Make these ads go away.
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 90

Thread: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

  1. #1
    Senior Member Accountable's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    24,996
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    02:23 AM

    Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    I really didn't want to start a fresh thread about this, but I couldn't find a suitable one to attach it to because so many people use 'gay' instead of 'homosexual' and the search engine here doesn't look for three-letter words.

    This is a commentary leaning decidedly against the idea, but it brings up good points and sites. I disconnected all links, but the article is here.


    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    ABC Follows 'Born Gay' Script to a T
    By Robert Knight
    Saturday, March 29, 2008

    ABC’s Good Morning America hit a grand slam today for the homosexual activist movement by airing a profoundly misleading segment that asks, “Can a Baby Be Gay?”

    A longer segment is slated for tonight’s 20/20.

    Convincing the public that some people are “born gay” is a central strategy of homosexual activists, who are being aided by a compliant media that routinely fails to examine such claims. If sexual behavior is hard-wired like race, then moral considerations can be swept aside, homosexuality declared a “civil right” and governments can move against people who believe homosexuality is wrong.

    The Good Morning America story follows the script proposed in the gay strategic manual After the Ball, by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. The two Harvard-trained PR experts set out to “overhaul straight America,” which was the title of an article out of which After the Ball was born as a full-length book in 1989.

    The authors tell activists to use the media to portray homosexuality as in-born, and homosexuals as victims. The heavies in the drama are proponents of traditional morality –especially Christians—who are to be depicted as ignorant at best, and haters and bigots at worst. The authors further advise that under no circumstances should the public be informed of actual homosexual behavior. Over the years, the media rarely have veered from the script, and Good Morning America is no exception.

    Host Diane Sawyer begins the Good Morning America segment by proclaiming the advent of a “truly landmark study” (whose results won’t come out until later this year) about “biology and being gay.

    And of course, what about the people who still believe that homosexuality is a choice?” Wink, wink. These are the same folks who still believe in a flat earth.

    The report is framed around a boy named Zack, who, along with his parents, believes he was “born gay.” The lone dissenter, Dr. Stanton Jones, is introduced as “a clinical psychologist and evangelical Christian.” No one else’s religious beliefs are mentioned. The message: Pay no attention to this man. His views are religious, not scientific.

    Here’s a portion of the transcript of the 4-minute, 19-second segment. Parentheses are added:

    (reporter) LYNN SCHERR: …Zack's parents both believe that homosexuality was probably in their son's DNA. For them, there is no medical mystery. But might a proven genetic link help other parents understand what they saw with their own eyes? Dr. Alan Sanders, a psychiatric geneticist at Northwestern Healthcare Institute, is currently heading the biggest study ever undertaken on sexual orientation. Do you believe you're going to find a gay gene?

    SANDERS: I think the evidence is pretty convincing already that a substantial contribution to sexual orientation comes from genetics. It’s probably the single biggest factor that we do know about. (Sanders is shown in a lab with lots of technical stuff around him.)

    SCHERR: But Dr. Stanton Jones, a clinical psychologist and evangelical Christian, says genetics plays at best, just a small role. (Jones is shown typing on a computer in an office.)

    JONES: The major misunderstanding in public awareness is that people are gay when they’re born and it’s just a matter of acknowledging that after you’ve developed the initial awareness.

    SCHERR: (quick cut, confrontational tone) And what's wrong with that position?

    JONES: That the evidence doesn't support it. The scientific evidence doesn't support it.

    Instead of exploring Jones’ contention, for which there is ample documentation, Scherr instead turns to Zack’s parents to pose a question that has the effect of ridiculing Stanton’s position:

    SCHERR: But if science does find that genetic link to homosexuality, could there one day be a test that could tell parents about their baby’s sexual identity in the womb, so they could perhaps change it? Cindy O'Connor would never have considered it.

    SCHERR off camera to Zack’s parents: If they offered you a patch – a hormone patch?

    ZACK’s DAD, laughing: A vaccine?

    SCHERR: To say, well, we think he's going to be gay, would you rather take this and we know he’ll be straight.

    CINDY O’CONNOR: No, I wouldn't have cared. He’s who he is, it doesn’t matter. You know, it’s not relevant.

    Diane Sawyer then says, in studio with Scherr, “Really, interesting. Interesting study they’re doing. And when’s it coming out?” Scherr answers that they “hope to have the first results at the end of the year.”

    But why wait until then? Why not continue to stack the deck for the “gay gene.”

    Since 1991, the media periodically have reported scientific claims of a genetic component to homosexuality, often on the front page of newspapers like The New York Times and in evening newscasts. Although none of the studies has held up under scrutiny, and none has been replicated—a necessary element for scientific validity—the media continue to sing from the gay songbook.

    The focus of the GMA segment, the young man, Zack, says he felt different from a very young age. Although this in no way lessens the credibility of competing theories that environmental factors are paramount in the formation of sexual desires, it stands as given: He felt “gay,” so he must have been born that way.

    Dr. Jeffrey Satinover, a psychiatrist with degrees from MIT, the University of Texas and Harvard, has written extensively about problems with genetic research on homosexuality, and also about professional organizations’ refusal to consider opposing evidence. In his book Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth, Satinover says genetic factors might contribute “not to homosexuality per se, but rather to some other trait that makes the homosexual ‘option’ more readily available than to those who lack this genetic trait.”

    He notes that most basketball players tend to be tall, but that this does not mean that they have a “basketball gene.” It only means that they might gravitate toward that sport because of their height. Similarly, a young boy might be more sensitive than other boys, be less athletic, be rejected by his father and peers, and hence be starved for male approval. An early sexual experience could then take him down a path he might not necessarily have taken.

    Satinover notes that cultures worldwide historically have varied greatly in terms of homosexual practice and that this indicates that “environmental” factors are at work.

    Given that such cultures have existed where the incidence of homosexuality is far greater than at present, the incidence of homosexuality is clearly influenced by mores.

    Good Morning America could have made their story more balanced, also, by including an interview with a former homosexual who once believed he or she was “born gay.”

    By ignoring scientific articles and books—and the existence of people—that effectively rebut the “gay gene” theory, and presenting homosexuality as something in-born and no more consequential than being right-handed or left-handed, Good Morning America continues to distort public understanding of a complex issue.

    The authors of After the Ball, wherever they are today, must be smiling.

  2. #2
    jimbo
    Guest

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    i think buddy some people are just born that way

    i know of young lads that would of rather played with dolls with the girls than football with the boys and have always been so girlie even before they where aware what gay meant and no suprise they turned out gay

    i also know girls that always climbed trees and fought with the boys and they turned out gay


    what i wonder about is bisexual's what happened there


    i mean just imagine the oppertunities for sexual partners there , if you found both sexes as equally atractive and you were happy with it how cool would that be


    ps acc what color boxers you wearing right now

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kingston-upon-Thames
    Posts
    5,130
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    07:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Seems to me the main issue here is bad journalism, not homosexuality.

    So far as I'm aware there has been no provable reason why some are homosexual, some are bisexual and some are het.

    Last I can heard about is some study suggesting younger siblings in families with lots of children were more likely to be gay than the older children, or childern in families with few children. Not worth much, since I can't recall where I heard it!

  4. #4
    Senior Member Accountable's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    24,996
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    02:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    Seems to me the main issue here is bad journalism, not homosexuality.

    So far as I'm aware there has been no provable reason why some are homosexual, some are bisexual and some are het.
    That's the point of the commentary. A TV news magazine 20/20 took an ongoing study too new to announce results and made it sound like fact.

    I don't get the fascination, frankly. We're supposed to be a monogamous society, so why should we care about who anybody else (besides our own parner) is having sex with?

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kingston-upon-Thames
    Posts
    5,130
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    07:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Quote Originally Posted by Accountable View Post
    That's the point of the commentary. A TV news magazine 20/20 took an ongoing study too new to announce results and made it sound like fact.

    I don't get the fascination, frankly. We're supposed to be a monogamous society, so why should we care about who anybody else (besides our own parner) is having sex with?
    chuckle. You're being FAAAR to logical about this. It's not a subject where logic applies! Look at dear old cherandbuster - happily married by all accounts, but starting threads on the most intimate of subjects and the incredible amount of sex scandal that gets into the news!

    (that's not a criticism, cher, I'm just not used to it. It's probably good for me)

    Partly, I suppose, sex is where grown-ups play, and involves a whole set of behaviours we'd never let even close friends see: It's both intensely private and at the same time, shared - even if only in our heads!

    But then of course, I'm British, and we don't believe in it.

  6. #6
    Senior Member cherandbuster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    8,485
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    02:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Quote Originally Posted by Clodhopper View Post
    (that's not a criticism, cher, I'm just not used to it. It's probably good for me)
    No offense taken, my new friend CHopper
    Live Life with
    PASSION
    !




  7. #7
    Jester2
    Guest

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Not making this issue into a religious issue here on this thread, but this is how the world now works, at least the western world when the media plays to the fringed and prevalent philosophy of man...

    Who's behind this big shift in the mainline thinking towards a more accepting view of homosexuality? A group of homosexual harvard PR buddies, what is thier goal? To stop the evengelical chirstians from saying they cant be 'gay'... not only do they want to be recognized and have normal status, they want anyone who disagrees with them to be punished under the law.

    Remove the subject and you have the method in the 20-21st century for changing the social fabric of the world.

    Please note in the article the hiding of the truth, the PR gurus do not want under any circumstances to have anyone in the media show the truth of homosexual activity. (HIV, STD, sodomy, medical problems associated with anal penetration) All that is to be kept secret.

  8. #8
    Senior Member yaaarrrgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,262
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    01:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Quote Originally Posted by Accountable View Post
    The authors tell activists to use the media to portray homosexuality as in-born, and homosexuals as victims. The heavies in the drama are proponents of traditional morality –especially Christians—who are to be depicted as ignorant at best, and haters and bigots at worst. The authors further advise that under no circumstances should the public be informed of actual homosexual behavior. Over the years, the media rarely have veered from the script, and Good Morning America is no exception.
    Now that's rich. "Christians" actively attack gay people, then turn around and try to paint themselves as the victims.

  9. #9
    Senior Member yaaarrrgg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,262
    Local Date
    10-16-2019
    Local Time
    01:23 AM

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jester View Post
    Please note in the article the hiding of the truth, the PR gurus do not want under any circumstances to have anyone in the media show the truth of homosexual activity. (HIV, STD, sodomy, medical problems associated with anal penetration) All that is to be kept secret.
    Believe it or not, lesbians have lower HIV rates than heterosexuals. Does that mean God prefers watching lesbian action?

    Also, the blanket statement that anal penetration is a "gay activity" is also false ... many straight people do this. There's really no such thing as "gay sex" that doesn't also exists in a heterosexual setting.

  10. #10
    Jester2
    Guest

    Re: Born Gay? - A Homosexual Gene?

    Register to remove this ad.
    Quote Originally Posted by yaaarrrgg View Post
    Believe it or not, lesbians have lower HIV rates than heterosexuals. Does that mean God prefers watching lesbian action?

    Also, the blanket statement that anal penetration is a "gay activity" is also false ... many straight people do this. There's really no such thing as "gay sex" that doesn't also exists in a heterosexual setting.
    The issue is about homosexual activity, anal penetration whether homosexual or hetrosexual in nature has physical/medical consequences. In either case its a bad idea unless you want those problems. But here we are talking about homosexual issues, and how they are portrayed in the media and 'hidden'. Not about the media protrayin the truth that there are health issues regarding homosexual activity.

    On the lesbian question, (and I'd like alink for proof of that please, but I'll answer in the negative, no, it means that God preferes men and women to be in committed, opposite gender, married relationships before having intercourse and then to keep the matter of intercourse in its proper format as the human body was created for.

    And I want it noted that I was not the first one to mention God in this thread. My intent was to keep my postings non-religious in nature.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 9 1 2 3 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. gene mutation
    By jimbo in forum General Chit Chat
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-19-2008, 08:51 AM
  2. Poor Gene...
    By Wolverine in forum Just For The Fun Of It
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-08-2008, 11:38 AM
  3. Another homosexual thread
    By weeder in forum General Chit Chat
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 01-15-2008, 03:47 PM
  4. Gene for Alzheimers?
    By valerie in forum Health & Wellness
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 08-25-2007, 01:04 PM
  5. Alaska High Court Backs Homosexual Benefits
    By Accountable in forum Crimes & Trials
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-29-2005, 11:30 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts