What causes homosexuality?

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

Of course I'm ignoring them. They're usually driven politically, not scientifically.

That actually doesn't matter to me. On a fundamental level, ANY science that must redefine fundamentals of nature just to survive is not a science. From a scientific point of view, such a science is fundamentally dysfunctional.

What are the fundamentals of nature? There seems to be various forms of reproduction that do not require a penis or a vagina. And in some cases things tat once had a vagina will have a penis and vice versa.

 

[Sunstone]

What's the purpose of the Skene's Gland? What was it designed for?

Or the clitoris, for that matter. Both were the work of the very same devil who planted bones in the earth so that scientists would later dig them up and think evolution had occurred. Learned it all in school.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Your desires are not the defining factor.

Your status as a member of a hetero species is determined by the physical attributes. Your desires are substantially impacted by your environment, culture, your experiences, etc., all of which help define behavior and norms.

But if I have those desires, how could I have been "born hetero" as you say everyone is?

 

[Clarity]

What are the fundamentals of nature? There seems to be various forms of reproduction that do not require a penis or a vagina. And in some cases things tat once had a vagina will have a penis and vice versa.

For this, I have to refer you to the biology lessons I've already given above. We are defined by science as hetero. Gays can't make a claim for scientic support of being gay unless they first change the fundamentals.

Bias always poisons your conclusions. There are no exceptions. You either accept the species as it is or you don't.

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Your desires are not the defining factor.

Your status as a member of a hetero species is determined by the physical attributes. Your desires are substantially impacted by your environment, culture, your experiences, etc., all of which help define behavior and norms.

You have obviously never spent more than 15 minutes watching Bonobo monkeys. They don't seem to care what gender the other monkey is.

 

[Sunstone]

You have obviously never spent more than 15 minutes watching Bonobo monkeys. They don't seem to care what gender the other monkey is.

Umm....bonobos are our closest ape relatives, along with chimps. But your point is a good one anyway.

 

[dgirl1986]

Of course I'm ignoring them. They're usually driven politically, not scientifically.

That actually doesn't matter to me. On a fundamental level, ANY science that must redefine fundamentals of nature just to survive is not a science. From a scientific point of view, such a science is dysfunctional.

Care to list a few examples that are driven politically instead of scientifically? What would you say about homosexuality being removed from the DMS? What do you think this was based on?

 

[Clarity]

But if I have those desires, how could I have been "born hetero" as you say everyone is?

The first half of your question has nothing to do with the second half.

20 years from now, your desires will be different. That's an indication that being gay is behavioral.

(My neice went from hetero to gay to hetero in the space of 7 years. Her status as--physically--a hetero female never changed.)

 

[dgirl1986]

For this, I have to refer you to the biology lessons I've already given above. We are defined by science as hetero. Gays can't make a claim for scientic support of being gay unless they first change the fundamentals.

Bias always poisons your conclusions. There are no exceptions. You either accept the species as it is or you don't.

If i remember rightly it was "the gays" that were making scientific claims. It were scientists in general conducting studies.

 

[Sunstone]

(My neice went from hetero to gay to hetero in the space of 7 years. Her status as--physically--a hetero female never changed.)

Pfffffft! Seven years? I do it twice a week.

 

[FranklinMichaelV.3]

For this, I have to refer you to the biology lessons I've already given above. We are defined by science as hetero. Gays can't make a claim for scientic support of being gay unless they first change the fundamentals.

Bias always poisons your conclusions. There are no exceptions. You either accept the species as it is or you don't.

But science does not define us as hetero. Science defines us as use of heterosexual reproduction. For instance the Bonobo chimps reproduce using heterosexual means but they still participate in homosexual sex. What do you think science would say about this?

Also what do you say about the sexuality of a person who has two X chromosomes but has a penis?

I'm kinda confused though about your "bias always poisons your conclusions"

What is that related too?

 

[Triumphant_Loser]

Or the clitoris, for that matter. Both were the work of the very same devil who planted bones in the earth so that scientists would later dig them up and think evolution had occurred. Learned it all in school.

I remember learning that in history class too. Right after the chapter on when Jesus wrote the Constitution after he sailed the ocean blue in 1492 and founded the United States of America.

 

[Clarity]

If i remember rightly it was "the gays" that were making scientific claims. It were scientists in general conducting studies.

All political interest groups at one time or another masquerade their views as scientific.

If you don't know how to recognize bias, you can more easily be suckered.

 

[dust1n]

Well, I got it my best to get an answer.

I look forward to not seeing this guy on the forum.

 

[dust1n]

All political interest groups at one time or another masquerade their views as scientific.

If you don't know how to recognize bias, you can more easily be suckered.

I think the easiest way to get suckered is to think you will actually respond to anyone's questions.

 

[Clarity]

But science does not define us as hetero.

No doubt the paramecium can't be defined as asexual, either, can it?

This is where the dysfunction takes place. Science has never defined homo sapiens as anything other than hetero.

 

[Sunstone]

I remember learning that in history class too. Right after the chapter on when Jesus wrote the Constitution after he sailed the ocean blue in 1492 and founded the United States of America.

Yup! And then it all went downhill when those there hateful homosexuals kicked Jesus out of the country.

 

[dgirl1986]

All political interest groups at one time or another masquerade their views as scientific.

If you don't know how to recognize bias, you can more easily be suckered.

So basically you dismiss all scientific research and studies based on your own bias view.

I am actually studying the foundation of statistics at the moment and have already covered bias in research and studies.

 

[dust1n]

Yup! And then it all went downhill when those there hateful homosexuals kicked Jesus out of the country.

I think we'll all remember this guy once the great gay-induced Christian genocide begins.

 

[dgirl1986]

No doubt the paramecium can't be defined as asexual, either, can it?

This is where the dysfunction takes place. Science has never defined homo sapiens as anything other than hetero.

You refer to heterosexual which is a term used to defined an attraction to the opposite sex. are my ovaries meant to be attracted to the opposite sex? See how ridiculous that sounds?