RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri

RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/2/2015 10:22:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal That depends whether they're actual transsexuals, or just using that as a pretense to sneak into the women's restroom. Or do you really not believe that teenage boys don't try to find ways of getting into the girls locker room? I mean they made an entire series of movies about that... I assume you remember the "Porky's" trilogy? Thats my point as well, hell all they gotta do is wear a dress then claim to be a lesbian!!! Then flunk every year so they could party long time!

Real0ne -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/2/2015 10:33:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin?

CreativeDominant -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 12:32:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin? And this leads us right back to the scientific fact that there is nothing in a person's genetic makeup that indicates they were born gay. That's not to say it won't be found someday. Someday, it may be found that there is a physiological reason behind the "feeling" that someone is trapped in the wrong-sex body. But right now...scientifically (which somehow seems less important in these discussions than it does in discussions of say, global warming)...there is no proof that gay is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, transgender is anything more than a feeling.

Thegunnysez -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 4:11:06 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal That depends whether they're actual transsexuals, or just using that as a pretense to sneak into the women's restroom. Or do you really not believe that teenage boys don't try to find ways of getting into the girls locker room? I mean they made an entire series of movies about that... I assume you remember the "Porky's" trilogy? Thats my point as well, hell all they gotta do is wear a dress then claim to be a lesbian!!! Then flunk every year so they could party long time! Just how does that work? How do they enroll in school? Do you think that children enroll themselves in school? Wouldn't the parents be pretty aware of their childs behavior? There would also be doctors involved. I have mentioned already how much is involved in just gettig a wheel chair approved. How many years do you think a student could stay in high school by flunking. Could they pull it off till they were 40? I am unaware of any school that would do as you claim.

tweakabelle -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 9:49:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin? And this leads us right back to the scientific fact that there is nothing in a person's genetic makeup that indicates they were born gay. That's not to say it won't be found someday. Someday, it may be found that there is a physiological reason behind the "feeling" that someone is trapped in the wrong-sex body. But right now...scientifically (which somehow seems less important in these discussions than it does in discussions of say, global warming)...there is no proof that gay is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, transgender is anything more than a feeling. well what about the accounts of the people concerned? Don't they carry any weight with you? Apparently not. Though the logical consequence of your position is that whole modern sexual rights movement is delusory, which will be news to the people that are part of the movement, the people that have benefited from the movement and even many of the bigots that want to destroy the movement. However if your position has any validity (and I'm not saying it has) then equally there is no proof that heterosexuality is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, gender is anything more than a feeling. Not sure that's a position I would like to have to defend .....

Thegunnysez -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 10:07:38 AM)
Ptolemy's geocentric theory prevailed for 1400 years. How long will this premis prevail?

CreativeDominant -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 10:13:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin? And this leads us right back to the scientific fact that there is nothing in a person's genetic makeup that indicates they were born gay. That's not to say it won't be found someday. Someday, it may be found that there is a physiological reason behind the "feeling" that someone is trapped in the wrong-sex body. But right now...scientifically (which somehow seems less important in these discussions than it does in discussions of say, global warming)...there is no proof that gay is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, transgender is anything more than a feeling. well what about the accounts of the people concerned? Don't they carry any weight with you? Apparently not. Though the logical consequence of your position is that whole modern sexual rights movement is delusory, which will be news to the people that are part of the movement, the people that have benefited from the movement and even many of the bigots that want to destroy the movement. However if your position has any validity (and I'm not saying it has) then equally there is no proof that heterosexuality is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, gender is anything more than a feeling. Not sure that's a position I would like to have to defend ..... Actually, there IS no genetic proof of heterosexuality either. Much like homosexuality and the 'gay' gene, science is still trying to find the 'straight' gene. Right now, the best science can come up with is that sexual orientation occurs due to a combination of genetic factors, prenatal hormones, brain structure, uterine environment. Some studies suggest that the amount of masculinization of the brain that takes place during gestation is what leads to straight men and women and gay men and women. Other studies add in such outside factors as maternal stress, drugs, etc.. Some studies suggest that the preponderance of straight men and women...with their necessarily complimentary reproductive systems ...indicates heterosexuality is what nature intended to ensure survival of the species.

