BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 12:49 PM

And, just to be clear, it was first detected not in a homosexual community but in a heterosexual African community.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 01:49 PM

No Amos, it was detected first in the gay community in California.
It was then traced back to Africa.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 02:13 PM

You are right--that was the first detection. But to relate that to a causal vector is entirely unscientific.

"AIDS was first reported June 5, 1981, when the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) recorded a cluster of Pneumocystis carinii pneumonia (now still classified as PCP but known to be caused by Pneumocystis jirovecii) in five homosexual men in Los Angeles.[132] In the beginning, the CDC did not have an official name for the disease, often referring to it by way of the diseases that were associated with it, for example, lymphadenopathy, the disease after which the discoverers of HIV originally named the virus.[68][69] They also used Kaposi's Sarcoma and Opportunistic Infections, the name by which a task force had been set up in 1981.[133] In the general press, the term GRID, which stood for Gay-related immune deficiency, had been coined.[134] The CDC, in search of a name, and looking at the infected communities coined "the 4H disease," as it seemed to single out Haitians, homosexuals, hemophiliacs, and heroin users.[135] However, after determining that AIDS was not isolated to the homosexual community,[133] the term GRID became misleading and AIDS was introduced at a meeting in July 1982.[136] By September 1982 the CDC started using the name AIDS, and properly defined the illness.[137]"

Source here

The risk vector is unprotected sex; it is increased by unprotected sex amongst already-infected populations. It is increased more by unprotected anal sex.

It is NOT increased by the gender of the sexual partner being the same or the opposite.

The partner's gender makes no difference in the transmission vector. Calling it a homosexual disease is therefore either rampant superstitious ignorance, or rednecked prejudicial bias.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 02:15 PM

"IDS is a homosexual disease. False. Although AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome) was first discovered in the homosexual community, anyone can get the disease regardless of his or her sexual preference. The high-risk groups include sexually active people with multiple partners, those who use non-sterile hypodermic needles, infants born to mothers with the AIDS virus, and infected blood transfusions. So don't be fooled into thinking that just because you aren't homosexual, you won't get AIDS. In fact, the World Health Organization said that the vast majority of people with AIDS worldwide got the disease from heterosexual - not homosexual - intercourse."

From here

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 02:20 PM

Making AIDS 'A Gay Disease'

(Click title for article)

New AIDS Disinformation Program Spread By
The Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center
By Alan Cantwell, MD
c. 2006 All Rights Reserved
9-29-2006

"In an unbelievable and unfathomable turn of events, the Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center has undertaken a new campaign to convince Gay/Lesbian/Bisexuals/Transgendered people that "HIV is a gay disease".

As a physician who has written extensively over the past two decades about the origin of HIV/AIDS, I am shocked and saddened by this misguided campaign to make gay men "own" and "end AIDS." The Center's gay media blitz is being conducted ostensibly to stop the excessive rate of new HIV infection in gay men in West Hollywood.

The slogan: "HIV is a gay disease" is certainly not scientifically correct for the simple reason that HIV is a virus, not a disease.
HIV, however, is the accepted cause of AIDS.

Is AIDS a gay disease? Of course not! In fairness the Center's campaign ad explains (in small print) that "OK, diseases don't have sexual orientations." Yet the full page ad I saw in the gay-oriented In magazine proclaims that "HIV has been, and continues to be, our disease." The full details of the new AIDS prevention campaign can be found on www.OwnItEndIt.org. People are encouraged to post their views on the site.

When the AIDS epidemic began officially in June 1981, it was widely considered exclusively a "gay disease." Now everyone should know that AIDS is a worldwide epidemic; and most AIDS cases are heterosexual, not homosexual.

During the early years of the epidemic when the cause was unknown and when HIV was in the blood supply, hemophiliacs were decimated by AIDS. Hemophilia does not cause AIDS - and neither does homosexuality. AIDS is caused by a virus, not by a genetic defect or by a lifestyle."

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 03:48 PM

Proposition 8, however, is not about disease, except the disease of bigotry and discrimination. THERE's a disease for you. No-one knows where it was first detected. But the vectors are fairly well known. There's a few of them in this thread as an exercise for the student.



