Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. #1
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    This is going to be a 1 vs 1 debate between myself and bluepinaple. I will be supporting that homosexuality is not a choice for every homosexual, while bluepinaple will be supporting that homosexuality is a choice.

    There will be:
    10 responses each,
    5 day reply limit, if either one of us fails to reply within 5 days that will be an automatic concession for the one who fails to reply, unless we notify the other one of the absence before hand and agree to put the debate on hold.
    We will have a Mod create a poll at the end of the debate for ODN to judge this debate.

    __________________________________________________ ___________________

    Let's start out distinguishing a few terms.

    1) Homosexuality: sexual desire or behavior directed toward a person or persons of one's own sex.
    Homosexuality

    2) Homosexual Behavior: Human sexual behavior or human sexual practices or human sexual activities refers to the manner in which humans experience and express their sexuality.
    Homosexual Behavior

    3) Sexual Orientation: the clear, persistent desire of a person for affiliation with one sex rather than the other. Also called sexual preference
    Orientation

    Now, moving on:

    Homosexuality is no more a choice as heterosexuality. Yes, there are some who choose to participate in homosexual behavior/activity. I am focusing more on the attraction aspect instead of the behavior/activity. IF sexuality is a choice, then any heterosexual could "choose" to be attracted to the same sex.

    I am NOT claiming that there is one gene that makes someone homosexual. I intend to support that instead of one gene it is a makeup of genetics, hormonal, and environmental influences.

    Several studies have been conducted dating back as 1930's. The study performed by Alfred Kinsey only showed that a large percent of the men tested stated they have never had any homosexual relations but when asked if they have engaged in any same-sex sexual relations that percentage almost doubled with the answer being "yes".

    In 1957, Karen Hooker performed the first psycholigical test to test for biological determinism.
    Hooker studied both homosexuals and heterosexuals. Both groups were matched for age, intelligence quotient (IQ) and education level, and were then subjected to three psychological tests. These three tests, the Rorschach, Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) and the Make-A-Picture-Story Test (MAPS), were then analyzed by psychologists, and the results were tabulated. The results of Hooker's experiment yielded no significant differences in answers on any of the three tests. Because both groups' answers scored very similarly, she concluded a zero correlation between social determinism of sexuality.

    The next study was performed by D.F. Swaab in 1990. This study showed the physiological difference in the anatomical structure of a gay man's brain.
    Swaab found in his post-mortem examination of homosexual males' brains that a portion of the hypothalamus of the brain was structurally different than a heterosexual brain. The hypothalamus is the portion of the human brain directly related to sexual drive and function. In the homosexual brains examined, a small portion of the hypothalamus, termed the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN), was found to be twice the size of its heterosexual counterpart [2].

    The same year, another study was performed by Laura S. Allen. Her study showed similar results as Swaabs.
    She found that the anterior commissure (AC) of the hypothalamus was also significantly larger in the homosexual subjects than that of the heterosexuals [2]. The very fact that the AC and the SCN are not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences results from differences in sexual behavior. Rather the size differences came prenatally during sexual differentiation. The size and shape of the human brain is determined biologically and is impacted minutely, if at all by behavior of any kind.

    In 1991, Simon LaVey conducted another experiment regarding the hypothalamus of the human brain.
    LeVay discovered that within the hypothalamus, the third interstitial notch of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH3) was two to three times smaller in homosexual men then in heterosexual men. The women examined also exhibited this phenomenon. LeVay concluded the "homosexual and heterosexual men differ in the central neuronal mechanisms that control sexual behavior", and like Allen and Swaab, agreed that this difference in anatomy was no product of upbringing or environment, but rather prenatal cerebral development and structural differentiation [2].

    The neuroendocrine viewpoint's basic hypothesis is that sexual orientation is determined by the early levels (probably prenatal) of androgen on relevant neural structures [7]. If highly exposed to these androgens, the fetus will become masculinized, or attracted to females.

    J. Michael Bailey and Richard Pillard also studied the gayness between MZ twins, DZ twins, and non-related adopted brothers. Their results showed:
    They found that 52% of MZ twins were both self-identified homosexuals, 22% of DZ twins were so, and only 5% of non-related adopted brothers were so.

    Dean Hamar took 40 DNA samples from homosexual men, and genetically examined them. He found that there was a 'remarkable concordance' for 5 genetic markers on section of the X-Chromosome called Xq28.

    EDIT: I forgot to add the link to the site I got the information from.
    Homosexuality: Nature or Nurture

    As I stated above, I am not claiming there is a 'gay gene' but more so a combination that contributes to sexuality innate.. I also am not claiming that ALL homosexuals are born gay. Yes some people choose to participate in homosexual behavior/activity.
    Last edited by Just Me; December 10th, 2010 at 05:45 PM.
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  2. #2
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    I would first like to dsay that reading your start to the debate this morning was really inetresting, and while at work i spent the day thinking about it
    Its challenging me and making me think harder which is really good.

    Ok on to the debate...


    You say that homosexuality is a choice, I disagree. Ok well we will focuz on the attraction aspect.

    Yes, I believe that homosexuality is a choice. Homosexuality is not hardwired into us...watever genes are envolved represent predispositions, not predeterminations. Because unless you find the gay gene then there is no differenciating homosexuals and heterosexuals scientifically.
    Yeah the brain may be wired diffrently, but it isen't genetic ( he/she can't help it and has no choice ) The brain is shaped through time with hormonal and enviromental influences.

    Predispositions. You could have a predisposition towards sports or maths. On the other hand. The same i believe for homosexuals. It is clear all human beings are diffrent and have diffrent likes and dislikes. These are predispositions, Your predisposition does not determine the ending of what a human being chooses to do with his feelings.

    If someone is born with no arms, they do not have a choice. They simply are born that way, same if you are born with blue eyes. On the other hand sexuality develops during pubescence, therefore a teenager may grow with a predisposition towards men ( ither due to his personality or surroundings). This does not take away his choice, but just proves that he has a predisposition for the same sex. He may then in later life; choose to change his thinking pattern and grow attracted to women.

    With regards to what you said about the brain, it could be possible that homosexuals have a diffrent brain wireing to heterosexuals. but of course like every human being, the brain grows with age and so do opinions and sexual feelings, so the brain may have a predisposition towards homosexuality but it does not mean that a person cannot take steps towards changing that.

    Simon LeVay, in his study of the diffrences between the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals offerd the following criticisms of his research:

    " It is important to stress what i did not find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I did not show that Gay men are born that way."

    I believe that if you cannot prove that you are born gay, then saying that there is no choice is simply absurd. The girl born with no arms has no choice, she is born that way. The guy who developed homosexual feelings at bubescence may have had a predisposition; but of course predispositions are not predestinations.

    I totally agree! Homosexuality could indeed be due to hormonal and eviromental influences... because those influences shape every human being. But as for genetics, hmmmm Predisposition. changeable? Of course!

    I know you said you where not claiming that there was a gay gene, but later on you did include genetics as one of the factors of homosexualty.

    Quote: "I am not claiming there is a gay gene, but more so a combination that contributes to sexuuality innate"

    Innate = in born = genetics. No proof. So it is not ennate.

    Please see" The Innate-Immutable Argument finds no basis in science." by Drs.A Dean Bryd, Shirley E cox and Jeffrey W. Robbinson who quoted several researchers- including researchers who are themselves homosexual and have no political or obvious social stake in the outcome.[COLOR="Silver"]



    Regarding change and the right to treatment, lesbian activist Camille Paglia offered the following observations:

    "Homosexuality is not 'normal.' On the contrary it is a challenge to the norm...Nature exists whether academics like it or not. And in nature, procreation is the single relentless rule. That is the norm. Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction...No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous...homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.....

    "Is the gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not wish to be gay? Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are possible. However, habit is refractory, once the sensory pathways have been blazed and deepened by repetition-a phenomenon obvious in the struggle with obesity, smoking, alcoholism or drug addiction....helping gays to learn to function heterosexually, if they wish, is a perfectly worthy aim.

  3. #3
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluepinaple View Post
    Yeah the brain may be wired diffrently, but it isen't genetic ( he/she can't help it and has no choice ) The brain is shaped through time with hormonal and enviromental influences.
    Support or retract that sexuality is not innate...


