I felt my CONservative friends here are in need of watching this

[Supersteeler]

Poor word choice...

I see what you did there.

 

[oneforthebus]

Yup, I hate gays and people who like disabled people and little white kids who have Asian friends. It's as simple as that, that's us conservatives in a nutshell. Thanks for opening my eyes Elfie.

 

[Vader]

It is an absolute fact that some people are born with chemical anomalies and differences in the brain that can be isolated and studied in terms of extra testosterone or estrogen that can cause significant behavioral and sexual identify differences. As for my own personal observation and working experience there is not one single shred of doubt in my mind that there are major biological brain factors in play for the majority of gay people. They aren't acting gay to "be silly" or "have a good time" or "be interesting". And I'm not talking about girls kissing each other in public because their boyfriends think it's hot. I'm talking about exclusively gay people. I have seen many many high school kids that are utterly and completely miserable and confused from the feelings they have about their sexuality. Most of them will say they have had those feelings from a pretty young age that they were different.

It's one thing to sit off at a distance and say it's wrong and you don't believe in it and it's also very easy to dismiss. It's quite another to have a 15 year old look at you in misery with tears in their eyes and confess how many times they have come close to killing themselves because they don't understand and like what they are. That is not quite so easy to dismiss without giving it serious examination. Or to have a kid tell you that they hate themselves because they should have been born a girl instead of a boy and have felt that way since they were in Elementary school. It's not some cute little game that gay people are playing to be interesting.

I would like to see these studies and their conclusions. Are they peer reviewed? Do we really know that chemical imbalances is what causes a person to be gay? And if it is chemical imbalances then shouldn't they be treated with drugs like ADHD or ADD?

 

[Supersteeler]

I would like to see these studies and their conclusions. Are they peer reviewed? Do we really know that chemical imbalances is what causes a person to be gay? And if it is chemical imbalances then shouldn't they be treated with drugs like ADHD or ADD?

I did a little reading up. Most of the studies I have read on it today seem to say that there are notable differences between the brains of gay and straight people, but also said that it can't be proven to be the ONLY factor and that environment may also play a part. A couple of them said that the brains of gay men more resemble the brains of straight women than straight men. Brains of gay women more resemble the brains of straight men rather than straight women.

I read the first 5 articles that came up in Google that seemed to be from somewhat of an impartial source. The ones from gay activism websites I skipped over. The studies I looked at were from university types...Neurosurgeons and doctors of Psychiatry, but I really can't tell you the specifics of the peer review process or specifics.

This one is basically a blog but it quotes the journal SCIENCE for two different studies that talk about brain structure and chromosome differences. I chose this one because it was the last one I read and the other 4 said pretty much the same thing. There is a good possibility that the noted differences in the brain could result in homosexual predisposition but it can't be stated that it is the only reason possible.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/10/19/is-homosexuality-a-choice/

I'm just saying that I have had a good number of educational trainings being in the counseling field and each trainer invariably points out that differences can be seen on brain scans. It would stand to reason, to me at least that if a male brain had a larger than normal amount of estrogen in the brain, that the person in question might have more feminine thoughts and tendencies and vice versa.

Here's from from a site called livescience.com. Never heard of it but it says that there are noted Serotonin differences in the brain that may also contribute to gay or straight behaviors.

http://www.livescience.com/13408-brain-chemical-serotonin-sexual-orientation.html

As far as treating with drugs, I guess I don't know enough about brain chemistry to say whether it's possible or not. If it came out that it was possible and safe to do, I feel confident that a sizable percentage of gay people would try it. Maybe not a majority though. I imagine for somebody to go through years of struggle, therapy and who knows what else to be ok with themselves as a gay adult, it would kind of feel like defeat to resort to drugs to change from something they have worked hard to learn to accept.

 

[ark steel]

the brains of straight women

yuo r teh funney!!

 

[Supersteeler]

yuo r teh funney!!

Oh damn, you are gonna get it now.

 

[Vader]

I did a little reading up. Most of the studies I have read on it today seem to say that there are notable differences between the brains of gay and straight people, but also said that it can't be proven to be the ONLY factor and that environment may also play a part. A couple of them said that the brains of gay men more resemble the brains of straight women than straight men. Brains of gay women more resemble the brains of straight men rather than straight women.

I read the first 5 articles that came up in Google that seemed to be from somewhat of an impartial source. The ones from gay activism websites I skipped over. The studies I looked at were from university types...Neurosurgeons and doctors of Psychiatry, but I really can't tell you the specifics of the peer review process or specifics.

