Fathers worst nightmare.

[Yannie]

Except.....when people make a statement that's open for scientific scrutiny Such as '' Homosexuality is a choice''. Instead they should say I believe that ''Homosexuality is immoral and goes against my religious convictions''. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that second statement because its not for a debate. The former leads to a debate in which both parties have to back up their claims with evidence and a holy scripture is not evidence.



Whether homosexuality is due to genetics...? No one really knows though... It's like saying that intelligence is entirely due to genetics.. Although it's partially true that genetics may influence one's intelligence. it's not entirely right. The same goes with homosexuality, i think. Those scientists who claim that homosexuals are genetically predisposed to it, are not completely correct and other factors play a bigger role. But you'd have to be utterly naive and intellectually dishonest to think that homosexuality is solely due to environmental factors. Because it doesn't explain why there are homosexuals in a religious environment where homosexuality is considered immoral and is punishable by death.

Yes one can argue that homosexuality is immoral because its against one moral belief system. Also , science have not found a gene that link with homosexuality behavior. So therefore you cannot argue that homosexuality has a genetic link.

 

[VixR]

Except.....when people make a statement that's open for scientific scrutiny Such as '' Homosexuality is a choice''. Instead they should say I believe that ''Homosexuality is immoral and goes against my religious convictions''. I don't think anyone would have a problem with that second statement because its not for a debate. The former leads to a debate in which both parties have to back up their claims with evidence and a holy scripture is not evidence.



Whether homosexuality is due to genetics...? No one really knows though... It's like saying that intelligence is entirely due to genetics.. Although it's partially true that genetics may influence one's intelligence. it's not entirely right. The same goes with homosexuality, i think. Those scientists who claim that homosexuals are genetically predisposed to it, are not completely correct and other factors play a bigger role. But you'd have to be utterly naive and intellectually dishonest to think that homosexuality is solely due to environmental factors. Because it doesn't explain why there are homosexuals in a religious environment where homosexuality is considered immoral and is punishable by death.

I agree with everything you said up to the second paragraph, in bold.

On the second paragraph: Due to the evidence, there is no pushback in the scientific community on their being a genetic component to homosexuality, there absolutely is, but you're right in there not being a definitive percentage on how much it does, and on their being multiple factors (though whether "bigger" is still a question mark, genes control expression)

I remember reading something about a twin study on homosexual and heterosexual identical twin pairs where scientists correctly guessed with accuracy which twin was the homosexual by looking at a section of the DNA something like 80% of the time (can't remember the actual figure tho).

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

This is @Cognitivedissonance and his brother.

Acudu billahi mina shadani rajiim.

War xaasidsana wuxu beerka caro ku goosey, naa yahoo

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

We can expect three pages of youtube videos now.

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

 

[Cognitivedissonance]

Because I honestly think he's lowkey gay that needs to come out of the closet before he marries a poor unsuspecting xalimo.

I will marry a Muslimah, illahay ha iga ilaaliyo gabar oo xaarka Iska dhaqin oo qansiir cuunto, tabartada Ma ahan waxas, Allahay ka Allah bradar

 

[gurey]

Let me clear up my argument. They were arguing that homosexuality is not a choice but has a lot to do with genetics. I was just pointing out how that assumption is problematic. If we accept that argument then those who engage in bestiality or other deviant sexual acts can argue that it is genetic also.

Exactly, where do we draw the line? Btw thank you very much walal.

 

[Yannie]

Exactly, where do we draw the line? Btw thank you very much walal.

I know it such a simple concept, but I guess they don't want to hear anyone saying anything negative about homosexuality. Your welcome brother.

 

[gurey]

I know it such a simple concept, but I guess they don't want to hear anyone saying anything negative about homosexuality. Your welcome brother.

It opens a pandoras box. Case in point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association.

@VixR @sinister what do you lot think about these people? They alreadygay through "genetics" but now they demand the removal of age of consent presumably because its unnatural?

 

[gurey]

When you say play the genetics card in order to secure acceptance, then so will other undesirable groups

 

[Yannie]

It opens a pandoras box. Case in point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association.

This is so disgusting. Those poor children.

 

[Yannie]

When you say play the genetics card in order to secure acceptance, then so will other undesirable groups

Yes, that what I mean when one type of deviant behavior accepted than other groups will try to find accepted also. I find it funny how these people here try to pick and choose what is deem as acceptable behavior and what is not. However, this is what happens when a society leaves the law of God and try to create their own. It's just one big mess.

 

[gurey]

This is so disgusting. Those poor children.

You know putin has the best democratic approach towards homosexuality. His government has banned teaching children about homosexuality in schools.

