Explain to me how Homosexuals are "born that way".

reply to post by itsthetooth

How would you define love?
You're actually grappling with something deeply romantic in your exposition.

Even getting past that the question comes up if they are just having fun or actually trying to produce offspring. There is simply no way to know these facts.

No, I think they were actually having fun, and not thinking about the off-spring duties for a while, like a moody Mrs. Penguin, sitting on eggs for days in the snow, or diving in the icy sea to feed all those hungry mouths. And later the little penguins will grow into bigger penguins, and kick you out of the flock. I doubt that's what they were thinking about.

They probably considered themselves frosty, and yet romantic.
A bit like Prince Charles and Camilla.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by draco49
I doubt very seriously that there are same sex species out there trying to make offspring that way. Humans are the only ones I have ever heard of that have sex for the enjoyment.

Apparently you haven't actually read the information I referenced regarding homo and bi sexuality in the animal kingdom. I told you it was back on page 43, but here it is again so you don't need to do any heavy lifting (www.news-medical.net...). And in case you don't have the will to actually click the link and focus your eyes, here's a quote:
"One fundamental premise in social debates has been that homosexuality is unnatural. This premise is wrong. Homosexuality is both common and highly essential in the lives of a number of species." --Petter Boeckman, University of Oslo

Here's another quote from Boeckman:
"Animals that live a completely homosexual life can also be found. This occurs especially among birds that will pair with one partner for life, which is the case with geese and ducks. Four to five percent of the couples are homosexual. Single females will lay eggs in a homosexual pair's nest. It has been observed that the homosexual couple are often better at raising the young than heterosexual couples.

And to shatter your inkling that humans are the only species that engage in sexual activity for procreation:
"Masturbation is common in the animal kingdom... Masturbation has been observed among primates, deer, killer whales and penguins, and we're talking about both males and females. They rub themselves against stones and roots. Orangutans are especially inventive. They make dildos of wood and bark."

I never claimed that same sex couples aren't capable of raising kids, all I'm saying is there is obviously a scientific reason they aren't able to produce children without the opposite sex. Why can't you address that little pesky fact. There is only one reason why it takes a man and a woman to produce off spring, because thats the way its suppose to be. I don't however believe we are living on our intended home planet. I believe we were placed here. It is possible that this stigma being addressed is not even a passing thought originally. I also never claimed that I completly believe in a creator, nor do I believe in evolution. I believe in intervention, which makes this mess your addressing stupid and pointless because the problems we deal with here from day to day, were never suppose to be problems to begin with. Thats my story and I"m sticking to it. Good luck to you, and yours, and anyone your raising.

Ok, my theory that you don't actually take the time to read is getting stronger. Go back to the post you responded to and try again. I WASN'T REFERRING TO YOU. The 2nd quote of my last post was a response to another user, so your "rebuttal" doesn't apply. But since you brought it up, I'll make it perfectly clear for you. I never said or implied that homosexual relationships result in offspring; that's just silly. I would think that it goes without saying that both a man and a woman are needed for procreation (surrogacy and laboratory fertilization aside). As a side note, I don't necessarily subscribe to the notion that we were placed here on Earth, but "intervention" is probably the best way to sum up my feelings on that topic.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by mountaingirl1111

 

The thing is, it isn't just humans. it's animals, too. The famous "gay" penguins at the Toronto zoo had displayed homosexual behavior and the zookeepers there decided to separate them in order for them to "breed". So, not only does the animal kingdom have homosexual members, but they also have to deal with humans making sure they breed, not love. More examples, though still more to be found using a quick search

I think the thing here that is going to be really hard to get to the bottom of, is if these animals know and are purposlty doing what it looks like they are doing.

For example in the human species same sex will seek out same sex as a preference. Are the animals possibly doing simply to be playful, or is it possible they are just horney and trying to releive some stress, and no opposites have been around or available for a long time. Is it possible they don't even know the other is the same sex. There are many possibilities, which is why I take the attituide that I do. I heard all about the study where a pheromone was able to turn flys gay. Even when you get to this stage, there is still many questions, like do they realize exactly what they are doing. With the flys probably not, as they were males but all made to smell like females. Even getting past that the question comes up if they are just having fun or actually trying to produce offspring. There is simply no way to know these facts.

