Does anyone remember a programme on Channel 4 quite a few years ago on a similar subject? I can’t remember what it was called. Basically, its point was that gay relationships were totally natural and were a benefit to the whole animal group.
I never understood why homosexuality ‘conflicted’ with evolution anyway because I’d always assumed that evolution was a species thing not an individual matter – ie for the good of the society. Each person/animal can bring different benefits to the group as a whole, and variety helps that happen.
Maybe some fundies would like to ask these 450 species of animals what their ‘agenda’ is? ;)
Yup, in research, we’ve known about this for quite a long time now really, but as you can imagine, it takes quite a lot of time of study over 450 species of animal and publish these findings with high certainty.
I’m still very glad its finally in print now, and quite widely accepted by the research community.
Iris – I think it was The Truth About Gay Animals, as part of a serious into sexuality. Might be on Youtube I guess. Would have been maybe 2002? Just goes to show how being “intellectual” humans can screw everything up. Animals probably don’t even know they’re displaying any kind of same-sex behaviour, it’s just what they have always done.
not so much ‘confound’ as ‘advance’ realy :)
Largest Elephant house in Europe with a gay elephant in it? Bet its beautiful appointed and decorated(!)
Think of it as a pre-emptive “thinning of the herd.”
There is such a huge body of research showing that homosexuality is natural and offering explanations why. There are many different reasons why homosexual behaviour is displayed in animals so there’s no simple explanation. It is not the same in all species. I believe that it is more common in sociable species which fits in with the main theory that the most significant biological purpose of homosexuality is parenthood. The albatross is an excellent example of this. Extra adults rearing young in a social group ensures the genes of that group are more likely to survive and go on in a Darwinian sense. I believe some call this the ‘helper in the nest’ theory.
With such overwhelming evidence that homosexuality is natural how can some countries still get away with making laws against gay people by defining homosexuality as unnatural. I believe this is the wording of the law against gay people in India. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if someone challenged this on the basis that it was NOT unnatural and called all of these research scientists as witnesses…
Monkeychops, many thanks for that suggestion. I’m going to have a look for it on youtube tomight as you suggested. It was certainly one in a short series (maybe three programmes in total?). I’d love to watch it again because it was so matter of fact.
Tony, if only someone WOULD challenge the bigots and the ignorant!
I cannot see how this fact can “counfound Darwin” (apart from the fact he’s been dead for years.) Homosexuality is just another trait of genetic mutation. Nature has no “master plan”. Gay people (or animals) are just an accident of nature, like blue eyes. It has to be said though that if homosexuality is totally genetic, then it would be a lethal gene (ie: one that eliminates itself due to lack of reproduction). However, even then, there are enough “bisexuals”, Asian men and married cowards to keep the force alive.
I cannot stand talking about idiotic things like ‘Gay Animals’ or the equally stupid thought, do our pets go to heaven when they die. Plain Stupid, all of it!
I genuinely wonder what the genetic benefits are for homosexuality.
This research reveals the Catholic Church’s argument that homosexuality is ‘unnatural’ to be the nonsense it is, of course. Homosexuality is a lot more natural, and seems to be a lot more conducive to genetic health than celebacy anyway.
@RobN : I think you answered your own quandry. (^_-)
Anyway, perhaps homosexuality is the natural genetic stasis, and that’s why it continually reoccurs; and it hasn’t become genetically universal only because of the procreational advantage of the occasional mutant heterosexual gene. Of course, I’m joking, but it would go some way towards explaining why so many of my heterosexual friends are happy to admit that males and females are a socially incompatible species united only in chemical attraction. (^_^)
Rob said “This research reveals the Catholic Church’s argument that homosexuality is ‘unnatural’ to be the nonsense it is, of course. Homosexuality is a lot more natural, and seems to be a lot more conducive to genetic health than celebacy anyway.”
And there was me thinking that Homosexuality was ‘a lot more natural’ amongst the catholic Clergy!
Do you think that the priests wear black shirts with white collars so that they can mimic gay penguins? Just an innocent thought.
Tony #7, this is exactly my thoughts. The wording is “unnatural acts” in my country too, and homosexual acts are perfectly natural in the sense that they happen in Nature, ie the real world, and not the made up version of “natural” as defined by Those Who Must Not Be Named.
So, in theory, it should be possible to go to court and have the law decreed unapplicable in this situation.
Rob Alexander #11, it took them 400 years or so to figure out Galileo “may be right afterall”. Give them a few thousand years and they’ll accept gay people are ok :)
Loved that, BouncerMan in Black!
It is my fervent hope that an academic paper is published in the very near future, that is, before I snuff it, on the ‘naturalness’ of homosexuality, which is what I have believed to be the case, all my life.
And to hell with the patronising claim by the RCC that ‘while homosexuality is in itself not sinful, the tendency is more or less disordered and leads to intrinsically moral evil’…or some such crapppppp..!
I shall get myself to Vatican City and drop my drawers in St. Peter’s Sq. and ‘moon’ at the whole damned lot, that day; I only hope that this horrible little German dweeb is still in office on the appearance of that treatise.
In its umpteen centuries of existence, wouldn’t you think that the RCC would keep its trap firmly buttoned, until it knows what it is talking about?
Galileo ring a bell?
They just look like the daft ‘tuncs’ that they are…(just re-arrange the letters in ‘tuncs’ dears, and start with ‘c’..) every time they open their maws.
That will have to be the year that the BIGGEST GAY PRIDE FEST EVER IS HELD IN CITTA DEL VATICANO…the leading processional float being a GIGANTIC hand, a la Kenny Everett, with an erect, extended, ‘up yours’ middle finger.
I can dream.
There you go!
Mr. Thor was posting exactly what I was in the process of writing.
We cannot ALL be wrong, can we…?
Catholic Church clergy?
Shit-head ponces, the lot of them.
I think the article is out of date – the biologist Bogomihl first broke the professional silence on gay animals some years ago and the count of species is well into thousands, including cocksucking vampire bats! Aristotle declared that homosexuality was disordered and exclusive to humans and in that form it was adopted into Catholic doctrine – I’d love to see them reverse-engineer the theology and admit their error. If you want to see ancient homophobia at work, then make Xenophon’s “The Athenian” your bedtime reading.
But who said what isn’t important – it’s what’s true that counts.
The report is, of course, perfectly correct to note the naturalness of homosexuality across the animal kingdom. Naturalists have noted it for a very long time, but were frequently compelled to ‘heterosexualise’ their observations to conform to irrational expectations of the human heterosexual population. The findings will be a new weapon against the opponents of LGBT people, but it would be premature to think that they will easily concede defeat. Some anti-gay extremists are already arguing that animal homosexuality is different from human sexuality, or argue that their deity still prohibits homosexuality amongst humans. For far rightist groups, pure denial will set in. The British National Party’s lone loon on the Greater London Assembly, Richard Barnbrook, simply describes all studies into animal sexuality as “leftie propaganda”. I suspect that as science demonstrates more and more prejudices to be irrational, if not dysfunctional, so the homo-haters will bunker down with creationists against the entire enlightenment. It will hopefully be their final stand before oblivion.
It’s not the channel 4 one mentioned above, but it’s quite interesting (and well funny at time :-P).
Watch it, the orangutan’s talent alone makes it worth the watch lol!
Even if a strong scientific case could be made that homosexual behaviour was natural, (which there isn’t) this would not necessarily justify such behaviour. There is a great deal of behaviour demonstrated in the “natural” world that one would not deem appropriate for humans. Some animals kill and eat their young- this is hardly a basis for arguing the case for infanticide.
What other behaviour modelled by penguins and three toed flums would the LGBTs like to emulate?
The ‘homosexual’ is a being that is as mythical as the Greek Chymera, a monstrous fire-breathing creature composed of multiple animal parts. The ‘homosexual,’ an impossible and foolish fantasy, like the chimera, or the fairies at the bottom of the garden, continues to develop ever new and diverse variations: lesbians; Trans sexuals; bi-sexuals; Trans genders; tri – sexuals; copra sexuals; necro-sexuals….. They never cease diversifying. They are as monstrous as the real life Chymera Isabel Quaresma, a Portuguese woman who was found in January 1980 at the age of nine, after she had spent the previous eight years shut in a hen-coop. Her growth was seriously stunted; she held her arms in the position of hens’ wings, and the palms of her hands were calloused. She had been fed on scraps; the same food as the hens received. Isabel’s belief that she was a chicken was a delusion, but her condition was real and for which I believe she continues to receive treatment for rehabilitation, to this day.
But the act of sodomy is no fantasy, neither are the negative effects on the mental, emotional, physical and social well-being of those who practice it – of whatever sexual orientation. Sodomy has been around since history began; it is not a modern invention. What is modern is its change of packaging, a change of name to the pseudo scientific and spurious nomenclature of ‘homosexuality’ and its antithesis, the equally fanciful invention, ’heterosexuality’. The use of the Greek prefix, ‘homo,’ meaning the ‘same’ and ‘hetero‘, meaning ‘different’ or ‘otherness, appear to give them authenticity, but this was a nineteenth century construct, invented by Károly Mária Kertbeny, inspired no doubt by Darwin. It was an attempt to legitimise homosexuality by making it appear to be genetic, a distinct sex, innate and immutable – maybe even more highly evolved than its ‘antithesis‘, ‘heterosexuality,’ another bogus “orientation”- coined later by the zoologist, Karl Jager. Indeed, David Mixner, reputed to be the most powerful gay man in America talks about his ‘ tribe.‘ The fact is that we born only men or women whose sexual orientations can indeed be in a state of flux until they get fixed at puberty.
David Attenborough ought to make a series about gay animals for the BBC.
Oh dear… david skinner, please take your bigoted, hateful, entirely unsubstantiated nonsense and fuck off somewhere cold and dark for the rest of your miserable little life.
Modern science has demonstrated beyond any reasonable doubt that the broad spectrum of both human and animal sexual orientation is largely determined by pre-natal biological factors. For the most part this is a combination of genetics and developmental factors such as hormonal conditions in the womb at critical periods during pregnancy. Real, measureable differences in brain structure have been observed which differentiate heterosexual and homosexual individuals, as the work of the respected neuroscientist Simon LeVay demonstrates, among others. To pretend otherwise and claim that sexuality is the result of nurture, culture or whatever is to ignore the extensive academic work that has been done on the subject and brand oneself a reactionary anti-intellectual idiot.
But the reason homosexuality is accepted, honoured and respected in our society is not because it is natural – which it undoubtedly is (indeed, everything is, because “unnatural” and “supernatural” are epistemologically meaningless terms) – but because it is life-affirming, positive, enjoyable, harmless and benign. There is no ethical difference at all between homosexual and heterosexual behaviour, and again to pretend otherwise is to expose oneself as the kind of bigoted individual who works on vile deluded fantasies of his own conjuration rather than the real tangible evidence of the world around him.
RobN gay people are not “accident of nature”. Do some reading before you make such unlearned statements, man. You have access to the internet, use it! Mutations do occur in genetics, but usually caused by caused by copying errors, and they affect natural selection. As homosexuals do not re-produce as a general rule, the sheer numbers of gay people means it cannot be a mutation, or an “accident of nature” by your definition. That I’m afraid is your own loathing of your homosexuality being imprinted on your perception of science.
“negative effects on the mental, emotional, physical and social well-being of those who practice it”
Really, Skinner? It doesn’t harm me, or any gay person I know. I have a great life and am fairly well sorted. Better educated than you too, it seems. It seems to affect you, for some reason.
But please, I’ll indulge you, show you evidence. And evidence from a scientifically recognised source please.
“Even if a strong scientific case could be made that homosexual behaviour was natural”
And would this matter to you if there were? No, it wouldn’t. There is evidence, and you chose to ignore it. You don’t believe in science, you said it yourself. Why talk about Darwin, when you don’t “believe” in evolution? The truth is you don’t understand evolution, and so choose to believe in simplistic nonsense like literal and selective quotes from the bible.
The simple truth is that homosexuality is natural. The simple biological fact is that it wouldn’t exist in such massive numbers if it didn’t have purpose. Because we don’t understand fully the purpose doesn’t mean there isn’t one, or we won’t understand it eventually.
Dear Vincent Poffley,
As you well know Peter Tatchell wrote an article in Spiked online, Tuesday 24 June 2008, that was entitled : Homosexuality: it isn’t natural. He then proceeded to say,
“Ignore those researchers who claim to have discovered a ‘gay gene’, gay desire is not genetically determined.”
