Evolution vs. Creation

Jan 6, 2011 Read more: Best of New Orleans 159,816
High school senior Zack Kopplin is leading the fight to repeal the Louisiana Science Education Act of 2008. Read more
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71099 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Homosexuality is genetic. It has something to do with hormones and how the brain responds to stimuli that produces arousal. This trait can be passed on. Although straight people also engage in homosexual behavior maybe out of curiosity. Sometimes it's a phase that one goes through when trying to learn about one's own sexual orientation. You know 'experimenting' while developing the id, ego and super-ego of the mind.
Autism, OCD, and other psychological disorders are anomalies or conditions associated with disabilities that disrupts normal mental functions. Being gay doesn't make one mentally handicapped. There is no medication for homosexuality that makes them attracted to the opposite sex. Gays aren't placed in special ed classes like how children are with mental disorders.
It is a trait that others consider abnormal. But it's more social and personality problem than anything. Perhaps it started out as a deviant behavior. But it has evolved into being a normal trait. It's in all cultures. There are even gods and goddesses that were homosexuals. lol
Epileptics, Tourette's patients and others aren't considered mentally handicapped in that way either. I never claimed that gays were mentally handicapped in a cognitive way. They have a medical symptom which may be the result of biology or environment. Some may have genetic reasons for the symptom, but not all. A lot of effort was made to find the "gay" gene. Nothing was found.

Freud's abstractions are awful. Even modern psychology is pathetic. Here's a good government source quote.

"The accuracy of psychiatric diagnosis was the highest for cognitive disorders 60%, followed by depression 50% and anxiety disorders 46%, whereas the accuracy of diagnosing psychosis was 0%."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3...

Well, who's to say who is political and who isn't? The question is, if homosexuality is a medical problem, then is it sensible to address it constitutionally? Race? Sex? Part of the human condition and consistent with evolution. Religion? Sexual preference? Not so absolute.

We protect the medically afflicted. We don't nurture their conditions.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71100 Jan 16, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
and just how would homosexuality fit into the evolutionary scheme, other than population control?... when one of the most fundamental idea of evolution is the procreation of a species? In fact I would say that is unsupported more in the ideas of evolution, than any religion.
The problem you are having with trying to understand homosexuality is twofold. First, you interpret all sexual behavior through the lenses of Western culture, which divides sexuality into homo and hetero. It further sees sexual behavior as a means to procreate, rather than looking at a bigger picture.

Second, you falsely assume that the evolutionary purpose of sexual behavior is limited to producing children.

Let me ask you some simple questions: why do most people have sex? Why do most people enjoy self or partner masturbation? Why do animals have sex?

More difficult question: Do you know what and how oxytocin works?

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71101 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Whoops! Parsing and being judgmental. No references. No science. Lot's of bluster though.
Read what I said. I said that obessive-compulsives want to purge the fixation. They don't like it. They just can't stop themselves.
Now, start over without the bluster and the pointless command to read some researcher. You want to make a point? I won't indulge you until you structure your arguments and pay full attention to mine.
You want to parse out sound bites and we can demonstrate obsessive-compulsive up close and personal. Gonna spell-check too? You MUST DOMINATE! YES!!!! ;)
False. I corrected your ridiculous statements and fabrications. Then I pointed you to people who, if you read them, would enlighten you about the strange things you claim. They're scientists.

You have only succeeded in writing a lot of projection above. You haven't produced a single cogent argument based on any science whatsoever. You are, however, quite good at making garbage up.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71102 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
Ok. There is this voice in my head that sort of communicates with me. On my way out, I grabbed the book I was reading. I got in my car and heard the voice said "happy." I'm like...ok. Then while waiting in the parking lot, I read the next chapter. Along the lines, I read the one that says "I'm not sure if 'happy' is the right word..." When wrapping up on my reading, I looked at the page number so I know which page I left off. It was on page 69. There is a significance of the number 69 to me, something about my birth date and all other coincidences. lol.
The book is about this spirit being who keeps coming in this girl's dreams. One day he begged the god Hades to bring him to life as human temporarily so he can experience this girl as he doesn't possess emotions in the realm of dreams. I personally chose this book after having a strange dream one night. What do you think?
interesting to say the least...I would say that maybe the book choose you by way of synchronicity...and there was a important message for you contained somewhere within the book...you should know it when you find it...I found it's best not to really try to search for it, but try just reading like you normally would, and if indeed there is,it will present itself...that's been my experience anyway.