I would believe that two penguines are pheromone confused long before I could believe two of the same sex are claimed to be in love. We don't have any way to prove they are in love to begin with. They might go through all the signs of love but if pheromones are at work, they could just be confused.

More ignorance of the most current knowledge. Please read www.dw.de... for the story of 3 gay penguins in a Germany zoo who REFUSED to have anything to do with a female that was introduced to encourage breeding. That zoo now has 3 same-sex penguin "couples" (6 gay birds). One of those couples adopted an egg that was abandoned by its heterosexual parents. The gay penguin couple took the egg in, incubated it, and continued caring for the newborn after it hatched. You can read that report here (www.cbc.ca...)

Here's a quote you might find interesting:
Scientific observation has shown that most sexual encounters between giraffes are homosexual. Male bottlenose dolphin calves often form homosexual bonds and exhibit bisexual behaviour when they're older. And female Japanese macaques, or snow monkeys, form monogamous relationships with each other that last from days to weeks. All of these behaviours have been observed in the wild and do not appear to have been influenced by a scarcity of available mates of the opposite sex.

That certainly gives credence to the theory that homosexuality is a natural phenomenon, as it occurs in virtually every species of animal on the planet, and that it is the result of a genetic predisposition rather than a choice.

reply to post by draco49

Apparently you haven't actually read the information I referenced regarding homo and bi sexuality in the animal kingdom. I told you it was back on page 43, but here it is again so you don't need to do any heavy lifting (www.news-medical.net...).

I quick read the article, and it was just as I had assumed. There are titles being made about bonding being an example of homosexuality.

It's going to be pretty hard for anyone to lable this as its going to be hard to identify in the wild. At least with humans we can claim we are in love with the same sex, but your not going to get those words out of another species. At the same time there could be events that make it appear that way, but whats really going on?

Anyhow, it was a good article, but as I suspected, very shortcoming with hard facts about proving homosexuality between other species. And like I keep saying its almost impossible to prove as its pretty in depth. Even if you do find two of the same species having sex, there is no way to identify what the motives are. It could be pheromones, it could be they are lonely, it could be they are just playing around. There is no way to prove intent with an animal.

reply to post by draco49

More ignorance of the most current knowledge. Please read www.dw.de... for the story of 3 gay penguins in a Germany zoo who REFUSED to have anything to do with a female that was introduced to encourage breeding. That zoo now has 3 same-sex penguin "couples" (6 gay birds). One of those couples adopted an egg that was abandoned by its heterosexual parents. The gay penguin couple took the egg in, incubated it, and continued caring for the newborn after it hatched. You can read that report here (www.cbc.ca...)

It would appear that your making a claim that since gay penguines adopted and raised one not there own, that it's proof of homosexuality. There is nothing that says gay people have to have kids, or that they want kids. I think the confusion here is between most species including humans having a love for life., and loving the same sex.

Originally posted by itsthetooth
I think the confusion here is between most species including humans having a love for life., and loving the same sex.

I find it very annoying when someone brings Love into a discussion of sex.

Sex is a physical/chemical reaction. Love has nothing to do with it.

I will tell you how I know they are "born that way". I'm a lesbian, and no before you assume, I'm not a "manly looking lesbian".
Please, do not confuse gay and lesbian people for BISEXUALS who tend to WHORE around (Not saying all bisexuals, I'm saying the ones who identify as one orientation, but are truly bisexual, and whore around and give everyone else a bad name). I've always felt "Different" from girls around me but didn't get why.

When i was 5 years old, I had a girl friend in kindergarten. While all my friends who were girls went through "boys are icky" stages, i went through a "girls are icky" stage, shortly after having my little kindergarten girl friend.
No, you're right, i didn't have sexual feelings back then. I do however, remember bringing a picture of my pre-k girl friend home, to my very anti-gay Christian household. Back then, I had no idea what being gay was... I knew I liked females, that's all i knew. I told my grandma that this is the girl im going to marry and showed her a picture of the girl. She immediately scorned me, and told me to NEVER say that again. I had no idea why, and it wasn't until in later years where i heard people talk bad of gay/lesbians that i found out what these meant.