“A few years ago, Dr James Watson, the Nobel Prize winner who co-discovered DNA, reopened the controversy over the so-called gay gene when he defended a woman’s right to abortion. He was quoted in the Sunday Telegraph as saying: ‘If you could find the gene which determines sexuality, and a woman decides she doesn’t want a homosexual child, well, let her [abort the foetus].’
Much of the reaction to Dr Watson’s statement focused on its homophobic versus freedom of choice implications. Largely overlooked was the fact that such an esteemed scientist was giving credibility to the flawed theories which claim a genetic causation of homosexuality……….”
Bill Muehlenberg also says in Culturewatch:
“A number of other homosexual activists have also admitted to such truths. Consider Australian activist and Latrobe University lecturer, Dennis Altman, who wrote this in 1986: “To be Haitian or a hemophiliac is determined at birth, but being gay is an identity that is socially determined and involves personal choice. Even if, as many want to argue, one has no choice in experiencing homosexual desire, there is a wide choice of possible ways of acting out these feelings, from celibacy and denial . . . to self-affirmation and the adoption of a gay identity.” “Being gay,” says Altman “is a choice”.
Another Australian homosexual activist has said similar things about homosexuality and genetics: “I think the idea that sexuality is genetic is crap. There is absolutely no evidence for it at the moment, and I think it is unhealthy that people want to embrace this idea. It does reflect a desire to say, ‘it’s not our fault’, as a way of deflecting our critics. We have achieved what we have achieved by defiance, not by concessions. I think we should be recruiting people to homosexuality. It’s a great lifestyle and something everybody should have the right to experience. If you believe it’s genetic, how are you going to make the effort?” Or as he put it elsewhere: “On the question of recruiting to homosexuality – well, of course, I am in favor of this. I believe homosexuality to be a perfectly valid lifestyle choice. . . . I am naturally keen to encourage people to participate in [the gay lifestyle].”
You claim that “the reason homosexuality is accepted is because everything in life is natural” and there is no such thing as “ unnatural” and “ supernatural” (and I presume open to scientific analyse). May I suggest, Vincent, that though the thinly veiled desire in your opening remark: “Oh dear… david skinner, please take your bigoted, hateful, entirely unsubstantiated nonsense and fuck off somewhere cold and dark for the rest of your miserable little life,”
may well say a great deal about your natural state, this is not a statement motivated by thoughtful, scientific reflection but a supernatural force, or in your parlance, “phobia“. Hate is a crime you know which no amount of science has been able to explain.
@ David – I seriously wouldn’t even go there David. My PhD is in developmental genetics from the british National Institute for Medical Research & UCL, your postulating a non-argument.
The evidence is now pretty solid and growing weekly. I wouldn’t go claiming Watson as being the ultimate autority on this scientific question either. As you should know, science isn’t based on one “guru’s” opinion. It is based purelt and solely on the evidence and if it stands up to scrutiny or not. The better the experimental methodology and the more evidence is produced, the more certain that the theory is fact.
This is not the case of just one paper claiming homosexuality in the animal kingdom, rather it is one part of a large and ever-growing body of evidence that this is so. Anyone can discover this for themselves – just google “pubmed” and enter the keywords for the research abstracts. If you wish to read the full articles (experimental methodology, discussion etc) then you have to pay for the service if you are not already working in the field, but the abstracts are sometimes of more use for the layman.
Given some of your world views David, its astonishingly hypocritical of you to even try to base your above arguments on pseudo-fact. All you do is quote one or two individuals (and one or two phrases at that) as being rock-solid proof that your world-views are correct and others’ being wrong. Much in the same way that you cherry-pick your biblical phrases for the same purposes. Unlike you however David, I research different view-points first (this has included kindly asking a local church minister for a hand with correctly interpreting the hebrew & greek versions of the bible…guess what?..homosexuality isn’t wrong according to it).
Honestly David, I’ve no problem in saying that all you’ve ever done on these threads is show yourself up as the intellectual clown you clearly are. The more you try to argue, the more comedic value you provide us with. Maybe I should look for your memoirs in the “humour” section of the local children’s bookshop one of these days.
Well done, Vincent and Will. I admire you being able to compose such educated replies in the face of such ignorance and bigotry.
David, homosexuality isn’t just a gene thing, it is related to hormonal influences in the womb. OK? This has been explained much better by numerous people on here but you go right ahead and ignore them all if it makes you feel better about your own prejudice.
Finally, sexual orientation isn’t in a ‘state of flux’ prior to puberty. People are born with their sexual orientation which only becomes apparent at puberty – a very different thing.
And George ;)
Homosexuals make up 1-2% of the population apart from breeding grounds like Brighton, where, through grooming, seduction, societal pressures and sheer lunacy, they may well reach 10%.
Will, I cannot spend too long on this issue but when you ask for scientific evidence showing the negative effects of homosexuality why don’t you ask the founder of Gaydar, Garry Frisch, or Kevin Greening, or Boy George? Why not ask the National Blood service? Why not indeed look at numerous past articles on Pink News, warning the practitioners of sodomy that HIV and AIDs are rampant amongst the gay community?
Does the fact that criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics also exist in large numbers mean that they are also born as such and therefore have no choice but to be what they are? Or in the words of Popeye the Sailor man: “I yam what I yam.”
You have the same affliction as Vincent Poffley: “Better educated than you too,” also seems to be more motivated by wishful thinking and blind bigotry than scientific reflection.
Can someone tell me; has anyone discovered a heterosexual gene? If homophilia is genetic, so too is its antithesis, heterophobia. Why is it admissible for “homosexuals” to express their blatant, genetic heterophobia by having exclusive venues and events such as gay bars, gay hotels, gay clubs, gay parades etc. which are discriminatory and non- inclusive towards heterophiles, whilst the genetically determined heterophile, is criminalized for his or her genetically determined homophobia?
Skinner, you are a jerk, go get a science degree and come back later if you want to bore us.
No, Iris, Everyone is born with the instinct to pro- create otherwise the human race would die out. This is done not through couples fluttering their eye lids at one another, or touching nose to nose but through the sex drive. This, however does not start off genitally but through emotional attraction or repulsion. During the early years of maturation this is malleable and can be trained in any manner of directions. It is only when puberty kicks, when the wind blows, that this becomes fixed.
The LGBTs are leading our children, not just to an obliteration of distinction between so -called “homosexuality” and “heterosexuality“, but presumably between any sexual relationship, such as that between penguin twin brothers, a penguin father with his baby son, a penguin daughter with her dead mother, a penguin child and horse, a penguin man and a bicycle, a penguin woman and a wall, a penguin trans sexual man with his transgender grandmother, a penguin football team…. They are all diverse and equivalent – all good. I don’t think so
Patrick if getting a science degree ends up demonstrating the level of scientific discussion on this blog, I am quite happy to remain a ” jerk .”
“Male fruit flies may court other males because they are lacking a gene that enables them to discriminate between the sexes,”
That is soo cool because that’s how I explain my bisexuality, I simply don’t discriminate between the sexes.
Well done, Vincent and Will. Actually, interesting to read some intelligent comments from a number of people – and a shame this has been brought to an end by the hysterical fuming and ranting, yet again, from david skinner.
Gary Fitch and Kevin Greening – two people out of a population of about three million, statistically no evidence at all – died of drugs overdoses. Their sexual orientation did not cause them to overdose. Many heterosexuals, afterall, overdose, and need their stomachs pumped out, in hospitals all over the land. Either look at all the data or none. And the vast majority of gay people do not have HIV, even now.
There is no sign in any venue in Compton Street, skinner, saying hetersexuals are not allowed. You can come and visit any time you like, provided you keep your bigotry and hatred to yourself.
Indeed, what a typically nasty incinuation to imply that gay venues are there in order to express hatred of straight people. The kind of reaction from someone who spends his life seething at other people’s pleasures, from behind his computer screen. The scene developed because gay people had nowhere else to go without being harrassed for expressing affection. As is still the case for most people who live north of Islington.
Vioncent is perfectly right to suggest you are undereducated. You know nothing about science or scientific method (as shown above), and of course, you are a creationist – which by definition, makes you an imbecile. A know-all and know-nothing, all in one go.
Homosexuality is harmful I guess – harmful to the feelings of a minority of people – religious nuts who just hate the fact other people are having a good time, and enjoying the Good Life.
“Everyone is born with the instinct to pro- create otherwise the human race would die out.”
And if everyone did procreate, the human race would indeed die out. It is estimated that we need 3.5 Earths to sustain the consumption of natural resources, waste and pollution caused by the human population. It is necessary for some people NOT to reproduce.
In any case, for the past 40,000 years, man has become the apex predator because of his ability to pass on ideas. Memes. we are a social species, we survive because we build very sophisticated communities. Contributing to the commmunity requires more than passing on DNA.
You don’t need a science degree to comment on science, but you need to be able to look at evidence objectively, which you clearly cannot do.
David Skinner’s argument that sexual orientation “can be trained in any manner of directions” can’t explain why twins, even those separated at birth, are more likely to share the same sexual orientation.
Will: You talk total crap. It is YOU who should do some research. Mutation occurs at EVERY single reproduction. It is a built in function called “crossover”, which is why brothers or sisters are not identical clones. As I stated, there are many homosexuals that DO reproduce, plus there are such things as recessive genes that can jump generations. I suggest you read Richard Dawkins, Steve Jones or Matt Ridley. I have done for years.
“The simple biological fact is that it wouldn’t exist in such massive numbers if it didn’t have purpose.” – That is bordering on evolution by design – you are starting to believe the crap the creationists like to spout. THERE IS NO PURPOSE! Nature’s principle is ‘chuck enough shit at the wall and some of it will stick’. The traits that stick are the traits that survive. Obviously homosexuality is a trait that has found a way to propagate itself, but that doesn’t mean it has a purpose, any more than haemophilia, diabetes or any number of genetically transferred conditions.
These factors are neither ‘good’ or ‘bad’, they may be beneficial, benign or malignant. Nature really doesn’t give a toss. It just IS.
Välkommen till PinkNews karl :-)
RobN is right: nature = Blind Watchmaker. There is a danger that people talk about ‘group’ selection. DNA’s instruction manual simply says ‘build another copy of me, to pass on another copy’.
If there were no mutations, there would have been nothing but dna.
Watch this excellent video, ‘why are we here?’
It is incorrect to assume that homosexual animals or gay humans do not pass on their genes. They do! Gay genes are so widespread that they are present in all sorts of species and so deeply rooted in humanity that no human culture or society exists without it- it is part of what it means to be human. From ‘civilised’ homophobic regimes to jungle tribes in every continent it is there. There is no doubt about that.
Yes, homosexuality has been proven to be partly genetic. Look at twin studies, for example. It is a predisposition present from birth and not a learned behaviour. Science has established that very solidly.
The real question is why is there an evolutionary advantage to maintaing a certain level of homosexuality on the gene pool and how is it passed on.
Homosexual animals do breed. Those albatrosses in female pair bonds still manage to lay eggs so must get mated. But the really interesting thing is the correlation between higher levels of homosexuality and gregariousness in species. That means that homosexuality offers a greater evolutionary advantage to gregarious species. There is a very obvious logic at work here- how are social groups formed in all gregarious species? They are family groups! What do family groups share? Genes! An individual with no offspring of its own will still be protecting the survival of its genes if it is helping to raise its younger siblings, nieces, nephews etc.
You can’t just look at the inheritance of genes from one individaul. Serious geneticists study POPULATION GENETICS.
” Everyone is born with the instinct to pro- create otherwise the human race would die out”
The earth is massivley overpopulated, to the point where there isn’t even enough food or clean water for everyone.
This over-population leads to a lemmings-like syndrome, i.e some people do not re-produce (gay OR straight) because of mass overpopulation, genetic abnormalities, disease and so on.
And if the ‘human race’and every human being as you say, has the sole objective of re-producing to preserve the race, then why do different races inter-breed? Surely it’s in white people’s interests not to breed with darker people as white characteristics are usually recessive?
David, science can solve and prove a lot of things; but human behaviour, personality and characteristics are not one of them. So please, do not insult my intelligence by using ‘science’ as an argument against homosexuality. It’s perfectly natural and does no harm to others.
