Quote Originally Posted by bodhi View Post
This is the only part that caught my attention, really. Cases of homosexuality date back to biblical times so Professor Miron's perspective about it becoming extinct really makes no sense. Gayness is not an adaptation so it wasn't formed through our evolutionary journey - it's a condition or abnormality.

Children that are born gay are created by two heterosexual people. Not a gay man and a straight woman, but again by TWO straight people. Their mother had an attraction to their father, who is male and who had an attraction to their mother. Why would you even bother posting an article by mainstream professors who aren't truely going to reveal the true report of their research? It's not something the public wants to hear, it's not something the people is ready to accept.

Homosexuality is a genetic mutation that occurs right before you either stay female or become male. Because I'm sure you know that every fetus is female then develops into male or female. In the males you obviously have the X/Y chormosomes. So many things can occur during this process. You could become male, female or even a third gender or like I've said a hijra (middle-eastern's version of a transgender). This type of condition goes back to Mesopotamia mythology. When a boy is born he is subconsciously attracted to his mother, and the father tends to get jealous over his son when the mother gives the boy too much attention. As a boy gets older he starts looking up to his father and wants to be like him, but wants a wife that's like his mother. In the girl's case is just the opposite, she looks up to her father as an object and wants a husband like him. (in both cases not EXACTLY like their parents that would be just too damn fucked up). I'm sure you know all this though right, David88vert?

Slowly men are becoming more senstive and emotional because of the BPA, a common chemical found in plastic water bottles and plastic food containers, that mimics estrogen in the body.

Estrogen, a sex hormone, causes men to become more emotional and effeminate, and it causes women to become more rational and masculine. When you look at a shemale you see the physical manifestation of the same sexual confusion you see in yourselves. There is no reason for BPA to be used in the manufacture of plastic. It serves no industrial purpose, it's just a chemical capable of simulating a human sex hormone in the body. But yet almost all plastic bottles and containers have very high amounts of BPA in them.

Then of course there's all the bottles and containers coming out now that say, "BPA FREE!" All of these bottles and containers happen to contain, not BPA, but another chemical which is also capable of simulating estrogen. Another estrogen-like chemical that has no reason, no purpose, and no business being used in plastic. But yet it's not only prevalent, it's damn near universal.

David88vert, when did you "choose" to be straight? I don't remember "choosing" to be straight, I just am. So what makes you think someone "chooses" to be homosexual? Wouldn't it work the same way? They just are? It's not a single gene that makes things what they are or who they are - it's an entire genetic sequence and billions of different combinations. In fooling around with genetic sequences, we could accidently create a "catnip" or "geoff" strand and end up with a bunch of completely dumbfuckin' tools.
Most gay people would not consider themselves a genetic mistake. With no scientific proof of genetics impacting homosexuality, is it wise to tell them that they are a genetic abnormality? I don't believe that is wise personally. We do know that a person can choose to be gay, straight, or not to be involved with anyone/thing. Sexual attraction is not somthing that cannot be controlled, like eye color or hair color. You cannot consciously decide that you want your eye or hair color to change, and then it change with just mental power. You can choose to involve or not involve yourself with either gender. Having masculine or feminine tendencies does not mean that a person is gay or has to involve themselves in homosexuality.

I personally agree that if there was any genetic impact on homosexuality, it would be a collection of genes, not an individual one, and if they are found, I am open to that if ti is found in the future; however, I am unwilling to take it on faith, when it is supposed to be science, not religion.

As for your other question - I choose to be straight everytime that I am with someone. I could just as easily choose to not have any relationships or be gay if that is what I chose to do. We are not robots or animals - we think, we make choices, and we live with the consequences. In our current time, a person has the freedom to choose to be gay, but they have to live with the consequence that they cannot be legally married. Every choice has consequences, and to claim that "my genes made me do it" is just a lack of personal responsibility.