It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Gays, medically born Gay? Gays superior to Strieghts?

page: 6
6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by moocowman
 


LOL No you didn’t the ding dong!


Dude, if ever the christians perform their juju on you and make you straight, never marry a woman and the get divorced coz you'd be wishing you were gay LOL




posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 04:14 PM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


hahahahaha, nice



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:18 PM
link   

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



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   

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.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea
 


So why did you become straight? I am curious. Which aspect of the nurture process and environment in general did you base this decision from?



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:30 PM
link   

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*



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


I do agree with Lucid that its not as if, in that hypothetical situation, That Homosexuals would simply state "im not going to help man kind for sex with the opposite gender cause that is gross". it is simply not logical.

Think of it in our case. Lets say the opposite is true, as in heterosexuals would need homosexuals to mate with and populate the human race. would you chose to slowly end our race simply because you dont like having sex with the same gender? no. I would instantly make that sacrifice to save our race.

[edit on 6/10/08 by Ghost147]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy
 


You are never going to convince people, either with logic, scientific data, or serious debate.

In this thread, posters (including me) have taken the time to research and post scientific data such as hormone levels, brain mapping, and brain similarities/differences in the brains of homosexual men and women compared to straight men and women.

It is like with religion (or maybe because of it); if someone believes in something strong enough, no amount of logic or science will change their minds. I don't know if it is due to fear or denial or just deep seeded faith, but the nature versus nurture debate will never be solved for some people, even if the "gay gene" is someday found.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost147
 


And we're 6 billion plus and growing, so I don't see where 'breeders' need our help in keeping the population up, y'all are doing a bang up job on your own!



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Veritas Lux Mea
 


Veritas Lux Mea if the population was being wiped out and everyone was being born gay all gay people have to do is have sex with the opposite sex, though they may not like it, to reproduce for humanity. Simple really. Gays are physically able to reproduce with the opposite sex, they usually simple don't wish to.

If we are to believe being a homosexual is something you are born as it seems that even with a strecth of the numbers homosexuality is an attraction less than 20% of us are born with. I doubt we have anything to worry about, since the world is vastly over populated already. Since they can't make children biologically with each other, gay couples are often adopting the already birthed children that are apart of our over populated planet.



[edit on 6-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by JaxonRoberts
 


no i know, im just replying to someones argument about there been a global catastrophy and theres only 20% of the population left, %15 percent being gays, and gays not wanting to reproduce cause they think its gross. which is probably the worst argument to get on to this topic so far.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghost147
 


Ahh, you're right, weak arguement. But if it comes down to that, I for one, will go ahead and take one for the team, so to speak. But even if we dwindle down to 20%, that's still 1,200,000,000 people, and 15% of that is 180,000,000 leaving 1,020,000,000 to 'repopulate' the earth. Historically speaking, that's the equivelant of the world's population in the mid 1800's and I don't think we were in trouble of extinction then.

[edit on 6-10-2008 by JaxonRoberts]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 07:38 PM
link   
thanks for mentioning that, i was too focussed on low numbers (15, 20, 5) to realize how many people that still is.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:03 PM
link   
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.

. . .



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:15 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Could you please cite credible sources for all the things you've stated? Just curious where you gain this information. Some of it I disagree with but I'm not going to bother linking the counter research for you unless I know if you are stating these things as facts supported by something or if this is just your opinion, which I don't plan on trying to dispute because that often proves useless.

[edit on 6-10-2008 by rapinbatsisaltherage]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:27 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:30 PM
link   
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]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:48 PM
link   
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



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
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.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 09:52 PM
link   
.
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




top topics



 
6
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join