    Predispositions. You could have a predisposition towards sports or maths. On the other hand. The same i believe for homosexuals. It is clear all human beings are diffrent and have diffrent likes and dislikes. These are predispositions, Your predisposition does not determine the ending of what a human being chooses to do with his feelings.
    Support or retract.
    Influencing factors may be determined more locally among sub-cultures, across sexual fields, or simply by the preferences of the individual. These preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of genetic, psychological, and cultural factors.
    ATTRACTION

    On the other hand sexuality develops during pubescence, therefore a teenager may grow with a predisposition towards men ( ither due to his personality or surroundings).
    Born Gay: The Psychobiology of Sexual Orientation, by Qazi Rahman, a psychobiologist at the University of East London, and Glenn Wilson, a personality specialist from the University of London, reviews research from the last 15 years into why people are gay.

    The evidence, they conclude, is that people are born with their sexuality defined, and it is not the result of their relationships with other people in their early life, as had been previously thought.
    He said there was no evidence that people could "learn" to be gay, for example children of gay parents are no more likely to be gay than their peers.
    The researchers examined evidence from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, genetics, endocrinology and evolutionary biology, and concluded that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetics and hormonal activity in the womb - and that upbringing, childhood experience and personal choice have little or no influence.

    Rahman and Wilson

    With regards to what you said about the brain, it could be possible that homosexuals have a diffrent brain wireing to heterosexuals. but of course like every human being, the brain grows with age and so do opinions and sexual feelings, so the brain may have a predisposition towards homosexuality but it does not mean that a person cannot take steps towards changing that.
    Again I am going to ask you to support or retract this claim. But I must ask.. If the hypothalamus is different in homosexuals and heterosexuals how could ones environment play the only role is one's sexuality?
    Actually the size and shape of the brain is determined prenatally during sexual differentiation. I do believe I already mentioned that in my previous post. But here it is again..
    The very fact that the AC and the SCN are not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences results from differences in sexual behavior. Rather the size differences came prenatally during sexual differentiation. The size and shape of the human brain is determined biologically and is impacted minutely, if at all by behavior of any kind.
    Nature or Nurture


    Simon LeVay, in his study of the diffrences between the brains of homosexuals and heterosexuals offerd the following criticisms of his research:

    " It is important to stress what i did not find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I did not show that Gay men are born that way."
    This is just one of the several studies I listed. How does one scientists criticism of his OWN research void the studies? Also, I never stated nor quote anything that said LeVay found that homosexuality is genetic or that a gay man is born gay. His study clearly showed that the results of his research study supported studies performed by other researchers and showed the difference in the hypothalamus in homosexuals and heterosexuals..

    I believe that if you cannot prove that you are born gay, then saying that there is no choice is simply absurd.
    Just as not being able to prove sexuality is a choice is simply absurd.. No, there is not any hard concrete evidence but there is a lot more that points to sexuality being innate then it does for sexuality being a choice.

    The guy who developed homosexual feelings at bubescence may have had a predisposition; but of course predispositions are not predestinations.
    If that is the case then what exactly would cause him to have feelings for the same sex?

    I totally agree! Homosexuality could indeed be due to hormonal and eviromental influences... because those influences shape every human being. But as for genetics, hmmmm Predisposition. changeable? Of course!
    Ok maybe I should have stuck with the term innate. Hormonal and environmental influences that was mention are prenatal..

    I know you said you where not claiming that there was a gay gene, but later on you did include genetics as one of the factors of homosexualty.
    Right I did include genetics.. But I clearly stated that there was not a known gay gene that determines sexuality alone.

    Innate = in born = genetics. No proof. So it is not ennate.
    Did you even look at the information I provided? There's plenty of evidence that supports sexuality is innate..

    Please see" The Innate-Immutable Argument finds no basis in science." by Drs.A Dean Bryd, Shirley E cox and Jeffrey W. Robbinson who quoted several researchers- including researchers who are themselves homosexual and have no political or obvious social stake in the outcome.
    What exactly am I to look at and where's the link?

    Regarding change and the right to treatment, lesbian activist Camille Paglia offered the following observations:
    Got a link to this?

    Since this is a limited post debate, When you quote me please use the [ quote] [/quote] it will make reading your posts much easier. And please provide links for your sources..
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  4. #4
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Support or retract that sexuality is not innate...



    Support:

    Sexuality is not ennate, Yes there are genetic factors that may have make he/she more susspeptable to being a homosexual. No, you cannot 100% predict that a person will be a homosexual when they grow up as this would mean that you could see into the future and pre-determin the personons actions and reactions to thier genetic makeup.


    You can genetically see wether a peroon will have blue eyes, blonde hair, tall, thin..etc. because these are genes.

    If a person has a predisposition towards homosexuality, you cannot preditermin how they will react, you cannot 100% predict that he/she is a homosexual. For predicting it a 100% would need a gene just like the gene that would show a babies eye colour or hair colour. The "gay gene" is missing. so the scientific proof is 0.


    You are contradicting yourself. You say that homosexuality is a combination of factors that contribute to homosexuality in your starting debate, and then quote someone saying sexuality is formed in the womb. Two contradicting paragraphs below:

    [ quote]I am NOT claiming that there is one gene that makes someone homosexual. I intend to support that instead of one gene it is a makeup of genetics, hormonal, and environmental influences.
    Then you quoted:

    [ quote] The researchers examined evidence from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, genetics, endocrinology and evolutionary biology, and concluded that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetics and hormonal activity in the womb - and that upbringing, childhood experience and personal choice have little or no influence. [/quote]


    [ quote]I must ask.. If the hypothalamus is different in homosexuals and heterosexuals how could ones environment play the only role is one's sexuality? [/quote]


    We are all diffrent the diffrence in in homosexuals and heterosexuals doesent prove anythin. this hypothalamus diffrence could have accured as the adult grew and how his biological being reacted to outside influences. You cannot pre-determin how a person will react (when fully grown and sexually aware) to his surroundings due to his biological makeup, you can only GUESS. therefor it is vastly diffrent from scientific gene predetermined evidence of a baby being brown with blue hair and brown hair.


    [ quote]Just as not being able to prove sexuality is a choice is simply absurd.. No, there is not any hard concrete evidence but there is a lot more that points to sexuality being innate then it does for sexuality being a choice[/quote]

    If this is the case then where is the scientific evidence that you can prove 100%that because a person is born with diffrent levels of hypothalamus in the brain they will ither be gay or straight. ( every single time, no acception )
    Where is the study that shows that for EVERY SINGLE guy with more or less hypothalamus will be 100% gay or straight ither way in future life? There is no such concrete evidence. therfor what ever evidence has veen found is a calculated guess and not "scientific evidence" that it is ennate.

    Your theory is a guess and is not as scientifically equal 100% predetermined science as the genes that show a fetuses future eye colour.


    [ quote]The guy who developed homosexual feelings at bubescence may have had a predisposition; but of course predispositions are not predestinations.

    If that is the case then what exactly would cause him to have feelings for the same sex?[/quote]

    You cannot predict how the child will react to diffrent situation in his life. There are many factors that could contribute to homosexuality such as: not bonding well with other boys, feeling inferior to boys, not feeling manly enough, sexual abuse, little interest inmale activities, weak/no father figure, early sexual activity..etc

    You cannot predict how all of these outside influences along the course of a childs life could influence a mans sexual desires. If a man had as a child, sex with another child, then his memory of that and wether it was a nice sensation or not would with out a doupt have an affect on his determination of wether he is gay or not. also he may be more likely then to stick with men if he had a weak father figure and had little heterosexual friendships/connection with boys.

    Note: these are all factors, i am not predicting that he will be a homosexual, he, through his personality, biological makeup and or other outside influences could swing him ither way. there is no gene or hard scientific piece of information that can prove that the homosexual in question had no choice over his sexuality.

    As for outside influences which you deny have an affect on a persons sexual orientation; you cannot deny that the experiences that you have had over the course of your life have greatly influenced the person you are today, not only that but those experiences have also shaped your current opinions and feelings on a range of personal subjects, these opinions would not have been shaped wer it not for outside influences.

    It is not inconcievable that a young mans life experiences ( sexual and not) can shape his perpective on this sexual orientation. I am saying that although he/she may have a biological makeup that is more suseptable to homosexuality the influences after birth wether sexual or none sexual will shape the person and the image they have of themselves both sexual and none sexual. and of course we are all individuals and react diffrently to one another, you cannot pre-determin how a person will react so you cannot forsee how a person will deal with the experiences that will enevitibly shape the person as he reaches adulthood.


    [ quote]Influencing factors may be determined more locally among sub-cultures, across sexual fields, or simply by the preferences of the individual. These preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of genetic, psychological, and cultural factors.
    ATTRACTION?[/quote]

    You said it yourself...complex veriety of genetic, pychological and cultural factors! these factors differ, as do how each individual will react to them. so what points towards it not being a choice when all these factors come into play?