Of course, living in the deep south, i did my best to ignore feelings for girls.

Let me just say, that although i'm VERY girly looking, i've seriously always felt I was a boy trapped in a girls body.
And no, that wasn't just because i preferred playing trucks over dolls. It was for many reasons, when i didn't even know what gay was.

For those that say someone can only be gay in an accepting household, that is a lie. I was ALWAYS told it was wrong, by everyone and to this day, i am still in the closet at 21 years old, except for those in my life that truly matter....

Anyway, it wasn't until puberty that i began getting sexual feelings, just like my friends. For those that say being gay is a sexual perversion is a downright disgust to me. I have always had more dignity, respect, and self-control, than any of my hetero sexual friends who were having sex.... I did not want to have sex with every girl I saw. In fact, I wanted an emotional connection with them first.

I tried liking guys. I can think guys are attractive, but it's in the same way another male would be able to judge another male, or a female would be able to judge another female... Nothing sexual, just simply knowing you aren't blind.

At 15, I fell in love with a friend of mine. Long story short, we did end up dating, and it sealed the deal for me knowing i loved girls in every way. I got butterflies, i felt happiness, i felt all around joy.

Once this teenage relationship came to an end, i was still calling myself a bisexual on the inside just because i was afraid to fully say i am gay. For some reason, growing up, i thought by imagining myself as a boy, that i was somehow not gay, since i was a boy, and i liked girls. I really think it was my subconscious way of trying to accept myself yet deny myself all in one.

Anyway, in my later teen years, i tried dating males. I didn't go whoring around, but guys who were attractive, friends, and good people, i tried. I even made out with them and such.
I felt like i was kissing a brick wall, every time.

In fact, the only time i could get the courage to go through with it, was when i was drunk.
And the next day i felt absolutely horrible.

It was like i was doing the WORST things, like drinking, when i tried being opposite of who i am, and who I believe God made me. That was the only time i really could go through with kissing males.

It didn't "disgust me" it just felt like nothing.
No butterflies, no anticipation to see these guys, no missing them, just seeing them as awesome friends.
Never in my 21 years, has a guy made me question otherwise.

No, i do not need to wait for "mr. right" to know I am gay.
You didn't need mrs. right to know you were straight.

I can't say if it's genetics that makes people gay or what.
I could tell you more about my past if you ask, but it's a lot to type.

Just know i tried the straight thing, all my life, and became horribly depressed.

People use 6 mistranslated bible verses to condemn people like myself.
I will not turn away from God over what those people try to say....
I have tried "praying the gay away" and no, it doesn't work.

I have however, prayed that if God loves me as I am, then please make me comfortable in my own skin.
And to this day, i have a girl friend of 2 years.
I do not lust after anyone else, i am not with her for sex, i'm with her because i love everything about her.

Straights seem to always point out sex in gays lives more than we do...
It's a plus, not a requirement.

Me not liking straight sex, is not why i always knew i liked girls and not boys...
If sex was the only thing preventing me from dating guys, i would've dated a guy and went on with my life a long time ago.

There's a lot of differences in both sexes besides body parts.

I like girls, i didn't ask to, nor was i ever told it was okay.

By the way, you're saying if it was a gene, there's no way it could get passed down because gay people don't reproduce....

Are you seriously not aware of the THOUSANDS of gays and lesbians that will NEVER act on it, and go on to have children and live a lie? What about the bisexuals?

They say about 5-10% of the population is truly gay/lesbian/bisexual....

But they are leaving out the thousands who will always remain in the closet.
Do you seriously think most people will indicate on any form that they are homosexual, or anything other than heterosexual?

Not to mention all of the countries that will literally hang anyone who even speaks of having such feelings....

Originally posted by itsthetooth
reply to post by draco49

 

I quick read the article, and it was just as I had assumed. There are titles being made about bonding being an example of homosexuality.

It's going to be pretty hard for anyone to lable this as its going to be hard to identify in the wild. At least with humans we can claim we are in love with the same sex, but your not going to get those words out of another species. At the same time there could be events that make it appear that way, but whats really going on?

