Gays brains react differently then hetorosexual brains

[chesty]

was it an interactive training session?

 

[justyxxxx]

it is unnatural because the basic purpose for sex is to procreate/propagate the species. Now you tell me how that is done dumping your shit in a tail pipe designed to excrete waste products. I already know what you are gonna say.

I find it unnatural, I believe it is unnatural. So far, I have not seen anything that proves that it is natural.

You said that the "basic purpose" for sex is to procreate, etc. While that is a basic purpose for sex, you cannot turn around and state that because someone gets off and doesn't procreate, then it's unnatural. Nature allows us the ability to enjoy sex while not bearing children. You think women and men that are sterile are unnatural because they can't reproduce and yet still choose to have sex?

Your reasoning is flawed. Nature also created AIDS, which not only can kill you, but can kill the child that you bear. That's Nature. It flies in the very face of your theory because it infects the population with a disease that does not have a cure, has killed millions and is spread thru sex, among other things. It kills people. By your theory, sex should be simply to pro-create. Sex, by nature, can also kill.

Nature isn't bound by your simplistic view of what it should be . . .

 

[justyxxxx]

The "gay gene" soft science of the early 90's done by LeVay[1] and Hamer[2]) has been debunked for years now. If a "gay gene" were such a case, how come identical twins who share the "gay gene" aren't both gay?

large proportion of monozygotic twins who [did not share] homosexuality despite sharing not only their genes but also their prenatal and familial environments.[3]

The... [50% odds]... for homosexuality among the identical twins could be entirely accounted for by the increased similarity of their developmental experiences. In our opinion, the major finding of that study is that 48 percent of identical twins who were reared together [and where at least one was homosexual] were discordant for sexual orientation.[/I][4]

Also, new research taken up by Mustanski[5] in 2005 (since the entire human genome has been mapped) have found no gene with a locus score high enough to show predeliction for homosexual behavior.

A possibility exists for a gene suggestive to homosexual behavior but it is more probable that it is learned behavior.

[1] LeVay S (1991) A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Science 253:1034–1037

[2] Hamer DH, Hu S, Magnuson VL, Hu N, Pattatucci AM (1993) A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science 261:321–327

[3]Byne W and Parsons B. Human sexual orientation: the biologic theories reappraised. Archives of General Psychiatry. 50, 3:230 (1993).

[4]Quoted by Horgan, J., Scientific American: Eugenics Revisited. June 1993, p. 123.

[5] Mustanski, B.S., DuPree, M.G., Nievergelt, C.M., Bocklandt, S., Schork, N.J. & Hamer, D.H. (2005). A genomewide scan of male sexual orientation. Human Genetics, 116(4), 272-278.

No one knows for sure why people are gay and no one can say that it's "more probable" that sexual orientation is a learned behavior and support it with facts.

Hermaphrodites have both male/female organs. Nature created them this way. Some men are more effiminate than others, some women are more masculine than others. This is true in both looks along with actions, in some cases.

Nature created many different types of things, it doesn't settle for such a militaristic, right-left, right-left, philosophy.

 

[Testosterone boy]

My point is that being gay period is not natural and what you do in your home is your business. I don't want to hear about it.[/QUOTE]
Interesting...since you started the thread?

 

[justyxxxx]

My point is that being gay period is not natural and what you do in your home is your business. I don't want to hear about it.[/QUOTE]
Interesting...since you started the thread?

Yeah - really - I was thinking the same damn thing. This back and forth opinion by chesty seems unnatural to me.

 

[perkele]

no it is not by definition a natural occurance. Jacking off is a natural occurance, eating pussy (male/female) is more natural than a guy sucking dick.

See, by who's definition. By someone who is gay it is a natural occurance. No one wants to do what is unatural because that would mean they are wrong or not right in the head.

Both are equally natural/unnatural. Eating food and communicating with other humans is why we have a tongue and a mouth.

 

[justyxxxx]

my hetorosexual brain hurts now

I really don't think you are 100% heterosexual, or even 98% heterosexual. I've got a good hunch that you would suck some cock with the best of us, given the right circumstances.

Some of you talk the talk, but walk a really thin rope.

 

[Testosterone boy]

Funny thing...I spend about a minute a year think about homosexuality.

Others are obsessed with it.

I don't see why we can't leave each other alone?

 

[redguru]

Both are equally natural/unnatural. Eating food and communicating with other humans is why we have a tongue and a mouth.

True, in all actuality, both are deviant from the actual act.

 

[Sub-Zero]

Yeah - really - I was thinking the same damn thing. This back and forth opinion by chesty seems unnatural to me.

lol