CreativeDominant -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 10:17:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin? And this leads us right back to the scientific fact that there is nothing in a person's genetic makeup that indicates they were born gay. That's not to say it won't be found someday. Someday, it may be found that there is a physiological reason behind the "feeling" that someone is trapped in the wrong-sex body. But right now...scientifically (which somehow seems less important in these discussions than it does in discussions of say, global warming)...there is no proof that gay is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, transgender is anything more than a feeling. well what about the accounts of the people concerned? Don't they carry any weight with you? Apparently not. Though the logical consequence of your position is that whole modern sexual rights movement is delusory, which will be news to the people that are part of the movement, the people that have benefited from the movement and even many of the bigots that want to destroy the movement. However if your position has any validity (and I'm not saying it has) then equally there is no proof that heterosexuality is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, gender is anything more than a feeling. Not sure that's a position I would like to have to defend ..... Actually, there IS no genetic proof of heterosexuality either. Much like homosexuality and the 'gay' gene, science is still trying to find the 'straight' gene. Right now, the best science can come up with is that sexual orientation occurs due to a combination of genetic factors, prenatal hormones, brain structure, uterine environment. Some studies suggest that the amount of masculinization of the brain that takes place during gestation is what leads to straight men and women and gay men and women. Other studies add in such outside factors as maternal stress, drugs, etc.. Some studies suggest that the preponderance of straight men and women...with their necessarily complimentary reproductive systems ...indicates heterosexuality is what nature intended to ensure survival of the species. Again though, these are all theories.

Thegunnysez -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 10:20:52 AM)
quote: Actually, there IS no genetic proof of heterosexuality either. Much like homosexuality and the 'gay' gene, science is still trying to find the 'straight' gene. Right now, the best science can come up with is that sexual orientation occurs due to a combination of genetic factors, prenatal hormones, brain structure, uterine environment. quote: Some studies suggest that the amount of masculinization of the brain that takes place during gestation is what leads to straight men and women and gay men and women. Other studies add in such outside factors as maternal stress, drugs, etc.. This is quite a bit different that the previous post. quote: Some studies suggest that the preponderance of straight men and women...with their necessarily complimentary reproductive systems ...indicates heterosexuality is what nature intended to ensure survival of the species. [/qoute] Do you think "nature intended" that all should be hetrosexual to maintain the survival of the specie or is nature smart enough to figgure out that few single digit percentage of non hetrosexual would have no negative impact on the survival of the specie?

kdsub -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 11:01:28 AM)
Here is a PBS frontline article that will answer all your questions about genes and homosexuality in science today... The bottom line of this article is they still just do not know....but I'm sure you do. Butch

joether -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 12:10:53 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Joe the main as in primary educator of a child is the parent, certainly not the state and thankfully not you. Sorry joe but anyone who tries to argue law using rhetoric rather than facts scares the hell out of me. Unfortunately for your argument, this is not about a home school child but one in a public school. Whom decides the processes that take place are the school's, the location it is in, the state, and the federal government. Parents have rights for THEIR CHILDREN. Not to dictate terms to someone else's kid. You do not like the facts as I presented them. Tough Shit! They are the facts. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne No Joe, its NOT about other parents hating the kid, its about other parents protecting their religious beliefs. the religious beliefs they and the churches teach their kids and to bring them up within their respective religions, not force them to watch some kid in a dress with a cock play around in the ladies room. Please point out in the Holy Bible......WHERE......it allows adults to be mean, hateful, ignorant, assholes towards a small child looking to get an education? Go ahead, I want to hear the bullshit. Religious freedom does not protect nor allow you to do things that break laws. Even though virgin sacrifices might be in your religion, they are NOT allowed within the United States of America. These people are ignorant fucktards. They believe gay people are an abomination to God. Unfortunately they have not prove God exists. Therefore much of the bible is just bullshit. Likewise, its also been known for psuedo-christians (which these people are) to ignore parts of the Holy Bible because they are inconvenient for one reason or another. How many of them work on 'the day of rest'? Because the bible says those who do should be stoned to death. Shouldn't they have already stoned all the police, EMTs, and fire fighters to death by now? Its called 'religious bullshit', RealOne! The transgender is in a PUBLIC SCHOOL. That means.....ANY.....child whom does not have very restricting problems (physical, mental, emotional, legal) can go there and be treated the same as anyone else. In this case, the transgender child identifies themselves as female. So how do we treat female students as it concerns the bathrooms? They go to the female bathrooms. The reason why we segregate children into separate bathrooms is because their brains have not developed to handle uni-sex bathrooms. They lack maturity due to age. Unlike these pseudo-christians that lack maturity due to their religious bullshit! quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne You have that too completely conflated for some reason or are you just trying to spin it under hate rather than religion? Oh? Its 'OK' for the religion to hate towards others; but if others hate towards the religion its not 'OK'? Since MANY conservatives hate Islam. Therefore your argument is bullshit both ways! This subject is....ALL ABOUT HATRED.... For you to deny that reality shows the lengths you will go. Therefore, undermining your credibility. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Its education outside the purview of state and is protected under the reservation of right to exercise their religion of THEIR choice Joe, NOT yours or the state or some atheist. Do they accept funding from the state? The Federal Government? Yes. And Yes. Therefore, both the state and federal government can choose at their discretion to withhold funding. In the case that it is proved in court that a bunch of people withheld a US Citizens's rights as they apply to a public school and learning environment....WILL...withhold the funds until things are corrected. How long can that school survive without state and federal funding? Their religious rights end where that little girl's rights begins. That little girl's rights end where theirs starts. Since we are all equal under the law; therefore, the metaphorical distance between her rights and anyone of their rights, is the same. In fact, the spirit of the constitution serves to protect the minority from mob rule. If that is still true, then even though there might be many hateful pseudo-christians, her rights are not nullified because they outnumber her 330+ to 1. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne Yes I know Joe, you could throew a lot of rhetorical arguments around, but the problem is when you are called out on the carpet only to abandon the debate because you have no bullets in your imaginary gun. I dont need to throw rhetorical arguments when I have the facts and evidence on my side! You are often the one, RealOne, whom throws out rhetorical arguments in your posts. This is your latest batch that I'm clearly destroying. Frankly I have more ammunition than several Hive Worlds can produce for a Chapter! Lets see if you can figure out the literature reference I'm making here.... quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne So the moral of your story is to teach them not to follow the footsteps of the US government, nice oxymoron. Really? The US Government should not protect....ALL people under its control.....but only those deemed 'approved' by the state? If that is true, you have no concept or understanding of the US Constitution or....WHY....it was created to perform. The pseudo-christians are allowed their 1st amendment rights to 'sue the government over grievances'. However, their 'grievances' are simply masquerading around to hide the hate speech. They are pissed off that most people with a brain and education see straight through their bullshit. Most judges worth their weight in antihydrogen will see right through the bullshit for what it is, and allow the child to use the girl's bathroom. quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne I suppose you didnt not know that America put hitler in business in the first place and supported hitlers infrastructure throughout the war then put hitlers scientists on the staff, which is the only thing in your whole post that I could actually agree with at least on some level. Nah then again not, had you said stalin yeh[/color] Seeing as Hitler was a GERMAN BORN citizen; its impossible that he could have run America from the White House. I think FDR would have had something to say about that! Nor if he was Speaker of the House; to which many people would have a problem with given history. Frankly, Hitler has a better chance, now, within the Tea Party of getting elected to public office. His closest 'ally' would be none other than Sen. Ted Cruz! BTW, what does Hitler or Stalin have to do with this thread? That would be more of your rhetorical bullshit on display. Yeah, 'lack of a serious, solid, and real argument' undermines you RealOne.