Maybe if you ghastly bigots got your end away more often you wouldn’t be so obsessed by OUR sexuality. Frustrated much? :)
David Skinner: “No, Iris, Everyone is born with the instinct to pro- create otherwise the human race would die out”
I would dispute that EVERYONE is born with the instinct to procreate. Two of my straight friends have absolutely no desire to have children. BUT my main comment on that is that the desire to have children is SEPARATE from one’s sexuality. The two are different things. Even though procreation needs a male and female, that doesn’t impact on one’s sexuality. But then, homosexual relationships aren’t just about sex, are they? They’re about love just as much as any heterosexual relationship.
“During the early years of maturation this is malleable and can be trained in any manner of directions. It is only when puberty kicks, when the wind blows, that this becomes fixed.”
Er…..speak for yourself, mate! What the hell’s that all about?? Even as a child, before I knew anything about sex or relationships, I responded to girls and girls alone. My innate sexuality was there underlying my feelings but not expressed or understood in a sexual sense until puberty. Nobody “trained” me – both my parents are straight as are my siblings. I didn’t really become aware of LGBT people until after puberty as I lived in a very remote area and hadn’t to my knowledge ever met anyone gay. When I did become aware of homosexuality, I was able to better understand my own feelings.
Sexuality is something you are born with. You can hide it if you choose or feel you must, but in scientific tests where sexual response is measured, gay people only respond to same sex eroticism. That’s a response beyond their control or influence. This is because – and I’ll keep saying it as many times as it takes – people are BORN gay.
Well said Iris. :)
Guys – good responses to Skinner (especially George, Vincent, Iris). Probably best to ignore him though, there’s no scientific evidence for what he’s supporting and this is a scientific article. If it were something more subjective and qualitative, like emotions or social values, fine, but all of this too reliant on data and sampling to have a coherent discussion. We’ll just end up going round in circles.
PS Sorry Lezabella, should have said “guys and girls” :)
Hatred cannot be explained by science? Hatred is somehow “supernatural”? Oh my giddy aunt, where to start…
Well, first of all science has very good explanations of why and how emotions such as hatred emerge. They’re not even very complicated in this case (as, for example, the explanation of why we have evolved a sense of humour is). Antipathy, dislike of specific recognisable groups and irrational negative emotion are all very useful instinctive tools. Without them animals would be exposed to many harmful dangers all the time. In social animals such as chimps and human beings there is a strong selection pressure towards maintaining in-group solidarity, because this will result in the improved survival chances of one’s own genes (kin selection). The corollary of in-group solidarity is out-group hostility – it makes sense to instinctively dislike those who are in competition for resources, because otherwise you might be tempted to help them out and hence waste resources that might go toward furthering the survival of your genes. Through culturally-inspired misfirings in the modern world, the kind of evolved antipathy toward rival packs and tribes manifests itself in antipathy toward those perceived as different in some way – the blacks, the gays, the jews etc. As far as evolutionary psychology goes it’s one of the very simplest case studies you’re likely to find.
Fortunately big brains with plastic, malleable, adaptable modes of thought are also a tremendous survival advantage, and by using them to minimise the instinctive negative emotions we feel it is possible to regulate our societies such that they are better places.
As for the idea of the “supernatural” or the “unnatural”, those are both non-starters. They’re not even meaningful concepts in a scientific context. By definition, any phenomenon we experience is natural – it is an observed part of the universe we live in. All human activity is natural, because human beings are, and everything we interact with is, a part of the natural world. There exists no workable definition of what “supernatural” would even mean, let alone any method one might use to construct a valid test for it. Without any kind of evidence to support it, and indeed no method of ever getting any, the concept is entirely worthless from an intellectual point of view.
Somehow I doubt that will ever matter to ill-educated ignorant morons such as yourself. Ignorance and poor education are in themselves no crime of course, but being proud of them certainly is…
Vincent – I presume that is aimed at Skinner…..?
Interesting what Tony says on ‘relatedness’ (how many genes we have in common: how many common ancestors you share x the generatonal gap, which halves at each step because of meiosis; a cousin = 2 x 0.5 x 0.5x 0.5 x 0.25; brother /sisters =2 x 0.5 x 0.5 etc; uncles 2 x .5 x .5 x .5). (see Selfish Gene, ch.6)
So if I babysit, or look after the nest on behalf of other family members, there is a greater probability I increase the survival of my genes. And those genes for such cooperation would be naturally selected because they have a better chance of survival in the first place. By the maths above, a ‘gay’ uncle’s genes, including those “for” homosexuality, would have a good chance of being reproduced by his surrogate children. We spent thousands of generations in tiny bands, then the last two hundred or so in anything we would understand as a community, so I guess, genes that had some predisposition for a particular trait get switched on and have different effects today…?
“Does the fact that criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics also exist in large numbers mean that they are also born as such and therefore have no choice but to be what they are? ”
Actually, alcoholism DOES have a series of genes making people more pre-disposed to it. “Psychiatric geneticists John I. Nurnberger, Jr., and Laura Jean Bierut suggest that alcoholism does not have a single cause—including genetic—but that genes do play an important role ‘by affecting processes in the body and brain that interact with one another and with an individual’s life experiences to produce protection or susceptibility.’ They also report that fewer than a dozen alcoholism-related genes have been identified, but that more likely await discovery.”
So you clearly haven’t done your research there!
“Why not ask the National Blood service? Why not indeed look at numerous past articles on Pink News, warning the practitioners of sodomy that HIV and AIDs are rampant amongst the gay community?”
Again, another Bible basher obsessed with ‘sodomy’. Seriously mate, go out and get bummed and just get it over with. Now, jokes aside, how do you explain “15 Feb 2008 … 51% of those currently diagnosed with HIV / Aids in the UK are heterosexual.” That’s over half. Or, “01.12.2003 – Now 40% of Botswana’s pregnant women have HIV “. They’re just the women who have recived medical attention….oh and they’re not gay men! Again, “Women account for almost half (47 percent) of people living with the disease as of the end of 2007.” These too, are not gay men who ‘practice sodomy’.
You’re talking out of your arse with tired old stereotypes. It started being seen as a ‘gay disease’ becasue the gay male community were one of, if not, the first community to be affected with it. If the first community to be affected with HIV/AIDS was a Chinese mountain community who only sleep with eachother, it stands to reason that only this village would get it.
As for, ‘why do you ahve gay bars etc’; because of dumb arse attitudes like yours that you’ve managed to pass on, over centuries, to straight people who aren’t even religious! We feel safe amongst eachother and can be ourselves. And we don’t ‘ban’ straights either. We all come from a Mum and Dad so we obviously don’t ‘hate’ heterosexuals.
RobN:- “Mutation occurs at EVERY single reproduction.”
That’s not what I was commenting about. I am aware of that, I hold two degrees in science, but thanks for the Genetics-101 lesson though. I was commenting on your assertion that these mutations are what’s caused gay people, and that we are an “accident of nature” as you put it. “Accident of nature” do not account for the number of gay people. Evidence suggest a gay gene, or combination of genes which increase the likelihood of a gay offspring, but these probably have other factors before becoming active, back to Iris’s comment on pre-natal influences to activate these gene sequences.
“That is bordering on evolution by design”. Please. Don’t patronise me with your stupid insults. Evolution has a purpose:- survival. Its the mechanism if adaptation which leads to all life adapting to survive, and emergence of a species. This is not creationist theory, its science, and is noting to do with a “plan”. “Obviously homosexuality is a trait that has found a way to propagate itself”, yes, and that’s my point, it must have a survival purpose, otherwise it would not exist in such large amounts in humanity and the animal kingdom. Not an “accident of nature”. I’m keeping this very simple for you, by the way.
As usual you imprint your own narrow and angry world view on another rational comment.
Does he think left-handed people (also 1 in 10) are also accidents of nature? And that they are the work of the devil?
Will – thanks for enlightening us with your scientific knowledge, I’m sure we have all learnt a thing or two from it (though Skinner doesn’t seem to have much of an absorption capacity).
Lez – As much as I have condemned petty insults on this site, your suggestion for Skinner to go out and get bummed did have me in a fit of giggles. Keep the lesbian contributions coming :)
Ha ha glad to hear it Monkeychops, it was meant in a light-hearted sense! :)
Yeah, Monkeychops, I hear you… but sometimes the futility is outweighed by the need to confront people like Skinner, who trawl gays sites for some kind of kick, it seems…. I’d love to know what he gets out of it, he’s outsmarted and out manoeuvred at every comment.
Still, it does pass away a little time and it keeps me off the streets :)
Well as someone who is both gay and left-handed, given my mother is left-handed & both parents very straight (& quite homophobic), I know of the above two characteristics of myself I’m more likely to have learned from my parents as a child, heh.
And like others have said here as well, I was very much aware of my same-sex attraction even as a very young child, long before I knew or had heard anything of gay people. So the “grooming” argument is totally defunct in my case. If anything, as Harvey Milk might have said, I was born to heterosexual parents, raised in a very heterosexual school & town with fiercely hetersexual values, so if I chose anything, surely it would have been to be straight, whereas I’m still gay.
P.S: Bear in mind that the vast majority of gene mutations are relatively minor, unless we get into crossing-over and mutagenic agents, & also single-gene mutations vs. whole chromosomal mutations etc etc.
Will – Yeah, there are a few of him around (I’m all the more wary of it as people keep accusing me of being of his “ilk”). I think we know what he gets out of it – the reaction. Some are just happy with attention, no matter what it is. Which we inevitably keep giving him, so I guess we must be partly to blame. On the other hand, it is honing everyone’s debating skills and the more arguments we take on (as a group or as individuals), the better the position we’ll be in to fight back with rational thought and genuine testimonies when it really counts. Not to mention using a bit of science :)
George – I’m left-handed and gay too (well, I’m quite ambidextrous having had to grow up in a right-handed world – and I could never use those crap left-handed scissors with the extra bit on at school). Fountain pens – always a nightmare! Men are apparently (not quoting anything here) 1 1/2 more times likey to be left-handed. Wonder what the stat is forgay men? Hmmm….Personally I quite like, it’s very useful out on the tennis or squash court, mouhahaha.
Yeah, but once he’s getting a reaction, and we’re getting a laugh, so its a win-win situation, no? :) Still, he’s not going to get any converts here… talk about a Sisyphean endeavour. We might all have differing opinions, but flipping to straight to fit his small world view, well that just ain’t going to happen!
And George, good point on the “born to heterosexual parents, raised in a very heterosexual school & town with fiercely heterosexual values, so if I chose anything, surely it would have been to be straight”… although this logic is wasted on the Skinner types. They think one day we woke up and decided a life listening to persecution by his kind would be a great laugh and we all love the idea of living in a world of in-equality and religious hate. Yeah, that must be it, I was bored being straight and needed a laugh…
…and cricket Monkeychops ;-)
AdrianT – Yays, though I tend to get hit by the ball anywhere from the mouth to the nads. Willow striking leather is a rare occurence when I’m at the crease :(
I get the point that genetic changes are an ‘accident of nature’, although I don’t think that is the best terminology. Mutation and shifting about of genes is built into the system so it is part of the design. Without it life would be very different and evolution wouldn’t work in the same way.
BUT homosexuality is humans did NOT occur because a human somehwere was born with a mutant gene for same-sex attraction which was passed on and spread. Homosexuality surely occurred long before humans evolved and we inherited it part and parcel from our ape ancestors. Look at the high incidecne of homosexual behaviours in primates, especially apes. Bonobos are our closest relatives and they are almost all promiscuously bisexual.
If you accept evolution you have to accept gay people and give them full equality. Only the crazy, creationist religious fundamentalist can logically attempt to make a homophobic stance (albeit on false foundations…).
I do wish people would get over this weird fixation in thinking that gay people are infertile and can’t have children. Gay people can and do have children and this is increasing. It is almost as stupid as the assumption that straight couples don’t have anal sex!
Please can we all ignore the homophobic trolls. They only come back because people give them attention and there is no chance that any rational explanation or debate will changed their rigid little minds.
Angela and Maria Eagle MPs are identical, (monozygotic)
and not fraternal, nay. sonoral (dizygoti) twins and yet one is lesbian and the other is normal.