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71103 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
The problem you are having with trying to understand homosexuality is twofold. First, you interpret all sexual behavior through the lenses of Western culture, which divides sexuality into homo and hetero. It further sees sexual behavior as a means to procreate, rather than looking at a bigger picture.
Second, you falsely assume that the evolutionary purpose of sexual behavior is limited to producing children.
Let me ask you some simple questions: why do most people have sex? Why do most people enjoy self or partner masturbation? Why do animals have sex?
More difficult question: Do you know what and how oxytocin works?
no...the truth is anyone who comes on forums that aren't about homosexuality, to promote homosexuality, are seeking to promote a political agenda for their own personal satisfaction...I could care less about what you think is right.
there's really only one of two reasons that you are here...
1. to intimidate
2. your looking to be accepted.
I find that most seek to intimidate.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71104 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Epileptics, Tourette's patients and others aren't considered mentally handicapped in that way either. I never claimed that gays were mentally handicapped in a cognitive way. They have a medical symptom which may be the result of biology or environment. Some may have genetic reasons for the symptom, but not all. A lot of effort was made to find the "gay" gene. Nothing was found.
Freud's abstractions are awful. Even modern psychology is pathetic. Here's a good government source quote.
"The accuracy of psychiatric diagnosis was the highest for cognitive disorders 60%, followed by depression 50% and anxiety disorders 46%, whereas the accuracy of diagnosing psychosis was 0%."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3...
Well, who's to say who is political and who isn't? The question is, if homosexuality is a medical problem, then is it sensible to address it constitutionally? Race? Sex? Part of the human condition and consistent with evolution. Religion? Sexual preference? Not so absolute.
We protect the medically afflicted. We don't nurture their conditions.
I don't know what your issue is with homosexuals. Is it because you hate to be called a fag? I don't have to explain more of what I just stated because it's common sense. Scientists haven't found a gay gene, well it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or should they exist in the first place? Can they identify the gene responsible for what kind of men I'm attracted to or my favorite color? It's all about chemistry and what turns you on. What about actors who play gay roles? Do they have that gay gene? Homosexuality is a genetic trait and I don't think it's a fuse in chromosome or any abnormality in the genes or any of that sort. It's both psychological and hormonal I would think.

"Both classes of male and female hormones are present in both males and females alike, but in vastly different amounts."
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71105 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
False. I corrected your ridiculous statements and fabrications. Then I pointed you to people who, if you read them, would enlighten you about the strange things you claim. They're scientists.
You have only succeeded in writing a lot of projection above. You haven't produced a single cogent argument based on any science whatsoever. You are, however, quite good at making garbage up.
Then you have nothing to say other than your arrogant opinion. OK.

Not science. You claim to be one? Hmm..

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71106 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Epileptics, Tourette's patients and others aren't considered mentally handicapped in that way either. I never claimed that gays were mentally handicapped in a cognitive way. They have a medical symptom which may be the result of biology or environment. Some may have genetic reasons for the symptom, but not all. A lot of effort was made to find the "gay" gene. Nothing was found.
Freud's abstractions are awful. Even modern psychology is pathetic. Here's a good government source quote.
"The accuracy of psychiatric diagnosis was the highest for cognitive disorders 60%, followed by depression 50% and anxiety disorders 46%, whereas the accuracy of diagnosing psychosis was 0%."
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3...
Well, who's to say who is political and who isn't? The question is, if homosexuality is a medical problem, then is it sensible to address it constitutionally? Race? Sex? Part of the human condition and consistent with evolution. Religion? Sexual preference? Not so absolute.
We protect the medically afflicted. We don't nurture their conditions.
I fail to see your point about psychiatric disorders? What does the link even have to do with homosexuality? Homosexuality is not a medical problem. And you say who is to say who is political or not? Why don't you ask Bernanke if he is closet gay and what his political views on gay rights? lol
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71107 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know what your issue is with homosexuals. Is it because you hate to be called a fag? I don't have to explain more of what I just stated because it's common sense. Scientists haven't found a gay gene, well it doesn't mean it doesn't exist or should they exist in the first place? Can they identify the gene responsible for what kind of men I'm attracted to or my favorite color? It's all about chemistry and what turns you on. What about actors who play gay roles? Do they have that gay gene? Homosexuality is a genetic trait and I don't think it's a fuse in chromosome or any abnormality in the genes or any of that sort. It's both psychological and hormonal I would think.
"Both classes of male and female hormones are present in both males and females alike, but in vastly different amounts."
Don't bother analyzing my motives. I've stated them. You choose to ignore them.

Just like you can't identify a gene for your favorite color, you can't find one that is responsible for homosexuality.....AND you aren't going to create any law about your right to a favorite color, just as there's no laws about rights to anyone's sexual preferences. It's foolish.

I'm posing a reasonable theory on the nature of homosexuality. My goal is to dismiss a claim that there's a moral mandate to protect homosexuality. You've inadvertently endorsed my logic. Your goal was probably to try to dominate the discussion by creating castration anxiety, but asserting my masculinity was not my goal.

