LGBT and Genetics

[Gendou Ikari]

personally i could care less what the hollywood stars think.

they don't live like the common man does. and havent a clue.

Miranda Cosgrove is not a hollywood star and she is a common person. Don't go dissing Miranda. I have a whole paternalistic, brother thing going on when I watch iCarly. :p

 

[jasoncran]

Miranda Cosgrove is not a hollywood star and she is a common person. Don't go dissing Miranda. I have a whole paternalistic, brother thing going on when I watch iCarly. :p

making 180k to you at age 16 is average?

worry, because that type of salary is not the norm. "iCarly" leading lady Miranda Cosgrove (also 16) lands at number two with $180,000 per episode, but after that the income of the young stars quickly drops off into potentially more reasonable levels

she makes more then most teens will ever make! if her show makes just 20 episodes a year that means you would have to tax her to death, why shes a burgoise! a capitalist!

she is way over that 250k limit.

acting, i'm sorry but i cant find much in common with acting as that often isnt what the average american does.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

making 180k to you at age 16 is average?

worry, because that type of salary is not the norm. "iCarly" leading lady Miranda Cosgrove (also 16) lands at number two with $180,000 per episode, but after that the income of the young stars quickly drops off into potentially more reasonable levels

she makes more then most teens will ever make! if her show makes just 20 episodes a year that means you would have to tax her to death, why shes a burgoise! a capitalist!

she is way over that 250k limit.

acting, i'm sorry but i cant find much in common with acting as that often isnt what the average american does.

I can also say that I can't find much in common with being a soldier as that often isn't what the average American does.

And, bourgeoisie are those who control the means of production. Miranda Cosgrove sells her labour power, so she is a member of the proletariat. Just go on YouTube and watch a video of her from an interview. She is insanely normal.

 

[jasoncran]

180k is not normal for a kid that was the point.

how many teens make that amount let alone americans? less then 5%

there are more vets then rich and wealthy.

by sheer stastisitic makes a vet more on the normal range then that millionare.

her parents control what she does with that money unless she is emancipated

so she sells her money, and never kepts it really works for free even.

thats a first.

dude my hometown has millioniares that make far more money then she would ever make in long time and they are in a different what a class.

does she worry at night about paying her healthcare?no
does she have school like a normal teen, wait she cant shes an actor
does she have to hide herself from the public for fear of mobbing and unwanted pics
yup

99% percent of us dont go through that.

i have favorite actors that i relate too but none of them are what i call average.

and that is why i dont listen to them on politics or issues they arent in control and they dont live amongst us commoners

i live near (so to speak) these famous persons,

john walsh, and i met him and nice guy
cindy crawford
and also peter busch of annhuser bush
and gloria estefan

none of these live like i do in fact i posted john walsh's house as an example to you of his taxes!my wife used to clean his house.

some of he the wealthy houses she cleaned she had to do in two days as they were that big.

common, i think not.

 

[Danus]

P.S. I love how we went from discussion belief about homosexuality and genetics, to discussing Miranda Cosgrove and her views on LGBT issues.

Yes. I think we are done with what causes homosexuality. It is a sexual persuasion of man to which there is NO scientific explanation that would discount anything less than a desired choice as far as what one chooses to embrace in their life. Those who do, would like to say it's a birth right.

If it is, then so is being a serial killer. Why do I say that?

This is all about Behavior and responsibility. In regards to this issue of sexuality God 1 - Man 0. You are completely responsible for your own homosexuality, just as I am responsible for my heterosexuality.

We've tried as a society, to have laws that limit or confine behavior to what's deemed best for society, and those laws are morally based on a Judeo-Christian foundation.

Man can have any laws he wants. The question is, whats best for Gods people? For those that don't follow God; who do what they want; the question is "what's best for ME?"

You where not born Gay, you where born a sinner, just like me. The question is, what will you do about it? Will you follow God and allow him to work in your life with your sin? or will you turn from God, embrace your sin and try to develop laws that you think will keep you from being responsible for your sin?

In the END...and there will be an END....you can come up with any law you want, it's not going to change your moral responsibility. No one escapes their moral responsibility. In the END the question God will have of you, the same question he will have of me, why should I count you righteous to be with me, to have life everlasting.

