Reply With Quote
I'm sorry for using CC's own words to qualify his views. I guess using your own words against you is a horrendous insult.
lol no udid you read the post you quoted?
I'm sorry for using CC's own words to qualify his views. I guess using your own words against you is a horrendous insult.
this is not about whether or not sex is hard wired. it is about why you seem to think that sexuality is not or could not be. if evolution has created a reward aspect to sex in order to ensure reproduction then why could not this same mechanism generate side effects or other aspects of adaptive or advantageous behavior when it comes to sex?
this is not about a gay gene. i have already indicated that there are studies regarding neural plasticity and RNA. these studies could shed some light on findings supporting a a neuroendocrine predisposition for sexuality. or even on the fMRI imaging findings that showed a marked difference in the symmetry of the brain of sexuals and heterosexuals.
this does not even have any tautological value. it is just politically charged metaphysics.This is who we are. sexuals are confused, whiny perverts who want all of us to accept their sexual perversion. They simply do not want to accept WHO THEY ARE, while at the same time trying to damage our culture and way of life by legitimizing a perverse union.
I've also read some interesting studies that (at least in males) are starting to relate male sexual behavior to a specific section of the mothers X chromosome. It's interesting in that it somewhat explains how the genetic behavior continues to exist century after century. Logic would seem to indicate that under classic genetic reasoning that a non-reproducing trait would die out over time, but with the genetic dice roll of XX combinations the male sexual genetic combination continues to be produced. The XX data hasn't been near as convincing for female sexuals, however.
This stuff really doesn't help anything. It's actually pretty ridiculous and does more damage to gay rights efforts than help.
I grew up around hundreds of devout Christians and I would guess 9 or more out of every ten of them oppose sexual lifestyles and marriage, and would adamantly oppose it if they were brought into a discussion about it. They aren't all gay.
The more likely psychological driver is the fear of their children growing up in a culture that accepts sexuality, which they fear will lead to their child choosing to be a sexual.
I didn't say everyone who "opposes" sexuality is gay. I said people who make a major production of it and devote significant chunks of their free time to campaigning to eliminate another class of citizens' civil rights - those people are likely covering SOMETHING up, avoiding some truth they don't want people to know.
And what does it mean to say someone "opposes" sexuality? That's roughly the equivalent to opposing some other fact in the universe, like gravity, breathing oxygen, or being carbon-based life forms. sexuality is a fact, and always has been. It doesn't matter whether it's biologically determined or a "choice." It just IS. And as long as we have a democratic system of government which defends the rights of minorities as well as majorities, part of that system means protecting all citizens from discrimination. You can't have a right that is granted by our government (like marriage, or education, or health care by 2014) and deny access to that right to any minority group just because you don't like them or they make you uncomfortable.
being maladaptive to reproduction does not ensure that a genetic trait will disappear. even diseases caused by a recessive allele, such as sickle-cell anemia in its zygous form, are not eliminated from the gene pool. (and sexuality is not fatal plus sexuals often reproduce.) deleterious traits that are also heterozygous are kept at low frequencies because if heterozygous, they are not expressed, and can be passed on perpetually, so they would only cause problems when matched with another heterozygous genotype such as a zygous allele. also, natural levels of mutation offset the slow decrease in frequency through natural selection. so, as an example, if the frequency of such a disease is only one in ten thousand, to reduce such a harmful allele just tenfold would take 500 generations, or about twelve thousand years in a human population
Or it's just their chosen soapbox. There are people who make careers out of railing against Jews, Muslims, Christians, blacks, immigrants... White supremacists aren't covering up their own blackness, are they?
conservatives and logic like oil and water
Is the judge gay?
apparently he is
I taught animals gave consent when they start smelling your crotch?
There's wild speculation made about this. He hasn't said he is. A SF newspaper made a claimed he was, but offered no evidence. What's more interesting is the context in which said offhand comment was made...
Vaughn Walker almost lost his chance to reach the federal bench because of claims that he was anti-gay and hostile to civil rights. Two dozen House Democrats, led by Rep. Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco, opposed his nomination because of his alleged "insensitivity" to gays and the poor. His first appointment, from President Ronald Reagan in 1987, stalled out in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
His nomination was renewed by President George H.W. Bush in early 1989.
Back then, Walker struggled to assure skeptical liberals that, as a judge, he could rule with impartiality even though he had represented the U.S. Olympic Committee in its successful effort to prevent an athletic compe ion in San Francisco from being called the Gay Olympic Games. He was harshly criticized for putting a lien on the home of a gay-games leader who was dying of AIDS. Walker insisted that he was not anti-gay and was only doing his best to serve his client.
Walker also was under fire for his membership in San Francisco's all-male Olympic Club. He resigned during the nomination process, which helped cement his confirmation.
Those who understood the distinct roles of lawyer-advocate and judge recognized that a person of ethics and fidelity to the law could separate his or her personal views and experiences from professional duty.
Today, at age 65, Judge Walker is presiding over the challenge to Proposition 8, which may well determine how quickly gays and lesbians achieve full marriage equality in this country. We now know what Walker never bothered to reveal when he was being castigated as anti-gay: He is gay, which changes neither his legal history nor his fitness for this assignment.
A judge's sexual orientation does not inherently shade his ability to read and interpret the U.S. Cons ution with clear-eyed wisdom. Assuming this case advances on appeal, no matter how Walker rules, there almost certainly will be jurists who will need to set aside their religion's teachings - and, quite likely, the impact of their ruling on close friends or even a family member - as they do their utmost to uphold the meaning of the Cons ution.
Walker did not think his private life was relevant to his ability to preside with fairness in the Prop. 8 trial. There is nothing in his long and laudable career to suggest otherwise.
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-02-0...-olympic-games
All this talk about incest and cousins has got me thinking. I have always wanted to bang and hook up with some of my female 2nd cousins who are hot as , but haven't been able to because of the laws and taboos of our American society.
That blows dude.
I think the ban on s getting hitched has been lifted. They can start the ceremonies on August 18th.
2nd Cousins are legal. I popped one in high school.
Wanted to bump this thread because while reading Gifford's shooting thread, I came upon this :
Porch Hate Cake
Tasty and unorganized.
Not MiamiHeat Approved
Seems like MannyIsGod owes me an apology for his posts in this thread, since he now agrees with me.
Looking back now, I was throwing my pearls before swine in this thread.
Good job on finally realizing your mistake though, MIG.
Happened in 2011.
Downright prophetic, isn't it?
lol reading comprehension
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