A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 20 Jun 09 - 05:09 PM

Amos ....Stop waving your arms about. Nobody knows if homosexual practice causes Aids, what we do know is that statistically and in real terms, a very much higher proportion of homosexuals develope Aids, than any other group.

The Los Angeles homosexuals are demanding a medical enquiry into why this link occurs. To get that enquiry they also demand that Aids be re-designated as a "homosexual disease" which can be transmitted to heterosexuals.

What do you not understand about that??....These people are in the front line, not like you, Don, or Mr Peekstock, merely "liberal" activists and highly unlikely to aquire the disease.
It's easy to be committed to homosexual rights from your position of safety, these people are concerned about bigger issues....like life and death!!

I would rather listen to them than listen to you, no matter how much you try to negate what they are saying.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Barry Finn
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 01:28 AM

I think we can go back to Ronnie Reagan & thank him for part of what Ake is spouting. Ronnie denied aid, money & research to the AIDs outbreak at the beginning by putting it as sometime that belong & should stay in the gay community when in actually it was out it the hetro community just as well but with the power invested in him by God he swept it under the rug & just said "no".


So those that supported the unliberated Ronnie continue to be unliberal. Just say "No" is all they'll ever know.
Just keep saying "no" & everything will be alright Ake.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Ebbie
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 02:05 AM

Ake, stop and take another look- that article was not written by Amos but a knowledgeable physician. If you take the time to read it - and understand it - and if you are at all interested in truth, you should feel your stance getting severely shaky.

Unless you are a guy who finds it impossible to say, "Hey, it appears that I was wrong. Let me rethink this."

We would all respect you for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Peace
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 02:07 AM

There was a thread about nuclear war that had fewer posts than this one. FYI.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 05:15 AM

Hello Ebbie.....I don't think I am wrong, nobody here has yet addressed the link between Aids/ homosexuality satisfactorally.

As Bruce has said, this has been an extremely long thread, if I am so wrong why have some of you spent so much time and energy tying to refute what I say?
If you really thought I was so wrong, you would have tired of this long ago and moved on to something else.
If you think my stance is getting shaky, read and think again, I sense a tone of desperation appearing in the "pro's" posts, as their real agenda on homosexual right becomes exposed!

And remember Ebbie, every cut and paste you read here(very few from me), was originally pruduced by someone with an "axe to grind" no matter how emminent they are.

I'll give you a tip Ebbie, one Iv'e used all my life....QUESTION EVERYTHING!!.......Ake.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 07:43 AM

"In fact, the World Health Organization said that the vast majority of people with AIDS worldwide got the disease from heterosexual - not homosexual - intercourse."

True globally, but not true in Western countries where heterosexual infection is very rare, especially if you discount those infected abroad.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 10:06 AM

1. More heteros than homosexuals suffer from HIV/AIDS.

2. You have presented no data and no theory that could possibly conceive your somewhat outlandish concept that AIDS was in any way more likely to strike a homosexual than a heterosexual, assuming other factors were equal just as diversity of partners and the kinds of sexual practices they engaged in. And, myself, I seriously doubt you will be able to come up with one. This is like the guy who waved his handkerchief around and around on a corner of New York. He said it was to keep the elephants away, and when they said "Don't be silly, man-there aren't elephants for thousands of miles!" he smugly replied that proved it was working.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 11:13 AM

HIV infections acquired through heterosexual intercourse within the United Kingdom represent less than 10% of all HIV infections amongst heterosexuals diagnosed in the UK, according to a paper published in the March 12thon-line edition of the British Medical Journal. The authors, from the UK's Health Protection Agency, emphasise that HIV transmission amongst gay men accounts for over 80% of HIV infections acquired in the UK. However, they acknowledge that even though small numbers of individuals are infected with HIV through heterosexual sex in the UK each year, the number is growing and is likely to continue to do so, particularly amongst ethnic minorities.
Although there has been a substantial increase in heterosexual HIV in the UK, the majority of cases involve individuals who originated from, and were infected with HIV abroad, most notably Africa.
http://www.aidsmap.com/en/news/0B40A041-6ED6-4E6D-8014-942C373655C5.asp

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 11:17 AM

When reading these stats, remember that as a proportion of the population, the risk is vastly greater for gay men than shown here.
These stats show only percentages of HIV victims not populations.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 12:09 PM

HIV/AIDS WORLDWIDE

As of the end of 2000, an estimated 36.1 million people worldwide -- 34.7 million adults and 1.4 million children younger than 15 years -- were living with HIV/AIDS. More than 70 percent of these people (25.3 million) live in Sub-Saharan Africa; another 16 percent (5.8 million) live in South and Southeast Asia.(1)

Worldwide, approximately one in every 100 adults aged 15 to 49 is HIV-infected. In Sub-Saharan Africa, about 8.8 percent of all adults in this age group are HIV-infected. In 16 African countries, the prevalence of HIV infection among adults aged 15 to 49 exceeds 10 percent.(1,2)

Approximately 47 percent of the 36.1 million adults living with HIV/AIDS worldwide are women.(1)

An estimated 5.3 million new HIV infections occurred worldwide during 2000; that is, about 15,000 infections each day. More than 95 percent of these new infections occurred in developing countries.(1)

In 2000, more than 6,500 young people aged 15 to 24 became infected with HIV every day -- that is, about five every minute.(1)

Through 2000, cumulative HIV/AIDS-associated deaths worldwide numbered approximately 21.8 million -- 17.5 million adults and 4.3 million children younger than 15 years.(1)

In 2000 alone, HIV/AIDS-associated illnesses caused the deaths of approximately 3 million people worldwide, including an estimated 500,000 children younger than 15 years.(1)

An estimated 13.2 million children younger than age 15 had lost their mothers or both parents by the end of 1999.(2)

Worldwide, more than 80 percent of all adult HIV infections have resulted from heterosexual intercourse.(1,2)

Mother-to-child (vertical) transmission has accounted for more than 90 percent of all HIV infections worldwide in infants and children.(1,2)

From NIAIDS Fact Sheet, here.

However, the issue is not AIDS, but civil rights and Proposition 8. It should be reversed promptly as an illegal infringement on a minority's civil rights.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: jeddy
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 12:24 PM

"However, the issue is not AIDS, but civil rights and Proposition 8. It should be reversed promptly as an illegal infringement on a minority's civil rights."

well said AMOS!!!

no one seems to be able to convince me that it is not a good idea, in fact apart from the HIV/AIDS arguement, no one seems able to anwer direcr questions or be able to produce any backup for their opinions exect for the yuk factor, which to me is a personal thing and should be stated at such.

lets be honest people please!!!!

take care all

jade x x

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 02:17 PM

Right Amos!...Can you explain in plain English what the fuck this means?

"You have presented no data and no theory that could possibly conceive your somewhat outlandish concept that AIDS was in any way more likely to strike a homosexual than a heterosexual, assuming other factors were equal just as diversity of partners and the kinds of sexual practices they engaged in. And, myself, I seriously doubt you will be able to come up with one."

I am neither a doctor nor a scientist, how would I know the cause of AIDS?......What I do know is that a far larger proportion of homosexuals develope Aids than any other sector of Western society.

Why do you keep on trotting out the figures for other sectors?...We all know that Aids can be transmitted by hetero sex.

The point in question is why New Aids outbreaks alway start among homosexuals and why such a very large percentage of them are affected by the disease.

I suppose what you are trying to say is that if homosexuals stopped having anal sex and being promiscuous the AIDS figures for homosexuals would drop......Well hell, thats pretty profound!

Unfortunately for the purposes of your argument......anal sex and promiscuity pretty well come with the territory!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 02:48 PM

Just cruising by to see how (if) things are progressing and this caught my eye:

"I am neither a doctor nor a scientist, how would I know the cause of AIDS?......"

THAT'S bloody obvious!!

Don Firth

P. S. By the way, what has all this to do with same-sex marriage (which will have the effect of encouraging stable relationships and decreasing promiscuity)? One would think that if someone is genuinely concerned about the spread of AIDS, he would be in favor of this.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 03:04 PM

Ake is predicating much of what he says here on the idea that HIV/AIDS is spontaneously generated by two previously uninfected homosexual males engaging in anal intercourse.

"Spontaneous generation" was a hard-held belief for many centuries, but it was duly slain by Louis Pasteur and a number of others.

A general survey of the idea of Spontaneous Generation

FYI.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 03:23 PM

The issue of marriage rights, as a part of civil rights of citizenship, is what the topic is about.

Pondering the etiology of AIDS/HIV is, essentially, irrelevant to the issue.


And imagining it is spontaneous is just absurd.

If, as Ake points out, we all know heterosexual sex can transmit AIDS then either Ake should take a stand against ALL marriage, or he should leave AIDS out of the question of same sex marriage.   There's no way to have it both ways!


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 03:41 PM

What we need to know is why so many homosexuals are affected....pure and simple!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 04:11 PM

Amazing! Swished right by it as if it wasn't there. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: jeddy
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 04:12 PM

ake, i still don't understand WHY you are so worried about this.

you are not gay so why should it bother you so much?

"What we need to know is why so many homosexuals are affected....pure and simple!" WHY?

this has no bearing on the subject, are you saying that gay people with HIV/AIDS, should not have the right to be married? if this is the case please just say so!!

what aboout hetro people who have it should they be shunned too?

jade x x

i couldn't help myself!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 04:25 PM

Amos, this may be peripheral to the main debate, but it has been raised and should be dealt with honestly.
You posted a page of data but no conclusions.
What were we suposed to understand from all that?
This debate is about western countries.
The epidemiology of HIV is quite different in third world countries, especially africa.
USA does not permit immigration of AIDS (or TB) sufferers.
UK does, and gives them free treatment for life.
That makes UK an attractive destination for many victims and the influx distorts our statistics.
We have 20% of aids sufferers who are straight.
Only 10 % of those were infected within Europe.
That makes only 2% of our AIDS victims are straights infected here.
1 out of 50 straight, 8 out of 10 gay.
But the gay population is only about 10 % of the whole population.
Thus a gay man has 400 times the risk of a straight person of being infected here.
Unless they are 400 times more promiscuous, there must be some other factor that does make gay men a higher risk for HIV transmission.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 21 Jun 09 - 05:04 PM

Well, Keith, that's a reasonable question, and I do not have a hard answer. I am sure it has to do with the incidents of contact and there are a lot of cultural angles that surround that into which I have no insight at all.

If, for example, all gays were kept in ghettos, or self-elected themselves into ghetto-like conclaves to avoid being harassed, it would explain such a concentration of incidents in combination with the other risk factors mentioned above. But this is all speculation, I have no idea what the factors are. I am fairly confident, however that they are NOT simply the homosexuality per se. The social fabric in which homosexuals operate, may be. The known factors I have read of are unprotected anal sex and promiscuity. These make sense on purely mechanical grounds of transmission.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 03:13 AM

Jeddy, the reason I am concerned about this, other than the obvious suffering being inflicted on homosexuals by ignoring it, is that I believe there is a political agenda at work here, involving PC"liberals" and homosexual activists to present homosexuality as "just another lifestyle" and deny the very obvious heath risks involved in that practice.

The process of normalisation, involves the granting of "rights" like marriage and fostering, to a section of society who are involved in dangerous sexual practices while refusing such "rights" to other minorities who behave in less dangerous ways sexually(for examples read the thread)

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 03:16 AM

Amos, I agree that it is not homosexuality per se, but some behavioral/lifestyle factor(s).
I think that Akeneton's point is that society should not appear to condone or promote such a life style.

A similar situation?
In your country and mine parents have the right to withdraw their children from the vaccination programme.
In your country, if they exercise that right, they forfeit their right of access to the public school system.
In the interests of public health their civil rights are curtailed.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 10:22 AM

There's a BIG difference which undermines that analogy. Laws like Proposition 8 tend to force the system toward greater promiscuity, not less, by demeaning the status of commitment. Same sex marriage does not expose a greater number to the "dangerous lifestyle" (which I think is a silly expression and semantically warped). It would tend to do exactly the opposite.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 10:28 AM

Only here, do 'grown up's have to be explained to, that there IS a difference between men and women..and anything else, as far as trying to 'define' that, is merely a behavioral CHOICE!...sorta happens when emotionally immature people get horny, and don't have it together enough to relate to the other sex, other than imitating them, to get laid!
To equate, this 'cause' to the real struggle of race, is absolutely the 'thumb suckers' mentality! As seen before, it is not a matter of race, creed, or color...or even gender,..just a matter of "I want to do what I want, and call it a different thing than it is!...Want to buy some health cigarettes?"
By the way, Father's Day, is a day that you thank your father, for having sex with your mom! Mother's Day is a day you thank your mom, for not swallowing you!
I got get caught up, on the thread, been away doing real things. Hang in there Ake!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Smedley
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 11:10 AM

Please DON'T hang in there. This is already the most pointlessly circular thread since the invention of the internet.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: frogprince
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 02:06 PM

"refusing such "rights" to other minorities who behave in less dangerous ways sexually(for examples read the thread)"
I'll admit up front that I'm going to reply to that without re-reading the whole thread. I don't believe that there are other examples given of minorities who are denied marriage because of their sexual behaviours , unless the reference is to someone who wants to marry their sibling, parent, or child.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Barry Finn
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 02:12 PM

Once this thread pasted the first 100 posts it became bait for the 2 trolls GfS & Ake both bottom fish, fishing. Between the 2 of them I'd be amazed if they posted 1 musicial post out of 100. They live only here in the lower kingdom & when they breathe they spout vile, when the talk it's all shit.
Why do they come to this folk forum? Not for the music, they have absolutly no interest in folk music at all, so ask yourselves what is it that keeps them returning? I doubt, with their sensibilities that they even enjoy music, probably disdain it.

Stop feeding the unmusical bigots.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Wesley S
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 04:02 PM

"Please DON'T hang in there. This is already the most pointlessly circular thread since the invention of the internet."

Actually Smedley - No it isn't. Believe me - there was a time here when a certain member thought we had a problem with censorship.....

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: jeddy
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 05:39 PM

i think the reason we can't leave it aloneis the fact that these two are spouting so much crap and i get outraged with what has been put forward as fact. i know they are out to wind us up, but i just can't help reacting,even though i know i am giving them what they want.

I MUST TRY HARDER!!!

take care all

jade x x

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 06:40 PM

As far as the two trolls here are concerned, at first I thought that the patronizing attitude they show to those who disagree with them (especially the ones who supply masses of documentation and scientific evidence for what they say) is deliberately and intentionally offensive. But I have revised that opinion. Offensive it is, but if they really believe what they say they do, it displays a new low in bloody-minded dedication to rank ignorance, solidly based on personal prejudice.

As my wise old uncle said. . . .

Don Firth

P. S. Let's all go have a beer and leave these two alone together. I mean, who knows. . . ?

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 06:50 PM

""Jeddy, the reason I am concerned about this, other than the obvious suffering being inflicted on homosexuals by ignoring it, is that I believe there is a political agenda at work here, involving PC"liberals" and homosexual activists to present homosexuality as "just another lifestyle".""

To the contrary Ake, we have been refuting allegations by YOU and GfS that Homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice".

WE have maintained that it is an "inborn" state.

If the best you can do is to attribute YOUR prejudices to US, then you HAVE INDEED lost the argument, as well as the plot.

Don

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: jeddy
Date: 22 Jun 09 - 06:57 PM

to both dons, a beer sounds like a fantastic idea, who is up for a game of pool?

jade x x

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Emma B
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 12:20 PM

I have not really joined in the discussion here about whether homosexual behaviour is a result of nature or nurture although I think, in many ways, it is absolutely pertinent to the original subject of the thread..

If it was possible to prove people were born gay it would probably give them wider social acceptance as an American Conservative think tank expressed it
"(it) would advance the idea that sexual orientation is an innate characteristic, like race; that homosexuals, like African-Americans, should be legally protected against 'discrimination;' and that disapproval of homosexuality should be as socially stigmatized as racism"

In the last decade polls have shown that this "biological" argument has gained momentum especially amongst young Americans.

Some advocates of gay marriage argue that proving sexual orientation is inborn would make it easier to frame the debate as simply a matter of civil rights, which view point we have seen represented quite forcibly in this thread.

An alternative belief that has also been equally strongly expressed is the one that dominated the thinking during much of the 20th century that is to say that homosexuality is connected to upbringing.

Freud, for instance, speculated that overprotective mothers and distant fathers helped to produce homosexuality

Since then there hasn't been much science produced to support the old, generally rejected, theories tying homosexuality to upbringing and it has been argued that Freud may have been seeing the effect rather than the cause, since a father faced with a very feminine son might well become more distant or hostile, leading the boy's mother to become more protective.

Cornell psychologist Daryl Bem has proposed an intriguing theory for how childhood gender nonconformity CGN might lead to homosexuality which stresses environment over biology but still considers this pathway to be triggered by biological traits

The American Psychiatric Association finally removed "homosexuality" from its manual of mental disorders until 1973

In 1991, Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist in San Diego claimed he had found a key difference between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men he studied
A small clump of neurons of the anterior hypothalamus - which is believed to control sexual behavior - was, on average, more than twice the size in heterosexual men as in homosexual men.
Although, theoretically, the clumps could, have changed size because of homosexual behaviour that seemed unlikely, and the study ended up jump-starting the effort to prove a biological basis for homosexuality.
Studies of identical and fraternal male twins demonstrated that there was a greater chance of both being homosexual than the usual incidence in the population and homosexual brothers were found to share a specific region of the X chromosome, called Xq28, at a higher rate than gay men shared with their straight brothers.

However the studies for biological origins have been small and underfunded, and the results have often been modest.

The gay gene theory has taken some hits; a Canadian team was unable to replicate the findings and a team from Dean Hamer's own lab reported only mixed results after having done the first scan of the entire human genome in the search for genes influencing sexual orientation.

LeVay himself is quoted as saying
."But it's also kind of frustrating that it's still a bunch of hints, that nothing is really as crystal clear as you would like."

In 2005 Swedish researchers reported finding important differences in how the brains of straight men and gay men responded to two compounds suspected of being pheromones

This research once again connecting the hypothalamus to sexual orientation comes on the heels of work with sheep. About 8 percent of domestic rams are exclusively interested in sex with other rams; researchers had found that a clump of neurons similar to the one LeVay identified in human brains was also smaller in gay rams than straight ones; although again, admitted that it was conceivable that these differences could be showing effect rather than cause.

During fetal development, sexual identity is set before the sexual organs are formed perhaps it's the same for sexual orientation


By now, there is substantial evidence showing correlation - though NOT causation - between sexual orientation and traits that are set when a baby is in the womb
The research suggests that early on in the womb, as the fetus's brain develops in either the male or female direction, something fundamental to sexual orientation is happening.
But -nobody's sure exactly what's causing it.

To conclude, all the research, at present, suggests that, while post-birth development may well play a supporting role, the roots of homosexuality, at least in men, appear to be in place by the time a child is born

But there is simply no consensus about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. and, while the doctrines of the world's largest religions generally view homosexuality negatively, concerns will continue to be expressed about such unions on religious grounds
However, in the light of increasing research the Rev. Rob Schenck, a prominent Washington, D.C., evangelical leader, said that he no longer believed homosexuality to be a life choice and, while still an opponent of homosexual relationships, warned that
"If it's inevitable that this scientific evidence is coming, we have to be prepared with a loving response. If we don't have one, we won't have any credibility."


The legalization of same sex marriages (as opposed to civil unions) may also be argued by some to be an attempt to impose the concept of homosexuality as an immutable characteristic analogous to racial determinants in the absence of any empirical evidence.
But, if the theory of maternal stress during pregnancy resulting in the release of androstendione is correct then the process is environmental and potentially preventable.


Others may perceive societal impacts and indirect consequences of same-sex marriage (for example a redefinition of marriage opening the door to the right to have polygamous marriage)
I hear that there is a strong lobby for this oppressively paternalistic and ultimately (given the proportions of men to women in the population) socially inequitable form of heterosexual 'marriage' in some American states



I'll look in again after the next 1688 posts

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 12:57 PM

Good post, Emma!
As so far as some of the usual political hacks, homosexuality is, in fact, much on the level as 'genetic masterbaters' or 'genetic porn addicts'!....That doesn't make much sense, and neither do your uneducated posts. Neither Ake, or myself, are trolls...we just have a different opinion, based on reality...but, then, I guess, because you've substantially lost this premise of yours, you resort to your usual name calling tactics...as if that convinces anybody of anything, other than you've run out of other fiction!!
"We often wish to ennoble those faults that we wish not to correct!"
Just because, unlike the masterbaters, or porn addicts, homosexuals cry out and demand 'sacred victim status' means absolutely nothing at all..except to those who wish to champion that particular cause, especially 'folkies' who have been out of the mainstream loop for a few decades now..but miss the 'good ol' days'.
Perhaps getting dialed in, BEFORE you take up a 'cause', might be a good suggestion....
GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 01:19 PM

You certainly offer nothing to support your histrionic assertions; and I do not see that jumping up and downand insisting they are reality-based makes them so, or even adds credibility.

For one thing, you seem incapable of making a simple declarative sentence offering facts; the vast majority of your posts have been sweeping generalizations,mostly of a negative camber, accompanied by energetic insistence and stylistic shrillness. But no hard data.

If all your dialogues are conducted this way it is a wonder you get through a day at a time.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: KB in Iowa
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 02:35 PM

'genetic masterbaters'

I'd like you to meet my wife, I call her 'Lefty'

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 03:26 PM

GfS's last post was conceptless, except for a blanket argumentum ad hominem against those who do not agree with his/her position, liberally mixed with straw man. He lumps us into a totally fictional group of people ("'folkies' who have been out of the mainstream loop for a few decades now..but miss the 'good ol' days") that more than amply demonstrates just how out of touch GfS is.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 04:13 PM

"masterbater"

Better look that one up.

Not one, but two problems I can see.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:04 PM

I figure that has to be someone who has a master's degree in putting red herrings on hooks. I didn't know they offered master's degrees in that.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:13 PM

With the exception of Emma's well crafted post, the last dozen or so have just been a heap of abuse with no value to the debate.

When the pro homosexual marriage "team" hit the rocks(as they have at this point), they assume their default position......doesn't everyone see how naturally they slip into the vicious personal attack mode.
They care about nothing but the small matter of silencing those who don't agree...it has now become a personal issue to them....they must not lose face. Well just for information,the last few posts have cost you any credibility that you ever had in this discussion.

In todays Times, Ian McKelleren the actor wrote in defence of homosexual "rights", his argument, or lack of one, was remarkedly similar to the one held by many here......"We are right and you are wrong; and if you continue to disagree or even speak, we will smear you"
The excrement they use is there for all to see in the posts above.
When reason fails to keep their position afloat, the mob mentality takes over.

I have written here for many years, in that time I have never had a post struck by Forum Admin, other than accidental Guest posting.
I never use any other handle than akenaton...and stand by everything I write. If I make a mistake I will immediately offer an apology, and certainly do not spend months arguing my case on threads like this is order to "wind folk up"......grow up Jeddy!

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage
From: Amos
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:23 PM

Well, except that the criticisms about GfS' post were completely accurate, Ake. It was just armwving.

For particular arguments based on facts, in support of Proposition 8, or in support of those who wish to see it overturned, there are only a small percentage of posters here who have gone to the trouble to male clear statements of facts--or for that matter of policy. The rest has been clouds of energized opinions floating back and forth.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: akenaton
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:30 PM

In repsonse to Emma's post, I would just say that if homosexuality were genetic I should be very easy for modern science to determine that fact. the genetic differences should be pretty marked.

In the event, it has proved impossible, and many emminent scientists have come to the conclusion that there is "absolutely no genetic difference between hetero and homo sexuals."

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Don Firth
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:42 PM

I feel a bit like Galileo must have felt when Pope Urban VIII told him that his ideas about a heliocentric solar system had "hit the rocks."

The truth will eventually triumph, and I'm quite content with that.

Don Firth

P. S. And as far as heaping insults and abuse, Ake, you and GfS most definitly take the prize there. If anyone objects to being thought of as a bigot (a legitimate term descriptive of a set of attitudes), there's a way to avoid it. Stop being one.

Subject: RE: BS: Californians Oppose 'Prop 8' Gay Marriage Ban
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 23 Jun 09 - 05:56 PM

When two men can produce a child during their 'marriage' let me know. Until then please leave the santictity of marriage to us christian heterosexuals