RE: Homosexuality in the News

RE: Homosexuality in the News (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> Current Events

Message

blessedhope -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/25/2006 3:14:06 PM)
quote: In any group of people you will have sub groups that are insane. Just look at the christians who play with snakes. But all homosexuality is wrong, regardless. I don't agree with the snakehandlers either, but I think some of that is a misinterpretation of the scripture RCJAMES posted above. Picking up poisonous snakes on purpose is tempting God in my opinion, and we are never to tempt God. I don't think we are to go out and look for snakes. I heard a true story of a missionary who got bit by a poisonous snake while in a foreign country and it didn't harm him at all. I think this is more what this verse is referring to.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/25/2006 6:18:23 PM)
Bishop abandoned in Africa over gay views 20:32pm 24th May 2006 The Bishop of Chelmsford and a group of clergy have been abandoned on a visit to Africa, after his liberal views on gays were discovered by the local Archbishop, it emerged today. The Rt Rev John Gladwin has been told that hospitality has been "withdrawn" by the Archdiocese of Kenya to himself and 20 other clergy because of his views about homosexuality. The bishop and his group are currently on a fortnight's visit to Kenya aimed at strengthening the 20-year links between the dioceses of Embu, Mbeere, Kirinyaga and Meru in Kenya and Chelmsford. Bishop Gladwin was named this month as one of four new patrons of Changing Attitude, the campaigning group that aims at equality of opportunity for lesbian, gay and bisexual people in the Anglican Church. The Anglican Church in Kenya is part of a group known as the "Global South" that is opposed to a liberalisation of the Anglican Church's teaching about homosexuality. The Archbishop of Kenya, the Most Rev Benjamin Nzimbi, said in a statement that the Kenyan Church was "unable to continue with advancing the lined-up activities with the diocese of Chelmsford." The Church of England group are currently in a hotel in Embu, a diocese to the north east of Nairobi, and have to stay a further week in the country before they can return to the UK. EXCERPT'S SOURCE: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=387637&in_page_id=1766&ito=1490

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/25/2006 6:22:08 PM)
MEMO TO THE ABANDONED: Jesus...don't leave home "without" him....

henny -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/25/2006 6:36:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blessedhope here is a group of homosexuals out there who actually think it is desirable and cool to have HIV. They see it as daring and living on the edge. I cannot fathom how anyone could possibly want a life threatening, infectious disease. That's so twisted. I've heard people argue that it is more of an anxiety thing, i.e. these particular groups of homosexuals are usually from innner cities and are very promiscuous so they live in a constant fear of getting HIV -so actively seeking it out in this way releaves the anxiety. Plus I think this is one area where the "gay community" bears alot of blame, as in certain parts of the country HIV has been so normalized that people see it as just an inconvenience -kind of like diabetes. So this might fool people into believing it's no big deal. quote: ORIGINAL: blessedhope Picking up poisonous snakes on purpose is tempting God in my opinion, and we are never to tempt God. I think it is tempting the snake.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 3:18:34 AM)
Guv would veto bill mandating inclusion of gays in textbooks Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Thursday, May 25, 2006 Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will veto legislation that would require public school instructional materials to contain discussions about the contributions of gay lesbian, bisexual and transgender people if the bill reaches his desk, a spokesman said Thursday. The statement from the governor, who rarely takes positions on bills until they pass the Legislature, dooms the measure which also prohibits teaching or textbooks that reflect adversely on people because of their sexual orientation. EXCERPTS SOURCE: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/05/26/GAYTEXT.TMP

blessedhope -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 1:47:51 PM)
quote: I've heard people argue that it is more of an anxiety thing, i.e. these particular groups of homosexuals are usually from innner cities and are very promiscuous so they live in a constant fear of getting HIV -so actively seeking it out in this way releaves the anxiety This was on my local news and they spoke to a man who does not live in a big city. To hear him speak, you would actually think they find this a thrill. He compared it to downhill skiing or sky diving. Actually I think it may be God giving them over to their rebrobate mind as it talks about in Romans, but I don't know. Maybe it could also be that they want to collect disability? People with HIV can receive a number of benefits or financial aid, although persoanally I still wouldn't want it.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 1:53:57 PM)
^^^Unfortunately in NYC there is a thriving unprotected sex club industry; I would not think it's God or why would he continue to raise up Christian ministries like Exxodus and even NY area churches to evangelize with love to the homosexual community ???? ...and in NYC for instance gays in general are amongst the highest paid work force, why would any sane person give up a big carreer for a small social security check & great insurance for medicaid ???

