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.
No, homosexuality is a sexual ORIENTATION, just like heterosexuality.
Liking bananas better than apples is a preference.
If homosexuality wasn't natural, it wouldn't be seen in nature. Since homosexuality has been documented in several species of animals, it is natural.
Just because the human genome has been mapped, does not mean that they know what every gene does, or how they might interact with each other. There is also no hetero gene found.
Animals are not moral creatures. The fact that they may choose to engage in homosexual behavior does not mean that it is natural for human beings to do likewise.
Once again, and as you agreed, no gene has been identified that ingrains such a trait.
Until one is found(which it won't) the claim that homosexuality is somehow "natural" and not a choice cannot be taken seriously.
Sexual preference is a choice, and the moral choice is the one that promotes procreation and family - heterosexuality.
Liberals throw that word around all the time - and they don't know what it means.
The OP is singularly intolerant about a particular person's viewpoint - in this case Alex Jones - so much that they are insulting and generalizing an entire political movement.
What does the TOS say - discuss the issue not people.
All the OP has to do is argue why this is a misguided claim - instead they choose to engage in ad hominem attacks.
It is a typical liberal tactic and one reason why some liberals are met with so much disdain on this forum.
Why are you conflating two very different types of intolerance? It's one thing to be intolerant when it comes to beliefs or viewpoints. For instance, I'm not tolerant of somebody who thinks Jews should be exterminated. It's another thing to be intolerant of somebody's sexuality, or skin color, or gender, or their handedness, or their blindness, etc - you know, immutable, biological characteristics.
Why are you conflating two very different types of intolerance? It's one thing to be intolerant when it comes to beliefs or viewpoints. For instance, I'm not tolerant of somebody who thinks Jews should be exterminated. It's another thing to be intolerant of somebody's sexuality, or skin color, or gender, or their handedness, or their blindness, etc - you know, immutable, biological characteristics.
Animals are not moral creatures. The fact that they may choose to engage in homosexual behavior does not mean that it is natural for human beings to do likewise.
Once again, and as you agreed, no gene has been identified that ingrains such a trait.
Until one is found(which it won't) the claim that homosexuality is somehow "natural" and not a choice cannot be taken seriously.
Sexual preference is a choice, and the moral choice is the one that promotes procreation and family - heterosexuality.
Well how can homosexuality be a "preference or a choice" when they can put hormones in juice box membranes and make you one?
Well how can homosexuality be a "preference or a choice" when they can put hormones in juice box membranes and make you one?
I never said that such a thing is possible.
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.