That's what I like to call scientific discipline. Checkpoint met!:o)

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71108 Jan 16, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
no...the truth is anyone who comes on forums that aren't about homosexuality, to promote homosexuality, are seeking to promote a political agenda for their own personal satisfaction...I could care less about what you think is right.
there's really only one of two reasons that you are here...
1. to intimidate
2. your looking to be accepted.
I find that most seek to intimidate.
hahaha!

So...you came here to intimidate?

I came here to procrastinate. I know I am wasting my time trying to explain how reality works to people like you, but to be honest, I don't write for you. I write for others and use you as a foil. The things is, people without religious prejudice aren't going to ask such uninformed questions. So the forums need people like you, with all your biases and strange beliefs to drive conversations.

I used to post links to scientific articles to back up everything I write. Time after time they just get ignored - people with committed belief systems are immune to learning. You guys just ignore the science. So why bother posting the links?

Cheers.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71109 Jan 16, 2013
xxxooxxx wrote:
<quoted text>
no...the truth is anyone who comes on forums that aren't about homosexuality, to promote homosexuality, are seeking to promote a political agenda for their own personal satisfaction...I could care less about what you think is right.
there's really only one of two reasons that you are here...
1. to intimidate
2. your looking to be accepted.
I find that most seek to intimidate.
I think she made a valid point though. If homosexuality can be observed in animals, why would we be any different? Talk about animal instincts. Damn bonobos!

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71110 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't bother analyzing my motives. I've stated them. You choose to ignore them.
Just like you can't identify a gene for your favorite color, you can't find one that is responsible for homosexuality.....AND you aren't going to create any law about your right to a favorite color, just as there's no laws about rights to anyone's sexual preferences. It's foolish.
I'm posing a reasonable theory on the nature of homosexuality. My goal is to dismiss a claim that there's a moral mandate to protect homosexuality. You've inadvertently endorsed my logic. Your goal was probably to try to dominate the discussion by creating castration anxiety, but asserting my masculinity was not my goal.
That's what I like to call scientific discipline. Checkpoint met!:o)
So you want to continue to discriminate them? I get it.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71111 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you have nothing to say other than your arrogant opinion. OK.
Not science. You claim to be one? Hmm..
Nah. I've posted links to science over and over again on these forums. But people like you are committed to remaining biased and ignorant and so just ignore them. I gave you two names from where my explanation came from and you just made fun of them without bothering to look them up. So why should I waste my time for someone like you who has no problems fabricating all kinds of pretend facts? It's not like you produced a single link to a single science publication.

Here: Strum, proving your ramblings about baboons to be bs:

http://www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/...

Her website and publications:

http://www.baboonsrus.com/16.html

Here, Vasy:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF...

Notice the abstract:

"Homosexual behavior is defined as genital contact, genital manipulation or both between same-sex individuals. Available data indicate that this behavior is phylogenetically widespread among the anthropoid primates, but totally absent among prosimians. The majority of the 33 species that demonstrate homosexual behavior do so rarefy, but for a substantial number (N =12) it appears to be a more common pattern under free-ranging conditions."

His book:

http://books.google.co.jp/books...

There, I gave you your links to the science that backs up what I have been explaining to you.

Yes, I know that posting these links to you is utterly futile because you are committed to a belief system rather than a deductive reasoning system.

“Nihil curo de ista tua stulta ”

Since: May 08

Orlando

#71112 Jan 16, 2013
From what I've learned (years ago), homosexuality is thought to be a combination of the influence of hormones (testosterone?)induced upon a fetus while in the womb, and nurture after birth.

Among other things, perhaps.

Clearly not a 'choice'.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71113 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I think she made a valid point though. If homosexuality can be observed in animals, why would we be any different? Talk about animal instincts. Damn bonobos!
Thanks Cybele. I just posted links to some of the info I was discussing above. Vasey's article is interesting - he produces 5 testable hypotheses to explain why homosexuality evolved.

I disagree with him on terminology, though. I think we should call it same sex sexual behavior so as to be specific in what we are discussing - not a sexual identity, but behavior.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71114 Jan 16, 2013
anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't bother analyzing my motives. I've stated them. You choose to ignore them.
Just like you can't identify a gene for your favorite color, you can't find one that is responsible for homosexuality.....AND you aren't going to create any law about your right to a favorite color, just as there's no laws about rights to anyone's sexual preferences. It's foolish.
I'm posing a reasonable theory on the nature of homosexuality. My goal is to dismiss a claim that there's a moral mandate to protect homosexuality. You've inadvertently endorsed my logic. Your goal was probably to try to dominate the discussion by creating castration anxiety, but asserting my masculinity was not my goal.
That's what I like to call scientific discipline. Checkpoint met!:o)
You aren't posting a theory, you are posting a hypothesis at best - one that has been tossed out decades ago.