Anyhow, it was a good article, but as I suspected, very shortcoming with hard facts about proving homosexuality between other species. And like I keep saying its almost impossible to prove as its pretty in depth. Even if you do find two of the same species having sex, there is no way to identify what the motives are. It could be pheromones, it could be they are lonely, it could be they are just playing around. There is no way to prove intent with an animal.

In what universe does the act of bonding and sexual activity between two same-sex members of a species NOT equate to homosexuality? If two creatures of the same sex engage in sexual and bonding behavior typical of their heterosexual counterparts, that is, by definition, homosexuality. Pheromones and "motives" are irrelevant. Female pheromones will never make a homosexual male desire females. Pheromones are biological attractant hormones that activate libido. They do not play a role in sexual preference, only in sexual desire. It is a proven FACT that homosexuality is present in every species that reproduces sexually, as opposed to asexually. Whether or not you believe a fact to be true is of no consequence. That's why it's a fact, and not an opinion.

reply to post by flyingkiwi


right on. can you imagine how terrible all the worlds's red heads would be treated if someone decided God said red heads are children of Satan?

Originally posted by divineiam2
reply to post by flyingkiwi

 

right on. can you imagine how terrible all the worlds's red heads would be treated if someone decided God said red heads are children of Satan?

Actually, I kinda do think that gingers have no soul.

Originally posted by draco49

Originally posted by divineiam2
reply to post by flyingkiwi

 

right on. can you imagine how terrible all the worlds's red heads would be treated if someone decided God said red heads are children of Satan?

Actually, I kinda do think that gingers have no soul.

Well, I WAS on your side...

reply to post by mountaingirl1111


I don't particularly care for "gingers" either.....as an American-born Gay man, I can say this. HOWEVER....there are AMPLE 'tastes" for everyone.....maybe someone out there LIKES "red-heads" (American English term that is the same as British English....for "ginger"...).

The question isn't "how are homosexuals born that way?" The question is actually: "is sexual preference a decision or is it predetermined?"

So many people say sexual preference is a decision made at some point in life, which in some cases it very well is. But to say sexual preference is a decision (without exception and that there's no way a person is ever born as a homosexual) is to imply that sexual preference is determined prior to birth.

So if a person is born with a sexual preference, would it not be possible that in some cases that sexual preference is configured in the opposite direction? If it's an either/or determination (meaning there's only one of two [or three] possible outcomes) - I would say yes, it's very possible that some people are born gay, some people are born straight, and maybe some people are born with no sexual preference at all.

Some people are born with 12 toes. Did they decide to have 12 toes? I doubt it (unless of course there was some sort of reconstructive surgery to split their pinky toes into two - in which case, yes, maybe someone did decide to have 12 toes.)

Or maybe nobody is born with a sexual preference, in which case, all sexuality is a decision. If this is true, then the question becomes: "why would a person choose to be gay?" And the answer could be that each person has their own subjective experience in life - an experience that no other person could truly understand.

As a straight man, I find women to be sexually appealing. Have I ever found another man to be attractive? Absolutely. Sexually appealing? Not as an adult, but as a child I'm sure every boy and girl has had some sort of sexual issue with the same gender. But do I find all women to be sexually appealing? No. Does the thought of making love to a man appeal to me? No. Does it disgust me? Not really. Does the thought of two men making love appeal to me? Not in the least. Does the thought of two women making love appeal to me? Absolutely. I hope you see where I'm going with this...

I like women. Maybe I was born that way, maybe I wasn't. I also like poetry and gardening. Does that make me gay?

I'm sorry to say, but really the debate in America now is: "should we hate gays because they are gay, or should we hate gays because they chose to be gay?"

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mountaingirl1111

 

I don't particularly care for "gingers" either.....as an American-born Gay man, I can say this. HOWEVER....there are AMPLE 'tastes" for everyone.....maybe someone out there LIKES "red-heads" (American English term that is the same as British English....for "ginger"...).

I do.

I've been attracted to redheads since my first memory.

I'm also attracted to "solid on the ground" men. Tall - thin - debonair men - - - do nothing for me.

Give me a hunk - - and I do mean HUNK any day over a tall dark and handsome.