    Plus may i add that you later quoted:

    [ quote]The evidence, they conclude, is that people are born with their sexuality defined, and it is not the result of their relationships with other people in their early life, as had been previously thought.
    He said there was no evidence that people could "learn" to be gay,?[/quote]


    So i guess your changing your mind on what you said about "Preferences of the individual" and the complex veriety of genetic phycological and social factors?


    "Preferences of the individual"
    Preferences = choice!

  5. #5
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluepinaple View Post

    Sexuality is not ennate, Yes there are genetic factors that may have make he/she more susspeptable to being a homosexual. No, you cannot 100% predict that a person will be a homosexual when they grow up as this would mean that you could see into the future and pre-determin the personons actions and reactions to thier genetic makeup.
    I really was hoping for a decent debate here. You keep making these claims and have YET to support the first one.. So I am going to ignore your claims and ask that you support or retract them. There is no need to continue a debate when the opponent refuses to support their claims.
    So support of retract...

    If a person has a predisposition towards homosexuality, you cannot preditermin how they will react, you cannot 100% predict that he/she is a homosexual. For predicting it a 100% would need a gene just like the gene that would show a babies eye colour or hair colour. The "gay gene" is missing. so the scientific proof is 0.
    1) I never claimed there was a "gay gene". Being innate does not equal one gene. And yes I have provided several scientific proof that homosexuality is innate.
    2)Support you claim here and actually show where the support I used is wrong as you claim it is. Just saying "uh uh that's not true" is not a rebuttal..

    You are contradicting yourself. You say that homosexuality is a combination of factors that contribute to homosexuality in your starting debate, and then quote someone saying sexuality is formed in the womb. Two contradicting paragraphs below:
    Umm how is that contradicting? A combination of factors does not contradict formed in the womb. What exactly do you think innate is?
    We are all diffrent the diffrence in in homosexuals and heterosexuals doesent prove anythin. this hypothalamus diffrence could have accured as the adult grew and how his biological being reacted to outside influences. You cannot pre-determin how a person will react (when fully grown and sexually aware) to his surroundings due to his biological makeup, you can only GUESS. therefor it is vastly diffrent from scientific gene predetermined evidence of a baby being brown with blue hair and brown hair.
    Support or Retract...


    If this is the case then where is the scientific evidence that you can prove 100%that because a person is born with diffrent levels of hypothalamus in the brain they will ither be gay or straight. ( every single time, no acception )
    Where is the study that shows that for EVERY SINGLE guy with more or less hypothalamus will be 100% gay or straight ither way in future life? There is no such concrete evidence. therfor what ever evidence has veen found is a calculated guess and not "scientific evidence" that it is ennate.
    Well considering that the difference in the hypothalamus was different for homosexuals and heterosexuals, and the study did not find the first heterosexual with a hypothalamus the same size as the homosexuals and not the first homosexual had the same size hypothalamus as a heterosexual, then the study shows a lot there..

    Your theory is a guess and is not as scientifically equal 100% predetermined science as the genes that show a fetuses future eye colour.
    MY theory? Is there a gene that show a person will be born blind or deaf? There does NOT have to be a specific gene that determines EVERYTHING about a person. So instead of saying my theory is a "guess", how about actually proving me wrong with actual evidence.

    You cannot predict how the child will react to diffrent situation in his life. There are many factors that could contribute to homosexuality such as: not bonding well with other boys, feeling inferior to boys, not feeling manly enough, sexual abuse, little interest inmale activities, weak/no father figure, early sexual activity..etc
    Support or retract...

    You cannot predict how all of these outside influences along the course of a childs life could influence a mans sexual desires. If a man had as a child, sex with another child, then his memory of that and wether it was a nice sensation or not would with out a doupt have an affect on his determination of wether he is gay or not. also he may be more likely then to stick with men if he had a weak father figure and had little heterosexual friendships/connection with boys.
    Support that sexual abuse "would without a doubt" determine if someone will later be gay or not.. This is all unsupported OPINIONS you are providing here.. Support or retract..

    Note: these are all factors, i am not predicting that he will be a homosexual, he, through his personality, biological makeup and or other outside influences could swing him ither way. there is no gene or hard scientific piece of information that can prove that the homosexual in question had no choice over his sexuality.
    Other then there is no one gene (which I have never claimed), support your claim here.

    As for outside influences which you deny have an affect on a persons sexual orientation; you cannot deny that the experiences that you have had over the course of your life have greatly influenced the person you are today, not only that but those experiences have also shaped your current opinions and feelings on a range of personal subjects, these opinions would not have been shaped wer it not for outside influences.
    Sexuality is not opinions..
    For the third time:
    The very fact that the AC and the SCN are not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences results from differences in sexual behavior. Rather the size differences came prenatally during sexual differentiation. The size and shape of the human brain is determined biologically and is impacted minutely, if at all by behavior of any kind.


    It is not inconcievable that a young mans life experiences ( sexual and not) can shape his perpective on this sexual orientation. I am saying that although he/she may have a biological makeup that is more suseptable to homosexuality the influences after birth wether sexual or none sexual will shape the person and the image they have of themselves both sexual and none sexual. and of course we are all individuals and react diffrently to one another, you cannot pre-determin how a person will react so you cannot forsee how a person will deal with the experiences that will enevitibly shape the person as he reaches adulthood.
    How the person reacts and what the person does based on outside influences is true. You get a male child raised in a very religious and conservative home where he is taught homosexuality is wrong, the child may grow up participating in heterosexual activities because he was taught homosexuality was wrong. That however does not mean that he is not homosexual. That just means he is not participating in homosexual behavior.


    The evidence, they conclude, is that people are born with their sexuality defined, and it is not the result of their relationships with other people in their early life, as had been previously thought.
    He said there was no evidence that people could "learn" to be gay,?
    He said, people are born with their sexuality already defined. That it is NOT the result of their relationships with other people in their early life, as it was previously thought to be.


    So i guess your changing your mind on what you said about "Preferences of the individual" and the complex veriety of genetic phycological and social factors?


    "Preferences of the individual"
    Preferences = choice!
    What?? I am lost here..
    NOTE: YOU NEED TO START SUPPORTING YOUR CLAIMS WITH ACTUAL SUPPORT INSTEAD OF OPINIONS. I DID NOT START THIS THREAD TO DEBATE USING OPINIONS. YOU AGREED TO THIS DEBATE, SO YOU NEED TO START SUPPORTING YOUR CLAIMS OR RETRACT THEM. EVERY CLAIM I HAVE MADE HAS BEEN BACKED UP WITH SUPPORT. IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS, THEN WE CAN CLOSE THIS THREAD NOW AND START THE POLL...
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  6. #6
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    I really was hoping for a decent debate here. You keep making these claims and have YET to support the first one.. So I am going to ignore your claims and ask that you support or retract them. There is no need to continue a debate when the opponent refuses to support their claims.
    So support of retract...[/I]
    Ok. in this debate i will back up my thoery as well as show the gaping holes in your theory:


    Your contradiction beliefes:

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    The researchers examined evidence from the fields of psychology, neuroscience, genetics, endocrinology and evolutionary biology, and concluded that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetics and hormonal activity in the womb - and that upbringing, childhood experience and personal choice have little or no influence. ...[/I]
    Here you clearly do not support that outside influences play a part in the individuals future sexual orientation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Influencing factors may be determined more locally among sub-cultures, across sexual fields, or simply by the preferences of the individual. These preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of genetic, psychological, and cultural factors....[/I]
    Here you clearly state that the individuals preferences as underlines above play a role in his sexual orientation as well as "cultural factors" ( outside factors ).

    make up your mind. Is sexual orientation determined in the womb, or by outside factors and the "individuals preferences"?

    ----------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Homosexuality is no more a choice as heterosexuality. Yes, there are some who choose to participate in homosexual behavior/activity. I am focusing more on the attraction aspect instead of the behavior/activity. IF sexuality is a choice, then any heterosexual could "choose" to be attracted to the same sex. ......[/I]
    You have yet to prove that the individual has no choice. As i have said previously you CANNOT scientifically know 100% who will be gay. So where is the proof that shows the individual has no choice?
    All you can do is show me the potential factors responsible for influencing the individuals sexuality. You have yet to prove to me that the individual had or has no choice what so ever. You can prove that the individual had no choice in his hormone levels, brain size...etc but you cannot prove beyond reasonable doupt that those factors actually MADE him gay!


    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Well considering that the difference in the hypothalamus was different for homosexuals and heterosexuals, and the study did not find the first heterosexual with a hypothalamus the same size as the homosexuals and not the first homosexual had the same size hypothalamus as a heterosexual, then the study shows a lot there......[/I]
    "Dr. Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences
    between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men,
    offered the following criticisms of his own research, "It's
    important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that
    homosexuality is genetic
    , or find a genetic cause for being
    gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most
    common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor
    did I locate a gay center in the brain." In commenting on the
    brain and sexual behavior, Dr. Mark Breedlove, a researcher
    at the University of California at Berkeley, demonstrated
    that sexual behavior has an effect on the brain."

