Gay is genetic

Joy Division wrote:What a complete load if pish.  

sphinx wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2559021/Being-gay-DNA-researchers-claim-controversial-new-study.html

A new study confirming the 1993 one that there is a genetic link to homosexuality.  

Raising the possibility of the creation of a prenatal test - and the choice of prospective parents to terminate pregnancy if the foetus is gay.

heavenly father wrote:

sphinx wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2559021/Being-gay-DNA-researchers-claim-controversial-new-study.html

A new study confirming the 1993 one that there is a genetic link to homosexuality.  

Raising the possibility of the creation of a prenatal test - and the choice of prospective parents to terminate pregnancy if the foetus is gay.

the 1993 one done by a gay that was proven total tosh, thats sounds right..lol

BigAndy9 wrote:What is pish to me is the fact that people are falling over each other to carry out such tests and find "the right" answer - the answer which is acceptable to liberal do-gooders.

Just like everything else, I've said it so many times - inquests will be repeated, referendums will be repeated, tests will be repeated... until the correct answer, result, whatever - is given.

Joy Division wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

the 1993 one done by a gay that was proven total tosh, thats sounds right..lol

That sounds far more like it Favva  :D 

sphinx wrote:

Joy Division wrote:What a complete load if pish.  

What is pish - that being gay is genetic or that if it is genetic it will be used to create a pre natal test allowing termination of pregnancy where the foetus is gay?

heavenly father wrote:

Joy Division wrote:

That sounds far more like it Favva  :D 

this agenda to find it normal or gentic is a tad worrying though, wonder what all that is  about..

Joy Division wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

this agenda to find it normal or gentic is a tad worrying though, wonder what all that is  about..

It's just experiment Favva, and some are getting hysterical over it.  

Joy Division wrote:

sphinx wrote:

What is pish - that being gay is genetic or that if it is genetic it will be used to create a pre natal test allowing termination of pregnancy where the foetus is gay?

...on the scan was the bairn standing with hand in the teapot manner?  

BigAndy9 wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


...on the scan was the bairn standing with hand in the teapot manner?  

Joy Division wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

  

BigAndy9 wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


  

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


  

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

Catman wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

I couldn't find a racist c**t one to define you either.

Catman wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

I couldn't find a racist c**t one to define you either.

eddie wrote:I know I'll sound like a muppet, but I don't put a lot of store by "scientist findings"

Next month they'll be saying that if mums ate flora margarine in their 7th month of pregnancy then they're sons will have blonde hair and dance like Beyoncé.

eddie wrote:I know I'll sound like a muppet, but I don't put a lot of store by "scientist findings"

Next month they'll be saying that if mums ate flora margarine in their 7th month of pregnancy then their sons will have blonde hair and dance like Beyoncé.

eddie wrote:Well Andy and HF, that's my point. Eggs are bad then eggs are good, too much cheese is bad then it's better to eat it if you're standing upside down blah blah

I'm not always sure that we're always told the truth about cancer

heavenly father wrote:

eddie wrote:Well Andy and HF, that's my point. Eggs are bad then eggs are good, too much cheese is bad then it's better to eat it if you're standing upside down blah blah

I'm not always sure that we're always told the truth about cancer

I'm sure they don't but it does make some people a shed load of money..

eddie wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

I'm sure they don't but it does make some people a shed load of money..

Yep I agree.

I also dislike all these bloody injections they keep insisting our children have! They're saying two year olds need flu injections!!!! WTF!!!!

heavenly father wrote:

eddie wrote:

Yep I agree.

I also dislike all these bloody injections they keep insisting our children have! They're saying two year olds need flu injections!!!! WTF!!!!

in the height of the swine flu they were prepared to use untested injections, how on earth did that get passed as a good idea..

eddie wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

in the height of the swine flu they were prepared to use untested injections, how on earth did that get passed as a good idea..

Well my little girl isn't having it. No way.
Trouble is, they target mums and play in their love and guilt....mums feel bad if they don't do the bets by their kids so they believe the GP's.
I won't be fooled.

heavenly father wrote:

eddie wrote:

Well my little girl isn't having it. No way.
Trouble is, they target mums and play in their love and guilt....mums feel bad if they don't do the bets by their kids so they believe the GP's.
I won't be fooled.

at their ages they should fight anything off any way, injections for kids that young just seems wrong.

Catman wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

I couldn't find a racist c**t one to define you either.

Catman wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:

I couldn't find one doing "I'm a little teapot" - certainly tried!

Hence why I put Mr "angry" Catman's scan up.

I couldn't find a racist c**t one to define you either.

Shady wrote:

Catman wrote:

I couldn't find a racist c**t one to define you either.

HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR HAR!!

AHOY THERE CATTY.YOU ACTUALLY SAID SOMETHING FUNNY FOR ONCE!!

