Pride parade in Mumbai!

[SachDan]

Just made a thread for fun...Alas where has this been taken?!

[punjabi_khota]

Is homosexuality a wholly genetically prescribed trait? Or does the nurture play a role in shaping an individual's sexual preference? If it's the latter' date= then we can conclude, atleast theoretically, that homosexuals, if they are allowed to raise kids, put the survival of homo sapiens at risk?

That my friend, is the fundamental question. And the proof scientists give us(AFAIK) about it being "by birth" is that some animals are also found to be homosexual. I am not convinced.

[triam]

Main Point is, this is not the matter of religiosity, persons beleif in Judaism, Christo-islam, Budhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Confuscianaism, Athieism or any "ism" known unknown. It is a matter of going against mother nature. I am surprised at the hypocricy of Hyper-Liberals. At point they will turn 400% environmentalist and cry foul about going against nature, for example evil Human are destroying nature, global warming, space getting polluted by human space programme, humans utilizing natural resources more than other animals, therfore human is evil blaah blaah blaah. And at the same time same very hyper-liberals by supporting un-natural practices like Gayism, beatiality-zoophilia etc. are going EXACTLY against what mother nature has made. Hypocricy at it's best!!

How is it against nature if animals exihibit the same tendencies? Cooking food is going against nature, having cows milk is against nature, there is no entity called Nature, can anybody define what are the rules of Mother NAture?

[Aditi]

Is homosexuality a wholly genetically prescribed trait? Or does the nurture play a role in shaping an individual's sexual preference?

There is no real concrete answer if homosexuality is the product of nature or nurture, or even a combination of both. It could may very well be a combination of a whole bunch of factors. You can't 'make' someone straight, just as you can't 'make' someone gay.

[Aditi]

It is a matter of going against mother nature.

By that same token, the human body is not designed to eat meat and yet we do. Isn't that going 'against mother nature'?

[Aditi]

Just made a thread for fun...Alas where has this been taken?!

The resident homophobes don't see it that way, unfortunately. :winky:

[Predator_05]

:haha::haha::haha::haha: Nice try. For every article like those, there are articles to counter it: http://www.apa.org/pi/lgbc/publications/lgplgparents.html

I am aware of that. Unfortunately, the issue has become so politicized that objective analysis in the field is almost impossible. Scholars are swayed by their own opinions and they design, conduct, interpret research based on their own opinions concerning the issue. I am sure there must be a few flaws in anti-gay studies as well. But a few things are still clear as daylight to me and they should be to you as well - that gays are incapable of maintaining stable relationships. The high # of partners during the course of a lifetime, the promiscuity are defining traits of homosexual lifestyle, the lifestyle you are "celebrating". How you can expect these people to raise kids is beyond me - after all, i think we can agree unequivocally that kids raised in stable, married families would do better in life than kids raised in broken homes more often than not. The relationships pursued by homosexuals aren't stable enough to last a lengthy period of time. Even the largest Gay and Lesbian study ever conducted (http://glcensus.org/press/02052004.html) proves that only 29% of gays have had relationships that lasted more than 10 years. I find it strange that you think its OK to grant these people the right to marry when all empirical evidence points to the fact they can't even sustain a proper married relationship. Judging by how you chose to ignore this completely when i asked you makes me think that you probably know it's true. Hell, i remember you stating your surprise at how quickly homosexuals move from one relationship to another in a different thread --> http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?p=87190&highlight=gay+friends#post87190 so i probably don't even need an answer from you.

[triam]

I am aware of that. Unfortunately, the issue has become so politicized that objective analysis in the field is almost impossible. Scholars are swayed by their own opinions and they design, conduct, interpret research based on their own opinions concerning the issue. I am sure there must be a few flaws in anti-gay studies as well. But a few things are still clear as daylight to me and they should be to you as well - that gays are incapable of maintaining stable relationships. The high # of partners during the course of a lifetime, the promiscuity are defining traits of homosexual lifestyle, the lifestyle you are "celebrating". How you can expect these people to raise kids is beyond me - after all, i think we can agree unequivocally that kids raised in stable, married families would do better in life than kids raised in broken homes more often than not. The relationships pursued by homosexuals aren't stable enough to last a lengthy period of time. Even the largest Gay and Lesbian study ever conducted (http://glcensus.org/press/02052004.html) proves that only 29% of gays have had relationships that lasted more than 10 years. I find it strange that you think its OK to grant these people the right to marry when all empirical evidence points to the fact they can't even sustain a proper married relationship. Judging by how you chose to ignore this completely when i asked you makes me think that you probably know it's true. Hell, i remember you stating your surprise at how quickly homosexuals move from one relationship to another in a different thread --> http://www.indiancricketfans.com/showthread.php?p=87190&highlight=gay+friends#post87190 so i probably don't even need an answer from you.

Let us hypothesize that in the future scientists manage to find a gene which exists in certain individuals that will make them be promiscuous and not sustain a long marriage. Should we then pass a law that these people cannot be married (normal hetero one) or not allowed to have kids? Divorce rates are going to increase in India and China pretty soon, no two ways about it, with the economic liberation of females and other such stuff, giving that as a reason is not a valid claim. Even if one gay couple will remain together forever, that is enough reason to grant them these rights. Always cater to the real minorities, which in every case is "one individual" instead of grouping them together.

[THX_1138]

By that same token' date=' the human body is not designed to eat meat and yet we do. Isn't that going 'against mother nature'?[/quote'] are you vegan aditi?

[THX_1138]

That my friend' date=' is the fundamental question. And the proof scientists give us(AFAIK) about it being "by birth" is that some animals are also found to be homosexual. I am not convinced.[/quote'] indeed... the question is whether homosexuality is the product of nature or nurture... but tell you what, douche baggery is an exclusive product of nurture... exhibit: predator, sandtest and yourself.

[Predator_05]

indeed... the question is whether homosexuality is the product of nature or nurture... but tell you what' date=' douche baggery is an exclusive product of nurture... exhibit: predator, sandtest and yourself.[/quote'] THX, i just hope that whoever cornholes your bleeding ass-crack uses some kind of protection. Stay safe, 'bro

[Lurker]

indeed... the question is whether homosexuality is the product of nature or nurture... but tell you what' date=' douche baggery is an exclusive product of nurture... exhibit: predator, sandtest and yourself.[/quote']

THX' date=' i just hope that whoever cornholes your bleeding ass-crack uses some kind of protection. Stay safe, 'bro[/quote'] :hysterical::hysterical: there are all kinds at ICF!

[Lurker]

Okay I read this entire thread and it was funny as hell! The thread that stood out was...

I really don't have any objections to gays as such' date= coz I don't know how they actually feel inside.The first time I came across one was back in 1997, when me and my friend were driving home from a club and gave lift to this guy was walking in the cold, and suddenly I felt his hand coming over, we both kinda told him to f**k off and the guy was so apologetic. I felt really bad after that. I heard this interesting snippet on the radio that some gays deliberately want to be HIV positive, coz it relieves them from the tension and trust. The response was " if I have it, I don't need to worry about it and some day or other, we gonna get it anyway ". Now thats bullshit, a disease which will lead u to AIDS and people are fighting all kinda of ways to find a cure and here we have some who deliberately want to be affected so their social sex life becomes more comfortable.

Was that intentional or a Freudian slip :hysterical::hysterical:

[THX_1138]

THX' date=' i just hope that whoever cornholes your bleeding ass-crack uses some kind of protection. Stay safe, 'bro[/quote'] i see that you were born into a colony of cretins who believe that calling someone a homosexual is necessarily an insult. whats next? wanna call me an Ethiopian? or better yet, an Ethiopian muslim?

[punjabi_khota]

indeed... the question is whether homosexuality is the product of nature or nurture... but tell you what' date=' douche baggery is an exclusive product of nurture... exhibit: predator, sandtest and yourself.[/quote'] O really ? So being curious about the origin of homosexuality scientifically is douche baggery ? So why are all those scientists doing such research ? Thats all I was talking about, if you read my posts. Crap posting is also a product of nurture...exhibit: you. :finger:

[Aditi]

are you vegan aditi?

No I am not. But those who accuse liberals supporting anything 'against mother nature' should be.

[Aditi]

I find it strange that you think its OK to grant these people the right to marry when all empirical evidence points to the fact they can't even sustain a proper married relationship

And I find it strange that you think its OK to judge people based on the stability of their relationships and promiscuity, and this somehow concludes that they shouldn't be given the right to marry. By that manner of thinking, a on-and-off again straight couple who continually cheated on one another shouldn't be given the right to marry either. And yes, I did make an observation in that old thread, but that doesn't mean that I support them any less. For every gay couple that breaks up and makes up faster than a blink of an eye, there is a straight couple that does the same thing.

[Predator_05]

And I find it strange that you think its OK to judge people based on the stability of their relationships and promiscuity, and this somehow concludes that they shouldn't be given the right to marry. By that manner of thinking, a on-and-off again straight couple who continually cheated on one another shouldn't be given the right to marry either. And yes, I did make an observation in that old thread, but that doesn't mean that I support them any less. For every gay couple that breaks up and makes up faster than a blink of an eye, there is a straight couple that does the same thing.

I am just going by the facts. The assumption isn't that ALL heterosexual couples are faithful and remain married for the long term. Similarly, i can consider the possiblity that there ARE homosexual couples who have fruitful, long lasting relationships. But when you look at the overall TRENDS and observe things in the proper context, it's clear that homosexuals are incapable of sustaining a long-lasting marriage. The difference is that with gays, promiscuity is not the exception (as it is with heterosexual couples) but the RULE. I just gave you a very realistic figure from a reputable gay and lesbian consumer affairs publication which proves this point with cold hard stats taken from one of the largest ever surveys conducted within he gays and lesbian community, and you have ignored it completely. I had also given you the corresponding figure for heterosexual couples. You yourself know what the reality is, but you just don't want to accept it because if you do, you might feel a bit differently about all your gay buddies' pleas to attain equal rights. So you close your eyes and look the other way.

[Rajiv]

Okay I read this entire thread and it was funny as hell! The thread that stood out was... Was that intentional or a Freudian slip :hysterical::hysterical:

Gays are still considered a black mark right, I mean u can see this thread so if someone is born gay , a person who disses them cannot really feel like em, just like a man cannot see the world through womans eyes

[vroomfondel]

rajeev, big up. i like your judgement/thought process.