This history of scientific investigation into homosexuality is rife with failures. First, they imagined physical differences between gays and straights - oops, none existed. Then they imagined hormone differences - oops, none exist. Next they imagined hormone-led developmental differences - oops, none exist. Then, hormone-led brain differences - ooops...non-explanatory and not found.

Homosexuality was removed as a psychological disorder because it is not one. Treatment programs for it failed; they were driven by cultural beliefs and not scientific information.

For you to imagine that homosexuality is a mental disorder, you have to ignore that all human cultures have homosexual behavior in them, with the majority of cultures (Ford and Beach, 1951) accepting of it as normal.

Your problem, as I've mentioned before, is that you fail to understand that your comprehension of all things sexual is a cultural construction. Western culture divides sexuality into homo and hetero - most cultures do not. In fact, that's new for Western culture, too - it began roughly 130 years ago with the rise of sexology in Germany.

But you are going to ignore history, ignore anthropology, ignore psychology to maintain your unsupported and unsupportable belief system. Why? Because you grew up that way - you were raised to value one way of doing sex against all others.

“Why does my ignorance”

Level 5

Since: Mar 11

justify your deity?

#71115 Jan 16, 2013
Kong_ wrote:
From what I've learned (years ago), homosexuality is thought to be a combination of the influence of hormones (testosterone?)induced upon a fetus while in the womb, and nurture after birth.
Among other things, perhaps.
Clearly not a 'choice'.
That camp has never produced viable theory - their hypotheses are never borne out.

“what we think we become”

Level 5

Since: Aug 11

above and beyond

#71116 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
Vasey's article is interesting - he produces 5 testable hypotheses to explain why homosexuality evolved.
I find one of them to be funny. lol

"practice for heterosexual copulation"
anonymous

Franklin, PA

#71117 Jan 16, 2013
Cybele wrote:
<quoted text>
I fail to see your point about psychiatric disorders? What does the link even have to do with homosexuality? Homosexuality is not a medical problem. And you say who is to say who is political or not? Why don't you ask Bernanke if he is closet gay and what his political views on gay rights? lol
If homosexuality is not a medical problem, why can't a civil union be as acceptable as marriage? Sure, make the contract carry the financial equality of marriage. But that's not the goal. It MUST BE MARRIAGE!!! I'm fairly confident that the agenda will accept nothing less. We've seen it from everyone who's lined up to go through their sound bites. The goal is legal recognition of homosexuality as "normal" behavior.

Well, there's the point you fail to see. Go around in circles some more. I won't forget. Bernanke won't care. My message continues to be demonstrated to my satisfaction.

Now, watch as we witness our latest contestant demonstrate all of the annoying traits like "Gish gallops" in the name of "Gay science." We still don't have a representative of the uniquely "gay" debate tactic, the invader of privacy.

Are you going to cross that line? If you do, here's how it goes: 1. I ask you if you're a homosexual. 2. You either refuse to answer or take it over the top, but really only keep working the castration thing. 3. I dismiss your claims as prejudiced opinion. 4. You either fall back to your dubious psychic theories or engage in a collaborative effort with hidingfromyou, but still only engage in attempts to generate castration anxiety. You then strive to establish an echo chamber of "one million Elvis fans can't be wrong" mob psychology.

Nah. I've never seen this slop before.



Conclusion: It's all politics!

Since: Jun 12

Location hidden

#71118 Jan 16, 2013
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
hahaha!
So...you came here to intimidate?
I came here to procrastinate. I know I am wasting my time trying to explain how reality works to people like you, but to be honest, I don't write for you. I write for others and use you as a foil. The things is, people without religious prejudice aren't going to ask such uninformed questions. So the forums need people like you, with all your biases and strange beliefs to drive conversations.
I used to post links to scientific articles to back up everything I write. Time after time they just get ignored - people with committed belief systems are immune to learning. You guys just ignore the science. So why bother posting the links?
Cheers.
and I should care about your homosexuality because...?

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.

Weird Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Last Post Wins! (Aug '08) 2 min Old Sam 140,023
3 Word Advice (Good or Bad) 3 min Old Sam 1,413
CHANGE One letter CHANCE (Sep '08) 4 min Old Sam 31,442
motorcycle traveling stories 4 min harleyhoney 379
Does Big Money 'run' Governemnt or do "WE"? 6 min Bill 13
Change-one-of-six-letters (Dec '12) 7 min Old Sam 5,154
Change "1" letter =ONLY= (Oct '12) 8 min Old Sam 5,429
What song are you listening to right now? (Apr '08) 46 min Jacklin 161,039
Denny Crain's Place (May '10) 2 hr Joy 18,128
Whatcha' doing? (Apr '12) 3 hr Crazy Jae 8,295
News Woman Shot By Robbinsdale Officer Charged With ... 4 hr Tar Zan of the Congo 28
More from around the web