Studies conducted in Australia, that tried to prove that homosexuality was genetic, and consequently that those who had an identical twin who was homosexual would also be homosexual, did not come up with the required 100%, nor even 75%, nor 53%, instead, only, something like 50% of people who had an identical homosexual twin also proved to be homosexual . The figure was even less when the group under scrutiny was not recruited from obviously gay and lesbian associations but from an ordinary cross section of society. In such a group of 14,000+ Australian twins, it was found that if one twin was homosexual, 38% of the time his identical brother was too. For lesbianism the concordance was 30%. Whether 30% or 50%, all the studies agree it is clearly not 100%. There is no argument about this in the scientific community.
But similar scientific studies have also been carried out on twins to find a gene causing alcoholism, drug dependency and criminality – like the identical twins Ronnie and Reggie Kray. The results are similar to those carried out with homosexual twins but no one has found genes causing these pathologies. Admittedly we can all see within ourselves and family members traits, strengths and weaknesses that we would attribute to chemistry, temperament , personality, and metabolism and which would make us more susceptible or responsive to this or that stimulus or environment . I have heard of some people becoming alcoholics, immediately after their first drink. But there is no gene that makes me behave the way I do. I am not a robot. I am free to decide how I shall react.
For example, I might be genetically attracted to make love to every woman I see; but I might also have a propensity towards impulsive and reckless behaviour. Moreover, these traits might conspire with other characteristics of my personality – but whether I take advantage of a woman will depend greatly on my world view, on whether I value my family, or even whether I am worried about appearing before the magistrates on a charge of indecent assault – or worse. No gene compels me to give full expression to traits inherited from my parents.
All this has been explained far more eloquently by Peter Tatchell, no less, in an article in Spiked online, Tuesday 24 June 2008. This was entitled ‘Homosexuality: it isn’t natural. ’ In it he said, “Ignore those researchers who claim to have discovered a ‘gay gene’, gay desire is not genetically determined.”
You have it there from the horses mouth.
Lezabella, again from the horse#’ mouth. Thank you . You say: “15 Feb 2008 … 51% of those currently diagnosed with HIV / Aids in the UK are heterosexual.” So who is responsible for the other 49 %? It must surely be the 1-2% of the population who are gay. Say it again: 98% or the population who are “heterosexual” are responsible for 51% of HIV and Aids; whilst homosexuals who represent 1-2% of the population are responsible for nearly half (if not more)of the STIs. Would you like me to explain it all again?
Lezabella: “David, science can solve and prove a lot of things; but human behaviour, personality and characteristics are not one of them. So please, do not insult my intelligence by using ‘science’ as an argument against homosexuality. It’s perfectly natural and does no harm to others.”
I beg to differ: ALL nature can be defined by science. Admittedly, we don’t yet have all the answers, but if it isn’t science, then it’s spiritual, and I for one am not going to even dare to attempt to open that can of worms.
A great deal of our personality and actions are primeval, and although we like to think we are advanced, intelligent and civilised, base instincts control our everyday lives far more than we like to think. As for not everyone wanting to reproduce, that is cobblers. It is the single most powerful driving force in any living organism. Do you think gay men have sex because they think there is a vague chance they may have babies? No. They do it because of the reproductive drive which is demonstrated in the sexual act. Gay men simulate heterosexual sex, and even lesbians do using toys etc. Your straight friends may not want children, but you can bet your arse they still want sex. Sex is the incentive to reproduce. If sex wasn’t enjoyable, the birth rate would plummet.
David Skinner: “I am not a robot. I am free to decide how I shall react.” Everyone thinks they are a free agent. So what happens if you start doing weird things due to genetic problems such as schizophrenia? I demonstrate the extreme end of the scale to make a point: There are so many things you do totally subconsciously that were built into you from before you were born. Homosexuality is possibly genetic, but the jury’s still out on that one.
As for why there are gay bars etc, I would have thought that pretty bloody obvious. Why do Christians have churches when they can pray just as well at home? Human beings are a gregarious lot, and like sticks with like; If you would prefer all us gay guys to meet in your church to mingle, I’m sure many would oblige. ;)
Vincent Poffley, I quite agree that emotions are instinctive; I think that is about as close as we will get in being in accord. The whole palette of emotions- love, hate, anger, peace, fear, joy, desolation – that are displayed in human nature are all necessary for our survival, like the notes on a piano, all are equally essential.
For example, We all know what it feels like to be prompted by instinct–by mother love, or sexual instinct, or the instinct for food. It means that you feel a strong want or desire to act in a certain way. And, of course, we sometimes do feel just that sort of desire to help another person: and no doubt that desire is due to the herd instinct. But feeling a desire to help is quite different from feeling that you ought to help whether you want to or not. Supposing you hear a cry for help from a man in danger. You will probably feel two desires–one a desire to give help (due to your herd instinct), the other a desire to keep out of danger (due to the instinct for self-preservation). But you will find inside you, in addition to these two impulses, a third thing which tells you that you ought to follow the impulse to help, and suppress the impulse to run away. Now this thing that judges between two instincts, that decides which should be encouraged, cannot itself be either of them. You might as well say that the sheet of music which tells you, at a given moment, to play one note on the piano and not another, is itself one of the notes on the keyboard. It is our conscience that science cannot explain that tells us the tune we have to play: our instincts are merely the keys.
But Vincent when you say, “ Antipathy, dislike of specific recognisable groups and irrational negative emotion are all very useful instinctive tools. Without them animals would be exposed to many harmful dangers all the time. In social animals such as chimps and human beings there is a strong selection pressure towards maintaining in-group solidarity, because this will result in the improved survival chances of one’s own genes (kin selection). The corollary of in-group solidarity is out-group hostility – it makes sense to instinctively dislike those who are in competition for resources, because otherwise you might be tempted to help them out and hence waste resources that might go toward furthering the survival of your genes.” …..when you say this, you legitimise homophobia. Thank you very much. You have just said that I am wired to hate homosexuality for I instinctively know that this will destroy not just my family members and community but the whole nation. I have to choose between allowing homosexuals to get “what they want when they want it” (Gaydar’s motto) or my family. Well I love my family and hate those who will destroy it and you go overboard.
The homophobic hate crime is the brain child of a megalomaniac, someone like Ben Summerskill. For a government to eliminate feelings of antipathy or hatred in order to produce a dehumanised society that runs like a well- oiled – piece of machinery, sounds ominously like the film “Clock work Orange,” where the behaviour of citizens can be controlled by drugs or brain surgery. This is surely pure evolutionary humanism.
Finally, Vincent your filthy mouth and vitriol cannot be explained by natural causes; they come from some deeper, darker source – a supernatural source.
Oh dear, he’s back. David S – stop going on about genes and read what people above have said about influences in the womb. Why do you bother coming to sites like Pink News if you’re unwilling to take on board what people actually say.
Do you know what? I’m not interested in Christianity, but I sure as hell don’t lurk around Christian news sites so I can make nasty little comments and utterly ignore any attempt at discussion. If I did that, I’d think I was rather sad. You’re wrong. Accept it. PEOPLE ARE BORN GAY. You might not like that but it’s the truth, and all your posturing and ‘look – it’s not genes’ crap won’t change that. I note that you haven’t replied to the bit about the sexual arousal experiments – but then you can’t, can you? You have to keep on trotting out the same propaganda and carefully ignoring anything that might show that to be wrong.
What are you trying to prove? If you genuinely think gay people are evil or something, then that’s our loss, isn’t it and god, if he exists, will judge us, NOT you. Actually, if god appeared to you and absolutely assured you that he made and loves gay people you STILL wouldn’t believe it, would you, because it’s not about facts for you – it’s about your own prejudices and trying to give them validity using fake science and religion.
DO YOU EVER GET THE FEELING THAT YOU ARE WASTING YOUR TIME..?
YOU ARE WITH WOSSISFACE ..REALLY YOU ARE..!
SAVE YOUR BREATH TO COOL YOUR CUSTARD.
YOU’D HAVE MORE LUCK WITH JOE RATZINGER.
EVERYTHING YOU SAY IS SPOT ON HERE BUT THERE IS NONE SO BLIND AS HIM AS WILLN’T SEE.
GO SMELL THE FLOWERS AND LEAVE THE DEAD TO BURY THE DEAD.
I have read this thread with interest, and the usual frustration and despair when reading the likes of David Skinner, and while the thesis is interesting, and the discussion fun ew have lost sight of a principal.
We are here: we need no apologia for that, nor any explanation, nor an explanation of how we fit into the natural world. We’re here, unique individuals whose sexuality is outside the mainstream norm, but equally valid. We don’t NEED a reason, we are equal human beings with a right to life etc.
And bugger the nay-sayers: if we adopt their battleground we are in danger of accepting their definitions and solutions.
that wasn’t meant as criticism of any one of our family commenting here, not even RobN who from time to time really pisses me off, but to whom I do owe an apology for my last response to him – it had been a bad day!
Iris, fancy that, you never know when people like me are suddenly going to appear to upset their conversations; but why should I be willing to take on board anything people on this site have to say, unless by one in a zillion chance it happens to make sense? After all I have suspicion that RobN believes that all of existence can be reduced to impersonal energy, mathematics and mechanics. We are after all nothing special; we are merely bio/socio/economical systems of chemicals, which have evolved over an unimaginable time scale. All of life operates within a sealed box within which only the laws of chance and mathematical probability operate. . Everything simply came by accident out of nothing. Life is purposeless and with meaning. Man is less than a machine: simply a small pile of chemicals or as one writer said “…a little puddle of water whose only freedom is death.”
As for my ignoring discussion. Where did you get that from? If as you say that I can only make nasty little comments why is that respondents don’t simply ignore me and get on with it, instead of being so distracted by such a worm, as myself. I am not stopping anyone. Get on with it. Do you really think that shouting as loud as you can or using capital letters, as in ‘PEOPLE ARE BORN GAY’ is a substitute for reasoned argument?
Iris, calm yourself. You make a lot of unsubstantiated remarks. Let us take this slowly. We, all of us, including me, are evil; all of us have sinned and there is no goodness in any of us. And you are absolutely right; it is God who will judge us and it is only He who has power to throw us into hell.
As for God turning up and telling me that he loves you and me, homosexuals included, those whom many think are beyond the Pale – even mass murderers; yes, of course I believe that God loves you. He has shown this already -2000 years ago. He tells us this is so in his book, the Bible.
The first time Jesus Christ came it was as a teacher and healer. He came to heal the sick and set the captives free. He said he had come not come to condemn the world but to save it. But to save it from what? Answer: for the due punishment, that we deserve for turning out backs on his Father; a punishment being stored up for when he returns the second time – not as a vulnerable baby, but as something wonderful and terrifying at the same time. On that day, in the twinkling of an eye, God will make all things new. The whole of creation groans for that day. But there can be no impure thing to spoil this new creation. In our present condition we would pollute and destroy it. God had no choice but send his only Son, Jesus Christ to take all our filth upon himself , to take the punishment that we deserve and take it to Hell. Were we to think that our own deaths would be sufficient payment for rebelling against God and going our own ways, well then we have no conception, either of God’s holiness and purity or our own abject degeneracy. Only the spotless sacrifice of someone who had never sinned was able to satisfy God’s wrath.
But that was not the end of it. Christ’s living sacrifice was sufficient and it was accepted, with the result that he rose from the dead and lives at the right hand of his Father. He conquered death and the power of Satan. He opened the door for you and me so that we might have access to the Father – not when we die, but now, this very moment. He cleaned us up and sent the Holy spirit to dwell in our hearts, to enable us live clean and righteous lives. Not that we immediately become perfect because this takes discipline, we stumble many times. Like children learning to walk, we get up and keep on going. .
Homosexuality is no worse than any other sin – such as pride, hypocrisy, cowardice, lying, backbiting and adultery etc., but it is only in this life that we have the choice of repenting, of accepting what Jesus Christ has done for us by handing him our filthy burdens and accept from his hand alone the free gift of eternal of life. Or we can reject it and attempt to pay the price ourselves when He returns again. But Iris, someone has to pay. Either Christ or you.
Christ has healed me from many of my own self- destructive traits and He continues to work on me: I am a work in progress. He can release you too from the bondage in which you find yourself. In the meantime, Iris, I am involved in a spiritual battle; I am at war. I am like an agent in enemy occupied territory and the enemy is not at all happy.
David Skinner: Your first paragraph basically sums it up. We are all bags of mainly water, and chemically not many miles away from a large courgette. The point is, however it is we got here, we may as well do something while we can before we are reduced back to the component atoms from whence we came. I believe that the whole universe is just a whole bunch of accidents. Unfortunately, it made one really fucking big one when you showed up…
“Homosexuality is no worse than any other sin – such as pride, hypocrisy, cowardice, lying, backbiting and adultery etc.”
