-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Possible explanations for homosexuality explained.
- Thread starter madhatter85
- Start date
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
All human behaviors and propensities, and causes for these behaviors and propensities, exist as spectrums - why would sexuality be any different?
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
http://www.religiousforums.com/foru...-actually-improve-human-gene.html#post1759166
Interestingly, instead of addressingthe subject, you merely heckle it.
OmarKhayyam
Well-Known Member
OK, I actually read the decision and you are BOTH wrong.
The issue was decided only on the grounds of race. Nowhere is the decision is the question of gender ever mentioned. That some state courts have relied on this decision to grant a “right” to SS marriages is a stretch. Doubtless the SC will have to rule on this matter in a few years. But for the moment legally there is no federal case that supports SS marriage. And the DoM act which prohibits it is still law.However the decision also says what Auto alleges, that marriage is a right not a privilege. It just doesn’t say SS marriage. And no federal court has either.
So we are back to what is a “marriage.”
My point previously was that the SC follows the election returns. That law is a creature of culture and the fact that the SC has decided is not evidence of anything other than it decided. I suspect what our devout and earnest opponent of SS marriage realizes is that the tide of cultural forces is decidedly against his position and he is hoping the law will stop that tide. It never has. He (as others have noted) is grasping at straws. The wheels of justice may grind slowly but grind they do. And what the culture wants will find its way into law; as the history of the last 200 yrs clearly shows.:yes:
Enjoy your bigotry while you can Hatter.
Last edited:
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
The wheels of justice may grind slowly but grind they do. And what the culture wants will find its way into law; as the history of the last 200 yrs clearly shows.:yes:
Enjoy your bigotry while you can Hatter.
:candle: Let us pray
Jeremiah
Well-Known Member
There are several evolutionary explanations that may account for homosexuality; to say that homosexuality isn't a selected trait makes little sense.
There are several possibilities: Same-sex couples may benefit groups, as in kin selection. Homosexuality in bonobos has been interpreted as contributing to social stability. The infamous Samoan study may be evidence of the kin selection hypothesis in action. The study found gay men contributed more time, effort and attention to their nieces and nephews than childless females- the men's altruistic behavior propogated their genes without themselves actually having children.
Even if homosexuality didn't directly contribute the necessary genes to perpetuate, some studies have claimed the responsible genes may contribute to overall reproductive fitness, as in boosting sterility in women. The Camperio-Ciani study found in a trial of 4,600 gay and straight men that mothers of gay men had an average of 2.7 births with 2.3 for mothers of straight men. It may be an indicator of genes and sexual attraction to men. But even Camperio-Ciani stress this may only account for a small percentage and other factors like hormones or environment may be involved.
All of these studies are tentative of course, but to deny natural selection selecting such a statistically significant population of the animal kingdom that practices same-sex, well, sex, is just denying the evidence.
There are several possibilities: Same-sex couples may benefit groups, as in kin selection. Homosexuality in bonobos has been interpreted as contributing to social stability. The infamous Samoan study may be evidence of the kin selection hypothesis in action. The study found gay men contributed more time, effort and attention to their nieces and nephews than childless females- the men's altruistic behavior propogated their genes without themselves actually having children.
Even if homosexuality didn't directly contribute the necessary genes to perpetuate, some studies have claimed the responsible genes may contribute to overall reproductive fitness, as in boosting sterility in women. The Camperio-Ciani study found in a trial of 4,600 gay and straight men that mothers of gay men had an average of 2.7 births with 2.3 for mothers of straight men. It may be an indicator of genes and sexual attraction to men. But even Camperio-Ciani stress this may only account for a small percentage and other factors like hormones or environment may be involved.
All of these studies are tentative of course, but to deny natural selection selecting such a statistically significant population of the animal kingdom that practices same-sex, well, sex, is just denying the evidence.
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Homosexuality is the easiest way to satisfy one's unbridled sexual preoccupations. If one wants to have sex without any fear of rejection or responsibility, homosexuality is the way to go. Children are never an issue. And if one wants children, one can make selections from orphanages and donor banks to suit one's personal tastes (but again, this isn't the important issue).
Among guys, they can get exactly what they want and not really have to support anyone. They can slap each other around if that is want they enjoy, etc., etc., etc.
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
Among guys, they can get exactly what they want and not really have to support anyone. They can slap each other around if that is want they enjoy, etc., etc., etc.
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
Mr Cheese
Well-Known Member
Yeah but this is from a guy who thinks blow jobs are against God....
Frankly I enjoy satisfying my unbridled sexual preoccupations within heterosexuality
I'd describe them, but I would be banned
Not everyone finds sex dirty and disgusting...and some of us do more than just penetration in bed....:sarcastic even hetero couples too!
...
ok I just read this
Lesbians, don't have to care about the agressions of their "mate" whom they can much easily handle. They don't have to make any effort to explain emotional issues which they both share anyway.
This is hilarious...sadly you are sincere, this is a big steaming pile of dingo feces
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Unfortunately, it's the guy who thinks that girls are only good for sex who can turn them onto other persuits...
I don't find sex dirty. I do believe it can be abused and abusive.
Last edited:
madhatter85
Transhumanist
Unfortunately for you I have not heckled anyone, you sir are the heckler with name-calling and sarcastic claims. Clown already responded to your post.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
and 1500 species of animals rely on genetic code that produces flaws and defects
madhatter85
Transhumanist
because It is only sexuality that produces offspring in a species that reproduces sexually. It is much different than other behaviors at a fundamental level.
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
This is assuming that the only function that sexuality serves in human beings is reproduction. This is simply not that case.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
If your assertion was true, proposition 8 in California would not have passed. It was decided by the voters. The Majority rules in the voting booth. Currently, "popular culture" does not include same-sex marriage.OK, I actually read the decision and you are BOTH wrong.
However the decision also says what Auto alleges, that marriage is a right not a privilege. It just doesnt say SS marriage. And no federal court has either.
So we are back to what is a marriage.
My point previously was that the SC follows the election returns. That law is a creature of culture and the fact that the SC has decided is not evidence of anything other than it decided. I suspect what our devout and earnest opponent of SS marriage realizes is that the tide of cultural forces is decidedly against his position and he is hoping the law will stop that tide. It never has. He (as others have noted) is grasping at straws. The wheels of justice may grind slowly but grind they do. And what the culture wants will find its way into law; as the history of the last 200 yrs clearly shows.:yes:
Enjoy your bigotry while you can Hatter.
madhatter85
Transhumanist
On a strictly fundamental level, it is.
McBell
mantra-chanting henotheistic snake handler
*grabs pontoon boat*
LittleNipper
Well-Known Member
Just remember a guy can perform a blow job on you and will likely do it with far more exuberance---especially if you promise to return the favor...
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
Have you ever had sex for any reason other than to reproduce?
Have you ever gotten anything out of having sex other than offspring?
Zorro1227
Active Member
#1 You are so right. Who wouldn't want to be persecuted, judged, hated, and different?....seriously? I do not know anyone in their right mind who would choose that kind of life.
I have one big question for you....Have you ever "struggled" with the "temptations" of homosexuality??
...and if you haven't then who the h*** are you to judge?
I have one big question for you....Have you ever "struggled" with the "temptations" of homosexuality??
...and if you haven't then who the h*** are you to judge?