Thank you for the article.
There are many “muscle bulls” in my gym.
Some make gay slurs, but most don’t. The irony here is that these guys are same gender attracted. And wouldn’t hesitate a tryst with another well built guy.
You’re so right about the overcompensating.
I would never call a gay guy a faggot…unless he’s being a faggot.
This:
People that use any kind of ethnic or other slur just show their basic ignorance and intolerance.
Funny though, how those who preach Jesus are usually less tolerant than Born Again Pagan Queer’s like myself ; (
Says this:
[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
People that use any kind of ethnic or other slur just show their basic ignorance and intolerance.[/quote]
Then says this:
[quote]
Funny though, how those who preach Jesus are usually less tolerant than Born Again Pagan Queer’s like myself ; ([/quote]
usmccds423:
just an observation. Because I could really give a rats red ass less about what people think.
[quote]killerDIRK wrote:
usmccds423:
just an observation. Because I could really give a rats red ass less about what people think. [/quote]
You observation is that “…those who preach Jesus are usually less tolerant than Born Again Pagan Queer’s…” and that somehow isn’t showing “…basic ignorance and intolerance…”
Just an observation on your post KillerDIRK.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
There’s some problems with the article, one of which is: "Most researchers, scientists, and psychiatrists agree today that sexuality isn’t a choice.
The implication is that it’s “scientific” that’s it’s not a choice. But that’s a myth. There is no science to support a gay gene, for instance. Now maybe someday this desire, and that’s the extent of what it is now, will bear scientific fruit but we don’t know yet and so it’s now based on emotionalism and feelings – not always the wisest choice but hey, it’s popular to do it.
Then we’ve got: “If you disagree, then just ask yourself about when you weighed the options and made the choice between straight or gay” as well as other implicit accusations that if you disagree it might just be because you’re a closet homosexual yourself, an attempt to slam the door on discussion. It’s an oft repeated ruse used by the Al Gore-ians and the like involving trumpeting on and on about “settled science.” Well, it ain’t settled science. You may want it to to be but you gotta do that based on your oh so precious feelings.
Also, whether one made the choice or not to be heterosexual is not based on a valid scientific principle that leads us to the “fact” that the homosexual did not make a choice.
So go ahead and mount your board and surf the wave so many are on right now. I’m not impressed.
[/quote]
Who would ever choose to be gay? How does a person change their sexual preference? Just as I can’t not find fit women attractive, I can’t imagine how I would formulate a desire for men. The evidence is that sexual conversion programs are a total failure and cause great psychological harm. There may or may not be a “gay gene”, but it is established that sexual preference is an inheritance trait and not a choice.
I respect other’s religions, but you religious right types create bizarre contradictory positions by warping reality to fit the words of your bible.
[quote]aeyogi wrote:
[quote]pushharder wrote:
There’s some problems with the article, one of which is: "Most researchers, scientists, and psychiatrists agree today that sexuality isn’t a choice.
The implication is that it’s “scientific” that’s it’s not a choice. But that’s a myth. There is no science to support a gay gene, for instance. Now maybe someday this desire, and that’s the extent of what it is now, will bear scientific fruit but we don’t know yet and so it’s now based on emotionalism and feelings – not always the wisest choice but hey, it’s popular to do it.
Then we’ve got: “If you disagree, then just ask yourself about when you weighed the options and made the choice between straight or gay” as well as other implicit accusations that if you disagree it might just be because you’re a closet homosexual yourself, an attempt to slam the door on discussion. It’s an oft repeated ruse used by the Al Gore-ians and the like involving trumpeting on and on about “settled science.” Well, it ain’t settled science. You may want it to to be but you gotta do that based on your oh so precious feelings.
Also, whether one made the choice or not to be heterosexual is not based on a valid scientific principle that leads us to the “fact” that the homosexual did not make a choice.
So go ahead and mount your board and surf the wave so many are on right now. I’m not impressed.
[/quote]
Who would ever choose to be gay? How does a person change their sexual preference? Just as I can’t not find fit women attractive, I can’t imagine how I would formulate a desire for men. The evidence is that sexual conversion programs are a total failure and cause great psychological harm. There may or may not be a “gay gene”, but it is established that sexual preference is an inheritance trait and not a choice.