    "In referring to his research, Breedlove states: "These
    findings give us proof for what we theoretically know
    to be the case--that sexual experience can alter the
    structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It
    is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause
    (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain."


    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    The very fact that the AC and the SCN are not involved in the regulation of sexual behavior makes it highly unlikely that the size differences results from differences in sexual behavior. Rather the size differences came prenatally during sexual differentiation. The size and shape of the human brain is determined biologically and is impacted minutely, if at all by behavior of any kind. ......[/I]

    Did i ever say that the size of the brain determines a persons sexual orientation? Could you prove that sexual diffrenciation happens prenataly? it has been proven as seen above that outside influences and personal sexual choices do change the brain

    Could it be that the heterosexual and homosexual are both adults? If this is the case then there is plenty of evidence as shown above that actions commited by the individual shape the brain and what it will look look like as well as outside influences over the course if thier lives. As i stated befor, a person may be born with a predisposition towards homosexuality, but acting on these thoughts and feelings will change the way the brain reacts and deepen the homosexual feelings, choice by the individual will determin wether he will make steps towards homosexuality or heterosexuality. If these two men are adults then thier previous actions both sexual and none sexual will have greatly shaped the brain therfor creating the diffrences.


    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    MY theory? Is there a gene that show a person will be born blind or deaf? There does NOT have to be a specific gene that determines EVERYTHING about a person. So instead of saying my theory is a "guess", how about actually proving me wrong with actual evidence.......[/I]
    Yep, but then again there isen't a gene that proves that you are born gay.
    quote:

    "They found a concordance rate of 52 percent among
    identical twins
    , 22 percent among non-identical twins
    and a 9.2 percent among non-twins. This study provides
    support for environmental factors
    . If homosexuality were
    in the genetic code, all of the identical twins would have
    been homosexual. Prominent research team William Byne
    and Bruce Parsons, as well as psychiatrists R.
    Friedman and J. Downey, reviewed the studies linking
    biology and homosexual attraction."

    "They concluded that there was no evidence to support a
    biologic theory but rather that homosexuality could be best
    explained by an alternative model where "temperamental
    and personality traits interact with the familial and
    social milieu as the individual's sexuality emerges."


    If am i am correct you quoted from the same researchers and they themselves have admited that sexuality is a mix of tempermental and of personal personality traits that interact with the familial and secial milieu as the individuals sexality emerges.

    The study of the identical twins scientifically shows that it is not genetic. This is because they are both genetically the same right down to the way they look. 52% scientifically shows that genetics is not the cause otherwise it would be 100%. it is rather as later stated a mix of personality and tempermntal traits. Proof.
    Scientifically they are pritty much the same! what makes them diffrent is ow they react to thier surrounding etc. They where identical in the womd yet only 52% where both gay, this strongly suggests the the whole sexual orientation in the womb is not genetic as if it where concrete evidence studies would show 100% not 52%.

    "Are homosexual attractions innate? There is no support
    in the scientific research for the conclusion that
    homosexuality is biologically determined. Is
    homosexuality fixed or is it amenable to change? There
    is ample evidence that homosexual attraction can be
    diminished and that changes can be made. Particularly
    disturbing is the lack of media attention to the
    research reported in the Archives of General
    Psychiatry, which concluded that gay, lesbian, and
    bisexual people were at risk for mental illness,
    specifically suicidality, major depression, and
    anxiety disorder."

    http://takebackcanada.com/innate.html

    Isen't it funny that i have quoted the same researchers you have. The only diffrence is i have found that they have concluded that it is not innate and you seem to believe it is? Your quoting from researchers who do not even support your thoery.
    It seems to me like you pick and choose what suits your theory leaving out what does not.
    Last edited by bluepinaple; December 18th, 2010 at 09:57 AM.

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluepinaple View Post
    Your contradiction beliefes:
    Here you clearly do not support that outside influences play a part in the individuals future sexual orientation.

    Here you clearly state that the individuals preferences as underlines above play a role in his sexual orientation as well as "cultural factors" ( outside factors ).
    Maybe you are not reading the ENTIRE part there.. This is what was stated. I will underline the part you seem to be over looking.
    Influencing factors may be determined more locally among sub-cultures, across sexual fields, or simply by the preferences of the individual. These preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of genetic, psychological, and cultural factors....
    That does not contradict the other statement at all..
    make up your mind. Is sexual orientation determined in the womb, or by outside factors and the "individuals preferences"?
    The preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of GENETIC, PSYCHOLOGICAL, and CULTURAL factors..


    You have yet to prove that the individual has no choice. As i have said previously you CANNOT scientifically know 100% who will be gay. So where is the proof that shows the individual has no choice?
    I have supported that not ALL individuals choose. Your claim is that it is a choice, therefor the burden of proof for that claim lies upon you to support.. It is on your to support that sexuality is a choice..


    All you can do is show me the potential factors responsible for influencing the individuals sexuality. You have yet to prove to me that the individual had or has no choice what so ever. You can prove that the individual had no choice in his hormone levels, brain size...etc but you cannot prove beyond reasonable doupt that those factors actually MADE him gay!
    And you have YET prove me wrong.. All you have done was stated, that don;t prove anything.. I have provided support for my claim, now let's see you provide support that sexuality is a choice.

    In commenting on the
    brain and sexual behavior, Dr. Mark Breedlove, a researcher
    at the University of California at Berkeley, demonstrated
    that sexual behavior has an effect on the brain."

    "In referring to his research, Breedlove states: "These
    findings give us proof for what we theoretically know
    to be the case--that sexual experience can alter the
    structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It
    is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause
    (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain."
    You have a link for this or am I to just take your word? I would like to see more about this research.. I have already commented on LeVay's statement.

    Did i ever say that the size of the brain determines a persons sexual orientation? Could you prove that sexual diffrenciation happens prenataly? it has been proven as seen above that outside influences and personal sexual choices do change the brain
    How about actually reading what I have posted. I showed the results of research that has been done.. And since it seemed you over looked a part, it stated that preferences come about from a varity of genetics, psychological, and cultural influences.

    Could it be that the heterosexual and homosexual are both adults? If this is the case then there is plenty of evidence as shown above that actions commited by the individual shape the brain and what it will look look like as well as outside influences over the course if thier lives.
    PLenty of evidence? You pasted what ONE researcher stated without ANYTHING about the research he done, nor did you provide a link..


    As i stated befor, a person may be born with a predisposition towards homosexuality, but acting on these thoughts and feelings will change the way the brain reacts and deepen the homosexual feelings, choice by the individual will determin wether he will make steps towards homosexuality or heterosexuality. If these two men are adults then thier previous actions both sexual and none sexual will have greatly shaped the brain therfor creating the diffrences.
    I can state that the color red is really the number 2 but just stating it does not make it true..

    Yep, but then again there isen't a gene that proves that you are born gay.
    quote:

    "They found a concordance rate of 52 percent among
    identical twins
    , 22 percent among non-identical twins
    and a 9.2 percent among non-twins. This study provides
    support for environmental factors
    . If homosexuality were
    in the genetic code, all of the identical twins would have
    been homosexual. Prominent research team William Byne
    and Bruce Parsons, as well as psychiatrists R.
    Friedman and J. Downey, reviewed the studies linking
    biology and homosexual attraction."
    Seriously??? If homosexuality was innate then ALL of the twins studied would have been gay? Let's look at what the study really said...
    They examined how many of the sample population examined were gay and how many were straight. They found that 52% of MZ twins were both self-identified homosexuals, 22% of DZ twins were so, and only 5% of non-related adopted brothers were so.
    They are not saying that out of all of the twins only 52% of the twins were both gay and 48% had 1 gay and 1 hetero twin.
    This evidence, repeated and found to be true a second time, showed to the biological camp that the more closely genetically linked a pair is, the more likely they both are to exhibit gay or straight tendencies.

    The study of the identical twins scientifically shows that it is not genetic. This is because they are both genetically the same right down to the way they look. 52% scientifically shows that genetics is not the cause otherwise it would be 100%.
    Look at the information I posted very closely again.. Out of all of the twins 52% were gay and 48% was hetero.