blessedhope -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 2:30:59 PM)
quote: I would not think it's God or why would he continue to raise up Christian ministries like Exxodus and even NY area churches to evangelize with love to the homosexual community ???? ...and in NYC for instance gays in general are amongst the highest paid work force, why would any sane person give up a big carreer for a small social security check & great insurance for medicaid ??? I'm a little confused about your statement that you don't think it's God which you correlated with the ministries out there. I wouldn't think anyone would want HIV just for the benefits, but I just don't understand how they can want HIV or they purposely try to get it. From the news story I heard, there are uninfected homosexuals who actually seek out a partner who has HIV. They spoke to a homosexual who is from a Midwestern city which has a population of about 200,000. They don't all have high paying jobs and great careers. Many of them have depression. They explained that having HIV to them is sort of an acceptance into the "brotherhood". I also think many of them have the misconception that HIV is now just a manageable illness like diabetes or something. Some have this idea that all you have to do is take treatment drugs and you will be ok. 2 Timothy 1:7 For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind. This verse tells me that God gives us a sound mind. I believe getting away from God or living in rebellion can give you just the opposite. The devil can blind you and confuse you.

Petula4God -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 7:31:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: henny quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God I wrote something similar to this in another thread regarding that if marriage is not defined, anyone could step up and say this IS WHAT I BELIEVE MARRIAGE IS; a person's "beliefs" regarding what marriage is could be endless (including polygamy and on and on and on). However, a poster said I was wrong. I suspect yoiu are refering to me. I'll spam my same response here since the other thread was closed. There is really no legal precedent for polygamy set according to the reasoning behind the ruling for gay marriage in Mass (the only state thus far to legalize gay marriage via the courts) as there's really no comparable basis (in the form of an existing marriage) by which polygamist can argue for "equal" treatment. Marriage as it exists legally in this country is between two people, thus while it is plausible that two men could site laws passed banning discrimination against homosexuals to argue that the country can't discriminate when it comes to marriage on the basis of gender, even if gay marriage is legalized, marriage as a legal arrangement has always been centered around 2 individuals so polygamists would still not have a very good basis to argue that they also deserve marriage. This is because there is no marriage equivalent that they could use as a basis of comparison to argue that "they" are able to marry but "we" aren't. So I don't ever see polygamy being legalized in this country via the courts. If it ever does, it would be because of legislation. Depending on how state constitutions and laws are worded (they are all different), the case for gay marriage isn't that far fetched legally in some areas as I don't think people anticipated gay marriage when the marriage laws were written and many states did not specify "gender" at all. So in most places it's more accurate to say that both sides (both anti and pro gay marriage) are attempting to legally "redefine marriage" simply because it was never really something that was defined in this way in the first place. Gay marriage also really says nothing about the right for incestuous marriage (or pedophilia as I'm sure someone will mention it at some point. There are seperate laws stating that incest and pedophilia are illegal, while sodomy is legal. If incest and pedophilia suddenly some day become legal, then they might have a legal basis but I don't see this happening anytime soon. quote: I would think The President knows more about the constitution, etc, then we do. Apparently you haven't been paying attention. [;)] You're not completely right henny. There have been anti-sodomy laws in this country for years. And also one cannot discrimate against race, religion, or gender. So, who's to say polygamist's can't win their case? There is polygamany in the Old Testament. The Book of Morman has polygamy. Don't they have rights too to define what marriage is to them also? When and how certain sodomy laws were over-turned in each state, I don't keep up on that. Yuck. Why should I focus on yucky stuff like that? I have no interest in sodomy laws from state to state. Again, why should I? However, addressing my and Bush's point, there are religons in other countries or from other countries that believe in pedophilia (too young to marry) marriages, and also their are religious books that state God didn't outlaw polygamy in the Old Testament, so why can't I have what God never condemned in the Old Testament? I've actually heard that question debated in regards to polygamy. So, what about their rights? I ask you? If they are citizens also, one could say they are being discriminated against their religion. So, yes, I've been paying attention. And, apparantly so has Bush and all the other politicians. I just needed to get caught up. [;)]