Homosexuality is your choice. It is not your birth right any more than a child molester, or one who is in to bestiality, or one who is an adulter, or even one who is just Asexual spending their time locked in fantasy. The same goes for any other behavior....You decide what you will or will not do.

Society has a say in that and should, when such behavior effects others and that's what our laws are based on.


We have a saying down here in the south. MAN-UP! Now you may put your own definition to that and use it as you see fit, but what it means is to take responsibility. You may prefer the term Man-down, I don't know, but on to more fun stuff.


So you like the I-Carly show? I do to, but I like it for my kids. They love that show and I've deemed it fit for their viewing.

 

[Danus]

So you are going to ommit section 2 where it talks specifically about contracts? Intellectual dishonesty again. When you can't win, spin.

Where did you get your law degree? online?

This is sec 2
Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

There is nothing in the 14th amendment that addresses contracts. Now, I'm no legal expert, but you mentioned the 14 amendment. I've read it and I see nothing in it that says homosexuals should be married, adopt children, or serve openly in the military. Perhaps you made a typo in regards to which constitutional amendment you are referring? I'll be glad to go through and look at it with you and discuss it.

Lance_Iguana, my concern for the society I live in, is a moral one. Do I think that can be legislated? Well, not really. To that I will agree. In fact I'll go as far as to say I don't even think it's entirely fair.

I try to hold on to the idea that God would not have us totally bind moral behavior, but I would not have the moral behaviors of other negatively effecting others in so much as life and liberty.

As I said before, I'm not against civil unions for homosexuals. I won't support it with you on the street because it is counter to what I hold as morally right. People of the same sex can not be married in the sense of what marriage actually is.

What I Mean is, I will not support something I don't think is good for you, but I would not keep you from writing it into law for yourself. At the same time I would not let you silence my opposition to it as an idea.

Your efforts are not enlightening the Christian community. We already understand you more than you think, and please know that we care about you more than you know.

Christians are broken people who look up to God for direction and salvation. I know some of us take a mighty fine photo with our families and nice looking existence, don't let us fool you, and I don't mean that in the way your thinking when you read it.

You can meet God right where you stand with yourself as you are in all your imperfections. don't let some well dressed "christian tell you you can't. They are just as imperfect and should count their blessing for the same grace God affords you. Will God bless or condone your homosexuality? NO. He makes that clear, but that's not what will keep you from him, and don't let it be the lie you listen to.

 

[coffeeelover]

Yes. I think we are done with what causes homosexuality. It is a sexual persuasion of man to which there is NO scientific explanation that would discount anything less than a desired choice as far as what one chooses to embrace in their life.

There are a multitude of studies using identical twins who were separated at birth. Many odd things were found in the studies. People who were raised in much different homes somehow ended up in the exact same careers, drove the exact same cars, or had the same pets. It proved, personality, likes, dislikes, and behavior are heavily influenced by genetics.

Also, gay is not the same as murder or bestiality. That is nonsense.

 

[Danus]

There are a multitude of studies using identical twins who were separated at birth. Many odd things were found in the studies. People who were raised in much different homes somehow ended up in the exact same careers, drove the exact same cars, or had the same pets. It proved, personality, likes, dislikes, and behavior are heavily influenced by genetics.

Well there you have it then. Solved depending on your definition of the word "Proof". No one has found a gene that causes people to be homosexual, and to my knowledge every human genome has been mapped. So the studies you read about in a phyc 101 text book or some PBS program have not proven what you are claiming.

Also, gay is not the same as murder or bestiality. That is nonsense.

Not according to the bible. Unless the bible is nonsense for you, which leaves you to that which is known of man's studies, which again has not "proven" behavior.

There is more "sense" to the idea that homosexuality is a behavior just like any other sexual behavior ....sense or nonsense? Well that depends on the proof doesn't it?

Those who reject God are always talking about the proof or lack of, yet there is no proof in regards to what causes homosexual behavior. There are studies and logical conclusions....but no PROOF. darn.