This one is basically a blog but it quotes the journal SCIENCE for two different studies that talk about brain structure and chromosome differences. I chose this one because it was the last one I read and the other 4 said pretty much the same thing. There is a good possibility that the noted differences in the brain could result in homosexual predisposition but it can't be stated that it is the only reason possible.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2012/10/19/is-homosexuality-a-choice/

I'm just saying that I have had a good number of educational trainings being in the counseling field and each trainer invariably points out that differences can be seen on brain scans. It would stand to reason, to me at least that if a male brain had a larger than normal amount of estrogen in the brain, that the person in question might have more feminine thoughts and tendencies and vice versa.

Here's from from a site called livescience.com. Never heard of it but it says that there are noted Serotonin differences in the brain that may also contribute to gay or straight behaviors.

http://www.livescience.com/13408-brain-chemical-serotonin-sexual-orientation.html

As far as treating with drugs, I guess I don't know enough about brain chemistry to say whether it's possible or not. If it came out that it was possible and safe to do, I feel confident that a sizable percentage of gay people would try it. Maybe not a majority though. I imagine for somebody to go through years of struggle, therapy and who knows what else to be ok with themselves as a gay adult, it would kind of feel like defeat to resort to drugs to change from something they have worked hard to learn to accept.

There are huge issues with those studies. LeVay's study included gay men that died of AIDS. AIDS is known to decrease testosterone. So using men with AIDS automatically means you find men with lower levels. That doesn't mean causation via lower levels but rather lower levels via AIDS.

Also LeVay even admits:

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 (as quoted in Byrd, et al., 2001, emp. added).

These are all just theories at this point. The human genome project came to an end over 10 years ago and they found nothing regarding homosexuality and a genetic link. I have no idea if it is chemical, genetic or environmental. I just know that all the studies that have been done to date have serious issues.

Even the in article you posted it says this "Your environment affects your sexual and romantic relationships". It puts almost equal weight on environment as it does genes. Right now I have no clue and if you take away the politics of it I think almost everyone would say the same.

 

[Supersteeler]

There are huge issues with those studies. LeVay's study included gay men that died of AIDS. AIDS is known to decrease testosterone. So using men with AIDS automatically means you find men with lower levels. That doesn't mean causation via lower levels but rather lower levels via AIDS.

Also LeVay even admits:



These are all just theories at this point. The human genome project came to an end over 10 years ago and they found nothing regarding homosexuality and a genetic link. I have no idea if it is chemical, genetic or environmental. I just know that all the studies that have been done to date have serious issues.

Even the in article you posted it says this "Your environment affects your sexual and romantic relationships". It puts almost equal weight on environment as it does genes. Right now I have no clue and if you take away the politics of it I think almost everyone would say the same.

Which is why I pointed out a couple times there that neither of those studies could say that it is absolute proof. That said, I happen to agree with it, but I understand that I have biases on the issue based on experience that make me lean more towards that way of thinking. There are always gray areas and special cases though. For instance, I think there are people who were sexually traumatized in childhood by the opposite sex through abuse and either consciously or subconsciously steer towards their own sex out of fear of the opposite sex or aversion to re-living past trauma. That being said, I will never buy the idea that many gay people are actually straight people who are living a full, 24 hour a day, 7 day a week gay lifestyle for fun....or attention.

 

[Elfiero]

I have seen it.

I keep saying that I believe in the God given right of every person to freely associate.

I'm glad you feel that way. I see though that you didn't mention the right to marry between two consenting adults, what say you?

 

[Vader]

Which is why I pointed out a couple times there that neither of those studies could say that it is absolute proof. That said, I happen to agree with it, but I understand that I have biases on the issue based on experience that make me lean more towards that way of thinking. There are always gray areas and special cases though. For instance, I think there are people who were sexually traumatized in childhood by the opposite sex through abuse and either consciously or subconsciously steer towards their own sex out of fear of the opposite sex or aversion to re-living past trauma. That being said, I will never buy the idea that many gay people are actually straight people who are living a full, 24 hour a day, 7 day a week gay lifestyle for fun....or attention.

I agree for the most part. However, people do stupid things all the time. To say that an entire group of people never do something for no reason or even a bad reason contradicts reality.

 

[Elfiero]

Back before Christmas, or in the fall sometime, I can't quite remember, there was a situation in which a father was arrested for having sex with his daughter. The daughter actually defended the father by advancing he notion that there was love there, so no one should question it.

Maybe Jerry Sandusky should have used that as his defense. "Hey, I really just loved all those boys."

Before anyone gets all wound up and says something about "how can you associate homosexuality with that deviant behavior?,"remember, the principle advanced here was it is just about love. It is love, no one should question it. Well, if that is truly the case, do we need to accept any type of "love?"