WELL DONE LAD.WELL DONE!!

Shady wrote:Good afternoon Folks.

I'm wracking my brains trying to think where I read an article about human evolution which explains in detail how homosexuals are a breakaway mutant species of the homonids.

AHOY THERE HEAVENLY FATHER....Now then HF,I know that you believe in the creation theory & I respect your beliefs but this theory as described above may explain a few things.

Because the use of the word 'mutant'indicates a fuck up in the evolution process.

What do you think?

Shady wrote:Good afternoon Folks.

I'm wracking my brains trying to think where I read an article about human evolution which explains in detail how homosexuals are a breakaway mutant species of the homonids.

AHOY THERE HEAVENLY FATHER....Now then HF,I know that you believe in the creation theory & I respect your beliefs but this theory as described above may explain a few things.

Because the use of the word 'mutant'indicates a fuck up in the evolution process.

What do you think?

Shady wrote:Good afternoon Folks.

I'm wracking my brains trying to think where I read an article about human evolution which explains in detail how homosexuals are a breakaway mutant species of the homonids.

AHOY THERE HEAVENLY FATHER....Now then HF,I know that you believe in the creation theory & I respect your beliefs but this theory as described above may explain a few things.

Because the use of the word 'mutant'indicates a fuck up in the evolution process.

What do you think?

heavenly father wrote:

Shady wrote:Good afternoon Folks.

I'm wracking my brains trying to think where I read an article about human evolution which explains in detail how homosexuals are a breakaway mutant species of the homonids.

AHOY THERE HEAVENLY FATHER....Now then HF,I know that you believe in the creation theory & I respect your beliefs but this theory as described above may explain a few things.

Because the use of the word 'mutant'indicates a fuck up in the evolution process.

What do you think?

its an interesting idea but how would homosexuals keep going if they were their own branch of a species as they cannot breed..

the idea of them being a mutation is weird and could explain somethings, again if the mutation could be removed perhaps they could become normal..

heavenly father wrote:

Shady wrote:Good afternoon Folks.

I'm wracking my brains trying to think where I read an article about human evolution which explains in detail how homosexuals are a breakaway mutant species of the homonids.

AHOY THERE HEAVENLY FATHER....Now then HF,I know that you believe in the creation theory & I respect your beliefs but this theory as described above may explain a few things.

Because the use of the word 'mutant'indicates a fuck up in the evolution process.

What do you think?

its an interesting idea but how would homosexuals keep going if they were their own branch of a species as they cannot breed..

the idea of them being a mutation is weird and could explain somethings, again if the mutation could be removed perhaps they could become normal..

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, the bullshit just abounds in this thread -- let me address that, briefly, by pointing out that journalists often say things about science in their articles that scientists themselves never actually said: http://skepchick.org/2013/11/bad-science-journalism-eat-nuts-live-longer/

On the topic of whether homosexuality is genetic -- it is, because all of our traits ultimately go back to our genes, though environment plays a role as well. And the idea of finding a gay gene is problematic because of the environmental factor and because some people might be tempted to try to "cure" it. (And the fact that a "gay gene" might turn out to be a complex of hundreds of genes that all line up in the right way to predispose someone toward becoming homosexual, and tampering with any of them might result in horrific side effects.)

Ultimately, I hate the whole "Is it a choice or are gay people born that way" question because it's predicated on the idea that there's something wrong with being gay -- for example, we don't pay nearly as much attention to studies on how much the trait of "athleticism" depends on genetics, because we don't think there's anything wrong with being athletic.

What we should be focusing on is whether homosexuality does any harm to society, and we know the answer to that -- it doesn't. Being gay doesn't hurt society any more than having blue eyes or black skin does.

Shady wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, the bullshit just abounds in this thread -- let me address that, briefly, by pointing out that journalists often say things about science in their articles that scientists themselves never actually said: http://skepchick.org/2013/11/bad-science-journalism-eat-nuts-live-longer/

On the topic of whether homosexuality is genetic -- it is, because all of our traits ultimately go back to our genes, though environment plays a role as well. And the idea of finding a gay gene is problematic because of the environmental factor and because some people might be tempted to try to "cure" it. (And the fact that a "gay gene" might turn out to be a complex of hundreds of genes that all line up in the right way to predispose someone toward becoming homosexual, and tampering with any of them might result in horrific side effects.)

Ultimately, I hate the whole "Is it a choice or are gay people born that way" question because it's predicated on the idea that there's something wrong with being gay -- for example, we don't pay nearly as much attention to studies on how much the trait of "athleticism" depends on genetics, because we don't think there's anything wrong with being athletic.

What we should be focusing on is whether homosexuality does any harm to society, and we know the answer to that -- it doesn't. Being gay doesn't hurt society any more than having blue eyes or black skin does.