I don’t know about others on here, but I find that statement downright fucking offensive. That’s like “Having a big nose is a sin” – it’s not like we had any choice in the matter. Believe me, as one who lived in denial for many years, you cannot bury the truth.
“If you shut up truth and bury it under the ground, it will but grow, and gather to itself such explosive power that the day it bursts through it will blow up everything in its way.”
Religion is for people that cannot understand science.
RobN, You would agree that you are less than a machine: simply a small pile of chemicals or as one writer said “…a little puddle of water whose only freedom is death.” Then why should you get so upset with me ? Why should you expect anything from me.? There is no “ought” in your world – only what is.
Neither do you believe that there is an absolute truth or as some one said “ true truth”– for you everything is relative, there being as many answers to the big questions as there are individuals. Hence the demand that we be tolerant of all and any opinions. You may give legitimacy to an argument by saying it is tolerant, inclusive, modern, enlightened, socialist, stark, progressive, courageous, scientific, technological, post modern, 21st century, but you must never, never, ever, ever – on pain of public ridicule – say that this is right or wrong, true or false.
Si what are you doing quoting Zola and his declaration of a truth cannot exist? For you everything is a matter of individual and shifting perception. All views and preferences are of equal value and what may be true for me might not be true for you; what might be true for me in the morning may well not be in the afternoon. Why get so upset? .
But Robn, there is the truth and the truth will set you free. You need to learn the truth about yourself, but also need to learn the truth about Satan and the lies he whispers into your head about who you are. He is the arch liar, deceiver and denier. Finally you need to learn the truth about the nature and character of God and that though he loves you, even as you are – no more and no less than He loves me – he does not want you to stay as you are, for this will only destroy you. Until the day you die, He will never cease to love you and offer you eternal life. But the moment you die, the offer dies and you face an eternity without God and all that means. Who knows when that moment might come? Next year, next month or even with the next five minutes?
“Homosexuality is no worse than any other sin – such as pride, hypocrisy, cowardice, lying, backbiting and adultery etc.”
- doesn’t this show how useless Christianity is as a moral guide. This person cannot tell the difference between actions where harm is done to another person. Go and tell the family of those murdered French students, actually, their torturers were no worse than a loving gay couple. Not offensive to me, but sure as hell offensive to victims of real crimes.
“As for God turning up and telling me that he loves you and me, homosexuals included, those whom many think are beyond the Pale – even mass murderers; yes, of course I believe that God loves you. He has shown this already -2000 years ago. He tells us this is so in his book, the Bible.”
- Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence. You make an arrogant, grandiose claim, not only that there is a god in the universe, but that you are on intimate terms with the mind of god. you know his opinions on whom I should sleep with and how. Who know his plan for me. How do you know this information? How do you know the bible is inspired by god, rather than palestinian peasants?
Until you can give a coherent answer to these questions, you have no place in any debate. You cannot magically leap over all these hurdles, and announce that the truth will set anyone free. But I think everyone knows that on here.
My name is Uriah Heep and I am ever so ‘umble and your servant Sir..!
The comments on here are way above my head, some from Ph.D.’s and other luminaries and your own comments, David, have at least an air of erudition, the like of which I could never hope to emulate.
But David, you generalise a smidgeon-ette.
YOU SAY AT #30
“No, Iris, Everyone is born with the instinct to pro- create otherwise the human race would die out”.
I cannot fault that logic.
But am I included in the ‘everyone’?
I sincerely hope so, David.
I paid tax all my life, love Mars bars and eat porridge with far too much cream and brown sugar, so I am pretty much yer average bod.
But it has never once, not one little time, not for an instantino-etty-effing-wetty…entered my head to look at a woman in ‘that way’ much less engage in naughties with one.
Nor is there any likelihood of me ‘changing’ ‘seeing the light’ becoming ‘ex-whatever’ or all the other gubbins…not at the almost bleedin’ 70 that I am now.
In fact the only time I ever touched a naked woman was in looking after my mother’s every need in her last days with Alzheimer’s; I was 57/60 at the time.
So there you have it.
The word ‘everyone’ does not necessarily include ‘everyone’ as in ‘every’…
I have no Ph.D. in anything except Mars bars, oh! and a doctorate in knowing and accepting ‘me’ for who I am, without complaint and that has taken me a lifetime to achieve in spite of Pacelli, Roncalli, Montini, Abini, Wojtyla and Ratzinger.
In closing, I am heartened to know that it would cause you no concern to remain a ‘jerk’.
This accepting, philosophical, frame of mind will stand you in good stead in later life since like me, you have come to realise that what is bred in the bone is set in stone.
Wise man, David, wise man!
Keith from a very wet and windy, yeah! hailstoney SALFORD.
And it’s mid-summer.!!
Robyn, schizophrenia is demonic, if not directly then indirectly. Period. If we follow your line of thinking we would not have had the Nuremberg trials, or in fact any trials, for everyone could claim that they could not help their behaviour. This may seem shocking to you but I believe very much in demons. I would have thought with the level of deception, delusion, denial, distraction and destruction, clearly evident in nearly all of us, in the entries on this blogg that this would have been self – evident.
Gays do not want to integrate into society; they wish to take it over. Why is it that out of nearly 12000 athletes competing in the Beijing Olympic Games there were only eight lesbians and two homosexuals? Instead of which the gays go off and organise their own Gay Olympics. Or take Gay Sunday, held at London Zoo, where gays get a discount and access to parts of the zoo that ordinary dads, mums and their children don’t – that is after paying hard cash.
The Muslims also wish to take us over. They do not integrate. They have no wish to, but demand instead that we conform shariah.
Homosexual ideology is Hegelian and it is this philosophy that falls on us and our children daily. Homosexuality is the physical manifestation of that philosophy and it this to which we are being forced to conform through threats, public humilation, fines, loss of job and now the threat of seven years in prison.
Keith, keep humble for it was to the meek and the humble that Christ came. He said “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”
As for Salford, Christ said in Matthew Chapter 5.” But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.”
Keith count your luck stars that you don’t have fire and brimstone falling on Salford, instead of wind, rain and hailstones.
On second thoughts , maybe having Hazel Blears as your MP might be God’s warning of worse to come!!
You have all my sympathy
Skinner, the bible is a load of bollox. Pure and simple.
Its you who have MY sympathy, trapped in a crusty old book full of silly stories and contractions.
And “schizophrenia is demonic”????? WHAT?????? Are you nuts????? Care to back THAT one up with any science? NO?
Your lack of understanding of science and the world around you is truly, truly astonishing.
“Religion is for people that cannot understand science.”
Now that I totally agree with.
And given Skinners assertions that demons cause schizophrenia, one can only assume he gets a lot of comfort from religion he cowers in his hovel clutching a bottle of holy water and chanting over rosary beads.
Daemons. I ask you. Not I know he’s actually insane. And to think we even tried to debate with this poor cretin?!? He need help, folks. Serious help.
“This may seem shocking to you but I believe very much in demons.”
Ah, for f*ck sake!!! Will & Ciaran are both right. We’ve been trying to talk science with a complete nutter!!! A bona fide hospital case.
David Skinner: “Why is it that out of nearly 12000 athletes competing in the Beijing Olympic Games there were only eight lesbians and two homosexuals?”
I’d like to know exactly where that little nugget of crap came from. There may well have been only that many openly gay or lesbian, but you can guarantee there were many, many more participating. It’s just that most, (particularly in sport), are unwilling to reveal their sexuality for fear of reprisals from bigoted fundamentalist fuckwits like yourself.
British football is renowned for it’s homophobic attitude. I only know of one openly gay professional footballer, (Justin Fashanu), who came out before he was actually “outed”, and suffered both personally and professionally from the revelation, and finally committed suicide. Is that your ultimate goal? I’m sure you people would much rather watch us all fall on our swords than upset your status quo.
A total shame that a scientific thread with interesting discussion points has been wrecked by superstitious gibberish.
This is why persistent posters who fail to provide evidence for their claims about ‘god’, ‘satan’ , demons’ should be either ignored or prevented from posting in the first place.
Perhaps Will and RobN could at least fake a heated argument to get this back on track?
Am I not the biggest titttt..!!.. that ever walked the Earth!
There’s silly old me giving YOU advice on savin’ yer breff and then I goes and falls into the same trap mesel’…wastin’ mine!
Good custard-coolin’ gear up the shute…! Phuffff, gone!
What a waste, wot a fool I am..!
DAVID S., petal, go and find a trick-cyclist, ‘ma expressissimo’ and seek help. Your whole comment is full of non-sekkies; and as far as I recollect being told, sweet JC came to save all. No one group was singled out, not the meek, not the humble, as you say, and not the rich and powerful of His day as they thought. He didn’t tell them what they wanted to hear and so they strung him up; much the same as today, tomorrow and every day throughout history; hodie, heri, cras.
As for our M.P. Hazel?
Well she’s a cheery little soul, all five foot squodge of her; like a red-headed Piaf she is. I often bumps into her in Sainsbury’s here in Salford, on her trolley run. I am not of her persuasion but so what! She is cheery and plez enough and hey! who can throw stones! It’s not for doin’ it that yer cop it, it’s fer gerrin’ kowt..! Hand in the till job. So what! I think I’d be on that same gravy train if I had had the chance. It is no different to nickin’ a couple of paper-clips from the office; ‘s just a question of degree.
David! I find it hard to get angry with you as so many on here do!
You are the in-print equivalent of the poor sod half way up Market St. in Madchester here.
Only 30 summat; Bible in hand and uttering fire and brimstone to the scurrying, shop-a-holic scummy masses who couldn’t give a monkey’s.
You need protectin’…not least from yourself.
I shall read all your future crud with a modicum of interest and a great deal of amusement, as hitherto, but I love hot custard so I’ll keep me breff for the purpose it was designed.
Keep truckin’ Dave.
Keith – in a much sunnier, if chilly, SALFORD.
AdrianT – No, no, let me, let me…ummmm…..the BNP is actually a left-wing human rights organisation. Discuss. That’s should get them going and distract Keith and David for a bit….
“Lezabella, again from the horse#’ mouth. Thank you . You say: “15 Feb 2008 … 51% of those currently diagnosed with HIV / Aids in the UK are heterosexual.” So who is responsible for the other 49 %? It must surely be the 1-2% of the population who are gay. Say it again: 98% or the population who are “heterosexual” are responsible for 51% of HIV and Aids; whilst homosexuals who represent 1-2% of the population are responsible for nearly half (if not more)of the STIs. Would you like me to explain it all again?”
And, as I’ve previously stated (which you obviously chose to ignore), the reason that 49% exists is due to the fact that the gay male community were the first insular, sub-culture to be exposed to the virus; and since gay men only sleep with eachother it stands to reason that a large number would have it. The same as the haemophilliac gene that exists in all of the royal Houses Of Europe, as it has been passed down from the matriach Queen Victoria and since her grandchildren, cousins and whoever only bred with eachother; they all carried it and passed it on. I can go through any amount of analogies you like to get this through to you. That isolated communities who are exposed to an STI would hence have more of it compared to other communities. Would you like me to explain that to you again? Or do you actually understand the concept of what I’ve just said?
Seriously mate, your religion was only finalised after Constantine declared Christianity legal in the Edict Of Milan. He also called together and presided over the Council of Nicaea where 300 bishops attended, which again dealt with the Arian controversy about the nature of the divinity of Jesus. The Council issued an official statement of creed affirming Jesus’ complete divinity, and the decision was enforced politically by Constantine
So Jesus, rather than just being a nice man; was made ‘divine’ and ‘magic’ by a politically motivated Roman Emperor. Oh dear. Doesn’t sound too good does it? :( Kind of takes the credibility away, doesn’t it?
Coupled with the works of Charles Darwin, and these funny little things called ‘di-no-saurs’ I would say that your ‘religion’ is a load of bollocks!
You have no proof of God, and no reason to believe in this book of stories; and you only do so because you’re afraid of death and too weak to make your own decisions so you let an ancient book do it for you. Well done.
So how dare you, come on here insulting people who are exactly the same as, and equal to you; but just happen to have different tastes in the bedroom. What the hell has it got to do with you?
Drop the superiority complex and live in the real world.