 

[Mohamud]

But... Bestiality completely removes the human intangible. It's a completely different paradigm. Will never understand the likening of sexual behaviour (however deviant) between two consenting adults to anything that doesn't have that specific connotation in place.

When you say play the genetics card in order to secure acceptance, then so will other undesirable groups

Yeah but it needs to be proved on both fronts. Like if gay can be explained scientifically that's relevant information worth assessing.

And as far as I know paedophilia has heterosexual leanings as well. I mean I don't think there's a disproportionate amount of boy fondlers in contrast with sick niggas that go for little girls.

That's a false equivalency no?

 

[sinister]

It opens a pandoras box. Case in point https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_Man/Boy_Love_Association.

@VixR @sinister what do you lot think about these people? They alreadygay through "genetics" but now they demand the removal of age of consent presumably because its unnatural?

@gurey I think you have to click on usernames in order for it to alert the user, I just happened to look back at this page to see you mention me.

Anyway, it is extremely simple for me. I do believe homosexuality is natural. The latest studies suggest that is the case, but that is not why I don't have an issue with homosexuality. Even if it was 100% choice (which I have no reason to believe), I wouldn't care ie. hate or hound them. That's because there's no inherent harm in two people of the same sex having sex. The example you gave is paedophilia. There is a very easy argument to be made as to why paedophilia is unacceptable. A child cannot provide meaningful consent. It is rape. I'm sure I don't need to go into this.

There isn't as much of a pandora's box as you think. The science is inconclusive (but points in a particular direction), but the morality is simple for me. They are not harming anyone, therefore it is not acceptable for me personally to hate or hound them and there shouldn't be laws that make their lives difficult. That's all it is for me. You are motivated by religion. That's fine. But there's no need to pretend there is some massive issue for those of us who are not religious. It comes down to harm. No inherent harm = not deviant or disgusting or troublesome etc In my book. It looks to me like you and @Yannie like to make things that are actually very simple seem complicated in order to justify your religious position.

 

[simulacrum]

I dont care about homosexuality but I cant stand how they always have to shove all that gay crap into your face "gay is the way" and they even started showing it on Tv shows I still dont know how they found it fitting to have a gay kiss scene in THE WALKING DEAD

Because homosexuals have power in Hollywood or people who want to spread it through art have power.

I agree with everything you said up to the second paragraph, in bold.

On the second paragraph: Due to the evidence, there is no pushback in the scientific community on their being a genetic component to homosexuality, there absolutely is, but you're right in there not being a definitive percentage on how much it does, and on their being multiple factors (though whether "bigger" is still a question mark, genes control expression)

I remember reading something about a twin study on homosexual and heterosexual identical twin pairs where scientists correctly guessed with accuracy which twin was the homosexual by looking at a section of the DNA something like 80% of the time (can't remember the actual figure tho).

I concur it's very difficult to say how much of an effect genes have on homosexuality. Some say around 30-40% while others believe genes play an even bigger role. Identical twins for example have the same genetic make-up but the chance that both twins are homosexual is like around 11%. for men and 14% for women. Whereas the chance of both them to have the same IQ is like 85%. Maybe intelligence and sexual orientation is not comparable, since we are all endowed with a modicum of ''intelligence'' whereas we aren't all endowed to liken the same sex.The presence of homosexuals makes evolutionary sense though, I mean who's going to design men's clothes, so that I can look fly for the ladies?

 

[simulacrum]

Yes one can argue that homosexuality is immoral because its against one moral belief system. Also , science have not found a gene that link with homosexuality behavior. So therefore you cannot argue that homosexuality has a genetic link.

Except it isn't immoral according to western values. However you have every right to find it immoral since there is freedom of speech in the west.

Just because they haven't found the genetic mechanism that leads to homosexuality doesn't mean there isn't any likelihood that genetics have something to do with it. Like I said before, there are homosexuals in an environment where it's completely condemned. So how is it possible that there are homosexuals in those cultures where homosexuality isn't promoted or remotely accepted? ''Nurture'' proponents can't explain it.

 

[Ferrari]

For the pro homosexual crew, instead of asking people to prove that homosexuality is a choice, can you prove it is not?

The biology of sex is what I use to conclude that people choose to be gay. When sex happens between a man and a woman, without being too detailed, certain changes happen to the woman's body making sex POSSIBLE. Why doesn't this biological response happen between labo khaniis?

 

[Mckenzie]

@Reign, i remember catching my nephew watching when he was 8, he was 8!! We are living in a hypersexualised world man

 

[brakenclaw]

i despise gays like how can you pass on breasts and pussy lmaoo fucking L's. instead they f*ck each other butthole smh