 

[Lance_Iguana]

There is nothing in the 14th amendment that addresses contracts. Now, I'm no legal expert, but you mentioned the 14 amendment. I've read it and I see nothing in it that says homosexuals should be married, adopt children, or serve openly in the military. Perhaps you made a typo in regards to which constitutional amendment you are referring? I'll be glad to go through and look at it with you and discuss it.

I'll double check, but the thing is, even if I find it I'm already convinced that you will just say that since it dosen't say specifically (homosexuals) it dosen't count. That's the headache.

Lance_Iguana, my concern for the society I live in, is a moral one. Do I think that can be legislated? Well, not really. To that I will agree. In fact I'll go as far as to say I don't even think it's entirely fair.

What exactly is unfair about this? Freedom means we all have the ability to live our own lives as long as we aren't hurting other people. How exactly is this unfair?

I try to hold on to the idea that God would not have us totally bind moral behavior, but I would not have the moral behaviors of other negatively effecting others in so much as life and liberty.

You haven't even shown how the attraction to the same sex even effects people negatively. Not once. You haven't even given a non religious reason why its bad, or how it takes any of your liberties away.

As I said before, I'm not against civil unions for homosexuals. I won't support it with you on the street because it is counter to what I hold as morally right. People of the same sex can not be married in the sense of what marriage actually is.

You guys aren't the only ones with a marriage definition. You don't own the entirety. I could get state married, and have a license and be married. That is it.

What I Mean is, I will not support something I don't think is good for you, but I would not keep you from writing it into law for yourself. At the same time I would not let you silence my opposition to it as an idea.

I haven't done that at all. I'm only criticizing your opinions against gay rights.

Your efforts are not enlightening the Christian community. We already understand you more than you think, and please know that we care about you more than you know.

You really don't understand me. Can you name my favorite color, food, place to eat, tv show, my best friend's name? If you can't then you don't know me at all. I've also taken enough psychology and philosophy classes to know the context of your question. You're not saying you actually know me, you are just conforming me to a preconceived notion of all humanity.

Christians are broken people who look up to God for direction and salvation. I know some of us take a mighty fine photo with our families and nice looking existence, don't let us fool you, and I don't mean that in the way your thinking when you read it.

I've been a Christian before and know what you are saying. One of the main reasons I left was because of the psychological teat down it did to me.

You can meet God right where you stand with yourself as you are in all your imperfections. don't let some well dressed "christian tell you you can't. They are just as imperfect and should count their blessing for the same grace God affords you. Will God bless or condone your homosexuality? NO. He makes that clear, but that's not what will keep you from him, and don't let it be the lie you listen to.

I responds to threats, and I've read your holy book. Your God dose not want me. He wants a servant, works don't matter, only my worship of him.

 

[evan33]

I haven't read all the replies to your topic so if I am not on topic anymore or repeat others I am sorry.

Why does everybody who is conservative assume people who are pro-LGBT, believe that sexual orientation is determined by genetics?

Your question implies that there are two types of LGBTs: People who feel like they are LGBT because that's how they were born, and people who just like being LGBT. But dont people who choose to be gay demean the other side's cause?

The idea that sexual orientation is determined by genetics is absurd anyway. First of all it implies that God makes people gay, and that's not biblical (unless there is just something I don't understand). Secondly the human mind subconsciously generalizes everything it processes. Think about it, to the naked eye men and women have much more physical similarities than differences: We both have faces, arms, and legs. Don't believe me? Just picture Justin Bieber wearing a dress and a wig. My point? Being LGBT is nothing more than psychology and has very little relevance to genetics.

 

[Danus]

I'll double check, but the thing is, even if I find it I'm already convinced that you will just say that since it dosen't say specifically (homosexuals) it dosen't count. That's the headache.

Not really. I'm not going to build an argument out of something that is not arguable to my view. I'd rather in such case just state my view. From what I gather our civil rights are bases on race, gender, and religion. Also creed. It's a stretch to say that would include sexual practices or feelings.

You haven't even shown how the attraction to the same sex even effects people negatively. Not once. You haven't even given a non religious reason why its bad, or how it takes any of your liberties away.

That's not something I'm attempting to do. However, your asking me to look outside my morality, which your confusing with the word religion, as if I just fallow some arbitrary rules. That's not the case.

