Gay, why is it not considered a mental illness, what would darwin think of gays

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Highly Deluded wrote: Most Americans support gay marriage, and that's a fact

No they do not. Amendments keep passing stating marriage is between one man and one woman (as it should be defined) but whining degenerates who cannot accept "no" for an answer run to the courts to overturn the will of the people, i.e., the will of most Americans.

Every national poll right now says the same thing. It is undeniable. Whether or not an amendment can pass in a given state does not change that. The population supports gay marriage.

Here are FIVE SEPARATE POLLS. Gallup, ABC/Washington Post, Pew Forum, PRRI, and CNN

You are in the minority. Sorry for your loss.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2011/03/poll_growing_pu.html

http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/05/majority-of-americans-say-they-support-same-sex-marriage-adoption-by-gay-and-lesbian-couples/

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/19/poll-more-americans-favor-same-sex-marriage/

http://www.pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/Religion-and-Attitudes-Toward-Same-Sex-Marriage.aspx

Because the media and Hollywood has mad it seem gays are numerous, people think that the gay population is 20% when in fact it is 3%.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Being gay could actually be an evolutionary strategy.

I know of many a gay uncle who dote on their little nieces and nephews. That gives extra resources to the offspring of the hetero sibling. If the gay uncles had kids, their kids would be competing for resources with the niece. And the gay uncle's genetics are basically idential to his hetero brother. So he is doting on his own genes.

As a matter of fact there are many biological theories regarding the causes of homosexuality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

One for instance suggests that some genes passed down on the X chromosome render a woman extremely fertile while causing at the same time some of her offspring to be gay. This would also be consistent with the idea that survival is ensured by ensuring reproduction while allowing the concentration of resources on a limited number of offspring.

And since the religious gay-haters are also those whose parents are likely to reproduce a lot, this lends even more credence to the idea that they are self-hating gays in the closet...

[Anonymous]

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147824/Adults-Estimate-Americans-Gay-Lesbian.aspx

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being gay could actually be an evolutionary strategy.

I know of many a gay uncle who dote on their little nieces and nephews. That gives extra resources to the offspring of the hetero sibling. If the gay uncles had kids, their kids would be competing for resources with the niece. And the gay uncle's genetics are basically idential to his hetero brother. So he is doting on his own genes.

As a matter of fact there are many biological theories regarding the causes of homosexuality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

One for instance suggests that some genes passed down on the X chromosome render a woman extremely fertile while causing at the same time some of her offspring to be gay. This would also be consistent with the idea that survival is ensured by ensuring reproduction while allowing the concentration of resources on a limited number of offspring.

And since the religious gay-haters are also those whose parents are likely to reproduce a lot, this lends even more credence to the idea that they are self-hating gays in the closet...

Is it a disability or defect if so why continue to promote it

[Anonymous]

Why do conservatives always seem to resort to strawmen to make their "points"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why do conservatives always seem to resort to strawmen to make their "points"?

You just strawmanned lol

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If being gay is not a mental illness and if you believe in evolution, wouldn't being gay be a means to eliminate that type of condition by naturall selection.

What would Darwin have thought of gays? Are you trying to tell me that there were no homosexuals way back when... I mean, doesn't homosexuality date back to the beginning of times, so in theory Darwin did know of the gays. Being he knew of "gays" and had no recorded opinion, doesn't that prove your theory wrong?

I mean, if dolphins can be gay, why can't humans?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Being gay could actually be an evolutionary strategy.

I know of many a gay uncle who dote on their little nieces and nephews. That gives extra resources to the offspring of the hetero sibling. If the gay uncles had kids, their kids would be competing for resources with the niece. And the gay uncle's genetics are basically idential to his hetero brother. So he is doting on his own genes.

As a matter of fact there are many biological theories regarding the causes of homosexuality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

One for instance suggests that some genes passed down on the X chromosome render a woman extremely fertile while causing at the same time some of her offspring to be gay. This would also be consistent with the idea that survival is ensured by ensuring reproduction while allowing the concentration of resources on a limited number of offspring.

And since the religious gay-haters are also those whose parents are likely to reproduce a lot, this lends even more credence to the idea that they are self-hating gays in the closet...

Is it a disability or defect if so why continue to promote it

Its neither.

[Anonymous]

Nobody is promoting being gay. People are just trying to make sure their civil rights are being protected, just like everyone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do conservatives always seem to resort to strawmen to make their "points"?

You just strawmanned lol

Except I was reacting to the premise of the question. You're right that I could have worded it better:

The premise of this thread is based on a man made of straw. Don't engage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Nobody is promoting being gay. People are just trying to make sure their civil rights are being protected, just like everyone else.

This. I've never understand the suggestion that gays "promote" or "recruit." There's nothing inherently attractive about the lifestyle -- who would willingly lead a life in which they will be discriminated against and scorned?

[Anonymous]

How do you "recruit" for something you are biologically prewired for? I never got that "logic"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Highly Deluded wrote: Most Americans support gay marriage, and that's a fact

No they do not. Amendments keep passing stating marriage is between one man and one woman (as it should be defined) but whining degenerates who cannot accept "no" for an answer run to the courts to overturn the will of the people, i.e., the will of most Americans.

Every national poll right now says the same thing. It is undeniable. Whether or not an amendment can pass in a given state does not change that. The population supports gay marriage.

Here are FIVE SEPARATE POLLS. Gallup, ABC/Washington Post, Pew Forum, PRRI, and CNN

You are in the minority. Sorry for your loss.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/147662/First-Time-Majority-Americans-Favor-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx

http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctpolitics/2011/03/poll_growing_pu.html

http://publicreligion.org/research/2011/05/majority-of-americans-say-they-support-same-sex-marriage-adoption-by-gay-and-lesbian-couples/

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/04/19/poll-more-americans-favor-same-sex-marriage/

http://www.pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/Religion-and-Attitudes-Toward-Same-Sex-Marriage.aspx

Because the media and Hollywood has mad it seem gays are numerous, people think that the gay population is 20% when in fact it is 3%.

Way to change the subject.

Five polls say you are wrong. Time for you to pack up your bag and head off for Curmudgeonville. Or, if you want to stay around here, I bet you'll find lots of likeminded people playing shuffleboard at shady acres.

[Anonymous]

Who cares what Darwin would think? He thought that men should rule over women and that European colonization was a good thing even if it destroyed other societies. It's completely irrelevant to what is moral today.

I don't spend a lot of time wondering what Newton would would have thought of Einstein either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:No because sexual orientation is not genetic, Dumbass.

First of all, f you for name calling.

Second, if, as studies suggest, gay people are "born that way", then yes it is genetic. Studies also show that environment affects the way genes are encoded, then stress of overpopulation could have an impact on the genetic code. But it doesn't really matter. And I'm sure science is irrelevant to you.