Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why do you keep claiming that no-one seems to be able to provide a link to studies when I and several other posters already have?
You have been asked several times to provide links to studies supporting your claim that people choose their sexual orientation, yet you just ignore the requests and keep demanding links to studies that have already been provided.
I have asked several times and I have read your abstracts. And yes, I am still asking for the link the proves your claim.
I did not suggest that you could not provide studies on sexual orientation but that you provide proof of being born homosexual. You have provided links of abstracts to the research only.
Because in your own link I keep running into statements such as: "These results are partly conflicting and indicate the need for a replication on a wider sample with a larger geographic distribution. . ." (a sample of 250 BTW). Also; " This suggested that genetic factors that are partly linked to the X-chromosome"
Even your own link which you provide as proof speaks of "possible evidence and "suggests", and "needs a larger"
Sorry but this is far from proof yet you get all huffy when I repeat my request.
I have asked several times and I have read your abstracts. And yes, I am still asking for the link the proves your claim.
I did not suggest that you could not provide studies on sexual orientation but that you provide proof of being born homosexual. You have provided links of abstracts to the research only.
Because in your own link I keep running into statements such as: "These results are partly conflicting and indicate the need for a replication on a wider sample with a larger geographic distribution. . ." (a sample of 250 BTW). Also; " This suggested that genetic factors that are partly linked to the X-chromosome"
Even your own link which you provide as proof speaks of "possible evidence and "suggests", and "needs a larger"
Sorry but this is far from proof yet you get all huffy when I repeat my request.
Here's a clue. The abstracts lead to the actual studies.
The links I provided are only a handful of some of the most recent studies. There are many more.
Researchers and scientists always use language like that. If you are looking for words like "absolute proof" you are not going to find them in any study in this field.
You're not used to reading scientific studies are you?
So where are all your peer-reviewed studies that even "suggest" that sexual orientation is a choice?
You have been asked several times now.
PS: Please don't bother with opinion articles from religious sites. I have no problem with you linking to abstracts from peer-reviewed publications - as I am capable of getting to the actual studies themselves - if there ARE any. (I already know there aren't any as I've been researching this for several years now, but knock yourself out trying to find something).
Here's a clue. The abstracts lead to the actual studies.
The links I provided are only a handful of some of the most recent studies. There are many more.
Researchers and scientists always use language like that. If you are looking for words like "absolute proof" you are not going to find them in any study in this field.
You're not used to reading scientific studies are you?
Ha Ha Yes Jaymax, I have a clue but thanks for your kindness.
And evindently you are incapable of debating in a civil way and without getting emotional and snarky?
I totally understand what an abstract is lol! I am well versed in scientific studies that is why I called you on your habit of linking to an abtract and not the actual study.
Maybe you don't have access to the study because you have to be a member for pubmed or pay for each individually.
I have access BTW.
It really is strange though how you always seem to have a mean-spirited undertone, "have a clue" you write, "gay and pray" and on and on.
We are getting nowhere here. I continually ask for your proof and you continue to answer with your snarky answers and state that you have provided it. So I guess I will wish you good luck and good day.
I am gay and partnered for 32 years. Not old here.... we started young! ha. I don't give a @^%* if who we are is by choice or birth. I am more interested in how we all will move forward. What will the future hold? It will be what we do with it. Must have a little partying, great food & drink.
How would you know this truth if you're not gay? You state an opinion, not a fact.
I never chose my sexuality. I was never attracted to women. There is no political point to be made by the fact that being gay is an inherent trait. But tell that to conservatives who will insist they know something they cannot possibly know.
From my experience, and people can argue this to no end, my being gay has its roots in karma. My attraction was set before birth to fulfill certain goals in this life. It would require superhuman abilities to change what we are born into. There may yet be a genetic marker for some, but why argue the fact that it's a choice when the overwhelming evidence says the opposite?
To those who believe that the choice argument is a political stunt to further an as yet undiscovered "agenda" (shield your eyes!), your heightened paranoia and ignorance are showing. I will continue to insist I was born gay because at no point in my life was it a factor I had any control over which puts me in the same boat with practically every heterosexual. See? We're not all that different.
Do we really want to be bigoted against gays or not? If we do, then there's plenty of ammo. But then, there's plenty of ammo if white folks want to be bigoted against blacks, or blacks want to be bigoted against whites, or humans want to be bigoted against dogs, for that matter. All that's required is a intolerant mindset and a little imagination.
So if a person wants to be bigoted against gays folks then he can find a way to do it. Such a person can choose religious reasons, for example. After all, the KKK uses religious reasons to be bigoted against blacks and Jews. So it has a proven track record. Or a person can simply announce that gay marriage, for example, is in some non-specific manner "wrong". That was used for centuries when arguing against interracial marriage. So sort of a generic "wrong" reasoning can work too.
On the other hand, you can choose not to be bigoted. If you go that route, then all these various anti-gay reasons can be dismissed. No need to discuss whether being gay is a choice or not. I mean, if being gay is really okay, then who cares what road was taken to get there?
And one final benefit, I can cease aiming satirical posts at the ignorant bigoted folks. And I'm sure we'd all perfer that.
I am gay and I was NOT born gay. I am a woman and I lusted after and dated men until my early 20s. Then I fell in love with a woman and have been with her for nearly 20 years. I still lust after men. I could very easily see myself with a man, in love with a man, having sex with a man.
NOT EVERYONE who is gay is "born" gay, whatever that means. In addition, why is it so bad for people to "choose" to be gay? I believe in free choice. Yes, my life would be easier had I fallen in love with or chosen to be with a man, but I am fine with my choice and live a great life in a great city in a great STRAIGHT suburban neighborhood.
Let's stop categorizing, shall we?
If this is a real post, you are not gay-- you are bisexual.
I think it's funny (in a sad kind of way) to see so many gay posters (who wish straights to be tolerant and accepting towards them) telling the OP "well YOU'RE not gay, you're just bisexual"
You do know, don't you, that not all of us who stated that are gay?
I think it's funny (in a sad kind of way) to see so many gay posters (who wish straights to be tolerant and accepting towards them) telling the OP "well YOU'RE not gay, you're just bisexual"
I think it's funny that you'd post such a desperate ad hominem to counter the rather gaping hole in the OP's argument. It should be painfully obvious to anyone who possesses the ability to read that the OP is attracted to both men and women as she's stated that she lusts after men. People who are either gay or straight do not lust after people of the opposite or same sex respectively.
Do you want to know what's truly funny (in a sad kind of way)? Blissfully ignorant people who are generally so blinded by their own deeply-ingrained religious dogma that they painstakingly try to prove that homosexuality is an unnatural occurrence despite its existence throughout all of documented human history and in every corner of the world. How is that for intolerance?
You have no proof of that, and no one can prove that they were born as a homosexual either.
Quit making things up.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. 