doublegunshop.com - home Forums Duck Dynasty

Because you used the plural of "idiot" I have to assume you are including me as a target in your agitated rant. Sorry if the truth causes you such difficulty but I can't help you with that.

As is often the case where ignorance rules, you make our case for us. If you think we are "grasping at straws" to assume the behavior has a sexual component and is not just one of dominance, than the corollary is true, you are also grasping at straws to assume it is only about dominance.

The fact is we don't really know why any of the behavior exists. We only know it does.

And as a side note, the proffering of an example of behavior, as Replacement did, is, to most of us, not an exhaustive compilation of all known incidences of that behavior, but just what was described....an example.

What I get is that you are blinded by ideology and appear to have no scientific training or education. I base this assumption on your apparent inability to source or to digest actual data about animal behavior, and on your unwillingness to admit that your assertions are incorrect when you are confronted with data that contradicts your opinion. There is nothing "tainted" about scientific data. It is what it is, even though it may not fit your preconceptions. This behavior does occur across a broad gamut of species, but you are too uninformed to be aware of that little detail. You specifically asked about this behavior among lions, I gave you a quote about lions, and then you go off on another tangent. This is natural behavior among animals, and man is an animal. As I have previously stated, natural does not equate to normal in a statistical sense. You really need to learn how to think and to evaluate data.

Happy New Year. When it comes to the birds and the bees, the 'animals' that have shown to have various homosexual pairings probably get it right more often than not. These aren't extinct species, are they. Interesting, if someone can get two same sex worms to wiggle up to each other, that's a break through, and the opinion of the majority of humans is demonized.

I wonder though how many of those lower order critters attach emotion to the issue and lobby for more. Or, is the frolicking gay life style of a tiny percentage of nonhuman animals tolerated by the majority, right up until something bigger eats them.

Noooo, there is never ever any politics in science, none what so ever. And Science with a predetermined agenda, is not science, its called social engineering hiding behind the name science to give it more credibility.

And ain�t it something that when the homosexuals started this current theory of theirs that �It isn�t my fault I was born this way� not too long ago as a matter of fact, and religious organizations began questioning this New theory of theirs by pointing out that if they were born this way and its a natural occurence then why do we not see it in other animals and across the spectrum of animals. Then all of a sudden all of this so-called scientific data started appearing about so-called homosexual activity observed in animals. Ain�t it something. No�. there�s no adverse political pressure within the scientific community its all facts. Just like the lead argument and the global warming argument......its all facts determined by scientific data.


Your facts, your data......not mine.

Craig, just as you suggest and just like humans, the animals get it "right" most often. Although I don't think anyone is describing the observations of these behaviors as a "breakthrough"....just observations. Do you think it's a breakthrough? And I'm not hearing the scientists and naturalists involved demonizing the majority of humans for their sexual preferences. These seem to be imaginary scenarios your fertile mind is concocting.

As for your second paragraph, you are probably right....like any other behavior in the wild, it is tolerated until the participants are eaten. The thing is the rest of the animal kingdom isn't busy making moral judgements...just trying to stay alive. And it wasn't long ago that standard scientific and religious thought held that no animal had emotions. Tell that to any dog owner.

Treblig, the incidence of observation of homosexual behavior in animals doesn't coincide with the championing of homosexuality by the Left over the last 30 years. It coincides with the dramatic increase in rigorous scientific research of our natural world that started in the mid 1800's and continues to this day.

And it isn't the theory of homosexuals that they were born this way. It is the theory of human behaviorists. Homosexuals have quite understandably adopted it.

Not everything is a gigantic plot designed to screw you over. Your assertions remind me of the arguments put forward by the diehard supporters of AGW. This may be hard for you to see but from where I sit, it is you that has the political agenda and are scrambling to try to justify it.

For the record, I'm all for social engineering if the engineering is designed to make successful societies, filled with responsible and productive people who contribute to their own and others well being and to the society at large. Your founding fathers engaged in a remarkable bit of social engineering and created arguably the greatest country and society that has ever existed.

What none of us like or approve of is social engineering that promotes an unsustainable social model and that unfairly burdens one group while relieving others from responsibility for their actions.

I think minuscule statistical aberrations are all around us. It is interesting to me how only certain ones can be quickly and confidently cited and how the majority of 'science' that is not easily revised, takes the minuscule role.

Treblig, you obviously needed a better education. What you refer to as "social engineering" has been practiced by humans since the days of the cave man. The institution of marriage and monogamous heterosexual pairings would be one of the earliest examples of social engineering. Helped to keep the male members of the tribe from killing each other over the females and helped the tribe to grow and prosper. I don't think the liberal agenda had much to do with that.