This is something I've been pondering myself recently, the leading scientific opinion is that jomosexuality is based on biology rather than being a choice, but I still wonder. I think Nature vs Nuture comes into play. Just wondering what others thoughts are.

Views: 1523

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Suppression of their true selves!

Yeah, it counts as gullibility / idiocy.

Yeah to add to what everyone else already said, the APA has declared twice that conversion therapy not only shows no evidence of working, but also that it is potentially very harmful.

This is one of those topics where I hate to openly talk about because we always seem to downplay the homosexuals, but for who understand the true nature of homosexuality, knows Gays and Lesbians are mistakes, just like any other animal anomalies. It is simply another unfinished job or job done wrong, nothing else. It is not a choice, not a brain damage or god's hatred. Nothing is wrong with gays and lesbians other than liking the same sex because their brains have more of the opposite sex feature.

 

Not a single true gay person told me they felt attracted to the same sex for beauty reasons or choice or for fun, all told me it comes naturally. This is because a man born with to much female feature may or will like only men. A woman born with to much male feature may or will like only women's, naturally without thinking. People are born the way they are and cannot change, for us, lovers of the opposite sex, we will never truly understand how they feel, our brain is wired well enough, at least concerning that area of the brain. And thank goodness for science and common sense for letting us support them morally, at least I do. :)

But go say these things to a fundamentalist.... LOL (stone in hand)

Gianni, you probably should delete or edit this.  Using the word "mistake" is going get a lot of people upset.  Nature is not precise enough to call any living thing a mistake.  See my post on this topic below.  More important, given the history of persecution of homosexuals you must be careful what you say and how you say it.  It is not enough to support them morally at the moment.  We must support them politically and psychologically as well.

@Mo Trauen

Please give me a few more hours or maybe a day to answer your post, i have so much things to do and I will respond trough my blog as my answer is absolutely too big for this place, I would need to cut it into many bits... LOL

But I will come back soon and enlighten you!!! Richrad Dawkins is not the ultimate word and will show you why.

I like the "Sneaky Fucker" theory

This.

Came to post this!

 

Dawkins has ruined me. I can't see anything on this subject without thinking about the Sneaky Fucker theory.

Love it!  "The Sneaky Fucker Theory"!

Have a search for INAH3, amygdala and BSTc and you will get quite a lot of research papers trending towards biological differences. It makes sense because I have never heard of a straight person choosing to be straight. As a trans person, I think some of the same mechanisms apply to that too. One interesting theory I read in Simon Levay's book is that the X chromosome carries genes that contribute towards male homosexuality but in women produce more "promiscuous" behaviour, which helps explain why the genese persist.

Why would you think that it does not make evolutionary sense?  There isn't any particular reason to believe that it doesn't.

RSS

Blog Posts

Aftermath

Posted by Belle Rose on September 20, 2014 at 2:42am 1 Comment

PI = 4

Posted by _Robert_ on September 16, 2014 at 8:53pm 5 Comments

Ads

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service