You guys aren't the only ones with a marriage definition. You don't own the entirety. I could get state married, and have a license and be married. That is it.

Legally no. Your correct. you can place any definition you want on it, but God does own the definition and it does not include two men or two women, or anything else outside one man and one woman.

You really don't understand me. Can you name my favorite color, food, place to eat, tv show, my best friend's name? If you can't then you don't know me at all. I've also taken enough psychology and philosophy classes to know the context of your question. You're not saying you actually know me, you are just conforming me to a preconceived notion of all humanity.

;) I could say the same, right? However, I know you as a human. I know your struggling with homosexuality in that you've been confused by it, and hurt by it. I know you've been made fun of, rejected and misunderstood by others.

What hurts me the most in thinking what it must be like for you, is to think that much of your rejection probably came from the church and other Christians.

If you feel sexually about men the way I feel as such about women, then God bless you my friend. I can't imagine what that's like as a man. However, that does not negate your responsibility just as it does not negate mine.

Something you said earlier about how people fear the unknown, speaking about homosexuals. I agree.

A friend of mine has two younger brothers. The middle one is gay. he called me one day to tell me that his brother informed the family. My friend said; "it all made sense now." speaking of his brothers over all behavior. He went on to say how angry and hurt he was.

I did not know quite what to say to him. He said; "what would you do if it was your brother?" so, I said the only thing I could say honestly...."I'd love my brother. What choice would I have?"

So, your right. I don't know you personally, and the truth is I may not even want to. But, who knows you might be a really cool guy. I don't know. But, I know you as a man and while I may not be able to relate to your full condition, God has taught me enough about my own condition that I can honestly say I'm no better in his eyes.

I've been a Christian before and know what you are saying. One of the main reasons I left was because of the psychological teat down it did to me. I responds to threats, and I've read your holy book. Your God dose not want me. He wants a servant, works don't matter, only my worship of him.

It's God's book not mine. I know there are things in his word you don't agree with. I struggled with some of what he has to say also, but as my relationship with Christ has grown over the years I've been able to see his word more clearly. It starts with trusting God with what you can first.

Being a Christian is not about just reading the bible, going to church, and my favorite..."being good".

It's about a relationship with God who does want you and who does love you more so than anyone else on this earth could ever possibly. Even despite your sin. How's that?

Now I know there are Christians on this board who will disagree, and you can listen to them if you want, but if your not good enough for God as you are then I promise you they are not either. OK, and that's biblical truth. You can check it out and decide for yourself.

My faith in Jesus Christ is a personal relationship above anything else. It trumps my wife, my kids...everything. It comes first even before my own desires and wishes.

I don't know what will come of this issue of Gay rights in man's world. I don't know. I support your right to be protected under the law. I can't legally make you into a Christian, or tell you to love God or get you to see yourself as God does. If I could that would be great, because that's what I want for you. If I could take your pain and sin away I would, but I can't.

But, you know what? I don't have to. Jesus already did that. So what I'm I going to do? Well, I'm going to love you despite you as best I can. What choice do I have if I'm to say that I love Christ? That does not include supporting you in a marriage to another man, but it does not include totally rejecting you because you think that's possible either. Real marriage is tough enough as God would have it. I honestly don't want to see you or anyone else hurt from the idea of thinking that marriage is based on sexual attraction and feelings, because it just not.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

So you like the I-Carly show? I do to, but I like it for my kids. They love that show and I've deemed it fit for their viewing.

I love iCarly, because it activates a paternal side of me that I didn't know I had in me before I started watching it. It feels nice. Additionally, it is some of the most original and witty comedy I have seen in a while. The current trend is just to make the worst sexual jokes you can get away with on broadcast television.

 

[coffeeelover]

Well there you have it then. Solved depending on your definition of the word "Proof". No one has found a gene that causes people to be homosexual, and to my knowledge every human genome has been mapped. So the studies you read about in a phyc 101 text book or some PBS program have not proven what you are claiming.


Not according to the bible. Unless the bible is nonsense for you, which leaves you to that which is known of man's studies, which again has not "proven" behavior.