All of you consider that Bailey and Zuk’s argument that “in many cases, gay behaviour in fact supports a species and can improve the chances of survival.” is a scientific fact
Well for all this talk of penguins we might as well be talking about moonbats, for the hard, scientific reality is exactly that which Pinknews has been publishing for sometime. This year alone it has given us this:
“The World Health Organisation (WHO) warned today that the HIV/AIDS epidemic may take a major turn for the worse in Asia unless countries urgently expand access to services to men who have sex with men (MSM).
Asia is believed to have the world’s largest number of men having sex with men, estimated at 10 million.”
March 7th 2009
“Around 7,370 new HIV diagnoses were made in the UK last year, according to latest figures from the Health Protection Agency.
Thirty-eight per cent of all new diagnoses were probably acquired through sex with men.
Although the numbers of gay men being diagnosed with HIV are slightly down on 2007, they are at their second highest level since recording began“.
“Charity Unicef has warned that Britain now has the highest number of new HIV infections in western Europe, with gay and bisexual men and black Africans most at risk.”
Britain probably spends more on HIV and AIDs prevention that it has ever done, by pouring tax payers’ money into organisations like Terrance Higgins Trust. Has anyone done an audit on them? Maybe we should the penguins or moonbats how they perform safe sex.
The truth is that practising homosexuals have a death wish. They know that they will die one way or another from STIs, and since the vast majority of them are atheists, they fondly believe that death will just bring oblivion. For many, like Garry Frisch, leaping from the eighth floor of his block of flats was the final and ultimate experience. So eat drink and bonk for tomorrow we die. This is all there is to a short and meaningless existence, so let’s enjoy. This cavalier and sanguine attitude to HIV and AIDs explains why playing Russian Roulette with bare backing and “Giving the Gift” are becoming ever more popular with practising homosexuals who have nothing to hope for.
I think this modern translation, from the “Message“, of Roman 1: 26 -32 will be my final entry on this blogg. I promise you. Though written 2000 years ago, I believe it is as scientifically an accurate picture of the gay life style, as one can get:
So God said, in effect, “If that’s what you want, that’s what you get.” It wasn’t long before they were living in a pigpen, smeared with filth, filthy inside and out. And all this because they traded the true God for a fake god, and worshiped the god they made instead of the God who made them—the God we bless, the God who blesses us. Oh, yes!
Worse followed. Refusing to know God, they soon didn’t know how to be human either—women didn’t know how to be women, men didn’t know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men—all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it—emptied of God and love, godless and loveless wretches.
Since they didn’t bother to acknowledge God, God quit bothering them and let them run loose. And then all hell broke loose: rampant evil, grabbing and grasping, vicious backstabbing. They made life hell on earth with their envy, wanton killing, bickering, and cheating. Look at them: mean-spirited, venomous, fork-tongued God-bashers. Bullies, swaggerers, insufferable windbags! They keep inventing new ways of wrecking lives. They ditch their parents when they get in the way. Stupid, slimy, cruel, cold-blooded. And it’s not as if they don’t know better. They know perfectly well they’re spitting in God’s face. And they don’t care—worse, they hand out prizes to those who do the worst things best!
I think that more or less sums a typical Stonewall Awards Evening. Bon Appetit
Most of the world’s ills and evils such as :
Violent physical assaults
Are all overwhelmingly committed by HETEROSEXUAL MALES.
So preach to them. You fool.
Yep…just read you again David and as I said at #71 you need help.
I bet you are a clone, in your own town, of the dweeb in Market St. Mad-chester who shouts all that Bible nonsense at the passing, tittering throng of a Saturday.
Well whatever rocks your boat.
Good luck at the trick-cyclist’s
David, you DO ignore reasoned argument. People make points which you then ignore. Why don’t you look above and count how many times you’ve done just that? No wonder I SHOUT – it’s like talking to a brick wall.
“Homosexuality is no worse than any other sin – such as pride, hypocrisy, cowardice, lying, backbiting and adultery etc., but it is only in this life that we have the choice of repenting, of accepting what Jesus Christ has done for us by handing him our filthy burdens and accept from his hand alone the free gift of eternal of life. Or we can reject it and attempt to pay the price ourselves when He returns again. But Iris, someone has to pay. Either Christ or you.”
See, that’s my point, David. Homosexuality is not a sin any more than being Asian or having blue eyes. I’m saying God made people homosexual because he has no problem with it. There may well be a Creator – I have no idea. But if there is, it’s not his/her words that you’re following, it’s their interpretation by Man (who, coincidently, you’ve already told me is evil and corrupt).
Your quote from Romans 1:26-32 is laughable. I’m quite familiar with that because I actually asked a bishop (yes, really) about it. He told me that it was a condemnation of behaviour exhibited during worship in temples and was nothing to do with LGBT people. You might also think about what issues the author of those words had himself – because it wasn’t God who wrote those words, was it, David?
I presume you agree with the execution of women who aren’t virgins when they marry? And slavery too – the Bible’s very keen on that so it must be ‘god’s word’, right?
Funny how so many people find that the Bible exactly coincides with their own prejudices, isn’t it?
P.S – all joking aside. I do feel that DS may actually be ill. That’s not a joke or bitchiness. I know he’s annoying but there’s something in his tone which concerns me. I’ve just re-read a number of his comments and I feel he’s not well.
Good bye David! Run along now go get your exorcist kit out, the kid down the road has a wonky eye, so I’m guessing he’s a demon in disguise!
Iris: I think he may have a nasty case of demons.
What he needs is good diet and exorcise.
As I said in #83 the lad is deluded and needs help.
O dear – More Christian Fundamentalism highjacking this thread with . . .
*One entrenched position
Yawn Yawn Yawn
I don’t know John K, it gives a very good picture of how a suicide bomber’s mind works: believe me or go to hell.
He still hasn’t answered how he knows the mind of god, he is still at square one.
This is interesting though: “Christ has healed me from many of my own self- destructive traits and He continues to work on me” – I am interested to know what those self-destructive traits were. Drugs? unsafe sex? Here’s the immorality at work: comit any wrongdoing or crime, and get a whitewash – a valeting service – instead of facing up to them yourself and taking responsibilities.
(How nonsensical: psycopath Dano Sonnex could walk into a confession box and be completely forgiven – just like many SS camp guards would do every Sunday, be absolved, and get back to the murdering business on monday. According to skinner, Sonnex’s actions are no worse than 2 men having a good time in bed – well fine, skinner: if you’re happy to say that ‘sin is sin’, don’t just do it on here, say it directly to the parents of those murdered french students, or the families of the Yorkshire Ripper’s victims, all murdered because of a man who had visions from god.).
Here is possibly someone who could not cope, with no self-control. To ‘come to Jesus’ necessarily means everyone else was to blame for the mess he made: he was ‘led’ into temptation. It’s childish.
1. If you think that gay sex is sinful, then don’t do it. And leave the rest of us who don’t think so to get on with our lives as we see fit. Don’t waste time and energy trying to convince us: many of us have been through that phase of belief already and have left it behind yonks ago.
2. There isn’t one single gene that causes homosexuality. Nor is there one single gene that causes heterosexuality, or one single gene that causes plenty of other things that ARE genetically determined. There’s no single gene that determines the colour of your eyes, for example.
3. So is sexual orientation genetically determined? My guess is that it is – at least mainly – but that’s only my guess, and I’m not a geneticist, nor do I have any expertise in biology, so my guess can carry no scientific weight.
However your argument that, if sexual orientation were genetically determined, then you wouldn’t have identical twins where one is heterosexual and the other homosexual is out of date. It was universally assumed until recently that identical twins always have absolutely identical genes, but a study recently conducted by scientists in America, Sweden and the Netherlands shows that they don’t. See: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215121214.htm
So, while it still hasn’t been proved that homosexuality IS genetically caused, your argument that it CAN’T be, based on twins with differing sexual orientations, completely falls to the ground. Not one stone remmains upon another.
“Christ has healed me from many of my own self- destructive traits and He continues to work on me”
AdrianT, its more likely that he’s one of these ridiculously entitled “ex-gays”. David Skinner is not different from the ex-smoker who becomes the greatest anti-smoker, its to validate their choices to “give up” what he did not have the strenght to deal with like the rest of us. They don’t see the hypocrisy of their statements.
Why else would he be here, on this site, with such an unnatural obsession with gay people?
Thing is, we all know his life of “ex-gay” will ultimately leave him angry, frustrated, depressed, and probably cruising a park at 2am….
…and all night until the sun comes up AND be back again next night.
You, Will, and we all, are wasting us breath and givin’ us selves eye-ache reading it all (D.Sk’s nonsense posts).
It is like a mad dog chasin’ its own tail…round and round and round and round and round and………pheww!
David Skinner, if you believe that gay sex is sinful, then don’t do it, and leave those who don’t agree with you to lead their own lives as they see fit. Trying to win other people over to your view is a sheer waste of time and energy: many of us on here will have already been through that phase of belief and moved beyond it yonks ago.
No, there isn’t a single gene that cause people to be homosexual, nor is there a single gene that causes people to be heterosexual. What of it? There isn’t a single gene that determines the colour of people’s skin or the colour of their eyes, but those traits are still genetically determined.
So is sexual orientation genetically determined? My guess is that it is – at least mainly – but that’s only my guess, and I’m not a geneticist, nor do I have any expertise in biology, so my guess can carry no more scientific weight than Peter Tatchell’s.
However your argument that, if it were genetically determined, you wouldn’t have identical twins where one is heterosexual and the other homosexual is wrong because it’s out of date.
It was pretty well universally assumed until recently that identical twins always have absolutely identical genes, but a study recently conducted by scientists in America, the Netherlands and Sweden (at the University of Alabama, at Leiden University Medical Center and VU University, and at Uppsala University and Karolinska Institutet) shows that they don’t.
So, while it still hasn’t been proved that homosexuality IS genetically caused, your argument from identical twins that it CAN’T be falls to the ground. Not one stone remains upon another.
William: Ref. my previous statement (35), Even identical twins have variances, otherwise they would be clones. They originated from the same egg, but due to the way the DNA is transferred, there are “variances” in replication. This is why no two animals are identical. I have a theory that there is quite a high incidence of the “gay gene”, but there is also the external influence. (Genotype vs Phenotype) – Many “gay” people may never work it out, or go with peer pressure or many other reasons, so their real sexuality may never surface. I think it requires a number of socio-environmental triggers to realise the “gayness”. I suspect this is why many anti-gay people believe you can “turn someone gay” – In a way, maybe you can, but the potential has to be there in the first place; all you are doing is awakening a dormant behaviour.
The theories of how people become homosexual or lesbian are as long as a piece of string and are as questionable and debatable as the theory of evolution. Try as people might, to prove that they have found incontrovertible scientific evidence, we are still left only with theories, for instance, evidence has shown that children from one parent families are more likely to become gay than those with both a mum and dad. What does that say for our society with an increasing number of children being brought up by a single parent?
Admittedly we can all see within ourselves and family members traits, strengths and weaknesses that we would attribute to chemistry, temperament , personality, and metabolism and which would make us more susceptible or responsive to this or that stimulus or environment . A distinguishing feature amongst many homosexuals is their hypersensitivity and this might explain why so many are artists and composers.
Each one of us has both masculine and feminine characteristics, which through psychological influences, especially during maturation, can be pushed in one direction or another. Many children go through what we might loosely term as homosexual and lesbian phases but for 99 % of the population, apart from the emotional need for intimacy, bonding, there is the need for the male to complement his masculinity and the female to complement her femininity.
However, let a young person once experience pleasure from sex play with someone of his or her own sex, and the sex play will become that much more appealing the next time. Let a person experience pleasure from sex play with an animal or an inanimate object and that sex play will also become that much appealing next time. Our bodily functions work in such a way that we irresistibly want to perform the action, not for its own sake, but for our survival. Physical pleasure is not an end in itself but a means whereby our bodies are encouraged to repeat an action. With regard to sex, if the pleasure and the relief are such as to outweigh someone’s sense of guilt and shame, that person can become as hooked to either heterosexual or homosexual pleasure as a smoker to cigarettes, an alcoholic to whiskey, a junkie to heroin, or, even an alarmingly high proportion of men to internet pornography.