    Scientifically they are pritty much the same! what makes them diffrent is ow they react to thier surrounding etc. They where identical in the womd yet only 52% where both gay, this strongly suggests the the whole sexual orientation in the womb is not genetic as if it where concrete evidence studies would show 100% not 52%.
    READ THE INFORMATION AGAIN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 52% were gay while 48% of the twins in the study was straight...
    "Are homosexual attractions innate? There is no support
    in the scientific research for the conclusion that
    homosexuality is biologically determined. Is
    homosexuality fixed or is it amenable to change? There
    is ample evidence that homosexual attraction can be
    diminished and that changes can be made. Particularly
    disturbing is the lack of media attention to the
    research reported in the Archives of General
    Psychiatry, which concluded that gay, lesbian, and
    bisexual people were at risk for mental illness,
    specifically suicidality, major depression, and
    anxiety disorder."

    http://takebackcanada.com/innate.html
    Regarding conversion therapy:
    The most high-profile contemporary advocates of conversion therapy tend to be conservative Christian groups and other religious organizations.[4] The main organization advocating secular forms of conversion therapy is the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), however, NARTH often partners with religious groups.[4][5]

    Isen't it funny that i have quoted the same researchers you have. The only diffrence is i have found that they have concluded that it is not innate and you seem to believe it is? Your quoting from researchers who do not even support your thoery.
    It seems to me like you pick and choose what suits your theory leaving out what does not.
    WHAT?
    From the link you provided, that is NOT what the researchers stated but someone else's INTERPRETATION of what their research said. And No, I have not picked and chose anything.

    The American Psychiatric Association states that conversion therapy is a type of psychiatric treatment "based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that a patient should change his/her sexual homosexual orientation."
    Psychologist Douglas Haldeman writes that conversion therapy comprises efforts by mental health professionals and pastoral care providers to convert lesbians and gay men to heterosexuality by techniques including aversive treatments, such as "the application of electric shock to the hands and/or genitals," and "nausea-inducing drugs...administered simultaneously with the presentation of homoerotic stimuli," masturbatory reconditioning, visualization, social skills training, psychoanalytic therapy, and spiritual interventions, such as "prayer and group support and pressure."


    I would bet that if you took the most heterosexual pastor, and you applied electric shock to his genitals that he would PRETEND to be homosexual if that's what you were aiming for, just to end the electric shock. Wow...

    Haldeman is skeptical that such stressful methods permit feelings of sexual responsiveness, and notes that Feldman defined success as suppression of homosexuality and increased capacity for heterosexual behavior.[60]
    Haldeman also discusses the covert sensitization method, which involves instructing patients to imagine vomiting or receiving electric shocks, writing that only single case studies have been conducted, and that their results cannot be generalized. He writes that behavioral conditioning studies tend to decrease homosexual feelings, but do not increase heterosexual feelings,
    Haldeman concludes that such methods applied to anyone except gay people would be called torture, writing, "Individuals undergoing such treatments do not emerge heterosexually inclined; rather they become shamed, conflicted, and fearful about their homosexual feelings."
    Haldeman writes in "Gay Rights, Patient Rights: The Implications of Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy" that aversive treatments sometimes involved the application of electric shock to the hands and/or genitals, or nausea-inducing drugs, administered simultaneously with the presentation of homoerotic stimuli, while less cruel methods included masturbatory reconditioning, visualization, and social skills training. All of these methods were based on the idea that homosexuality is a learned behavior that can be reconditioned.[7]

    Haldeman
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Facts:

    1)There is no gay gene.

    The total lack of this "Gay gene" actually answers alot of questions. It shows that there is no concrete genetic evidence to show that the individual had no CHOICE in his sexuality.
    With out the vital "gay gene" there is a major hole in the concept that homosexuality is not a choice. This is because you can only show the genetic evidence for predisposition NOT predetermination!

    You are claiming that you can pre-determin a persons sexuality. This is yet to be proven 100%. Because if you could pre-determin it 100% then this debate would be futile.

    2)You cannot 100% predict an individuals future choices, regardless of his biological makeup.

    If you cannot predict how an individual will REACT to his biological tendencies then you cannot predict that the individual will not have a choice in his sexuality. FACT. With out the gay gene you cannot say that he she does not have a CHOICE.
    There is only evidence that points towards the individual being more suseptable to being a homosexual. But with out the gay gene you cannot pedict 100%!

    It is proven that a humans choices make a diffrence in his brain structure, so as i have stated so many times before. If the individual makes choices towards homosexuality, it will have an affect on how his brain works as he will see males attractive and not females.

    (the individual may have a biological predisposition towards homosexualty, he has a CHOICE as to wether he wants to act on those tendecies or work towards heterosexuality ) why does he have a choice? because there is no gay gene, hence CHOICE ither way regardless of which sex he seems to prefer.

    If the individual takes physical steps and has sexual intercourse with another male, the homosexual identidy is deepend yet again and his brain and memory will retain and remember the plueasurable experience.

    "sexual experience can alter the
    structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It
    is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause
    (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain"

    http://takebackcanada.com/innate.html

    If sexual eperiences can altar the shape of the brain then this is a hudge indication that what the individual CHOOSES to do sexually and none sexually will have an affect on how his brain is wired and rienforce or break the predisposition the individual has.

    after all with out the "gay gene" CHOICE has to play a part. The brain changes massively over the course of a child to teen to adult life, if it has been proven that experiences change the way the brain works and sees things then the individuals CHOICES are critical! how can a person have no choice over his sexuality if it is yet to be proven that there is a gay gene but there is plenty of evidence showing that sexual and none sexual choices have an affect on the brain in turn on a persons perspective...orientation..etc

    "You can't assume that because you find a structural difference in the brain, that it was caused by genes. You don't know how the difference got there," said Breedlove."
    "The first evidence that sexual experience can create differences in neurons or cell bodies of the nervous system has been produced by a Berkeley psychology professor."
    "The structural changes were found at the base of the spinal cord in neurons that control erection and ejaculation in male rats."

    "These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case-that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it," said Marc Breedlove.


    http://berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/...19/sexexp.html

    If sexual experiences can altar the shape of the brain as well as the genes of that person, then what is to say that as i have previously mentioned, early sexual exploration, abuse, wether a child bonds with other boy...etc can also shape the individuals perception of themselves as well as thier sexual orientation..! ( contributions towards being a homosexual, not definit causes )

    Also if sexual EXPERIENCES change a persons brain, then CHOICE has everything to do with how this person will turn out ( homosexual and heterosexual ) the individual has a choice and a physical affect is created out of the choices he chooses to make regardless of how predisposition!

    Your contradiction:
    Yes you are contradiction yourself!!!!!!

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    These preferences come about as a result of a complex variety of genetic, psychological, and cultural factors....
    Here you say that the individuals preferences are shaped by genetic, phycological and cultural factors!

    I agree!!! predispositions are the only valid answer as the gay gene is so far NON EXISTANT!

    Then you said:
    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    concluded that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of genetics and hormonal activity in the womb - and that upbringing, childhood experience and personal choice have little or no influence. ....


    You are now saying that sexual orientation is predetermined in the womb....so if it is predetermined in the womb why would you say that the individuals preferences are shaped also by cultural and phycological factors? it doesn't make sense since you are CLAIMING that it is all predetermined in the womb. if sexuality is determined in the womb then what is the point in you saying that outside factors play a pert in a persons sexuality?


    "Thousands of ex-homosexuals testify of their change, and renowned Columbia University psychiatrist, Dr. Robert Spitzer, documented some of those changes. His 2003 study shows that some highly motivated individuals can change their orientation from homosexual to heterosexual through reorientation therapy.67 This is significant because Spitzer is no propagandist for the religious right. Quite the contrary—a self-described “Jewish atheist,” Spitzer was considered a hero by gay activists for getting homosexuality declassified as a mental disorder back in 1973."

    website: http://www.allaboutlove.org/homosexu...change-faq.htm

    tudy done, proof that homosexual feelings can change:

    Before treatment, 68 percent of respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual.
    Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable.
    As a group, those surveyed reported statistically significant decreases following treatment in the frequency and intensity of their homosexual thoughts, in the frequency of masturbation to gay pornography, and in the frequency of their homosexual behavior with a partner. Respondents also indicated that, as a result of treatment and sexual orientation changes, they were also improving psychologically and interpersonally.
    Of the psychotherapists surveyed, 82 percent said they believe therapy can help change unwanted homosexuality. They further indicated that on average, one-third to one-half of their patients had adopted a primarily heterosexual orientation.
    And more than 95 percent of the psychotherapists said they either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the statement that homosexual patients may be capable of changing to a heterosexual orientation.

    This proves that it is possible to change with CHOICE a homosexual can change.