There is more "sense" to the idea that homosexuality is a behavior just like any other sexual behavior ....sense or nonsense? Well that depends on the proof doesn't it?

Those who reject God are always talking about the proof or lack of, yet there is no proof in regards to what causes homosexual behavior. There are studies and logical conclusions....but no PROOF. darn.

Proof does not exist outside of mathematics. The studies of separated twins shows that genetics affects likes, abilities, behavior, and much more. Genetics as a science is still very new, so just because a human genome is mapped in no way means that they understand what each gene does or how they work with other genes.

I am sorry if the science and medicine of the modern world conflicts with your interpretation of a collection of non literal moral stories, but reality is reality. Just as science understands that demons don't cause schizophrenia we know that genes influence behavior, and likes. For example the hatred for cilantro in people is looking like its genetic.

 

[Danus]

I love iCarly, because it activates a paternal side of me that I didn't know I had in me before I started watching it. It feels nice. Additionally, it is some of the most original and witty comedy I have seen in a while. The current trend is just to make the worst sexual jokes you can get away with on broadcast television.

Interesting.
It seems you relish the wholesomeness of it from what your saying. There is a "goodness" to it that you like?

 

[Danus]

Proof does not exist outside of mathematics. The studies of separated twins shows that genetics affects likes, abilities, behavior, and much more. Genetics as a science is still very new, so just because a human genome is mapped in no way means that they understand what each gene does or how they work with other genes.

Well, here is some food for thought.

There is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. Your going to have to concede to that fact based on your opening remark, unless you can provide the mathematical science that says otherwise.

This thread addresses both moral and scientific questions surrounding homosexuality.Your position, from what I can tell, is one of a scientific nature, not one of morality, but I think your trying to mix the two.

Your arguing that homosexuality has a genetic link, you say proof does not exist outside mathematics, and you give no mathematical proof that homosexuality is genetic. Then you try and link twin studies to homosexuality with no specifics. You still lack what you need to prove what your saying. You have no proof to back up your argument that homosexuality is genetic, and you started your last reply with, " Proof does not exist outside of mathematics." Not much more I can say there, but how about you publish some of these studies?

I am sorry if the science and medicine of the modern world conflicts with your interpretation of a collection of non literal moral stories, but reality is reality. Just as science understands that demons don't cause schizophrenia we know that genes influence behavior, and likes. For example the hatred for cilantro in people is looking like its genetic.

What's this part about? I'm making a moral argument saying homosexuality is a choice, and so far modern science and medicine does back up my argument for lack of proof otherwise. It does not conflict with biblical teachings. Genetics may indeed influence behavior, but it does not prove, nor does it predict behavior. Lastly, it has nothing to do with moral responsibility. If it did, you could argue that no one could be held responsible for their moral behavior because of their genetics.

So, if you, or society says something is "wrong" but I do that "something", I could say that it's all because of my genetics, and therefor I can't be held responsible.

I would ask that you think deeply about this before responding so that I might engage your response, but I welcome your response.

 

[coffeeelover]

Well, here is some food for thought.

There is no proof that homosexuality is genetic. Your going to have to concede to that fact based on your opening remark, unless you can provide the mathematical science that says otherwise.

This thread addresses both moral and scientific questions surrounding homosexuality.Your position, from what I can tell, is one of a scientific nature, not one of morality, but I think your trying to mix the two.

Your arguing that homosexuality has a genetic link, you say proof does not exist outside mathematics, and you give no mathematical proof that homosexuality is genetic. Then you try and link twin studies to homosexuality with no specifics. You still lack what you need to prove what your saying. You have no proof to back up your argument that homosexuality is genetic, and you started your last reply with, " Proof does not exist outside of mathematics." Not much more I can say there, but how about you publish some of these studies?

In this context proof does not exist. There is evidence from which we draw conclusions. Proof has nothing to do with it. Twin studies show that genetics pays a role in many things including homosexuality. That does not mean that ones genetics is the sole cause for liking green or being homosexual. Only that it is a factor.