I think it was a given when John Lennon spoke those words that love in the sexual sense(he was really talking about emotional love) is between two adults. I don't think anyone but the sociopathic would include minors, animals, or any other nonsense that the right tries to use as an excuse to continue to oppress certain people.

 

[Supersteeler]

I agree for the most part. However, people do stupid things all the time. To say that an entire group of people never do something for no reason or even a bad reason contradicts reality.

Perhaps, but trying to lump a large segment of gay people with that does that as well. When people get going on the subject, it seems they often go to the "getting attention" thing as if that is a large contributor. It's illogical. To say that even a a significant number of gays are purposely singling themselves out for ridicule and scorn each and every day because they like the attention, makes no sense. Yes there are a couple of nutcases in every group of people, but it isn't even a blip on the radar of why gay people are gay IMO.

 

[Supersteeler]

Now I have met a couple of kids who became very open and defiant about being gay, the kind that throws it in people's faces that they are gay. The one kid was very vocal about it and would tell anyone who would listen. Maybe the kind of person that the people here will point to as "attention seeking gays". But there is normally a reason people things and sometimes it can be a defensive tool.

With this kid, we were talking once in my office about why he is so loud and defiant with the way he handles it. He basically said that ever since Middle School, all the kids harassed him constantly, saying he was gay, calling him ******, etc, because he did have an effeminate way of talking and walking. He knew he was not like the other boys but for years he tried to cover it the best he could. He would observe how the other boys acted in school and try and mimic them. Well after 5 or 6 years of that, by the time he got to 12th grade, he just basically, got to the point of saying "**** this, I'm taking control of this and not being a victim any more. I'll tell people right up front as loud as I can and then what else can they say to accuse me or hurt me if I've already admitted it and said it for them?" It was his way of trying to take some power back and not letting people make him feel worthless.

 

[Elfiero]

Lennon a prophet?? Now I've heard it all

Apparently you didn't hear it the first time....

"If they didn't understand the Beatles and the Sixties then, what the **** could we do for them now? Do we have to divide the fish and the loaves for the multitudes again? Do we have to get crucified again? Do we have to do the walking on water again because a whole pile of dummies didn't see it the first time, or didn't believe it when they saw it? You know, that's what they're asking: 'Get off the cross. I didn't understand the first bit yet. Can you do that again?' No way. You can never go home. It doesn't exist."-----John Lennon

 

[Elfiero]

You spelled Lenin wrong.

You're right what was I thinking. Let me try again; Pat Robertson.

That looks right to me, i mean if we're going to use the lens of fascism.

 

[oneforthebus]

As a florist I worked with many gay men through the years. Some you would never know were gay, others were very purposely flamboyant about it, most were guys who didn't try to shove it in your face but still, you couldn't even imagine them ever being with a woman. I don't know what causes homosexuality but I don't believe it is a choice for the vast, vast majority.

In any case, my personal moral or religious beliefs on homosexuality are irrelevant. It's not the government's business who you, as a consenting adult, choose to sleep with or share your home or your life with. I should not be deprived of rights and benefits offered to others based solely on who I choose to have sex with or live with. The only somewhat legitimate argument that could be made was if being raised by same sex partners was somehow damaging to the children involved, and I have seen no real evidence that's the case. There are an awful lot of ****** up straight people who face no restrictions on having or raising kids together, in fact they are encouraged to do so by a multitude of government benefits.

I'd like to see government get out of the marriage business altogether. Define all legal marriages as civil unions, little more than a contract between two consenting adults that conveys each of them certain rights and benefits, like a business partnership or articles of incorporation. Allow religious and secular institutions to define marriage for their members however they choose.

 

[Elfiero]

If you know anything about child sexual abuse or adults preying on children, you'll know that the tactic almost always used by the adult abuser is to convince the child that this is "a normal loving relationship" and that there is nothing wrong with it. So if the child believes abuser and says that it is ok, you feel it's on par with gay adults thinking they are in "love" too? I have some serious questions about that line of thinking to say the least.

He's trying to establish equivalency by bringing into the discussion straw man ideas that will never be tolerated because they involve protected groups. In other words minors, animals, etc. groups that because of progressivism receive protection today where as in the past(the good ol conservative days) those groups were openly abused and exploited.

 

[Elfiero]

As a florist I worked with many gay men through the years. Some you would never know were gay, others were very purposely flamboyant about it, most were guys who didn't try to shove it in your face but still, you couldn't even imagine them ever being with a woman. I don't know what causes homosexuality but I don't believe it is a choice for the vast, vast majority.