Hiker02 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 8:23:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: brooklynsblessed1 Guv would veto bill mandating inclusion of gays in textbooks Greg Lucas, Chronicle Sacramento Bureau Thursday, May 25, 2006 Sacramento -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will veto legislation that would require public school instructional materials to contain discussions about the contributions of gay lesbian, bisexual and transgender people if the bill reaches his desk, a spokesman said Thursday. The statement from the governor, who rarely takes positions on bills until they pass the Legislature, dooms the measure which also prohibits teaching or textbooks that reflect adversely on people because of their sexual orientation. "The issue for the governor is he is not supportive of the Legislature micro-managing curriculum," said Adam Mendelsohn, the GOP governor's communications director. "California has an 18-member standards board that is a national model for looking at curriculum," Mendelsohn said. "The governor just believes it's not the Legislature's job to determine curriculum." I totally agree with Arnold. When you start focusing on certain issues you are classifying them into different levels of importance which I feel is wrong. Schools should simply focus on teaching students the "golden rule" and not on what ever issue seems to be most important at the time.

henny -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 9:30:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God And also one cannot discrimate against race, religion, or gender. When it comes to the law, though, it has to be placed into context, here being marriage. They have the right to define what marriage is to them, but they lack the legal precadent to argue on the basis of "equality" that the government should recognize their marriages in a civil manner as well. They would have only a very flimsy legal basis to claim discrimination when it comes to marriage simply because no marriage analogous to theirs exists where they could argue that "they" marry but "we" can't. There's also an important distinction between "homosexuality" and "religion" that has to be considered. Whether you agree or disagree with it, it is becoming the popular notion both in our culture and in law, that homosexuality is an inborn trait similar to skin color. So there is legal precedent in certain areas to treat it like "race" and not like "religion" -Mass. was one of those areas. Which is why it depends so much on individual states. I don't think it would be very likely to enable gay marriage via the courts in a state like, say, Arkansas. quote: So, who's to say polygamist's can't win their case? Who's to say a meteor won't crash into the earth and kill us all tomorrow? What's your point? quote: When and how certain sodomy laws were over-turned in each state, I don't keep up on that. Yuck. Why should I focus on yucky stuff like that? I have no interest in sodomy laws from state to state. Again, why should I? Um, because you are posting on a forum about it. But to bring you up to date: all anti-sodomy laws were overturned by the supreme court a few years ago as they were seen as a violation of privacy (although anti-sodomy laws didn't just cover homosexuality, but also heterosexuality. So techinically married heterosexuals who engaged in the acts banned by them -in some areas this included not only sodomy, but also oral sex- were breaking the law as well). quote: If they are citizens also, one could say they are being discriminated against their religion. One could say that, but it wouldn't fly in court. Discrimination is based on the absence of equality, not on the failure of the government to adopt or reward any one groups religious beliefs. They should be free to practice religious beliefs within the bounds of the law (i.e. no human sacrifices, etc), but that's different than making religious beliefs into civil/legal contracts.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 9:45:03 PM)
^^^Arkansas, gay marriage and partner benefit grabs don't even have support in places like NY, once likened to Sodom...which to me is militant San Francisco... NOTE: As liberal as many NY pols are, we have no gay marriage bill ever passed or in the pipe. I LOVE NY ! (EXCERPT: ) Top N.Y. Court Axes Domestic Partner Law The Associated Press Tuesday, February 14, 2006; 3:19 PM ALBANY, N.Y. -- The state's highest court on Tuesday invalidated an anti-discrimination law for domestic partners that the New York City Council had passed by overriding a veto from Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The 2004 Equal Benefits Law required the city to do business only with contractors and property owners that agreed to provide the same benefits for the domestic partners of employees as they did for the spouses of employees. Bloomberg refused to enforce the law but was ordered to do so by a judge after the council sued, arguing that his refusal to carry out the law had upset the separation of powers. An appeals court overturned that ruling, saying the city statute conflicted with competitive bidding requirements in state law. Attorney Steven Holley, who represented the council, said it wasn't clear if the council had any remaining avenues for appeal.

Petula4God -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/26/2006 9:48:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: henny quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God And also one cannot discrimate against race, religion, or gender. When it comes to the law, though, it has to be placed into context, here being marriage. They have the right to define what marriage is to them, but they lack the legal precadent to argue on the basis of "equality" that the government should recognize their marriages in a civil manner as well. They would have only a very flimsy legal basis to claim discrimination when it comes to marriage simply because no marriage analogous to theirs exists where they could argue that "they" marry but "we" can't. There's also an important distinction between "homosexuality" and "religion" that has to be considered. Whether you agree or disagree with it, it is becoming the popular notion both in our culture and in law, that homosexuality is an inborn trait similar to skin color. So there is legal precedent in certain areas to treat it like "race" and not like "religion" -Mass. was one of those areas. Which is why it depends so much on individual states. I don't think it would be very likely to enable gay marriage via the courts in a state like, say, Arkansas. quote: So, who's to say polygamist's can't win their case? Who's to say a meteor won't crash into the earth and kill us all tomorrow? What's your point? quote: When and how certain sodomy laws were over-turned in each state, I don't keep up on that. Yuck. Why should I focus on yucky stuff like that? I have no interest in sodomy laws from state to state. Again, why should I? Um, because you are posting on a forum about it. But to bring you up to date: all anti-sodomy laws were overturned by the supreme court a few years ago as they were seen as a violation of privacy (although anti-sodomy laws didn't just cover homosexuality, but also heterosexuality. So techinically married heterosexuals who engaged in the acts banned by them -in some areas this included not only sodomy, but also oral sex- were breaking the law as well). quote: If they are citizens also, one could say they are being discriminated against their religion. One could say that, but it wouldn't fly in court. Discrimination is based on the absence of equality, not on the failure of the government to adopt or reward any one groups religious beliefs. They should be free to practice religious beliefs within the bounds of the law (i.e. no human sacrifices, etc), but that's different than making religious beliefs into civil/legal contracts. Polygamists say it's in their "nature", too. It's the way they were born. They think no one can be monogamous. It's not in our "nature". I think I take the governments side on this one.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 5:32:17 AM)
^^^Unfortunately FORD MOTOR has even got more self-destructive by cosponsoring The Advocate, a gay magazine that on it's front cover seen on AFA via link (not allowed to be posted) supports not only marriage between a man & a man or a woman & a woman--But polygamy..the radicals & their demonic allies are trying to take America down a very dangerous path... AFA, 20 Other Pro-Family Organizations Call For One-Year Boycott of Ford Motor Company American Family Association, along with 18 other pro-family organizations, has called for a one-year boycott of Ford Motor Company. The boycott was called after Ford reneged on an agreement with American Family Association to stop funding homosexual groups which promote homosexual marriage. Ford could have easily avoided this boycott had they desired to do so by simply remaining neutral in the cultural battles. Leaders of 44 pro-family groups urged Ford not to take sides, but to remain neutral. However, Ford rejected the plea of the leaders and publicly announced their continued support of the homosexual groups. The hundreds of thousands of dollars Ford gives to homosexual groups allows the groups to pay their fixed expenses with funds given by Ford while using other funds in promoting the legalization of homosexual marriage. AFA Chairman Donald E. Wildmon says that complaints about the boycott from dealers and others should go to chairman Bill Ford at Ford Motor Company, not to AFA. AFA tried every avenue open to get Ford to stop their promotion of homosexuality. Ford was adamant that they would not remain neutral in the homosexual cultural debate. AFA has mailed to 2,200 Ford dealers information on the background and reason for the boycott. Ford’s commitment to the homosexual agenda was summarized by the Detroit Free Press: “Ford Motor Company, led by Chairman Bill Ford, donates hundreds of thousands of dollars to homosexual groups, sponsors gay pride parades and holds mandatory diversity training for employees…" Ford has every right to give hundreds of thousands of dollars to groups promoting homosexual marriage. But those who oppose homosexual marriage have every right not to buy automobiles made by Ford Motor Company. In May, 2005, AFA called for a boycott of Ford products. However, when AFA was approached by a dealer in the Dallas/Fort Worth area, a meeting between AFA representatives and several Ford dealers was held. At that meeting the dealers asked that AFA suspend the boycott for six months to give them time to see what they could do to avoid the boycott. AFA agreed to the suspension and agreed to work with the dealers and Ford. Over the next six months, AFA met with three representatives from Ford on three different occasions after the boycott was suspended. Representing Ford in the discussions were Ziad Ojakli, Group Vice President, Corporate Affairs; David Leitch, Senior Vice President and General Counsel; and Jerry Reynolds, a Ford dealer from the Dallas area. At the last meeting on Nov. 28, here is what Ford and AFA agreed on: Ford would not renew current promotions or create future incentives that give cash donations to homosexual organizations based on the purchase of a vehicle. Ford would not make corporate donations to homosexual organizations that, as part of their activities, engage in political or social campaigns to promote civil unions or same-sex marriage. Ford would stop giving cash and vehicle donations or endorsements to homosexual social activities such as Gay Pride parades. Ford would cease all advertising in homosexual websites and media outlets (magazines, television, radio) in the U.S. with the exception of $100,000 to be used by Volvo. The Volvo ads would be the same ads used in the general media and not aimed at the homosexual community specifically. After this agreement was made, several homosexual groups complained to Ford. Ford invited leaders from those groups to a meeting. After being told by the homosexual groups that the agreement between Ford and AFA was unacceptable to the homosexual groups, Ford Chairman Bill Ford reneged on the AFA/Ford agreement and caved in to the demands of the homosexuals. To appease the homosexuals, Ford announced that ALL their brands, not just a few, would support the homosexual media with advertising. The homosexual leaders also demanded, and got, a letter from Ford stating that Ford would continue their strong support of the homosexual groups. All the homosexual groups which receive financial support from Ford have the legalization of homosexual marriage as the top item on their agenda. To understand the depth of Ford’s support for the homosexual groups, one has only to look at Ford’s forcing their employees to attend “diversity training” classes. In these classes, the employees are captive as homosexuals lecture the employees on the acceptance of homosexuality. Ford does not allow any other view of homosexuality to be presented in the “diversity training” courses. There is no “diversity” in the classes. The only view presented as being acceptable is that of the homosexual activists. To counter the pro-family boycott, homosexuals have begun a “buycott” of Ford made automobiles. The success of the boycott will be determined by which group—homosexuals or pro-family—are able to get the most people to support their efforts. The homosexuals have shown that they are dedicated to their cause of homosexual marriage. It remains to be seen if pro-family people are as dedicated to their cause. UPDATE: To show those supporting traditional marriage they mean business, Ford sponsored the June 6 issue of the homosexual publication The Advocate. The cover reads: "Polygamy & Gay Men. Dirty laundry or sexual freedom? How gay men handle multiple partners." The article promotes homosexual polygamy. Ford sponsored the publication with a full page back cover advertising Ford Motor company product Volvo and a full page ad for all Ford brands with the line: "Ford Motor Company. Standing strong with America's families and communities."

SonInMe1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 8:00:03 AM)
quote: it is becoming the popular notion both in our culture and in law, that homosexuality is an inborn trait similar to skin color. Its not factual though. No scientific evidence anywhere suggests a gay gene.

Who-So-Ever -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 11:01:04 AM)
I was considering posting a message in this forum but I was concerned that I would receive a: " *********** Admin's Note: Please do not use our Community to in any way promote or advocate the acceptability of same-sex unions/marriage, homosexual activity, or homosexual adoption rights. ] *********** " Am I to understand that this "forum" does not allow for differing points of view? forum. 1. A public place or marketplace in an ancient Roman city. 2. A public meeting place, radio or TV program, or area in a newspaper or computer bulletin board in which two or more people may openly discuss ideas. If I offer a interpretation of homosexually from a Christian perspective that is different from others here, will it be removed?? WhoSoEver

ta_mosquito -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 11:16:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Who-So-Ever I was considering posting a message in this forum but I was concerned that I would receive a: " *********** Admin's Note: Please do not use our Community to in any way promote or advocate the acceptability of same-sex unions/marriage, homosexual activity, or homosexual adoption rights. ] *********** " Am I to understand that this "forum" does not allow for differing points of view? forum. 1. A public place or marketplace in an ancient Roman city. 2. A public meeting place, radio or TV program, or area in a newspaper or computer bulletin board in which two or more people may openly discuss ideas. If I offer a interpretation of homosexually from a Christian perspective that is different from others here, will it be removed?? WhoSoEver It depends. I would suggest emailing it to the administrator at community@salemwebnetwork.com and getting his viewpoint before posting it. I would also suggest reading the Range of Doctrines (link at the bottom of each forums page), the section about homosexuality. That might clear it up for you. Thanks! Tricia Forums Moderator Please do not reply to this message within the Community. Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns. Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 2:30:47 PM)
There has not been alot of good news lately for those attacking traditional marriage. Even in liberal Spain, judges are denying i.e. gay nups for those that may have benefit grab as a motive. See brief @: http://www.typicallyspanish.com/news/publish/article_4443.shtml (No full article published)