    I encourage you to read more on this site as to the many changes that can and have happend for homosexuals seeking to change and lead a heterosexual lifestyle.

    website: http://www.narth.com/docs/study.html

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    I have supported that not ALL individuals choose. Your claim is that it is a choice, therefor the burden of proof for that claim lies upon you to support.. It is on your to support that sexuality is a choice..
    Umm, with all do respect, since you are saying that it is pre-determined in the womb you ARE actually saying that ALL homosexuals have NO choice. There is no gay gene or concrete 100% scientific evidence that shows that the individual has NO choice what so ever, only that the individual may be more SUSEPTABLE.
    Indeed The total LACK of envidence to support you claim that the individual has NO puts YOU firmly at a LOSS.
    It is up to you to prove that some homosexuals have NO choice, so far you haven't proven it. surely your the one who needs to support your WILD claim that some homosexuals have no choice, which may i say is yet to be proven.


    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Look at the information I posted very closely again.. Out of all of the twins 52% were gay and 48% was hetero...
    There is no gay gene. so what do you classify as them being gay? appart from them saying they are attracted to men and them having diffrent brain structures which may well have been changed by person sexual and non sexual choices towards homosexuality or heterosexuality as well as the individuals world perspective and way of dealing with situations/feeling...etc. and i have proven above that the actions of the individual change the brain structure. so diffrences in the brain could very well be due to the indivuduals CHOICES not just thier genetic makeup. once again defining GAY with NO CHOICE with NO gay gene isen't really defining it, is it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    Regarding conversion therapy:
    The most high-profile contemporary advocates of conversion therapy tend to be conservative Christian groups and other religious organizations.[4] The main organization advocating secular forms of conversion therapy is the National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH), however, NARTH often partners with religious groups.[4][5]...
    Wow. I am religious. religion plays a part in my beliefs. But so far i have NOT brought my personal religious views on to this debate.
    You may not be a christian, but trying to disqualify where i get my research and evidence from purely based on the fact that YOU THINK with you secular view that Narth is biast is very unfair.
    Thier research is SCIENTIFIC and they are highly professional.
    Please do not start to make judgements on Narth as they are widely recognised and the fact that they use some christian material is errelevant.






    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    The American Psychiatric Association states that conversion therapy is a type of psychiatric treatment "based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon the a priori assumption that a patient should change his/her sexual homosexual orientation."
    Psychologist Douglas Haldeman writes that conversion therapy comprises efforts by mental health professionals and pastoral care providers to convert lesbians and gay men to heterosexuality by techniques including aversive treatments, such as "the application of electric shock to the hands and/or genitals," and "nausea-inducing drugs...administered simultaneously with the presentation of homoerotic stimuli," masturbatory reconditioning, visualization, social skills training, psychoanalytic therapy, and spiritual interventions, such as "prayer and group support and pressure."
    ]...
    I would bet that if you took the most heterosexual pastor, and you applied electric shock to his genitals that he would PRETEND to be homosexual if that's what you were aiming for, just to end the electric shock. Wow.....[/QUOTE]

    Haldeman is skeptical that such stressful methods permit feelings of sexual responsiveness, and notes that Feldman defined success as suppression of homosexuality and increased capacity for heterosexual behavior.[60]
    Haldeman also discusses the covert sensitization method, which involves instructing patients to imagine vomiting or receiving electric shocks, writing that only single case studies have been conducted, and that their results cannot be generalized. He writes that behavioral conditioning studies tend to decrease homosexual feelings, but do not increase heterosexual feelings,
    Haldeman concludes that such methods applied to anyone except gay people would be called torture, writing, "Individuals undergoing such treatments do not emerge heterosexually inclined; rather they become shamed, conflicted, and fearful about their homosexual feelings."
    Haldeman writes in "Gay Rights, Patient Rights: The Implications of Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy" that aversive treatments sometimes involved the application of electric shock to the hands and/or genitals, or nausea-inducing drugs, administered simultaneously with the presentation of homoerotic stimuli, while less cruel methods included masturbatory reconditioning, visualization, and social skills training. All of these methods were based on the idea that homosexuality is a learned behavior that can be reconditioned.[7]

    Haldeman[/QUOTE]

  9. #9
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Facts:

    1)There is no gay gene.

    The total lack of this "Gay gene" actually answers alot of questions. It shows that there is no concrete genetic evidence to show that the individual had no CHOICE in his sexuality.
    With out the vital "gay gene" there is a major hole in the concept that homosexuality is not a choice. This is because you can only show the genetic evidence for predisposition NOT predetermination!

    You are claiming that you can pre-determin a persons sexuality. This is yet to be proven 100%. Because if you could pre-determin it 100% then this debate would be futile.

    2)You cannot 100% predict an individuals future choices, regardless of his biological makeup.

    If you cannot predict how an individual will REACT to his biological tendencies then you cannot predict that the individual will not have a choice in his sexuality. FACT. With out the gay gene you cannot say that he she does not have a CHOICE.
    There is only evidence that points towards the individual being more suseptable to being a homosexual. But with out the gay gene you cannot pedict 100%!

    It is proven that a humans choices make a diffrence in his brain structure, so as i have stated so many times before. If the individual makes choices towards homosexuality, it will have an affect on how his brain works as he will see males attractive and not females.

    (the individual may have a biological predisposition towards homosexualty, he has a CHOICE as to wether he wants to act on those tendecies or work towards heterosexuality ) why does he have a choice? because there is no gay gene, hence CHOICE ither way regardless of which sex he seems to prefer.

    If the individual takes physical steps and has sexual intercourse with another male, the homosexual identidy is deepend yet again and his brain and memory will retain and remember the plueasurable experience.

    "sexual experience can alter the
    structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It
    is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause
    (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain"

    http://takebackcanada.com/innate.html

    If sexual eperiences can altar the shape of the brain then this is a hudge indication that what the individual CHOOSES to do sexually and none sexually will have an affect on how his brain is wired and rienforce or break the predisposition the individual has.

    after all with out the "gay gene" CHOICE has to play a part. The brain changes massively over the course of a child to teen to adult life, if it has been proven that experiences change the way the brain works and sees things then the individuals CHOICES are critical! how can a person have no choice over his sexuality if it is yet to be proven that there is a gay gene but there is plenty of evidence showing that sexual and none sexual choices have an affect on the brain in turn on a persons perspective...orientation..etc

    "You can't assume that because you find a structural difference in the brain, that it was caused by genes. You don't know how the difference got there," said Breedlove."
    "The first evidence that sexual experience can create differences in neurons or cell bodies of the nervous system has been produced by a Berkeley psychology professor."
    "The structural changes were found at the base of the spinal cord in neurons that control erection and ejaculation in male rats."

    "These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case-that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it," said Marc Breedlove.


    http://berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/...19/sexexp.html

    If sexual experiences can altar the shape of the brain as well as the genes of that person, then what is to say that as i have previously mentioned, early sexual exploration, abuse, wether a child bonds with other boy...etc can also shape the individuals perception of themselves as well as thier sexual orientation..! ( contributions towards being a homosexual, not definit causes )

    Also if sexual EXPERIENCES change a persons brain, then CHOICE has everything to do with how this person will turn out ( homosexual and heterosexual ) the individual has a choice and a physical affect is created out of the choices he chooses to make regardless of how predisposition!

    Your contradiction:
    Yes you are contradiction yourself!!!!!!



    Here you say that the individuals preferences are shaped by genetic, phycological and cultural factors!

    I agree!!! predispositions are the only valid answer as the gay gene is so far NON EXISTANT!

    Then you said: [/U]

    You are now saying that sexual orientation is predetermined in the womb....so if it is predetermined in the womb why would you say that the individuals preferences are shaped also by cultural and phycological factors? it doesn't make sense since you are CLAIMING that it is all predetermined in the womb. if sexuality is determined in the womb then what is the point in you saying that outside factors play a pert in a persons sexuality?


    "Thousands of ex-homosexuals testify of their change, and renowned Columbia University psychiatrist, Dr. Robert Spitzer, documented some of those changes. His 2003 study shows that some highly motivated individuals can change their orientation from homosexual to heterosexual through reorientation therapy.67 This is significant because Spitzer is no propagandist for the religious right. Quite the contrary—a self-described “Jewish atheist,” Spitzer was considered a hero by gay activists for getting homosexuality declassified as a mental disorder back in 1973."

    website: http://www.allaboutlove.org/homosexu...change-faq.htm

    tudy done, proof that homosexual feelings can change:

    Before treatment, 68 percent of respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual.
    Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable.
    As a group, those surveyed reported statistically significant decreases following treatment in the frequency and intensity of their homosexual thoughts, in the frequency of masturbation to gay pornography, and in the frequency of their homosexual behavior with a partner. Respondents also indicated that, as a result of treatment and sexual orientation changes, they were also improving psychologically and interpersonally.
    Of the psychotherapists surveyed, 82 percent said they believe therapy can help change unwanted homosexuality. They further indicated that on average, one-third to one-half of their patients had adopted a primarily heterosexual orientation.
    And more than 95 percent of the psychotherapists said they either strongly agreed or somewhat agreed with the statement that homosexual patients may be capable of changing to a heterosexual orientation.