In any case, my personal moral or religious beliefs on homosexuality are irrelevant. It's not the government's business who you, as a consenting adult, choose to sleep with or share your home or your life with. I should not be deprived of rights and benefits offered to others based solely on who I choose to have sex with or live with. The only somewhat legitimate argument that could be made was if being raised by same sex partners was somehow damaging to the children involved, and I have seen no real evidence that's the case. There are an awful lot of ****** up straight people who face no restrictions on having or raising kids together, in fact they are encouraged to do so by a multitude of government benefits.

I'd like to see government get out of the marriage business altogether. Define all legal marriages as civil unions, little more than a contract between two consenting adults that conveys each of them certain rights and benefits, like a business partnership or articles of incorporation. Allow religious and secular institutions to define marriage for their members however they choose.

Great post. I agree with most of what you said and want to add that it should also not be an agenda of gays, nor should they attempt to ever force upon religious organizations that they must marry gays. The religious while in my opinion engage in fantasy, still have a right to define that fantasy within their scriptures, doctrines, etc.

 

[Elfiero]

For those of you discussing the nature of homosexuality; all the legit research points to the belief that science has held for the past ~25 years, that it's genetic.

Because it's so hard to isolate the genes though is why there is still some doubt,but the latest research reinforces that idea.

Sorry bible thumpers maybe the Koch brothers can find some researchers they can pay off to 'find' what you want them to find.

 

[oneforthebus]

Great post. I agree with most of what you said and want to add that it should also not be an agenda of gays, nor should they attempt to ever force upon religious organizations that they must marry gays. The religious while in my opinion engage in fantasy, still have a right to define that fantasy within their scriptures, doctrines, etc.

I'm glad you agree, perhaps since you've seen conservatives and even a religious person like myself with a variety of viewpoints on this, you can rethink your relentless caricatures and stereotyping of conservatives and religious people. Doubt it though. Your OP seems to equate conservatism with hatred for gays, nonwhites and the disabled. Laughable.

 

[diver]

He's trying to establish equivalency by bringing into the discussion straw man ideas that will never be tolerated because they involve protected groups. In other words minors, animals, etc. groups that because of progressivism receive protection today where as in the past(the good ol conservative days) those groups were openly abused and exploited.

No I am not. Don't give me that crap. YOU posted a quote in which Lennon says, basically, love should never be questioned. Now you want to try to say what Lennon meant. How the heck do you know? And don't tell me things will never be tolerated. How do you know that as well? As I said, my grandparents simply could not conceive of the things that were being tolerated by society in their later years. We have no idea what 50 years from now will look like.

For some reason, I will never forget an interview Richard Chamberlain gave sometime in the early 1990s, I think. Maybe earlier. He was doing some mini-series. The guy was the king of mini-series. Anyway, he talked about the fact that somewhere, in older times (it may have been Japan, was there a mini-series Shogun or something?) that older men routinely had young boy lovers. He felt this was fine. Again, he used the term "love."

I guess what I am trying to say is how can it be a strawman argument when there are people(like the daughter with the father, Richard Chamberlain) who have tried to advance the argument?

 

[Supersteeler]

I'm glad you agree, perhaps since you've seen conservatives and even a religious person like myself with a variety of viewpoints on this, you can rethink your relentless caricatures and stereotyping of conservatives and religious people. Doubt it though. Your OP seems to equate conservatism with hatred for gays, nonwhites and the disabled. Laughable.

Life is always better when people can recognize there are degrees of everything and you can't put everyone into the one box you want them to fit into. It leads to good discussion. Vader and I disagree on almost everything football and otherwise for instance, but as shown in this thread he can discuss an issue thoughtfully and disagree but at the same time also find some common ground.

Personally, in terms of politics and religion I am all over the place on everything. I try to look at each issue as a completely separate thing and then decide how I feel about it.

 

[Elfiero]

I'm glad you agree, perhaps since you've seen conservatives and even a religious person like myself with a variety of viewpoints on this, you can rethink your relentless caricatures and stereotyping of conservatives and religious people. Doubt it though. Your OP seems to equate conservatism with hatred for gays, nonwhites and the disabled. Laughable.

You're not a true conservative then. If you want to dilute it into fiscal,social, etc. then in the words of someone who's name I can't recall; "you're not doing it right".

 

[Supersteeler]

I guess what I am trying to say is how can it be a strawman argument when there are people(like the daughter with the father, Richard Chamberlain) who have tried to advance the argument?

My question would be, what does pedophilia have to do with what consenting adults do? You seem very stuck on that topic in this thread where the rest of the discussion is about adult relationships.

 

[oneforthebus]

You're not a true conservative then. If you want to dilute it into fiscal,social, etc. then in the words of someone who's name I can't recall; "you're not doing it right".

That's your exceedingly narrow worldview, not my own.