S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
6 members (KDGJ, Jusanothajoe, mark, steve f, Marks_21, 1 invisible),
1,007
guests, and
3
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums10
Topics38,526
Posts545,835
Members14,420
|
Most Online1,344 Apr 29th, 2024
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 34
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 3,437 Likes: 34 |
My apologies to the other esteemed members of this Board, namely, Replacement and Canvasback. My loathing got the better of me. Been away for a couple hours, actually working. Apology accepted. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,755 Likes: 30
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 1,755 Likes: 30 |
Interesting that the argument of "They were born that way" is an accepted explanation for their deviant behavior and is an accepted reason and promulgated by the left/ homosexuals/ liberals but if you say that about certain ethnic groups and their proclivity for criminogenic behavior you get slammed as prejudiced/bigoted etc! By saying that certain groups are born with criminogenic tendencies will get you crucified.
Brian LTC, USA Ret. NRA Patron Member AHFGCA Life Member USPSA Life Member
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 7,438 |
Jim, re: one of triplets.
Let's call it a birth defect. That can occur in any child. It's somewhat random in the sense that in many instances we don't know what caused it to occur. Being part of triplets doesn't eliminate the possibility of something going wrong. James: Are you implying that the gay triplet is the result of a birth defect? This is the 1st time I've ever heard this put forth as an explanation. Please understand I'm not discounting it out of hand but I'd certainly be interested in more information on this subject. Jim Brian: Quote: "Interesting that the argument of "They were born that way" is an accepted explanation for their deviant behavior and is an accepted reason and promulgated by the left/ homosexuals/ liberals but if you say that about certain ethnic groups and their proclivity for criminogenic behavior you get slammed as prejudiced/bigoted etc! By saying that certain groups are born with criminogenic tendencies will get you crucified." Left wing hypocrisy knows no bounds . Jim _________________________
Last edited by italiansxs; 12/30/13 05:50 PM.
The 2nd Amendment IS an unalienable right.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
Interesting that the argument of "They were born that way" is an accepted explanation for their deviant behavior and is an accepted reason and promulgated by the left/ homosexuals/ liberals but if you say that about certain ethnic groups and their proclivity for criminogenic behavior you get slammed as prejudiced/bigoted etc! By saying that certain groups are born with criminogenic tendencies will get you crucified. Is the proclivity for criminal behavior in certain ethnic groups innate or is it learned behavior? I would suggest it is most likely a learned behavior, children consciously and sub consciously emulating the behavior they see modeled. That is why so many of us here believe in the value of a two parent family, modeling good behavior and imparting to our children a moral and ethical code to see them through life. If it was innate, why would we bother. Because, of course, if criminogenic behavior is innate, so must be productive, non criminal behavior. And BTW, how would that criminogenic behavior catch up to our changing legal codes over the centuries. For as a society evolves, what was once fine....say settling an argument with a duel or "having" the bride on her marriage night if you were her feudal lord, is no longer acceptable and is now illegal.
Last edited by canvasback; 12/30/13 06:03 PM. Reason: spelling
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
Jim, I didn't mean to call it a birth defect as we typically understand birth defects. I was trying to put forward the idea that something is different about that specific child, despite similar DNA. For example, I have a friend who has a profoundly handicapped child. That child's DNA was set at the time of conception. The medical explanation for my friend's daughters condition is that something happened at the time of birth that caused issues in the brain.
My point being that her brain is not operating as is mine or yours but she still has the same DNA make-up as she had before....her problem didn't change that.
Although this doesn't explain the gay triplet, a working theory that is being explored is that some types of stress during pregnancy results in a statistically higher rate of homosexuality in the child.
As I said before, no one really knows why some people (and animals) behave this way. We only know at this point that they do.
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212 |
....Craig, all I can say is where do you get the idea that the "majority" of science, that not easily revised, takes the miniscule role? That's not how I read it.
But what I am reading is a blind reluctance to acknowledge a reasonable and observable fact and a bunch of dancing and twisting to try to explain it away. Does that remind you of anyone? No danc'in around for me cback. I fully agree that there are scientific studies showing various non human organisms attempting to mate or court. I don't think I'm off base at all assuming that there are mountains more studies, facts, history, etc., etc. showing the typical way to propagate a species is through heterosexual reproduction. I'll repeat what I think is interesting. What you see as my blind reluctance and dancing around is curiosity. What causes folks to conclude that spotting a minuscule fraction of a percent of homosexual behavior in the animal world is proof of normality. It's a big wide animal world out there, that may be proof enough that heterosexuality is the norm. How again do tiny fractions of a percent of observable animal behavior equate to the proof that all humans should accept human homosexuality without question. That seems more of a reach, dance, skip and a hop. Really doesn't matter to me. Live and let live in the privacy of ones own affairs. But, how does catching two male dogs humping on video equate gay pc influence. Heck I know there're a bunch of leg hounds out there, that doesn't make the unlucky recipient an advocate for beastiality.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 7,464 Likes: 212 |
....Although this doesn't explain the gay triplet, a working theory that is being explored is that some types of stress during pregnancy results in a statistically higher rate of homosexuality in the child.
As I said before, no one really knows why some people (and animals) behave this way. We only know at this point that they do. I'd ask as I've asked before, who gets to choose. Why are folks, let's say some priests, who might be attracted to boys because of some stress mom had during pregnancy....not normal. I think extreme, but there are many other examples. Many many other examples, and all might have support of a study or two.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,065 |
We had neighbors with identical twin sons. One had a learning disability, one did not.
Identical twins and triplets do not have identical fingerprints.
Cloned horse and dogs do not have the same color patterns (spots) as the DNA donor.
The triplets didn't have identical experiences after they were born.
I am glad to be here.
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 6,494 Likes: 396 |
Craig, to your first post above...perhaps I misunderstood what you were saying initially. And perhaps you, me.
I never meant to suggest that it is "normal" as in widespread within the animal world, as a percentage of the total sexual activity. I was initially responding to an assertion, patently incorrect, that it does not occur. Didn't suggest it was common or normal. Only suggested it has been observed in a wide variety (1000 plus) species of animals.
But be that as it may. I think you make great leaps of inference that aren't supported by anything when you make comments like:
"But how does catching two male dogs humping on video equate gay pc influence. Heck I know there're a bunch of leg hounds out there, that doesn't make the unlucky recipient an advocate for beastiality."
I just don't see what that comment has to do with what we have been discussing.
As to your second post above, what do you mean "who gets to choose?" My point, if I had one, that that queers probably don't get to choose. they just are. So there is little point in imagining we could "cure" them and there is little point in imagining that whatever ails them might be "catchy" if we (or adopted kids) spent too much time around them.
Now before the board goes wild, I do not support gay couples adopting. But it's not because I fear the child will become homosexual.
The world cries out for such: he is needed & needed badly- the man who can carry a message to Garcia
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,202
Sidelock
|
Sidelock
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 1,202 |
I suppose Pedophiles should be the next protected class as well since "they were born that way" too.
The liberals are asking us to give Obama time. We agree, and think 25 to life would be Appropriate.
|
|
|
|
|