    This proves that it is possible to change with CHOICE a homosexual can change.

    I encourage you to read more on this site as to the many changes that can and have happend for homosexuals seeking to change and lead a heterosexual lifestyle.

    website: http://www.narth.com/docs/study.html



    Umm, with all do respect, since you are saying that it is pre-determined in the womb you ARE actually saying that ALL homosexuals have NO choice. There is no gay gene or concrete 100% scientific evidence that shows that the individual has NO choice what so ever, only that the individual may be more SUSEPTABLE.
    Indeed The total LACK of envidence to support you claim that the individual has NO puts YOU firmly at a LOSS.
    It is up to you to prove that some homosexuals have NO choice, so far you haven't proven it. surely your the one who needs to support your WILD claim that some homosexuals have no choice, which may i say is yet to be proven.


    There is no gay gene. so what do you classify as them being gay? appart from them saying they are attracted to men and them having diffrent brain structures which may well have been changed by person sexual and non sexual choices towards homosexuality or heterosexuality as well as the individuals world perspective and way of dealing with situations/feeling...etc. and i have proven above that the actions of the individual change the brain structure. so diffrences in the brain could very well be due to the indivuduals CHOICES not just thier genetic makeup. once again defining GAY with NO CHOICE with NO gay gene isen't really defining it, is it.

    __________________________________________________ ________________


    Wow. I am religious. religion plays a part in my beliefs. But so far i have NOT brought my personal religious views on to this debate.
    You may not be a christian, but trying to disqualify where i get my research and evidence from purely based on the fact that YOU THINK with you secular view that Narth is biast is very unfair.
    Thier research is SCIENTIFIC and they are highly professional.
    Please do not start to make judgements on Narth as they are widely recognised and the fact that they use some christian material is errelevant.

    I would bet that if you took the most heterosexual pastor, and you applied electric shock to his genitals that he would PRETEND to be homosexual if that's what you were aiming for, just to end the electric shock. Wow.....


    Haldeman is skeptical that such stressful methods permit feelings of sexual responsiveness, and notes that Feldman defined success as suppression of homosexuality and increased capacity for heterosexual behavior.[60]
    Haldeman also discusses the covert sensitization method, which involves instructing patients to imagine vomiting or receiving electric shocks, writing that only single case studies have been conducted, and that their results cannot be generalized. He writes that behavioral conditioning studies tend to decrease homosexual feelings, but do not increase heterosexual feelings,
    Haldeman concludes that such methods applied to anyone except gay people would be called torture, writing, "Individuals undergoing such treatments do not emerge heterosexually inclined; rather they become shamed, conflicted, and fearful about their homosexual feelings."
    Haldeman writes in "Gay Rights, Patient Rights: The Implications of Sexual Orientation Conversion Therapy" that aversive treatments sometimes involved the application of electric shock to the hands and/or genitals, or nausea-inducing drugs, administered simultaneously with the presentation of homoerotic stimuli, while less cruel methods included masturbatory reconditioning, visualization, and social skills training. All of these methods were based on the idea that homosexuality is a learned behavior that can be reconditioned.[7]

    Haldeman[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

    COULD YOU PLEASE CLEARLY EXPLAIN THE POINT YOU ARE TRYING TO MAKE FROM THE ABOVE?

  10. #10
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluepinaple View Post

    1)There is no gay gene.

    The total lack of this "Gay gene" actually answers alot of questions. It shows that there is no concrete genetic evidence to show that the individual had no CHOICE in his sexuality.
    Just because there is no 'one' gay gene does not mean that sexuality is not innate.

    You are claiming that you can pre-determin a persons sexuality. This is yet to be proven 100%. Because if you could pre-determin it 100% then this debate would be futile.
    Let's turn this around so maybe you can see the lack of logic with that..
    Sexuality being a choice has yet to be proven 100%. If it was proven 100% then this debate would be futile..

    2)You cannot 100% predict an individuals future choices, regardless of his biological makeup.
    You seem to be supporting sexual BEHAVIOR, that is not what the debate is about. Sexual BEHAVIOR is not the same as SEXUALITY..



    It is proven that a humans choices make a diffrence in his brain structure, so as i have stated so many times before. If the individual makes choices towards homosexuality, it will have an affect on how his brain works as he will see males attractive and not females.
    And what about someone that has not made any choices towards homosexuality. How do you explain the attraction then?

    (the individual may have a biological predisposition towards homosexualty, he has a CHOICE as to wether he wants to act on those tendecies or work towards heterosexuality ) why does he have a choice? because there is no gay gene, hence CHOICE ither way regardless of which sex he seems to prefer.
    Again you are talking about "behavior" not sexuality..

    If the individual takes physical steps and has sexual intercourse with another male, the homosexual identidy is deepend yet again and his brain and memory will retain and remember the plueasurable experience.
    And someone who has not taking these physical steps??


    "sexual experience can alter the
    structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. It
    is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause
    (rather than are caused by) differences in the brain"

    http://takebackcanada.com/innate.html
    I have already refuted this. I will not repeat myself when you use the same support to refute mine.

    after all with out the "gay gene" CHOICE has to play a part. The brain changes massively over the course of a child to teen to adult life, if it has been proven that experiences change the way the brain works and sees things then the individuals CHOICES are critical! how can a person have no choice over his sexuality if it is yet to be proven that there is a gay gene but there is plenty of evidence showing that sexual and none sexual choices have an affect on the brain in turn on a persons perspective...orientation..etc
    It has been proving that the hypothalamus is shaped innate..

    "The structural changes were found at the base of the spinal cord in neurons that control erection and ejaculation in male rats."
    http://berkeley.edu/news/berkeleyan/...19/sexexp.html
    This is talking about the base of the spinal cord.. Not the hypothalamus where sexual attraction comes from..

    I also find it funny that you just so happened to leave this out that you jumped over to exclude from your support there..
    FROM YOUR SITE:
    "It doesn't nullify the notion of a hereditary component in homosexuality," said Breedlove. "To my mind the scientific literature is clear: there is a genetic factor."

    Now Breedlove contradicts himself.. He says here:
    "You can't assume that because you find a structural difference in the brain, that it was caused by genes. You don't know how the difference got there," said Breedlove.

    A part of the hypothalamus, a brain structure associated with sexual appetite, is smaller in women and homosexual men than in heterosexual men. The difference might be inborn, but it could also be the result of experience, said Breedlove.


    If sexual experiences can altar the shape of the brain as well as the genes of that person, then what is to say that as i have previously mentioned, early sexual exploration, abuse, wether a child bonds with other boy...etc can also shape the individuals perception of themselves as well as thier sexual orientation..! ( contributions towards being a homosexual, not definit causes )
    As Breedlove stated.. The shape of the brain MIGHT be innate..

    Also if sexual EXPERIENCES change a persons brain, then CHOICE has everything to do with how this person will turn out ( homosexual and heterosexual ) the individual has a choice and a physical affect is created out of the choices he chooses to make regardless of how predisposition!
    Again, sexual behavior is NOT the same as sexuality..


    You are now saying that sexual orientation is predetermined in the womb....so if it is predetermined in the womb why would you say that the individuals preferences are shaped also by cultural and phycological factors? it doesn't make sense since you are CLAIMING that it is all predetermined in the womb. if sexuality is determined in the womb then what is the point in you saying that outside factors play a pert in a persons sexuality?
    I've already went over this..


    "Thousands of ex-homosexuals testify of their change, and renowned Columbia University psychiatrist, Dr. Robert Spitzer, documented some of those changes. His 2003 study shows that some highly motivated individuals can change their orientation from homosexual to heterosexual through reorientation therapy.67 This is significant because Spitzer is no propagandist for the religious right. Quite the contrary—a self-described “Jewish atheist,” Spitzer was considered a hero by gay activists for getting homosexuality declassified as a mental disorder back in 1973."
    website: http://www.allaboutlove.org/homosexu...change-faq.htm
    Good point by Dr. Spitzer. After all, if people can be talked into it, then why can’t they be talked out of it?
    Were you talked into being heterosexual? So people are homosexual or heterosexual because they were talked into it?