joether -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 12:17:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal The thing that really bugs me is that at some point, some sexual predator of a boy is going to figure out all he needs to do to get access to the girl's locker room and bathroom (possibly even with a camera) is to put on a wig and scream "bigot!" at anyone who questions him. This IS the sort of thing that crosses the mind of immature teenage males. Eventually it WILL happen - and with the blessing of the local school board as well. Perhaps that's even what is happening here. Not every boy who claims he identifies as a girl will actually be who he claims to be. What if this had been an option for Josh Duggar? well if a little boy who put on a dress really and truly was a little girl then it would be proven if he were pining to get into the mens room since girls at that age are most often (not always) are attracted to and play with boys!!!! I don't think it's possible to truly know what's going on in an individual's head. No doubt there are girls using those girls rooms that the other girls wouldn't want to share with if they knew what they were thinking. Still, as I said, some teenaged boy IS going to take advantage of this - it's a matter of when, not if. And he's going to make a lot of transgender activists look really naive. Not likely given that transgender individuals (or those that suspect they are) would be sent to a therapist for an evaluation. And those evaluations are VERY long processes. Taking several months to define. Often it is not just one therapist they see. Likely also, that individual will be monitored by other therapists via video to determine the genuine article of transgender from 'those that would lie just to get into the girls bathroom'. In fact, most transgender children whom are not in heavily religious repressing households will state they have problems with gender long before there is even a sexual component. To which the parents; if they are intelligent, send them to a therapist whom has a vast amount of experience, study, and skill. To which if the therapists is of even average skill, will help the parents in understanding their child. What steps could and can be taken in their development to adulthood.

Kirata -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 12:50:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Here is a PBS frontline article that will answer all your questions about genes and homosexuality in science today... A book review from the July 1995 issue of The New York Review of Books? Yeah, I don't think so. K.

joether -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 1:05:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Here is a PBS frontline article that will answer all your questions about genes and homosexuality in science today... A book review from the July 1995 issue of The New York Review of Books? Yeah, I don't think so. Then let's give you some REAL reading material. If you do not like reading it online, you can get the book from Amazon or your local bookstore.

TheCabal -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 2:14:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal The thing that really bugs me is that at some point, some sexual predator of a boy is going to figure out all he needs to do to get access to the girl's locker room and bathroom (possibly even with a camera) is to put on a wig and scream "bigot!" at anyone who questions him. This IS the sort of thing that crosses the mind of immature teenage males. Eventually it WILL happen - and with the blessing of the local school board as well. Perhaps that's even what is happening here. Not every boy who claims he identifies as a girl will actually be who he claims to be. What if this had been an option for Josh Duggar? well if a little boy who put on a dress really and truly was a little girl then it would be proven if he were pining to get into the mens room since girls at that age are most often (not always) are attracted to and play with boys!!!! I don't think it's possible to truly know what's going on in an individual's head. No doubt there are girls using those girls rooms that the other girls wouldn't want to share with if they knew what they were thinking. Still, as I said, some teenaged boy IS going to take advantage of this - it's a matter of when, not if. And he's going to make a lot of transgender activists look really naive. Not likely given that transgender individuals (or those that suspect they are) would be sent to a therapist for an evaluation. And those evaluations are VERY long processes. Taking several months to define. Often it is not just one therapist they see. Likely also, that individual will be monitored by other therapists via video to determine the genuine article of transgender from 'those that would lie just to get into the girls bathroom'. In fact, most transgender children whom are not in heavily religious repressing households will state they have problems with gender long before there is even a sexual component. To which the parents; if they are intelligent, send them to a therapist whom has a vast amount of experience, study, and skill. To which if the therapists is of even average skill, will help the parents in understanding their child. What steps could and can be taken in their development to adulthood. Given that Lila decided that she was a girl less than a year ago, clearly there hasn't been sufficient time to determine whether or not she is, in fact, a girl and not just a boy pretending to be one. Prior to that he was living as a gay male. That's really the whole problem with this in a High School. These kids are still exploring their sexuality. Many aren't even sexually active. For those who are going through gender identity issues, they don't even know themselves well enough to sort it out, let alone getting someone else to figure it out for them. At 17, they haven't had the time or the opportunity to explore their sexuality enough to know.

