My gay theory!!!

Originally posted by artemisminion
Also it seems to me that urban areas do have higher rates then rural areas. This is just speculation, but i'd be willing to bet money on it.

You could make proof by focusing on Seattle or Sydney or something.

It would be wagging the dog though. A small rural area of 100 people, even if they are gay friendly ... there would be perhaps 5 - 20 gay people maximum. 20 being ridiculously generous. That's not a lot of persons to date, so the person would move to a city.

Same with the population control aspect to some extent ... after a few thousand odd years of oppression you would expect more to suddenly appear. Religious persons might say its morality declining or you may say population control ... without either of those two factors the numbers would still look the same due to increasing freedoms.

reply to post by artemisminion


I've had the same thought. And I've taken it a step further to consider that perhaps the reason the bible spoke against it was because there were not nearly as many people on the planet when this was written, and not only that but the cleanliness aspect. Even today, practitioners of anal penetration must take many precautions to make it as safe as possible... Any doctor can tell you its just not a good idea and if you insist on putting things where they don't belong you must take precautions, many more than with vaginal intercourse, whereas the vagina was naturally meant to accept a penis. Of course there can be such thing as a gay relationship without anal penetration, but I personally believe that is what the bible was getting at when it talks about men laying together. The bible was always very vague when it talks about sex. It took me forever as a kid to realise what it meant when it said thay a particular man and woman "knew" eachother. So, it never said a man can't love another man. It was against anal penetration I believe. And well, today we have access to lots of things that will allow you to do all kinds of crazy things and survive it or avoid sickness or injury... Even so, there can be disastrous results... I can't even get into what I've heard because of tnc. But I do believe in freedom and we have no worries of humans dying off due to gayness XD So I have no problem. It's just not for me. I think its gross. Just the anal penetration part. Just like I'm sure they think vaginas are gross. Whatever. Live and let live when it comes to that

This sounds like a very old study on lab rats I read in a science book back in High School...The over crowded rat cage not only turned some rats homosexual but it also turned some rats homicidal...en.wikipedia.org...People are humans rats are animals...apples and oranges...

reply to post by artemisminion


The reason you have more gay people in cities is because you have more people in cities. People like to live close to each other where things like markets and hospitals are. If you live in New York you could easily get the idea that the US is overpopulated. If you're a truck driver however and drive across the country you'll actually see the country has mile after mile after mile of empty land. With all this empty land why oh why do people cram themselves into New York city? Because people like to be around other people. That's why they build cities in the first place.

I don't think the percentage of homosexuals is higher in cities than it is anywhere else once you take regular demographics into account. One city may have more, but another may have more blacks, and another more whites. Depends on the city what its makeup of people is.

Homosexuality may be a form of population control. But my point was it really has nothing to do with the Bible. Lots of people try to get into the argument that if something is natural it's okay and therefore the Bible is wrong. So, they try to argue different ways that homosexuality is natural.

Which they don't really need to do. There's no argument needed. It is completely natural. You see it all over the animal kingdom.

But it has nothing to do with Sodom and Gomorrah and it doesn't matter if God is real or not. You can choose to be a Christian or not. If you choose not to be one homosexuality doesn't matter. But if someone chooses to believe there is a God, well the Bible asks people to give up all kinds of behaviors that they would naturally do had they not chosen to be a Christian.

Sorry, I don't buy it? It may be genetic, the bad genetics should have died out long ago, but homosexuals had to marry a hetrosexual to hide or cover up their atavistic genetics that had been passed to them by an ancestor who never came out of the closet.

Now that Gay marriage is legal in many states, that should accelerate the extinction of these genetic defects in the general population. However, we need to restrict the adoption or procreation by married homosexuals because of the negative effect it has upon children.

Now that Gays, can be open about it, society should benefit in that those with the deviant behavior can now be readily identified, and children protected from them. John

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by artemisminion

 

The reason you have more gay people in cities

Who actually *says* there are more gay people in cities? It's as likely there are the same numbers of gays in rural areas but they simply can't or don't want to come out since there is a bigger negative stigma with "being gay" in rural bumblefck/TN as compared to, say, Seattle

reply to post by NoRulesAllowed


That's not to say you have a higher percentage. For example a city with 200 gay people obviously has more gay people than a city that only has 100 people in TOTAL. But the percentage may be the same.

reply to post by artemisminion
You can't catch being gay its not a choice. your either born gay or straight my belief anyway. Oh also it would be a boring world if everyone was the same. Good OP though and I respect your opinion

Sorry not a fan of this theory......

homosexuality is nurture over nature, if it were nature then there would be something in our genetic make up that has changed to increase the number of homosexuals.

ones sexuality is a matter of psychology not physiology, to say that it was would me that we are evolving as a homosexual species yet we know that homosexuality is something that has been going on since the times of the Ancients. It is not something that is new, and that is another problem with your theory.

so whist i can understand the point of view of the OP,

I have to say i for one disagree 100%

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin
I don't think its nurture as it could be a chemical imbalance when being created. There was a program on tv of a man who was straight had a fall and woke-up gay so it could be a chemical in the brain that has changed. Or he could have been given a new life task from God when he came back to earth. I believe that we were assigned tasks before we were given vessels ( human bodies ) basically pre birth. We all have a destiny and to find our path.

Originally posted by Pinke

Originally posted by artemisminion
Also it seems to me that urban areas do have higher rates then rural areas. This is just speculation, but i'd be willing to bet money on it.

You could make proof by focusing on Seattle or Sydney or something.

It would be wagging the dog though. A small rural area of 100 people, even if they are gay friendly ... there would be perhaps 5 - 20 gay people maximum. 20 being ridiculously generous. That's not a lot of persons to date, so the person would move to a city.

Same with the population control aspect to some extent ... after a few thousand odd years of oppression you would expect more to suddenly appear. Religious persons might say its morality declining or you may say population control ... without either of those two factors the numbers would still look the same due to increasing freedoms.

only if homosexuality is a choice. Also it would depend on whether that genetic switch is flipped before or after birth. If before birth. It wouldn't matter how many people live in those towns as adults. It would have to do with where they were born or carried.

Pffftttt. That theory just ain't right at all.

Everyone knows homosexurality is a choice!

They choose to be disgustinger than hell!

-Early Cuyler

Originally posted by Sk8ergrl
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

I don't think its nurture as it could be a chemical imbalance when being created. There was a program on tv of a man who was straight had a fall and woke-up gay so it could be a chemical in the brain that has changed. Or he could have been given a new life task from God when he came back to earth. I believe that we were assigned tasks before we were given vessels ( human bodies ) basically pre birth. We all have a destiny and to find our path.

nice story,

but no way am going to buy it.

it is my view that homosexuality is nurture over nature and always has been.

Originally posted by 3n19m470
reply to post by artemisminion

 

I've had the same thought. And I've taken it a step further to consider that perhaps the reason the bible spoke against it was because there were not nearly as many people on the planet when this was written, and not only that but the cleanliness aspect. Even today, practitioners of anal penetration must take many precautions to make it as safe as possible... Any doctor can tell you its just not a good idea and if you insist on putting things where they don't belong you must take precautions, many more than with vaginal intercourse, whereas the vagina was naturally meant to accept a penis. Of course there can be such thing as a gay relationship without anal penetration, but I personally believe that is what the bible was getting at when it talks about men laying together. The bible was always very vague when it talks about sex. It took me forever as a kid to realise what it meant when it said thay a particular man and woman "knew" eachother. So, it never said a man can't love another man. It was against anal penetration I believe. And well, today we have access to lots of things that will allow you to do all kinds of crazy things and survive it or avoid sickness or injury... Even so, there can be disastrous results... I can't even get into what I've heard because of tnc. But I do believe in freedom and we have no worries of humans dying off due to gayness XD So I have no problem. It's just not for me. I think its gross. Just the anal penetration part. Just like I'm sure they think vaginas are gross. Whatever. Live and let live when it comes to that

edit on 7/20/2013 by 3n19m470 because: just to be clear, i meant thay maybe there was reason to fear that population would decline, and we needed more peiple bwck then to invent things amd whatnot. Also, these are just thoughts ive had, it doesnt make them true and it doesnt mean i think theyre true. i also realize i didnt mention lesbians but that falls under concerns iof population and creativity decline in the ancient past. remember the old testament was even thousands of years before jesus.

Nice. In antiquity usually your priests wee doctors and surgeon generals as well. Theres a large school of thought, that the reason pork was not "edible" was because of lack of refrigeration and salmonella. If you allowed your flock to eat pork you lost alot of them to food poisoning. So obviously God hated pigs!!! hehe

reply to post by Cancerwarrior
I'm sorry but your wrong. Being gay is not a choice its like a disabled person wants to be disabled come on that's just silly and your silly for believing that.

Originally posted by shells4u
This sounds like a very old study on lab rats I read in a science book back in High School...The over crowded rat cage not only turned some rats homosexual but it also turned some rats homicidal...en.wikipedia.org...People are humans rats are animals...apples and oranges...

edit on 7/20/13 by shells4u because: (no reason given)

LMAO yea..... Were different from the rest of the mammels on this planet.... by what 1 to 10 %... Way different. LOL

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin

Originally posted by Sk8ergrl
reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

 

I don't think its nurture as it could be a chemical imbalance when being created. There was a program on tv of a man who was straight had a fall and woke-up gay so it could be a chemical in the brain that has changed. Or he could have been given a new life task from God when he came back to earth. I believe that we were assigned tasks before we were given vessels ( human bodies ) basically pre birth. We all have a destiny and to find our path.

nice story,

but no way am going to buy it.

it is my view that homosexuality is nurture over nature and always has been.

I respect your belief and we don't really know the actual answer only our creator does. We only have our own opinions which might might not be correct.

Originally posted by Faust100f
Sorry, I don't buy it? It may be genetic, the bad genetics should have died out long ago, but homosexuals had to marry a hetrosexual to hide or cover up their atavistic genetics that had been passed to them by an ancestor who never came out of the closet.

Now that Gay marriage is legal in many states, that should accelerate the extinction of these genetic defects in the general population. However, we need to restrict the adoption or procreation by married homosexuals because of the negative effect it has upon children.

Now that Gays, can be open about it, society should benefit in that those with the deviant behavior can now be readily identified, and children protected from them. John

Not if it is in all humans whether the the flip is switched or not. If being gay is a natural population control vehicle then it would be encoded in our DNA and wouldn't have " died out".

The theory is based on the notion that straight people always have children and gay people never do.

Children with gay or lesbian parents were estimated to be between 6-14 million in 1990 in the US (although this could mean that one biological parent identified as LGBT).
adoption.about.com...

In 2010 two million children were raised by same-sex parents (despite same-sex households only comprising 1 percent of the population).
Same-sex households are raising 65 000 adopted children (4 percent of all adopted children).

Most of the same-sex parents were in the southern states, and Hispanics had higher statistics for both male and female same-sex households raising a child under 18.
www.nationaljournal.com...

I think if one one would analyze this further the same-sex parents would reflect the same class and race population increases or decreases as heterosexuals.
www.census.gov...
That could suggest that some populations (specifically whites) are choosing not to procreate at the same level as others.
I think globally the greatest population growth is in areas and communities where girls start having children very young, there is a low level of education amongst women, and polygamy and concurrent relationships are common for men.
Just take our Zulu President in South Africa, Jacob Zuma. He's got four current wives and an estimated 20 children.
Western people who have a conspiracy about population control should ask themselves why Western heterosexuals aren't having children at this rate, instead of pointing fingers at a tiny gay minority (who were in many ways discouraged from forming families and having kids).
Pointing the finger at gays without examining heterosexual procreation (or the lack there-of) is the real conspiracy, because it's pointing in the wrong direction.

The Old Testament has some other great recipes for fast population growth, like polygamy, concubinage, stealing women through conquest, widow inheritance, making virgins who are raped marry their rapists, and in the story of Lot (Genesis 19) incest between fathers and daughters, if nothing else is available.
I have a feeling though that most Western heterosexuals today (especially women) wouldn't like any of that very much.

Perhaps some heterosexuals are a bit unenthusiastic because of the chemicals in their diet?

Originally posted by OtherSideOfTheCoin
Sorry not a fan of this theory......

homosexuality is nurture over nature, if it were nature then there would be something in our genetic make up that has changed to increase the number of homosexuals.

ones sexuality is a matter of psychology not physiology, to say that it was would me that we are evolving as a homosexual species yet we know that homosexuality is something that has been going on since the times of the Ancients. It is not something that is new, and that is another problem with your theory.

so whist i can understand the point of view of the OP,

I have to say i for one disagree 100%

How is the fact it has been going on since ancient times proof against it? MY theory was that as soon as we started gathering together in cities... homosexuality started popping up. I guess really large tribes could have had the same issue. Since before we had cities we have almost no record of how many people were gay in a tribe. How does this affect my theory at all?