Every human possess impulses from which they would like to escape. Such impulses often originate in the mind and when repeated are translated into acts. These in turn develop into habits. Habits take on an unbreakable hold, so much so that they begin to form a person’s character. Often a paedophile’s character, habits, actions and thoughts (“heterosexual included) remain hidden from his nearest and dearest, even to himself through the propensity of us all towards self- delusion and denial, until one day the mask comes off.
All of nature is unnatural. It is not as it was intended. It is broke . Death, disease, pain and suffering are unnatural otherwise we would accept them without the slightest reaction. Why do we spend so much money trying to counteract their effects? One day, however, it will be put right.
In the meantime, all of us, below the surface are a can of worms. The seeds of self -destruction lie within all of us. For one person it may be a propensity to murder; for another it may be to steal, or lie , or to slander, or commit adultery. How many times do we see, on the news, someone, like Harold Shipman, a respected pillar of society, without a blemish to his name, suddenly reveal, one day, what was lying dormant, only for it to break out with such destructive power.
There but the grace of God go I and if it were not for God’s restraining hand keeping me from my own self – destructive traits, I too, would headed along a road to destruction, as all practicing sodomites are.
Leaves one gasping, dunnit..?
AdrianT Thread 38
Thanks for the response . . . and encouragement to keep a sense of purpose and tenacity alive in these threads.
With regards the threads to date . . .
I am not aware that the nature-nurture debate has been resolved for or against heredity Vs environment in relation to homosexuality per se.
Although one can find cases of programmed behaviour in animals with little environmental stimuli needed, however even in these cases the environment is still often an important trigger even when behaviour is largely the result of a phylogenetic inheritance.
Interestingly, recent ethological research in dolphins points to the importance of homosexuality in facilitating social bonding in dolphins communities, pointing perhaps to less phylogenetically driven behaviours.
“Help, help!” cried Piglet, “a Heffalump, a Horrible Heffalump!” and scampered off as hard as he could, still crying out, “Help, help a Herrible Hoffalump! Hoff, Hoff, a Hellible Horralump! Holl, Holl, a Hoffable Hellerump!” And he didn’t stop crying and scampering until he got to Christopher Robins house.
The World of Pooh, A. A. Milne, 1957
“Beware of the Heffalump!”
“The theories of how people become homosexual or lesbian are as long as a piece of string and are as questionable and debatable as the theory of evolution.”
Really David… so I suppose your theories on how “demons” cause schizophrenia are more rock solid. Please, enlighten us?
“A distinguishing feature amongst many homosexuals is their hypersensitivity”
Evidence for this? No? Demons again perhaps?
“like Harold Shipman, a respected pillar of society, without a blemish to his name, suddenly reveal, one day, what was lying dormant, only for it to break out with such destructive power.”
Yes, and he was straight. Demons again?
No, seriously, explain to me the “science” behind demon possession with regards schizophrenia. I am fascinated.
Will if I could explain the science behind the transcendent it would no longer be transcendent
And if you cannot produce any evidence to explain it, or means of testing your hypothesis, it isn’t Science.
And if you could, it wouldn’t be faith in any case.
“…let a young person once experience pleasure from sex play with someone of his or her own sex, and the sex play will become that much more appealing the next time..” – David Skinner
That theory certainly doesn’t work in my case. I was homosexual years before I had sex with anyone.
Nor does your analogy with smoking work. I’m a smoker myself (although I’m trying to give up), but not once in the years before I began smoking did I ever dream that I was smoking a cigarette and then wake up to find my bedclothes mysteriously sprinkled with tobacco ash.
“…let a young person once experience pleasure from sex play with someone of his or her own sex, and the sex play will become that much more appealing the next time.” – David Skinner
That theory certainly doesn’t work in my case. I was homosexual long before I ever had sex with anyone.
Nor does your analogy with smoking work. I’m a smoker myself (although I’m trying to give up), but not once in the years before I started smoking did I ever dream that I was smoking a cigarette and then wake up to find my bedclothes mysteriously sprinkled with tobacco ash.
@David Skinner. Not sexual experiences make someone a gay person. It starts with falling in love, just as it has happened with you.
“Will if I could explain the science behind the transcendent it would no longer be transcendent”
What a cop out answer! So, let me get this right…. Schizophrenia is caused by demons, but you have no proof of that, even though there is scientific evidence, and becuase you don’t understand it, hence it must be demons?!?
What a load of rubbish. Do you seriously expect any person, anyone normal that is, to take you seriously?
Not only is your bigotry unfounded with your version of pseudo-science, but you use demons to explain away things your don’t understand. Such utter nonsense. David, and grow up.
You need help. Seriously.
Time you moved to the 21st century… it must be lonely back in 1492.
Will is right, the time for people like you David is long gone. No more buringin people as witches, no more blaming demons for mental health issues, no more persecution of other beliefs.
Its people like you who have been, and still are, the scourge of humanity all throughout history. Your rantings and persecutions set mankind back hundreds of years. People like you caused the dark ages and the suppression of learning. Millions of innocent people died horrible deaths becuase of your so called “demons” and small minded interpretations of “gods will”.
You’re a dinosaur.
You are deeply offensive to rational though, and to your fellow man.
David Skinner: “How many times do we see, on the news, someone, like Harold Shipman,”
- Out of a population of 60 million, there will always be sociopaths, psycopaths somewhere. We are a poorly evolved species, with over-developed adrenaline glands and under-developed outer cortexes.
DS: “if it were not for God’s restraining hand keeping me from my own self – destructive traits, I too, would headed along a road to destruction,”
- See how faith destroys any sense of self-worth. If the only thing that stops you from mass-murder is because god tells you not to, then you probably need some supervision in the first place. Evidence shows not only that less religious countries are likely to be better off, more educated, have lower crime rates than religious ones. But from the events seen in Beirut, Belfast, Baghdad, Bali, god’s hand leads directly to the path of destruction!
It was belief in demons that led to the genocide of the Inquisition. In Saudi Arabia, women are still being put to death today for witchcraft, incidentally. And – Seung Hui Cho, the perpetrator of the Virginia Tech 2007 murders, was given an exorcism, instead of getting proper psychiatric help.
I shudder to think what society would be like with a Skinner theocracy. In Europe, it is estimated over 50,000 were murdered on accusations of witchcraft from the 1400s until the 1850’s, inspired by, among others, Acts 8:8; 19:19. Carl Sagan in The Demon-Haunted World (1995) described some of the medieval witch trial methods, including those prescribed by the Malleus maleficarum (the blue print for torture written by Dominican monks, on the orders of the pope):
“What the Malleus comes down to, pretty much, is that if you’re accused of witchcraft, you’re a witch. Torture is an unfailing means to demonstrate the validity of the accusation. There are no rights of the defendant. There is no opportunity to confront the accusers.”
And he describes the vicious circle that ensued from the torture of accused witches:
“The more who, under torture, confessed to witchcraft, the harder it was to maintain that the whole business was mere fantasy. Since each “witch” was made to implicate others, the numbers grew exponentially. These constituted “frightful proofs that the Devil is still alive,” as it was later put in America in the Salem witch trials. In an credulous age, the most fantastic testimony was soberly accepted – that tens of thousands of witches had gathered for a Sabbath in public squares in France, or that 12,000 of them darkened the skies as they flew to Newfoundland. …
In the witch trials, mitigating evidence or defense witnesses were inadmissible. In any case, it was nearly impossible to provide compelling alibis for accused witches: The rules of evidence had a special character. For example, in more than one case a husband attested that his wife was asleep in his arms at the very moment she was accused of frolicking with the devil at a witch’s Sabbath; but the archbishop patiently explained that a demon had taken the place of the wife. The husbands were not imagine that their powers of perception could exceed Satan’s powers of deception.”
Unreal that there are people who still believe this nonsense. But they do, and on youtube you can see exorcisms being inflicted on goung gay people.
Will, I have no desire to move back to 1492. Back further maybe, to the time, 2000 years ago when Jesus Christ said:
“God’s Spirit is on me; he’s chosen me to preach the Message of good news to
the poor, Sent me to announce pardon to prisoners and recovery of sight to the blind, To set the burdened and battered free…” (Luke 4: 16-21)
Or the time when he was curing many of diseases, plagues and evil spirits and he said, “Go back and tell John ( the Baptist) what you have just seen and heard:
The blind see, The lame walk, Lepers are cleansed, The deaf hear, The dead are raised, The wretched of the earth have God’s salvation hospitality extended to them.(Luke 7:21-23)
Or “If you hold to my teaching, you are really my disciples. Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” John 8
William I don’t understand what you mean by “but not once in the years before I started smoking did I ever dream that I was smoking a cigarette and then wake up to find my bedclothes mysteriously sprinkled with tobacco ash.” Surely the sequence of events is that you woke up; thought of that six – foot long cigarette; that made you crave for the smell and taste of one; this then led to a desire and determination to light up and hey presto – a pile of ash on the bedclothes. It originates in the mind; you need to renew your thinking . Another word for this is “repenser“: to repent!
Wim from Holland, I do not doubt, that for many, falling in love is the first stage to consummation, though it is equally true that for many, (both heterosexual and homosexual) love just complicates things and all they want is sex.
But there are also those in incestuous, paedophile, bestial and plainly adulterous relationships, who could equally say that it was love that drove them to abandon their wives and husbands, as with the case of the June Bride, Bishop Gene Robinson of the USA.
When we make someone an idol, the thing we cannot possibly live without, then that is not love but idolatry and slavery to the object of our desires. Such relationships feed off one another parasitically. These are not love. I have been there, in the past, many times, unfortunately.
Finally, I am guessing that most of you are prepared to believe that we descend from gay apes, gay worms or even gay penguins millions and billions of years ago, on the say so of quack scientists like Richard Dawkins and David Attenborough. And Yet the eye witness accounts and irrefutable historical, first hand documentation that Jesus Christ walked this earth only two thousand years ago, you dismiss without a moments thought.
“quack scientists like Richard Dawkins and David Attenborough.”
Quacks? You don’t understand evolution or any science for that matter, and you believe demons cause schizophrenia, so they’re “quacks”??? And you know better, do you? The audacity of a fool like you to call someone infinitely more learned than you a quack! It shows your disturbing lack of education.
And where are these “eye witness accounts” you talk of? The bible? That’s just a story. Ha! That’s no more proof than a Stephen King novel is! And besides, since when does the proof that jesus existed, automatically make him a god? Or how does that discredit evolution?
The simple reality is that if you did go back 2000 to meet jesus, if he existed, he would shun you. For people like you are the polar opposite of his teachings. You hate when he promoted tolerance. You think in small narrow ways, when he defied the norms. You would be another Pharisee to jesus.
And you comment “love just complicates things” is a real eye opener. I’m guessing you are deeply frustrated and have some sexual health issues to say something like that. All goes back to the ex-gay thing doesn’t it? It must pain you to see others who have come to accept and rejoice in their sexuality laughing at a demented weak minded cretin like you.
We’d feel sorry for you, if you weren’t such a fool.
David Skinner, I don’t think that you’ve understood the point that I’m making, which is that to be a smoker you have to DO something: you have to start smoking. You may be CURIOUS to try smoking before you have ever started, or you may want to try smoking because your mates are doing it, but you don’t experience a CRAVING for tobacco until you’ve become a smoker. A craving for sex, however, can manifest itself long before you actually have sex – or even if you never do.
To be homosexual (or heterosexual) you don’t have to DO anything at all. I knew that I was homosexual, although I tried to ignore the fact in the hope that it would go away, – I didn’t know any better in those days – for years before I had sex with anyone.
If all the people that you “fall for” are people of the same sex and all your erotic dreams (which are, of course, outside your control) are about people of the same sex, then you’re homosexual whether you actually engage in sex or not. You can call yourself a “non-practising” homosexual, a “celibate” homosexual, a “chaste” homosexual or whatever, but you’re still homosexual. Even if you take a vow of life-long celibacy and succeed in keeping it, you’ll still be homosexual. (Exactly the same pattern applies if you’re heterosexual.)
On the other hand, while you can be an ex-smoker, or even an non-smoker most of the time who occasionally gives in and has a fag, you can’t be a “non-practising” smoker or a “non-smoking” smoker.
Simon LeVay (and whether or not one agrees with other things that he wrote on the subject is irrelevant in the present context) put it very nicely when he said that a woman can meaningfully say, “I’ve never slept with another woman, but I know I’m a lesbian”, whereas it makes no sense at all to say, “I’ve never broken into anyone’s house, but I know I’m a burglar.”