TheCabal -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 2:24:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: ORIGINAL: CreativeDominant quote: ORIGINAL: Real0ne quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub quote: I don't know that we "understand more" I think we are understanding more... or at least believing it. By that I mean for a very long time many people believed homosexuality was a choice...a deviation of nature only followed by less moral people. Like I said this is now understood to be bullshit. The actual trigger in the brain or genetics is still not known but it is not a choice..at least that is becoming the popular belief...In my opinion. Butch Yeh its pretty well known the gay gene excuse is bullshit! [8\|] 8 major studies of identital twins prove homosexuality Is NOT genetic Eight major studies of identical twins in Australia, the U.S., and Scandinavia during the last two decades all arrive at the same conclusion: gays were not born that way. Identical twins have the same genes or DNA. They are nurtured in equal prenatal conditions. If homosexuality is caused by genetics or prenatal conditions and one twin is gay, the co-twin should also be gay. “Because they have identical DNA, it ought to be 100%,” Dr. Whitehead notes. But the studies reveal something else. “If an identical twin has same-sex attraction the chances the co-twin has it are only about 11% for men and 14% for women.” Because identical twins are always genetically identical, homosexuality cannot be genetically dictated. “No-one is born gay,” he notes. I assume your post is just more groundless spin? And this leads us right back to the scientific fact that there is nothing in a person's genetic makeup that indicates they were born gay. That's not to say it won't be found someday. Someday, it may be found that there is a physiological reason behind the "feeling" that someone is trapped in the wrong-sex body. But right now...scientifically (which somehow seems less important in these discussions than it does in discussions of say, global warming)...there is no proof that gay is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, transgender is anything more than a feeling. well what about the accounts of the people concerned? Don't they carry any weight with you? Apparently not. Though the logical consequence of your position is that whole modern sexual rights movement is delusory, which will be news to the people that are part of the movement, the people that have benefited from the movement and even many of the bigots that want to destroy the movement. However if your position has any validity (and I'm not saying it has) then equally there is no proof that heterosexuality is anything other than a choice and that, except in rare cases, gender is anything more than a feeling. Not sure that's a position I would like to have to defend ..... Actually, there IS no genetic proof of heterosexuality either. Much like homosexuality and the 'gay' gene, science is still trying to find the 'straight' gene. Right now, the best science can come up with is that sexual orientation occurs due to a combination of genetic factors, prenatal hormones, brain structure, uterine environment. Some studies suggest that the amount of masculinization of the brain that takes place during gestation is what leads to straight men and women and gay men and women. Other studies add in such outside factors as maternal stress, drugs, etc.. Some studies suggest that the preponderance of straight men and women...with their necessarily complimentary reproductive systems ...indicates heterosexuality is what nature intended to ensure survival of the species. In some ways, the transsexual community has made the 'gay gene' argument obsolete. We know that one's sex IS genetic. It's not even just a gene, it's an entire chromosome. The central tenet of the transsexual argument is they can be whatever sex they identify with IN SPITE of their genetics. Which means, even if there is a gay gene or a straight gene, the genetics can be overcome. Honestly the 'gay gene' theory was poorly thought out to begin with. The smart principle to argue would be: 'This is a free country. We can love who we want (provided they're an adult), how we want (provided everyone is consenting), and we can change our bodies the way we want.' But I think this doesn't work for a lot of activists because it implies that people who disagree with them have a right to their own beliefs as well. And therefore would be free to do things like not issue marriage licenses.

JVoV -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 2:40:53 PM)
I was fully aware of my sexuality well before I was 17, and had experimented quite a bit already.

TheCabal -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 2:47:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I was fully aware of my sexuality well before I was 17, and had experimented quite a bit already. Good for you. At 17, not everyone is. Less than a year ago, Lila believed she was a gay male. Clearly she's still sorting it out.

Lucylastic -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 2:56:12 PM)
Im sorry...a gay male is attracted to males yes? Why would a gay male wish to go into ladies washrooms to wiggle his dick around in?

Thegunnysez -> RE: Transgender rights in rural Missouri (9/3/2015 3:00:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheCabal quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV I was fully aware of my sexuality well before I was 17, and had experimented quite a bit already. Good for you. At 17, not everyone is. Less than a year ago, Lila believed she was a gay male. Clearly she's still sorting it out. Clearly sexually aware would you not agree?

Page: << < prev 4 5 [6] 7 8 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.298828E-02