Originally posted by mr-lizard
No offence, but am i the only one who sees the irony of this...

If people were gay then...... we wouldn't have as many children.... and then if even more people were gay. We wouldn't have any children, thus there would be nobody to have this conversation.

No offence, but i found it funny.

EXACTLY!!

*IF* (and that's a BIG if) gays were truly BORN gay, who's to say that nature would always be certain of the *percentage* of gays to conceive..

Hypothetical situation: There is no technology which would enable gays to have children OTHER than by having sex with an opposite sex person, so we must revert back to NATURAL pro-creation. 'Gays' are born gay. 15% of the world's population is NOW gay. A world disaster strikes, wiping out 90% of the heterosexual population -- leaving more gays than straights alive.

What the hell do you think would happen to our species as a whole if there were more (naturally born) GAYS than STRAIGHTS alive? Would we flourish as a race and STILL be able to sustain ourselves, when every *true* gay is utterly REPULSED by the idea of having sex with an opposite sex individual?

All in all, if gays are actually BORN gay -- who's to say that mother nature would not someday lose balance and begin creating more gays than straights? There's no way to tell for sure.. and with the way of the world these days, mother nature is already flipping and mixing up her usual operation here (i.e. chaos has erupted on earth and within nature).

I still stand firm that gays are created that way through environment, EXPOSURE, education, peer influence and the like.. NOT BY GENETICS! And not by "nature' in its purest form. Genetics give us all a blank slate to work with upon birth regarding sexuality.

It is, therefore, OUR INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY to create and express our personal preferences.

I'm not here to argue with anyone -- I've done my research, I have my own mind and this is what I think -- like it or not.

- Mea

Originally posted by NOTurTypical
Humans turn to the same sex when there isn't a positive, loving parent in that person's life in the very early years. It's a psychological reaction to that.

You're so full of it. Instead of talking to real people, you just allow yourself to be indoctrinated by your church witchcraft.

1. There are many many many homosexuals that had loving parents.

2. If this is true then why don't straight people turn gay when they have abusive neglectful parents? Or do you believe all straight people had loving parents?

3. You WANT this to be true because you think homosexuality is wrong.

Originally posted by Veritas Lux Mea
Hypothetical situation: There is no technology which would enable gays to have children OTHER than by having sex with an opposite sex person, so we must revert back to NATURAL pro-creation. 'Gays' are born gay. 15% of the world's population is NOW gay. A world disaster strikes, wiping out 90% of the heterosexual population -- leaving more gays than straights alive.

What the hell do you think would happen to our species as a whole if there were more (naturally born) GAYS than STRAIGHTS alive? Would we flourish as a race and STILL be able to sustain ourselves, when every *true* gay is utterly REPULSED by the idea of having sex with an opposite sex individual?

What would happen? In the event that the Worlds population was diminished drastically and there were more gays then straights?

The exact same methods used today when homosexual couples want to make kids It's called technology. We have it now, we will have it then.

Also, in this hypothetical, it would be a moral imperative to reestablish population. Everyone would be concerned with this... it's not like morality is a heterosexual exclusive. *Some believe this*

thanks for mentioning that, i was too focussed on low numbers (15, 20, 5) to realize how many people that still is.

1. At MOST, the genetic and hormonal predispositions toward male homosexuality, according to the latest research I've SEEN, comprise no more than 20% of the variance totally.

2. That would leave 80% environmental conditioning etc.

3. Mothers who are super stressed during the first trimester have a significantly higher proportion of homosexual boys.

4. Fathers who are harsh, cold, distant, UNaffectionate, abusive, absent . . . produce a significantly higher percentage of male homosexuals regardless of what some propagandists assert.

5. We do NOT know, scientifically, much about the "sins of the fathers visited upon the children to the 3rd and 4th generation" in some sort of 'spiritual transmission' of various maladies/aberrations/differences. We HAVE recently discovered that virtually ANYTHING ANYONE THINKS AND TALKS ABOUT A HUGE PERCENTAGE OF THE TIME CAN CHANGE THEIR VERY DNA.

6. We do know that male homosexuals tend to live 20 YEARS LESS than straight males.

7. We do know that overly protective, smothering AND/OR harsh, abusive, controlling etc. mothers produce a significantly greater number of male homosexual sons--regardless of what the propagandists assert.

. . .

And please don't cite the genome project, because I already uncovered it comes from Rockefellers lawyers and as such I'm not interested in their conclusions. I already wrote that its very easy to direct scientific studies along lines that don't discover anything substantial. Look at how that family buried Tesla and free energy. We could have already been living close to the Venus Project standards, but oh no, we got the fossil fuel, slavery, war and disease deal all in the name of Science.

For me i have elevated male hormones because i suffer from cysts on ovaries so i have more testosterone and estrogen then progesterone. I grew up in a household of boys.
I can tell you now that my hormones don't make me look at other women. But im of strong build for a woman and have a butt like a man's. Gay women do look at me but i just dont have attractions to them.
I have caught gay men looking at my butt which was wierd, unless they were bi i wouldnt know.
I have nothing against gay people but i dont think it has anything to do with hormones.
I love the structure of a man and his build and chiselled bones and have always been attracted to men. I also repulse at lesbians wanting me when i was younger, im also jealous of women wanting my men.

So i kept thinking after thet scientific discovery of gays being born gay. Am i a gay-straight because i still love men lol.. Another thing is i think like a gay man i want to look more womanly then more built.



[edit on 6-10-2008 by meadowfairy]

Obviously you people are missing the point... WAYYY OFF!

My original point WAS: If gays are actually born gay, then nature would have an automated 'system of percentage' that would determine WHO was born gay and WHO was not. It would also automatically be set as to HOW MANY gays would be born.

IF nature somehow became tainted and the 'PERCENTAGE' of gays versus straights became unbalanced, this would have a dramatic affect on our race and species as a whole.

With more gays than straights, the population would dramatically decrease until we eventually died out.

This has nothing at all to do with technology, I know that the technology is available TODAY to produce offspring without sex (and it wasn't even 100 years ago) -- BUT this is nature, not technologically based. Forget technology, as if it never even existed, and perhaps you'd be able to see my point of view here.

Nature WOULD NOT design itself to produce gays. It does NOT create people to become gay. It has never happened and never will.

Its a very simple and logical concept..

- Mea

Nature doesn't make these mistakes on its own though. We do whenever we second guess her. Example, 2% milk promoted for infants so they would be slender designer babies, then suddenly the necessity of the whole milk, the fat for brain growth amongst other things. Nature always mutates and provides a way towards life. It some disaster killed off mostly heterosexuals then nature would provide the urge to reproduce, perhaps even mutation to comply, like the weird mutations in Jurassic Park. Don't think nature is without her means.

.
95% of all men are gay anyway

Some are born that way, some choose to be, some dally with it, some are coerced, some are forced

Why bother with Divide and Conquer tactics such as pretending to ask if 'gays are superior'.

As 95% of men are potentially gay in any case, it's a non-question