William, I understand . But between the moment you were born and the time you realised that you had same sex feelings, a great deal had happened in the way of interventions that caused your emotional development to go one way rather than another . The reality is that homosexuality can never be satisfying in the long term. The depression and bio -polar depression that many homosexuals experience, though maybe partly explained by societal rejection, I believe, is because whatever it is that one was denied as a baby or young child can never be satisfied by a substitute father figure, or for a girl, for a substitute mother. Maybe it is far more complicated than this, but I don’t believe that there is any future pursuing the homosexual path.
I also believe that healing is possible. There are people who have changed orientation; there are others who wish to change but at present are unable to and finally there are those who are set on the path, irrespective of the long term consequences. They are headless of their own safety or that of others.
Joe Nicolosi of NARTH did run a course for healing in London a few months back and it was extremely successful. That is a fact. It was called Sex in the City. If you were to go onto Anglican Mainstream and put in the search for Jo Nicolas , I am sure you could pursue this more profitably.
But it all depends on whether you want healing or not.
David Skinner, you don’t know what you’re talking about. My own dad was marvellous, so I never needed to look for a substitute father figure. He passed on some years ago, but I knew that I was gay many, many years before that. And if I’d been looking for a “substitute father figure” – which I know I never have – why did I always go for guys in my own age group? Furthermore, if you’re going to suggest that my relationship with him was somehow “unsatisfactory” or “defective” without my having realised it, does that mean that, if it HAD been satisfactory by some unspecified standards, it would eventually have become sexual? The whole theory’s just a lot of absurd, airy-fairy claptrap. It simply doesn’t, as they say nowadays, “stack up”.
As for healing, homosexuality isn’t an illness or a disorder and therefore doesn’t need to be “healed” any more than heterosexuality does. What will you be suggesting next – that I seek healing for my blue eyes?
I’ve been aware for some years of Nicolosi and his “reparative” hocus-pocus, and I wouldn’t recommend anyone to touch it with a barge-pole. My advice to anyone who is offered any kind of “healing” or “treatment” for his/her homosexuality would consist of just three short words: just say no. (What some MAY need, of course, is healing for their lack of ability to accept their natural sexuality or counselling to help them to express it responsibly.)
This whole thread should be called TROLLS AND THEIR FEEDERS.
People, please remember – DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!!
“Joe Nicolosi of NARTH did run a course for healing in London a few months back and it was extremely successful.”
Bingo. And there we have it. He’s ex-gay. I knew it.
David, you’re a weak-minded fool, and you’re on your own with your ex-gay rubbish. I doesn’t work. There’s no proof at all that it works. And there never will be. And what have you got out of it? Trawling a gay site for support. You’re beneath contempt, and we’re all way, way above your sad little denial.
And you know what? We’re all a lot happier than you are and you’ll ever be.
@David Skinner. Why do you have to complicate simple things. I do love my partner. Do you yours ? Well O.K. Succes !
Tony: “People, please remember – DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!!!”
Usually I don’t mind discussing things with people who have different opinions to mine, or with the ultra-religious people who appear occasionally, but DS is someone who doesn’t do discussions. My guess is that he’s hear to take up people’s time, distract and attempt to upset people. He won’t do the last of those because we can all see him for the pitiful (ie deserving of pity) person he is, but I think I agree with Tony on this one. We’re wasting our breath.
*’here’ – long day
Well, there you have it, Skinner neatly pigeon- holed , stereotyped, done and dusted. But all you will have done is to have silenced with the “ success” of clause 61( formerly 58 of the Corners and Justice Bill that will no doubt be debated and voted for in the House of Lords today) the only voice capable of combating all that separates you from a fate worse than death. Your mockery, contempt and vilification will be short – lived for in persecuting the Christians, all you will have done is to open wide the door to Islam. I suppose they can only kill you once, but it is the way that they do it you want to worry about. But none of this makes sense to you. But believe me, within a decade it will – if not sooner
“separates you from a fate worse than death”
Who says? You? You’ve proven you can barely think for yourself. You don’t understand the world around you. You cannot accept change to your narrow medieval views. You are unable to engage in rational discussion. You deny what you see and evidence put to you on the basis you don’t understand it. You’re blind to reason. You think demons are responsible for mental illnesses. You are so weak minded and fearful you could not deal with being gay, so now you are nothing more than a programmed mouthpiece for a religious movement who advocates sexual repression not seen since the nazi party.
And you think WE are going to listen to YOU as someone who has an expert opinion of what’s in store for us?!?
Please, don’t make me laugh. I surprised you can keep it together to open your frond door in the morning without assistance.
Oh, and its been noted that your racist view of islam is supposed to frighten us? You’re less of a bigot than they are? You’re all bigots. Why split hairs? Islam, christianity, bahai, judaism… its all the same nonsense, just with a different book cover. Mumbo-jumbo for the fearful.
ONWARDS, CHRISTIAN CRACKPOTS….
Here we go again, whining on about imagined persecution, just like that stupid school receptionist whose daughter upset her class mates telling them they were all going to hell.
The National Secular Society will do a far better job than you in keeping religion where it belongs, inside its churches, mosques and temples, and not getting any special treatment or exemptions in the public sphere. In any case, who is the greatest supporter of Shariafascism? None other than the Primate of England!
Now look here, you lot are sounding more and more like Ann Robinson. Will, I can assure you that not only can I close doors, I can also tie my shoe laces. Christianity is a billion light years away from Islam and soon, within your lifetime, you will have the luxury of seeing the difference.
AdrianT as for the National Secular Society sorting out Islam, they have not done a very good job so far and are not likely to do any better in the future. In fact I would imagine that they are scared stiff; but it is so much easier to bash Christians, knowing that they wont pronounce a death sentence on them. But AdrianT, your last sentence gave me a glimmer of hope in that you seem to be faintly aware that, yes, the prospect of Shariah is not an imaginary possibility. Reality is dawning. Certainly you will get no help from Rowan Williams, but Michael Nazir, the Bishop of Rochester, who already has to have police protection from Muslims, is your best hope – except that you and the LGBTs will have put him in prison for seven years. I am afraid that this going way off gay penguins, but these also will have to watch out if the Muslims lay their hands them.
David skinner . . . Yes this is way of the topic of gay penguins.
It is very itneresting that you are unable to stay with the idea of homosexuality in animals.
Will you be suggesting that gay animals seek NARTH based cures. Perhaps NARTH and Anglican Mainstream will be developing a behavioural form of its Affect focused therapy just for penguins.
It is interesting how your off topic rants defensively avoid reality . . . i.e Homosexuality in animals.
“Christianity is a billion light years away from Islam and soon, within your lifetime, you will have the luxury of seeing the difference.”
Oh, big deal. One bigoted bunch of bigoted nutters worried about another bunch of bigoted nutters! Please! What’s the difference?
Well, lets see, shall we:-
You believe in demons, they believe in demons. As demons don’t exist, than you both equally insane.
You believe in pretty vengeful god, they believe in a petty vengeful god.
You’re believe you’re right above all others, they believe they’re right above all others.
You suppress learning and science, they suppress learning and science.
You ignore the proof of science, they ignore the proof of science.
You don’t tolerate others, they don’t tolerate others.
Hmmm…. where to find a difference….
The reality is that you’re as bigoted towards religious as stupid as your beliefs as your are homophobic.
So, again I ask you. Why would any of us believe one work from the mouth of an ex-gay bigot who has chosen a lifestyle of stupidity, dogma, and hate?
If I were you, I’d be more worried about the rise in the secular beliefs, people like me.
Well David – sure you can do all those things. But you share an unfortunate common belief, alas, with the gibbering, paranoid, terrorism-exporting self-proclaimed ‘supreme leader’ of soon-to-be nuclear Iran. Khamanei and his illiterate president non-elect sidekick ascribe all their problems to demons and satans, who invariably possess Britain, America and Israel. You seem to do the same, as Will pointed out above.
Christianity now, diluted thanks to the Reformation, the Enlightenment and greater levels of literacy and education might well be light years from Islam in its pure form. But Christianity in its purest form, as the demon-inspired terror of witch hunts in the middle ages shows us, is not all that different.
No doubt by the way, that the Islam tempered by Ijtihad (sura 4:135) would be just as well meaning as Vicar-of-Dibley Anglicanism is today. SO long as people are allowed to get away with making claims based on no evidence, there will always be a danger of faith getting out of control, like a garden becoming overrun by knotweed. However much your friends at the christian institute wish it to be, there are no calls from LGBTs to lock up religious crackpots who make crazy claims – a chorus of indignation and disgust, yes.
As for Sharia kangaroo courts in the UK – well, we’re not going to let that happen. We’re going to stand with the hundreds of secular and ex-muslims who marched through London in March. We are in this mess because too many politicians, of all parties, think that any faith is a Good Thing. It was Holy Tony and co who after all opened faith schools everywhere and elevated unelected reactionary fanatics like the Muslim Council of Britain to ‘community spokesman’ status.
Will’s reaction makes me laugh :-)
122 Posts. Is this a record?
No. “Onward Christian Soldiers” by the Massed bands of the Warrington All-Women’s Tractor Manufacturing Collective. That’s a record.
David Skinner – Please stop it. I know I get this rabble all worked up, but bloody hell mate, they are all beginning to foam at the mouth and bang their heads on desks. You are never going to convince anyone you even vaguely in the ballpark of being right when you come out with statements like “All nature is unnatural”.
I suggest you go find a small room somewhere, preferably wallpapered by someone like Silentnight, and ensure that all sharp objects are removed from your person. Just remember to take those little sweets they give you. They contain God(tm).
May the Lord preserve us from nutters such as this.
“And to think that unto such as you
A maggot-minded, starved fanatic crew,
God gave the secret but not to me?
Well, well, what matters it? Believe that too!”
(A beautiful quatrain from Omar Khayyam’s Rubaiyyat, as applicable to Mr Skinner as it is to Khamenei’s mafia goons.)
I think I’m going to launch a website for gay farm animals and call it oinknews.co.uk :-)
EUROPE WON’T BE ‘ISLAMIFIED’ – POLLS SHOW
This exerpt from a piece by Terry sanderson of the NSS nicely refutes claims above that Britain is going to be run by mullahs: people from ethnic minorities themselves want to be more western in their outlook. They don’t want god thrust down their throats either, by the ‘david skinners’ of their own community…..
“……So it may be in impoverished nations. And God may well be back, to an extent, in the political processes of Europe, but he is not back in the hearts of Europeans. And with an American President who truly understands the meaning of secularism, God is finding himself on the back foot in the US, too.
A Eurobarometer poll (pdf) reveals that when asked about what they value most, only 7% of Europeans nominated religion. That same poll tells us that about half of Europeans think that religion is afforded too much importance. When asked about what values the European Union represents, the ranking starts with human rights (37%), then peace (35%), democracy (34%) and way down last again is religion with only 3%.
So, if Christianity is not the future of Europe, will the continent become Islamic?
The answer is again, no. The capitulation of western governments to the violence of Islamic jihadists and the subsequent channelling of all discourse about Muslims through religious representatives has created the impression that all Muslims are deeply pious and inimical to western values. They are not.
We have been bamboozled by the term “Islamophobia”, which suggests that Islam is under systematic persecution in the west. But new research by the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (pdf) shows clearly that while people who identify themselves as Muslims are, indeed, victims of much discrimination, by their own account hardly any of it is because of their religion. Another poll showed that young Muslims have a strong desire for westernisation, which again contradicts those who have been appointed to speak for them from the pulpits.
The next claim that the vested religious interests make is: Christianity was responsible for the present democratic nature of Europe. Without Christian influence, Europe would not be the prosperous and compassionate place it is today.
Politicians are gradually becoming wise to the ploys of the theocrats who have bullied them into submission. When they have completed this process of disengagement from religious power-seekers, the secularisation of Europe’s states and institutions will resume at an increasing pace.
And we will all – religious and non-religious alike – be the better for it.”
Wed, 03 Jun 2009
MUSLIMS IN BRITAIN, POLL OF 1511 MUSLIMS IN BIRMINGHAM: 98% of respondents would not have problem if son / daughter came out as gay. Someone should cover this, or at least follow it up.
website: britishbornmuslims .org .uk /blog/BRITISHMUSLIMPOLL
Why, thank you AdrianT! ;-)
When Skinner refuses to address the blatantly obvious without using “demons” as his proof, then all we are left with, is getting a cheap giggle out of him!