Biology and sexual orientation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

What's this part about? I'm making a moral argument saying homosexuality is a choice, and so far modern science and medicine does back up my argument for lack of proof otherwise. It does not conflict with biblical teachings. Genetics may indeed influence behavior, but it does not prove, nor does it predict behavior. Lastly, it has nothing to do with moral responsibility. If it did, you could argue that no one could be held responsible for their moral behavior because of their genetics.

So, if you, or society says something is "wrong" but I do that "something", I could say that it's all because of my genetics, and therefor I can't be held responsible.

I would ask that you think deeply about this before responding so that I might engage your response, but I welcome your response.

Ones genetics does not absolve one of responsibility or accountability for actions.

I personally don't care what other people do. If boys want to kiss and be in love and live together it doesn't hurt me, or anyone else, and I don't see how a religion through force of the government can deny homosexuals their constitutional rights.

Arguments that constitute if homosexuals are treated equally then that means that people marrying bookshelves will be legal. That kind of reasoning is nonsense.

Homosexuals should not fear being hunted down and kicked out of the military, or school system, or anything else.

Also the rampant promotion of bullying of children because they appear homosexual is evil.

 

[Gendou Ikari]

Interesting.
It seems you relish the wholesomeness of it from what your saying. There is a "goodness" to it that you like?

Indeed. I find comedies that rely solely upon cursing and sex to be cheap, and I am usually not interested. You might be surprised with some of my beliefs. For example, I think our culture has an unhealthy conception of sex. I might not agree that sex should only be present in marriages. Yet, ideally, sex should be linked with committed relationships.

 

[Danus]

In this context proof does not exist. There is evidence from which we draw conclusions. Proof has nothing to do with it. Twin studies show that genetics pays a role in many things including homosexuality. That does not mean that ones genetics is the sole cause for liking green or being homosexual. Only that it is a factor.

Biology and sexual orientation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia






Ones genetics does not absolve one of responsibility or accountability for actions.

I personally don't care what other people do. If boys want to kiss and be in love and live together it doesn't hurt me, or anyone else, and I don't see how a religion through force of the government can deny homosexuals their constitutional rights.

Arguments that constitute if homosexuals are treated equally then that means that people marrying bookshelves will be legal. That kind of reasoning is nonsense.

Homosexuals should not fear being hunted down and kicked out of the military, or school system, or anything else.

Also the rampant promotion of bullying of children because they appear homosexual is evil.

Then we agree. If a persons genetic make up does not absolve them of responsibility or accountability for their actions, and I agree it does not, then we have to consider what they are responsible for. Correct? You would agree then, that there has to be a standard, a level, a defined parameter of agreed upon acceptable behavior that people may be held accountable to. Correct?

With that, we can move on from the idea that homosexuality has a genetic basses because there is no solid proof, but even if it does we agree that it has no barring on said individuals accountability for their behavior, and sexual behavior is behavior once it's acted on, or out in some physical way.

So, what we are left with is a discussion, not on the causes of homosexuality, but rather what is right within the parameters of of an agreed upon standard of behavior. What we may disagree on is that standard. You will say it's a standard of man and I will say it's a standard of God. Additionally, I would include that we have a moral responsibility for the responsibility of others, but you would say that part can not be legislated and guess what.....I agree. It can not.

I can't force anyone to love God, be a Christian or follow a Godly path, but I can take a stance on what I believe to be my moral responsibility to society as a whole as it relates to that which I hold moral. Don't think I have the right? Well, what give you the right to do the same to me?

So you see, we are in the same boat, we just don't agree on the standard for morality.However, we don't actually have to agree on the standard of morality if we want to look at this constitutionally. Then it's a legal question and there is nothing in the constitution that grants marriage rights for same sex couples, unless you want to show where in the constitution that is. So far no one on this thread has done that.

 

[Danus]

Indeed. I find comedies that rely solely upon cursing and sex to be cheap, and I am usually not interested. You might be surprised with some of my beliefs. For example, I think our culture has an unhealthy conception of sex. I might not agree that sex should only be present in marriages. Yet, ideally, sex should be linked with committed relationships.

Well then we are not too far off on the mark there are we? I too believe our society has an unhealthy concept of sex and I don't care for TV shows that stoop to the cheapness of mankind.