Well, if they aren't born that way, that means that every single person has the exact same inclinations as any other person and every single person would have to make the choice of whether they were homosexual or heterosexual. That means that even the original posters and others who claim that homosexuality is a choice also had to make that choice for themselves.
I ask them, when did you decide to not act on your homosexual desires? When did you chose to have sex with people of the opposite gender instead of the same gender? You say it's a choice, and if it's a choice for them, it must be a choice for you as well, which says you have the same tendancies they have. It's basic logic. If it is as you say it is, it's there for you the same as it is for them.
So, when did you decide to not follow your homosexual inclinations? How do you resist those inclinations you must have according to your logic? Is your inclination and your decision to avoid it the reason you have so much hatred for those who don't avoid it?

Just for the record, I don't believe it's a choice, I believe they are born that way and more and more scientific evidence is being found every day to show that this is true. It has only been an "issue" for the past few centuries because when someone made a new translation to the bible, they decided that certian verses applied to same gendered sexual intercourse and they didn't like it. The "meme" grew and became the homophobia we see today.
This too shall pass.

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mountaingirl1111

 

I don't particularly care for "gingers" either.....as an American-born Gay man, I can say this. HOWEVER....there are AMPLE 'tastes" for everyone.....maybe someone out there LIKES "red-heads" (American English term that is the same as British English....for "ginger"...).

Well, thanks, I know at least some do, I'm married and haven't been lonely my whole life, either Growing up, I caught hell as a kid, but when I got a little older, I realized that some men really love redheads, just like some men really love blondes. Maybe it depends on the shade, my hair is naturally a very deep, dark red. I once read some article about gingers, it was a u.k. article, and it talked about how women giving birth were so thankful they didn't give birth to one and always felt sorry for women who did. I thought that was absolutely terrible!

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mountaingirl1111

 

I don't particularly care for "gingers" either.....as an American-born Gay man, I can say this. HOWEVER....there are AMPLE 'tastes" for everyone.....maybe someone out there LIKES "red-heads" (American English term that is the same as British English....for "ginger"...).

I do.

I've been attracted to redheads since my first memory.

I'm also attracted to "solid on the ground" men. Tall - thin - debonair men - - - do nothing for me.

Give me a hunk - - and I do mean HUNK any day over a tall dark and handsome.

Yay, a supporter! Thanks, Annee. I'm with you on the skinny, nothing-to-them men, who can wear my clothes (though I do like them tall, just solid). Also, the hairless everywhere and perfectly dressed, too-sophisticated-for-his-own-good-man is a turn-off for me. If you take yourself that seriously, then you probably can't have fun and be goofy or a lunatic that cracks me up.... then I won't be having fun and that will suck

Originally posted by mountaingirl1111

Originally posted by Annee

Originally posted by ProudBird
reply to post by mountaingirl1111

 

I don't particularly care for "gingers" either.....as an American-born Gay man, I can say this. HOWEVER....there are AMPLE 'tastes" for everyone.....maybe someone out there LIKES "red-heads" (American English term that is the same as British English....for "ginger"...).

I do.

I've been attracted to redheads since my first memory.

I'm also attracted to "solid on the ground" men. Tall - thin - debonair men - - - do nothing for me.

Give me a hunk - - and I do mean HUNK any day over a tall dark and handsome.

Yay, a supporter!

Thanks, Annee. I'm with you on the skinny, nothing-to-them men, who can wear my clothes (though I do like them tall, just solid). Also, the hairless everywhere and perfectly dressed, too-sophisticated-for-his-own-good-man is a turn-off for me. If you take yourself that seriously, then you probably can't have fun and be goofy or a lunatic that cracks me up.... then I won't be having fun and that will suck

If you like the "solid" redhead types, you gotta love Brendan Gleeson, right? He's a big teddy bear of an Irishman, and I love him!!

Originally posted by kaylaluv

If you like the "solid" redhead types, you gotta love Brendan Gleeson, right? He's a big teddy bear of an Irishman, and I love him!!

Oh yeah! That works

I don't understand the hairless man either. Grooming I understand - - - but the chest and back waxing? Not unless you are a body builder and the defined muscle is essential.