I respect other’s religions, but you religious right types create bizarre contradictory positions by warping reality to fit the words of your bible. [/quote]
There’s no established evidence that sexual preference is inherited in any way. there is however evidence that suggest that neonatal stress contributes to a dissociation of sexual affiliation from biological gender(transexuals). The one thing that is pervasive among both dominant and passive members of gay and lesbian relationships is the significantly higher incident of childhood sexual abuse.
this is why the highest rate of domestic abuse is among lesbian couples and the highest rate of gay pedophilia is among those sexually abused at a young age.
In other words, while homosexuality may not be a choice, it certainly isn’t inherited and is grounded in biological and/or psychological trauma.
There’s nothing inherently wrong with voluntary sexual activity between consenting adults, but there is something foundation immoral about ignoring the trauma at it’s foundation.
Further, it’s impossible to provide optimal physical and psychological health to a child without a mother and father.
The optimal nourishment for an infant is being breastfed directly from the mother from birth to 12-18 months on demand and the safest household condition for a children are with married biological mother and father.
Growing up without your biological father is particularly damaging to children due to a variety of factors.
There’s no way to achieve this with 2 women or 2 men as parents.
[quote]TooHuman wrote:…
[/quote]
And if a child’s environment isn’t optimal, what would you do?
I will start out with the obligatory “some of my best friends are gay/lesbian” blah blah.
But even incredibly tolerant and generally Nobel prize eligible me is just tired of hearing about gay rights/pride/marriage/rainbows/hooray the world finally gets it. (Not to mention the flip side).
It’s like the Macarena or something. Everywhere you go it’s there being played. It’s not terrible, chicks are dancing, whatever but how about all this energy into things like creating jobs, debating a trade bill, what do we do about Putin, how come our bureaucratics are so freakin inept but are never held responsible?
You made it to the end zone, spike the ball but no need for the icky shuffle.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:…
[/quote]
And if a child’s environment isn’t optimal, what would you do?
[/quote]
Non-optimal can mean everything from extreme poverty and starvation to emotional abuse. Can you elaborate?
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:…
[/quote]
And if a child’s environment isn’t optimal, what would you do?
[/quote]
Non-optimal can mean everything from extreme poverty and starvation to emotional abuse. Can you elaborate? [/quote]
I’ll cut right to the chase: is a child better off with a gay couple who can give the child parental love and support or a straight couple who smack the kid around?
Perhaps I’ve misread your post, but you seem to be implying that because a gay couple aren’t…well, straight…they’re not able to optimally nurture a child, whatever that means. But I could be wrong.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
[quote]TooHuman wrote:…
[/quote]
And if a child’s environment isn’t optimal, what would you do?
[/quote]
Non-optimal can mean everything from extreme poverty and starvation to emotional abuse. Can you elaborate? [/quote]
I’ll cut right to the chase: is a child better off with a gay couple who can give the child parental love and support or a straight couple who smack the kid around?
Perhaps I’ve misread your post, but you seem to be implying that because a gay couple aren’t…well, straight…they’re not able to optimally nurture a child, whatever that means. But I could be wrong.[/quote]
Physical abuse is far worse on outcomes than a lack of direct breastfeeding of course.
The effect of breastfeeding and the impact on parental bonding is significant, though.
Likewise, the lack of a biological father is also not insignificant.
the fact that it’s primarily MOTHERS, especially in the absence of biological fathers that hit their kids also means that gay couples do better than lesbian couples.
Bodybuilding is not the gayest sport on earth, there is always male synchronized swimming.
[quote]orion wrote:
Bodybuilding is not the gayest sport on earth, there is always male synchronized swimming.[/quote]
Sure.
Just go right to the deep end of the pool…
[quote]2busy wrote:
[quote]orion wrote:
Bodybuilding is not the gayest sport on earth, there is always male synchronized swimming.[/quote]
Sure.
Just go right to the deep end of the pool…[/quote]
You dont understand, if I tried to be the gayest, not even the most flaming figure skater would stand a chance…
Well, they would, but I would challenge their supremacy!
BB does not try to be the gayest or we would be.
We just happen to be the second or third gayest, but that is just a coincidence.
In totally unrelated news I am very excited about my new Samsung washing machine I paid an unreasonable amount of money for but it can wash more than 8 kgs and has more than 15 programs and an app!!!
1400 rotations a minute!