Kath -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/27/2006 4:32:38 PM)
Who-So-Ever Please email community@salemwebnetwork.com concerning your account. Please do not post until you have received a reply from community management. Sincerely, Kath Volunteer Assistant Administrator Please do not reply to this message within the Community. Please email Community@salemwebnetwork.com with questions, comments, or concerns. Please do not send me PMs regarding this message.

brooklynsblessed1 -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/28/2006 5:26:23 AM)
US Churches Asked To Speak On Gay Marriage June 4th: SEE: http://www.wdcmedia.com/newsArticle.php?ID=1197

tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 12:16:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SonInMe1 quote: it is becoming the popular notion both in our culture and in law, that homosexuality is an inborn trait similar to skin color. Its not factual though. No scientific evidence anywhere suggests a gay gene. There is no genetic evidence, no, and even if it is ever proven that homosexuality is part of the genetic makeup, it will never be as simple as being caused by a single "gay gene". There is scientific evidence that gay and straight brains are physically different, and that sexual identity can begin to form very early in life (whether from nature or nurture is still undecided). Oops - forgot to say that there is recent research that hints the cause of homosexuality might be hormonal. It has been observered statistically that for every older brother you have, you are 33% more likely to be gay (if you are male). The theory is that the cause could be related to the way the mother's body reacts to the present of a male fetus, especially if she has had boys before.

henny -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 3:49:55 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God Polygamists say it's in their "nature", too. It's the way they were born. They think no one can be monogamous. It's not in our "nature". I've heard serial monogomists (Read: the majority of the population) and swingers use this argument, but I've never heard polygamists use it. Usually polygamy is tied to some form of fundamentalist religion (i.e. Mormonism or Islam) so they have very strict rules governing sex, and it usually isn't a free for all orgy where sex is OK because it is "in our nature." I would imagine the majority of modern practicing polygamists are more "up tight" about sex than most of the people on this forum. quote: ORIGINAL: SonInMe1 Its not factual though. No scientific evidence anywhere suggests a gay gene. The gay gene has been refuted by just about everyone, pro and anti gay. This forum is the only place I hear it brought up anymore. Now it's all about hormones in pre-natal development.

Petula4God -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 7:30:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: henny quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God Polygamists say it's in their "nature", too. It's the way they were born. They think no one can be monogamous. It's not in our "nature". I've heard serial monogomists (Read: the majority of the population) and swingers use this argument, but I've never heard polygamists use it. Usually polygamy is tied to some form of fundamentalist religion (i.e. Mormonism or Islam) so they have very strict rules governing sex, and it usually isn't a free for all orgy where sex is OK because it is "in our nature." I would imagine the majority of modern practicing polygamists are more "up tight" about sex than most of the people on this forum. quote: ORIGINAL: SonInMe1 Its not factual though. No scientific evidence anywhere suggests a gay gene. The gay gene has been refuted by just about everyone, pro and anti gay. This forum is the only place I hear it brought up anymore. Now it's all about hormones in pre-natal development. Yes, that is what YOU'VE heard. It sounds to me by all your posts henny you are an advocate of homosexual marriage. Is this a correct assumption?

tacitus -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 3:59:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God Yes, that is what YOU'VE heard. Well, it's a fact that the more older brothers you have, the more likely it is (if you are a male) that you will be gay. The statistics prove it (rather strikingly). One proposed hypothesis is that it is caused by hormonal imbalances in the interation between the fetus and the mother while still in the womb. There may be others.

Petula4God -> RE: Homosexuality in the News (5/29/2006 4:15:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tacitus quote: ORIGINAL: Petula4God Yes, that is what YOU'VE heard. Well, it's a fact that the more older brothers you have, the more likely it is (if you are a male) that you will be gay. The statistics prove it (rather strikingly). One proposed hypothesis is that it is caused by hormonal imbalances in the interation between the fetus and the mother while still in the womb. There may be others. uhhhhhhhhhhh, Actually, how would you explain a friend I had, the eldest brother saying he was gay, died at 27 from complications of AIDS; younger brothers definately NOT gay.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI