Proof that homosexuality is a matter of conditioning.

[jeffspot]

Originally Posted by mitex

I didn't choose it or "learn" it. I didn't have a broken childhood or a dominant mother. It just happened.

Unless your actually a homosexual who goes through the day and life of being one; then I wouldn't expect you to understand how it happened or came about.

NARTH can make all the theories they want. Its not a choice. Trust me; do you really think I would choose this existence?

Here, here. I couldn't agree more.

Although I will say I'm now at the place where I would not be too eager to explore a 'cure' if such a thing even existed. The ability to see beauty where others don't isn't something I'd want traded.

[SonCatcher]

Originally Posted by mitex

Me?

It may have been directed at the OP or one of the other posters.

[Charlemagne II]

Try this!

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/tim...m_medium=email

[johnnyjones]

Very illuminating link posted above. Wallace's investigation amplifies long held beliefs.

What if an individual is born gay? How does that change anything? I suppose the argument would be, "I'm born that way, nothing I can do about it." But aren't people randomly born with all types of ailments. Just like a gay person would say, 'you don't know how it is until you've had to wrestle with it', I say the same thing about alcoholism, which I have had to treat.

Treatment is provided for all types of sicknesses. Homosexality was treated as a disorder into the late 60s. Why did it become no longer an abnormality?

My personal view is that a "no longer fight it" mentality creeped in. Some of it due to physicians who themselves had tendencies to be gay.. That influence permeated the medical community. An acceptance model was then embraced. Other factors include power and influence by afluent persons who were gay or knew gay people.

[SonCatcher]

Originally Posted by johnnyjones

An acceptance model was then embraced.

Frankly, that is the better one, so long as it is properly done. They should embrace their cross just like everyone else. Homosexuals have both the issue of their own sexuality and celibacy to deal with. The community has the responsibility to support their struggles with those issues.

[Dakota Roberts]

Originally Posted by johnnyjones

Very illuminating link posted above. Wallace's investigation amplifies long held beliefs.

What if an individual is born gay? How does that change anything? I suppose the argument would be, "I'm born that way, nothing I can do about it." But aren't people randomly born with all types of ailments. Just like a gay person would say, 'you don't know how it is until you've had to wrestle with it', I say the same thing about alcoholism, which I have had to treat.

Treatment is provided for all types of sicknesses. Homosexality was treated as a disorder into the late 60s. Why did it become no longer an abnormality?

My personal view is that a "no longer fight it" mentality creeped in. Some of it due to physicians who themselves had tendencies to be gay.. That influence permeated the medical community. An acceptance model was then embraced. Other factors include power and influence by afluent persons who were gay or knew gay people.

Sexual attraction to the same sex in itself doesn't show up on objective mental illness tests.

[johnnyjones]

Originally Posted by SonCatcher

Frankly, that is the better one, so long as it is properly done. They should embrace their cross just like everyone else. Homosexuals have both the issue of their own sexuality and celibacy to deal with. The community has the responsibility to support their struggles with those issues.

I think embracing their cross would involve treatment. There are recovered gay people who would support aother gay person who had a desire to change. As many know, that is the philosophy used to aid alcoholics or drug addicts, help your brother with the same struggle (AA).

[Uzziah1]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

Dr. Joseph Nicolosi claims to have essentially proven that male homosexuality is the pre-wired HETEROSEXUAL male formation process gone awry and then imprinted in that state.

In other words, so long as the same heterosexual formation process continues to successfully generate reproductive heterosexual males, the portion of the process which goes awry and generates homnosexuals will not be bred out of our species.

[mitex]

Originally Posted by Uzziah1

Dr. Joseph Nicolosi claims to have essentially proven that male homosexuality is the pre-wired HETEROSEXUAL male formation process gone awry and then imprinted in that state.

In other words, so long as the same heterosexual formation process continues to successfully generate reproductive heterosexual males, the portion of the process which goes awry and generates homnosexuals will not be bred out of our species.

Originally Posted by mitex

I didn't choose it or "learn" it. I didn't have a broken childhood or a dominant mother. It just happened.

Unless your actually a homosexual who goes through the day and life of being one; then I wouldn't expect you to understand how it happened or came about.

NARTH can make all the theories they want. Its not a choice. Trust me; do you really think I would choose this existence?

[Reepicheep]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

Huntington's Chorea is a genetically transmitted disease that leads to death by advanced physical and mental senility, often by the age of about 30. Very counter-survival. Yet the disease continues to be passes on.
Multiple Sclerosis and Cystic Fibrosis and genetically transmitted, if I'm not mistaken. They also do bad thngs to the sufferer's chance to pass on their genes. Yet both conditions keep showing up.
I do not believe that there is such a thing as a "gay gene." Yet I fear the above argument does not disprove the notion that homosexuality is genetic.

[couponfit]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

So why is Fido gay? Why are there gay monkeys? Gay bears? Gay rats? I mean certainly the Gay gene should be gone in those species by now.

[livingwordunity]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

But you are using logic.

[Et Cetera]

Qoeleth's intial post is ridiculous and offensive, not to mention lacking in logic. I literally am not wasting the time and energy to refute it. This stuff is pulled here all of the time. It's some type of baiting/trolling. Please everyone, just move on.

[Andre1000]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

This is not sound because "Darwinian natural selection" is untrue

[OraLabora]

Originally Posted by Qoeleth

Darwinian natural selection means that traits which are not conducive to survival and perpetuation of genetic material lead to extinction. Clearly, IF homosexuality were a genetic proposenity, it would be radically contrary to genetic perpetuation. Therefore, the homosexual gene (IF it exists) would very soon have been bred out of the species.

This seems to prove that homosexuality is not a genetic propoensity. Egro, it is a matter of either conditioning, choice or both. Therefore, it can be cured.

Proof that you're wrong: there are plenty of (incurable) genetic anomalies, diseases and conditions that aren't conducive to survival.

Yet they happen anyway.

Sorry, the argument has been tried and found wanting after even the most superficial analysis.