No,not bullshit.Just people discussing differing opinions.

Ben I don't know why you bother to post on this site because you seem to hate any form of discussion,different opinion or debate.

The comments that you have made are unproven opinion.That's all.Nothing more & nothing less.

With regards to my initial post I was merely speculating about an article that I had read,possibly in a magazine or online & I was interested to hear HFs opinion.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Shady wrote:

No,not bullshit.Just people discussing differing opinions.

Ben I don't know why you bother to post on this site because you seem to hate any form of discussion,different opinion or debate.

The comments that you have made are unproven opinion.That's all.Nothing more & nothing less.

With regards to my initial post I was merely speculating about an article that I had read,possibly in a magazine or online & I was interested to hear HFs opinion.

Actually, this thread was a bunch of head-nodding, which I've heard all about in the past few weeks, until I shared MY differing opinion.

This is what discussion and debate look like. And my opinions are backed with far more evidence than most of the horsecrap that has been posted in this thread up until now. You're just too prejudiced to allow yourself to consider that there's actually nothing wrong or harmful about being gay, regardless of what causes it.

Shady wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Shady wrote:

No,not bullshit.Just people discussing differing opinions.

Ben I don't know why you bother to post on this site because you seem to hate any form of discussion,different opinion or debate.

The comments that you have made are unproven opinion.That's all.Nothing more & nothing less.

With regards to my initial post I was merely speculating about an article that I had read,possibly in a magazine or online & I was interested to hear HFs opinion.

Actually, this thread was a bunch of head-nodding, which I've heard all about in the past few weeks, until I shared MY differing opinion.

This is what discussion and debate look like. And my opinions are backed with far more evidence than most of the horsecrap that has been posted in this thread up until now. You're just too prejudiced to allow yourself to consider that there's actually nothing wrong or harmful about being gay, regardless of what causes it.

Well you either are in the early stages of dementia or you're being your usual dismissive self.

I support gay rights but I reserve the right to take the mick out of gays when they push their beliefs down my throat.

There is nothing wrong with being gay.

But I will discuss homosexuality as I would discuss any other topic as it is not a taboo subject for me.I'm not scared or embarrassed by discussing homosexuality.

Discussing the subject doesn't make me nervous or angry.......I just discuss it coldly,clinically & with an open mind Ben...................An open mind.

You don't back your arguments up with evidence....just opinion & guess work.

eddie wrote:I know I'll sound like a muppet, but I don't put a lot of store by "scientist findings"

Next month they'll be saying that if mums ate flora margarine in their 7th month of pregnancy then their sons will have blonde hair and dance like Beyoncé.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Shady wrote:

Well you either are in the early stages of dementia or you're being your usual dismissive self.

I support gay rights but I reserve the right to take the mick out of gays when they push their beliefs down my throat.

There is nothing wrong with being gay.

But I will discuss homosexuality as I would discuss any other topic as it is not a taboo subject for me.I'm not scared or embarrassed by discussing homosexuality.

Discussing the subject doesn't make me nervous or angry.......I just discuss it coldly,clinically & with an open mind Ben...................An open mind.

You don't back your arguments up with evidence....just opinion & guess work.

Ah, and here come the personal attacks, the last refuge of people who can't dismiss the actual points being made.

Actually, if you you don't think being gay is wrong, we're pretty much in agreement. I'm not opposed in any way to research into the possible genetic causes of any human trait, only justifiably concerned that findings will be used to further oppress a segment of society that deserves equal rights.

Shady wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Ah, and here come the personal attacks, the last refuge of people who can't dismiss the actual points being made.

Actually, if you you don't think being gay is wrong, we're pretty much in agreement. I'm not opposed in any way to research into the possible genetic causes of any human trait, only justifiably concerned that findings will be used to further oppress a segment of society that deserves equal rights.

Well you've personal view on poster, no debate on the topic made personal attacks against me so I'm just returning the compliment.

And if you're personal view on poster, no debate on the topic not opposed to any research regarding the subject why have reponded to my posts in the way that you personal view on poster, no debate on the topic have?

Ben gotta go for a bit but do you personal view on poster, no debate on the topic actually or ever think before you open your personal view on poster, no debate on the topic mouth?

Shady wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

its an interesting idea but how would homosexuals keep going if they were their own branch of a species as they cannot breed..

the idea of them being a mutation is weird and could explain somethings, again if the mutation could be removed perhaps they could become normal..

Blimey HF that's three times you said that. :D 

But what about inbreeding? Would that answer your question & explain why homosexuality may well be an illness.............caused by inbreeding.

BigAndy9 wrote:Homosexuality is caused by problems in the homosexual person - everybody knows that.

Extreme ugliness in girls, problems with the opposite sex, women being used and abused by men.

Abusive past, childhood...

Etc etc.