof. They're just mathematical projections on their interpretation of the data. It's a hypothesis in the works, and the team of researchers actually pride themselves on how their work can be easily disproved if new data arrives to do so.
This really threw you didn't it?

The bitch slap of denial is bitter, isn't it. Better now than later, face it like a man. You'll make it!
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#242 Aug 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
I never said it was proved.
The article and the researchers said it was pending.
I didn't write the article. When a epi-marker is normally erased, and the marker is originally meant for the other sex, most people don't need much clarification to understand...
But you are not most people right now, are you?
There is no genome-wide, epi-maker map, nor is there direct evidence of epi-makers playing a role in human sexual orientation. We don't know exactly what is "meant" to be anywhere yet. We don't have enough data yet to yield truly concrete conclusions, so your best impressions on what a doctor would say are amusing. The researchers were not saying homosexuality was a genetic defect, nor is that ever hinted at in the scientific article. Simply that gays have lower fitness. In fact, in the scientific paper, the researchers suggest that women that have higher fitness are more likely to give birth to gay males. You're just parroting Bryan Fischer's retarded ramblings.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#243 Aug 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
This really threw you didn't it?
The bitch slap of denial is bitter, isn't it. Better now than later, face it like a man. You'll make it!
Why would I be bitter? You're projecting again. I find your blithering to be hilarious.

“KiMare'a the Monster Mutation”

Since: Nov 10

Location hidden

#244 Aug 4, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no genome-wide, epi-maker map, nor is there direct evidence of epi-makers playing a role in human sexual orientation. We don't know exactly what is "meant" to be anywhere yet. We don't have enough data yet to yield truly concrete conclusions, so your best impressions on what a doctor would say are amusing. The researchers were not saying homosexuality was a genetic defect, nor is that ever hinted at in the scientific article. Simply that gays have lower fitness. In fact, in the scientific paper, the researchers suggest that women that have higher fitness are more likely to give birth to gay males. You're just parroting Bryan Fischer's retarded ramblings.
Never heard of Bryan, only read these articles. Doesn't take much to get the drift.

I'll look him up.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#245 Aug 4, 2013
KiMare wrote:
<quoted text>
Never heard of Bryan, only read these articles. Doesn't take much to get the drift.
I'll look him up.
You read the articles, ignored the study, and spun the conclusions. It's not really your fault. You're senile, after all. And really? You guys are really alike. I feel you two would really hit it off.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Education Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News White students disproportionately use Ohio scho... 1 hr d pants 17
Do you think I deserved a paddling I got in sch... (Dec '15) 1 hr Paddle Him In Lust 41
Sir Arthur, Where Art Thou? (Mar '12) 1 hr Danish Jersey Washed 119
LPIC-3 303 exam 303-200 dumps 2 hr MichaelaaNr 4
News FBI raids home of ex-College Board official in ... 2 hr MaltaMon 7
HS nude swimming (Feb '14) 2 hr MaltaMon 136
News Esther Cepeda: Standardized testing is imperfec... 5 hr Jerry 1
More from around the web