    As a group, those surveyed reported statistically significant decreases following treatment in the frequency and intensity of their homosexual thoughts, in the frequency of masturbation to gay pornography, and in the frequency of their homosexual behavior with a partner. Respondents also indicated that, as a result of treatment and sexual orientation changes, they were also improving psychologically and interpersonally.
    Not the first time did they mention that the frequency of masturbation to hetero porn increased.. Nor the frequency of heterosexual behavior increased.

    I
    encourage you to read more on this site as to the many changes that can and have happend for homosexuals seeking to change and lead a heterosexual lifestyle.
    website: http://www.narth.com/docs/study.html
    I did read more on that site and found this from your biased site...
    "When I realized that homosexuality was a trap," one man stated, "I turned to others for help. My therapist and our relationship provided a model for appropriate male-to-male, nonsexual relationships, and taught me about appropriate touching, bonding and expression of needs."
    Anything about his orientation changing? Nope not a word.. All it clearly shows is he was taught homosexuality was inappropriate..

    Another man wrote: "I had been involved in compulsive behavior several times a week for eight years, from the time I left home and began living on my own. I had occasional physical encounters as well. Since joining a therapy group, I've had no recurrence of compulsive masturbation, no use of phone sex or pornography, with basically no desire to participate in those behaviors. The attraction to men lingers, but every week I participate [in] the group encourages me more."
    The bold underlined says enough for that one...

    A female respondent stated: "I never expected this much recovery. My relationships with men have greatly improved--I am able to relate sexually to my husband in a way I was never able to before. I'm learning to leave the familiar protective emotions of contempt, arrogance, pseudo self-sufficiency, anger and self-indulgence behind, and practice the emotions of love instead."
    Anything about sexuality here? Nope not a word.. Just shows this woman has learned to leave some emotions behind..

    "Change is extremely difficult and requires total commitment," said a male respondent. "But I have broken the terrible power that homosexuality had over me for so long. I haven't been this light and happy since I was a child. People can and do change, and become free."
    Anything about sexuality here? Nope not a word..

    Now a little information about your biased source NARTH..
    However, a closer examination of NARTH reveals that it has long been a refuge for disreputable characters, extremists and even criminals.

    1) Dr. George Rekers is on NARTH’s Board of Directors. He is the author of numerous books including, “Shaping Your Child’ Sexual Identity” and “Growing Up Straight: What Every Family Should Know About Homosexuality.” A major anti-gay figure that used to work at University of South Carolina, Rekers is also a founder of the Family Research Council and testified as an expert witness in favor of gay adoption bans in both Arkansas and Florida.
    George A. Rekers, was discovered by the Miami New Times with a male prostitute he met on RentBoy.com.

    3) In 2006, Gerald Schoenwolf, PhD, also a member of NARTH’ “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a polemic on the group’ website that seemed to justify slavery:
    Read more on the link I post below on this part..

    4) In 2006, NARTH psychiatrist Joseph Berger, MD, a member of its “Scientific Advisory Committee,” wrote a paper encouraging students to “ridicule” gender variant children. “I suggest, indeed, letting children who wish go to school in clothes of the opposite sex–but not counseling other children to not tease them or hurt their feelings,” Dr. Berger wrote on NARTH’ website. “On the contrary, don’t interfere, and let the other children ridicule the child who has lost that clear boundary between play-acting at home and the reality needs of the outside world. Maybe, in this way, the child will re-establish that necessary boundary.”

    5) NARTH associates with known extremists. At one NARTH convention, Richard Cohen (see Cohen and Nicolosi videos below) served as a therapy trainer. Cohen once belonged to a cult that practiced nude therapy and was permanently expelled from the American Counseling Association in 2003 for malpractice. Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a NARTH therapist, has written that Prozac may cure gayness. Holocaust revisionist Scott Lively, has been a frequent contributor to NARTH’ website. Lively’ book, “The Pink Swastika” blames the holocaust on gay people. NARTH therapist Christopher Austin, (mugshot left) who taught seminars for NARTH, was convicted for sexually abusing his clients.

    6) NARTH habitually distorts research. In 2008, Dr. Lisa Diamond, University of Utah, publicly rebuked NARTH in a Truth Wins Out YouTube video. Diamond claimed that Dr. Nicolosi deliberately twisted her work for political gain. NARTH also uses outdated studies from up to 100 years ago and repackages these invalid studies as new.

    NARTH recommends “treating” males as young as three years old, referring to them as “pre-homosexual boys.”
    Now if sexuality is determined by experience, then how can a 3 yr old boy be determined as 'pre-homosexual'?

    8) Reparative therapy is not considered a legitimate and accepted form of psychological care. It is soundly rejected by every mainstream medical and mental health organization in America. The American Psychological Association says attempts to change sexual orientation can cause, “anxiety, depression and self destructive behavior. In August 2009, the American Psychological Association produced a landmark report that said, there was “no evidence” that ex-gay therapy was effective, and many cases it was linked to harm.

    11) NARTH is not a secular organization, as it often claims. For many years, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi served as a spokesperson for the far right Christian organization Focus on the Family. On CNN’ 360 Degrees with Anderson Cooper, (April 14, 2007), Nicolosi said, “We, as citizens, need to articulate God’ intent for human sexuality.” At the Feb. 10, 2007 Love Won Out conference in Phoenix, the “secular” therapist told the audience, “When we live our God-given integrity and our human dignity, there is no space for sex with a guy.”

    13) NARTH’ co-founder, Joesph Nicolosi encourages male clients to become more masculine by drinking Gatorade and referring to friends as “dude”. NARTH therapists have been known to practice rubber band therapy, where a gay client is made to wear a rubber band and snap it on his wrist when sexually stimulated. It is a mild form of aversion therapy meant to “snap” the client out of the moment of attraction. NARTH members have also been known to practice “touch therapy”, where a client sits in the therapist’ lap for up to an hour, while the therapist caresses him.
    http://www.truthwinsout.org/blog/2010/05/8608/

    It is up to you to prove that some homosexuals have NO choice, so far you haven't proven it. surely your the one who needs to support your WILD claim that some homosexuals have no choice, which may i say is yet to be proven.
    I have supported that "WILD" claim that you have yet to refute..So until you do, then you can not say they are wrong..

    Wow. I am religious. religion plays a part in my beliefs. But so far i have NOT brought my personal religious views on to this debate.
    And I have not said you have...
    You may not be a christian, but trying to disqualify where i get my research and evidence from purely based on the fact that YOU THINK with you secular view that Narth is biast is very unfair.
    I don't THINK NARTH is biased, I showed above HOW NARTH is biased..
    Thier research is SCIENTIFIC and they are highly professional.
    Please do not start to make judgements on Narth as they are widely recognised and the fact that they use some christian material is errelevant.
    They use OLD research as I showed above.. They also take new research from other scientists and twist the results to what they WANT the results to be...

    The point I was making was the success of this therapy is not successful as in the clients actually changing from homosexual to heterosexual. The homosexual feelings are just suppressed, they are not 'cured'..
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  11. #11
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Im done with this debate. My point has clearly been made.

    finished.

  12. #12
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by bluepinaple View Post
    Im done with this debate. My point has clearly been made.

    finished.
    If you are not going to continue with the debate til the end then you need to either concede or continue..
    And no, you're point has not 'clearly' been supported...
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

  13. #13
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    Quote Originally Posted by Just Me View Post
    If you are not going to continue with the debate til the end then you need to either concede or continue..
    And no, you're point has not 'clearly' been supported...
    Im sorry but i do not concede, i think alot of my points have been valid ( as have been yours ) but i no longer want to continue.
    Some of the things you said in your post where offensive and untrue and i no longer want to start having to put up with some of the things you said, i am not going to have you slander my beliefs and twist things ither.

    A debate is a debate, but you crossed the line.

  14. #14
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    34
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    I believe that we have reached the end of this debate ahead of time. I do not concede, Put the poll up and let others judge for themselves.

  15. #15
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I'm lost
    Posts
    3,026
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Just Me vs Bluepinaple: Homosexuality, is it a choice or genetics?

    MODS, please start a poll for this debate and close this thread please!!!
    Show me the government that does not infringe upon anyone's rights, and I will no longer call myself an anarchist.~Jacob Halbrooks
    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.~Benjamin Franklin
    "Go big or Go home"~ LoLo Bean

 

 

Similar Threads

  1. Amazing genetics of my family.
    By MindTrap028 in forum Shootin' the Breeze / Off-Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: August 12th, 2011, 05:47 AM
  2. Genetics/Religion
    By Turtleflipper in forum Religion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26th, 2007, 01:15 PM
  3. Developments in the Genetics of "Race"
    By chadn737 in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: January 15th, 2007, 03:14 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •