Gays, medically born Gay? Gays superior to Strieghts?

reply to post by mystiq


Sure chances are a homosexual is going to have a good grasp on the idea of tolerance and equality because of his or her life experience. I will agree to that

Not saying there isn't racist homosexuals though!

It all evens out methinks.

Ok, as my own disclaimer, I have to say that I have several close gay friends, and have even wrestled myself with the idea that I may or may not be. with that in mind, this is merely an idea/thought piece of mine, thrown out there for thought.

this is more of an explanation of how a 'gay gene' (or genetic predispositions to) could happen.

Take a time, say the height of Greece, homosexuality is highly accepted; gay people are allowed to be so openly; thus, they do not procreate, but the straights do, and so they become more prevalent; culture is slowly dominated by them, and, say, by the dark ages, gays are forced to 'hide' in heterosexual relationships. they now start having kids, passing their genes, and living a life of denial. they become more prevalent, and overtime, as they start to, through discusion and whatnot, realize there are a fair number of them, they again slowly become culturally acceptable, and the cycle continues.

reply to post by Vilkata


That very may well be the case. I really do not know. That idea may well have some merit.

I wouldn't be surprised though if homosexuality was just as prevalent during the times of Sumer.

reply to post by space cadet

Oh boy, when I read your post, I laugh my self-silly!
It reminded me when I was on Prozac, and I did not know if I was coming or going.
Thank G-d I was able to do something about it, I thought Prozac would help me but it was the worst thing for me. I was finally diagnosed with posttraumatic stress and HADD.
With the right meds, my mind was able to slow down, and I was able to complete all my projects. Nevertheless, I do remember those days I could not stay out of the bathroom I was always primping always afraid someone would see a flaw, little did I know I was being so ridicules. I wish I knew what I know today back then.
It was so funny after being on Prozac for six months, my partner had a little talk with me one day, he told me I needed to get off that drug because he did not know who I was anymore, and that I was not the person he had known.
My partner and I are still together we have been together for 16 years now and we love each other dearly. Do not think for one minute it has been smooth sailing for 16 years we have had are share of fights. However, we made a rule; never go to bed mad at each other until we resolve our different.
I have to admit; that I do put the feminine touches in our home my partner is far to masculine to. Although I will out, do any straight man, when it comes to cutting trees down, plumbing a house, digging a ditch, or changing a transmission in a car with out help. I do not mind getting my hands dirty, after I get clean up I will go paint the dog toenails, not my bedlington terrier, but my rat terrier, or cook a casserole.
I do not think I am feminine nor do my friends think I am, but I can be soft in conversation, and sensitive to feelings, to critical, opinionated, to politically crazy.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage Also you ignored the rest of my post, still curious about all those things you assume about nature.

Perhaps you'll find out one day. But as of now, I'm finished debating this topic -- its rather pointless and futile. Regardless of what I say, of what you say, of what ANYONE here says -- every individual will believe what they will. A personal belief is probably the most difficult (if not impossible) thing to change in another person.

There's no point in trying and wasting my time.

Have fun..

- Mea

reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea


Well since you never replied to any of my posts to you.

I guess debate is futile

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy
So... would you have sex with a women for this cause? Would other straight women?

I do, of course, see your point. But I never claimed myself to be a "straight woman," so this doesn't exactly apply to me and I won't answer this question on a personal level.

Also, I've re-read everything I have written thus far and reached the conclusion that you and I are on separate wave lengths. We don't 'get' one another -- and that's fine, since it happens quite often.. and with quite a lot of people.

Furthermore, as I just said to 'Rapin' above, I'm finished with this conversation.

Carry on amongst yourselves and enjoy!

- Mea

reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea


Well this is a debate forum. And clearly you just want to avoid debate altogether. So I am not entirely sure what to do or say. You made up your mind, decided we are on different wave-lengths, without ever talking to me. Hey, that's fine. I wasn't trying to prove a point, I was just trying to debate ideas.

Hopefully a longer stay on ATS will open things up and you will be more inclined to debate topics you don't initially agree with.

perhaps it is a natural adjustement to overpopulation

reply to post by TheOracle


Well homosexuality has been around when the population was only a fraction of the size it is now.

Perhaps the overall amount of homosexuals increases in response to an increase in population. I know many people have speculated this.

The problem with that theory is that there isn't an overpopulation problem. There is a hell of a lot of people, but there is also a hell of a lot of unpopulated land mass.

[edit on 9-10-2008 by Lucid Lunacy]

reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea


I disagree that upbringing has anything to do with someone being gay.

If that were the case there would be no gay people! That may be an overstatement, but, I, like most of the other gay people I know, was raised by straight parents. I can understanding being exposed to more feminine or masculine traits as a child in a single parent home (or what have you) but in a way it's like saying 'gay couples shouldn't be able to adopt because they will raise gay babies.' What's more important: Making sure that child has a loving home and family, or making sure that that child is raised by straight people so that he or she won't 'turn out' gay?

Like I said, I was raised by not only straight, but very religious parents. My mom was vehemently anti-gay when I was growing up. So I guess my upbringing really didn't have much to do with how I 'turned out.'

reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea

Perhaps you'll find out one day. But as of now, I'm finished debating this topic -- its rather pointless and futile. Regardless of what I say, of what you say, of what ANYONE here says -- every individual will believe what they will. A personal belief is probably the most difficult (if not impossible) thing to change in another person.

When the evidence supports my opinion yes, I find it very hard indeed to shift opinions. I think the only thing I’ve shifted my opinion on recently was the death penalty. Having actually studied child development and social and political science, homosexuality comes up a lot in things I research. So far all that research has swayed me to the conclusion that while nurture and nature may play a part in homosexuality it is very clear homosexuality is not a choice. So yes, I am very adamant in opposing those who go against what the best evidence shows because of preconceived notions or bigotry. As for your biological theories I just wanted to see if any of them held any water what so ever, and it appears they don’t. It just seemed like a weak argument against homosexuality that involves an already inadequate procreation argument that appears to have no relevance.

[edit on 9-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]

reply to post by rapinbatsisaltherage


A very well articulated post

The procreation argument has no merit imo. I have been involved in many debates on that, and it gets thoroughly dismantled every time.

Originally posted by cashlink
I believe, if religion would stop preaching that homosexuality is a sin and stop preaching hatred against gay people, we would see more acceptances in society.
I have a friend who has gotten religious, who has known me most of my life, she never had a problem with me being gay. Now she dose, she told me it was abomination and I was going to hell. I was outraged! I ask her who brain washed you. What happen to you?
She told me this is what the bible has taught her this is what her pastor preaches to his congregation. I ask my friend had she ever research her religion, she told me no that she did not need to. Her preacher preaches the truth. I told her that I did two and half years of research on her religion and I let her know she was being mislead by preachers who have not done any research on what they preach that they only interpt and give their own opinions from the good book.

This religion has damaged a wonderful friendship; we had an argument about this she finally said she did not want to talk about her religion and me being gay and that I was all wrong, finally, I told her that this whole problem was in her lap that she has to deal with it because it is not mine. We hardly talk now and this breaks my hart.

Dude I wholeheartedly agree with you,
It would appear (IMHO) that the day we see the end of intollerance is the day we see the end of organised religion (if ever).

When we ask people who are anti gay (those who are not of the religious persuation), why they think the way they do. More often than not they appear to not really know, it would seem that their mindset is a product of cultural inheritance.

Given the fact that most culturally inherited attidudes, have at some point in their history been heavely influenced by religion, would it be fair to say that the bulk of intolerance toward homosexuality has come directly or indirectly from religion.

I'm also amazed by the attitude of many christians who are repulsed (often they seem to exagerate it) by the thought of 2 men copulating, but indulge in anal sex with their wifes.
When pressed on this matter, and are asked, what is the difference between penetrating a male rectum and a female rectum, they seem to become totally brain dead and change the subject.

One cannot fail to notice that , the more secular a society is the more tolerent toward homosexuality it appears to be.














It woul

Originally posted by moocowman
It would appear (IMHO) that the day we see the end of intollerance is the day we see the end of organised religion (if ever).

I agree.

In my HUMBLE opinion, Christian Churches in the USA are the primary cause for this intolerance and bigotry against homosexuals in the States.

Originally posted by Lucid Lunacy

Originally posted by moocowman
It would appear (IMHO) that the day we see the end of intollerance is the day we see the end of organised religion (if ever).

I agree.

In my HUMBLE opinion, Christian Churches in the USA are the primary cause for this intolerance and bigotry against homosexuals in the States.

Then logic would dictate that for the sake of our species, we should irradicate that which is limiting the thinking of so many and encouraging them to stifle our evolution.


There are only 2 types of bigot' the secular bigot who is quite stupid and has inherited his opinion without questioning his own reason. The religious bigot who brainwashes himself because of insecurity, fear and an indolent mind with the views and beliefs of others equally as deluded.

It is long past time that our global society rid ourselves of of other peoples imaginary friends and gods, that keep humanity in evolutional infancy.

Are you kidding me?

The whole point to being alive is to reproduce and carry your genes down to the next generation.

Think about it: When does your body start breaking down and dying? At around age 40, which is coincidentally right after most people have finished raising their children into adulthood. It's like your body is saying "OK, you've done your purpose, time to die now."


Since homosexuals do not want to reproduce, how can they be "superior" to heterosexuals? They are not carrying out their sole purpose in life.

Originally posted by rukiddingme
Since homosexuals do not want to reproduce

There are plenty who want to reproduce and who do. What is your point? Not wanting to sleep with the opposite sex does not cripple their ability to procreate, or trump their want or need to produce children or raise children in this world. Especially in lesbians, who as women seem statistically more likely to seek parenthood, many have biological children with the help of a donor.

Originally posted by rukiddingme
Are you kidding me?

The whole point to being alive is to reproduce and carry your genes down to the next generation.

Think about it: When does your body start breaking down and dying? At around age 40, which is coincidentally right after most people have finished raising their children into adulthood. It's like your body is saying "OK, you've done your purpose, time to die now."


Since homosexuals do not want to reproduce, how can they be "superior" to heterosexuals? They are not carrying out their sole purpose in life.

I cant agree that ANY type of human could be superior to another
But i certainly cannot agree that anyone has a sole purpose, purpose is a human way of thinking, who's given us a purpose?

Surely the only purpose we have is that which we give ourselves, I really cannot understand what appears to be (correct me if I'm wrong) your narrow minded statement.
You imply that you know that a man his wishes or ideas are not relevent, in that his only reason for being is to procreate.

Who is to say that a homosexual man is not a man evolving, for a reason we clearly don't understand, so what is wrong with evolution?

When creatures in the natural world change their sex under certain ecological circumstances, do we condemn the creature or considertae an abomination and have it stoned to death for what it has become?

If we as a species were not so insecure we wouldn't even entertain the thought of the homosexual being inferior or some sort of abhoration, and we certainly wouldn't be asking the question is the homosexual somehow superior to the hetrosexual.

Come to think of it, it would seem that it's a very unevolved mind that would come up with the idea of superiority in the first place.

But again, I could be wrong ideas are easy to change, shame about beliefs.

Originally posted by rapinbatsisaltherage

Originally posted by rukiddingme
Since homosexuals do not want to reproduce

There are plenty who want to reproduce and who do. What is your point? Not wanting to sleep with the opposite sex does not cripple their ability to procreate, or trump their want or need to produce children or raise children in this world. Especially in lesbians, who as women seem statistically more likely to seek parenthood, many have biological children with the help of a donor.

That's the problem though it's only a viable option as long as the technology exists.

It's merely a prolonging of an inevitable fate.

And is about stable an assumption as a bubble or balloon floating towards storm, that the technology and access to it will always be there. Because no one can predict the future.

Especially if we end up going back to the stone age thanks to the worldwide market crash.

I'm not for persecuting anyone and think the religious homophobia BS has been one of humanitys biggest crimes BUT the fact as clear as day here is if you are a homosexual you cannot produce kids naturally with your same sex partner.

That's not a knock that's just the physical law of this planet and the reality of the situation.