WC > Politics
gay history in california
Page 2 / 4 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 « previous | Next »
gay history in california
07/08/2011 4:42 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
Apples and oranges man. People cant help what color they are.  They can help being straight or gay.  I dont care if they tell ya otherwise.



Look at the studies I cited above.  That is unless you simply don't believe in science.
Quote   
07/08/2011 4:53 pm

Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/20/2010
Topics: 63
Posts: 949
OFFLINE
You will never get me to believe that its anything other than a choice man.  I dont care what some scientists think.  Some scientists think we came from apes too.  I dunno about you, but I didnt have an ancestor that spent the day flinging crap at one another.  Lol!
................
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r49/DrHesper/Misc/TributeMartinGrelle.jpg
Quote   
07/08/2011 5:06 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
A You will never get me to believe that its anything other than a choice man.  I dont care what some scientists think.  Some scientists think we came from apes too.   B I dunno about you, but I didnt have an ancestor that spent the day flinging crap at one another.  Lol!



A So there is no evidence that could be presented to you that would persuade you of either a genetic/biochemical control on sexual preference or evolution?  None what so ever?  Why is this?

B   Why is this so hard for you to believe?  There is still a subspecies of hominid,  homo politicus, that practice such behaviors on a daily bases.  If you don't believe me go see them for your self, while they're distributed across much of the Earth, I hear there is quite a population of them along the Maryland/Virginia border.
Quote   
07/08/2011 5:24 pm

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE
are we having the gay argument again. look, i'll put it the same way i have in the past. i personally know of too many people who have "become gay" later in life, after many years of heterosexuality, typically after bad experiences with the opposite sex. i have yet to hear of definitive scientific proof that there is anything biologically different about gay people than straight people, just as there is no biological difference between people who are sexually attracted to minors. and no, i'm not saying gay people are as morally wrong as pedos.
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
07/08/2011 9:34 pm

Forum Fanatic


Regist.: 04/10/2011
Topics: 12
Posts: 284
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
to me, this is just as silly as having a semester devoted to the accomplishments of heterosexuals.



They already have that though, it's just called "history class" :-P



Not really.....western history classes cover Greek and Roman history......
Quote   
07/09/2011 6:58 am

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Mark Simmons:

Originally Posted by Kieran Colfer:

Originally Posted by Dødherre Mørktre:
to me, this is just as silly as having a semester devoted to the accomplishments of heterosexuals.



They already have that though, it's just called "history class" :-P



Not really.....western history classes cover Greek and Roman history......



but they don't talk about how gay they were, or their affairs with young boys.
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
07/12/2011 10:40 am

Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/20/2010
Topics: 63
Posts: 949
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:
A You will never get me to believe that its anything other than a choice man.  I dont care what some scientists think.  Some scientists think we came from apes too.   B I dunno about you, but I didnt have an ancestor that spent the day flinging crap at one another.  Lol!



A So there is no evidence that could be presented to you that would persuade you of either a genetic/biochemical control on sexual preference or evolution?  None what so ever?  Why is this?

B   Why is this so hard for you to believe?  There is still a subspecies of hominid,  homo politicus, that practice such behaviors on a daily bases.  If you don't believe me go see them for your self, while they're distributed across much of the Earth, I hear there is quite a population of them along the Maryland/Virginia border.



A:  Because I believe in God.  (I know yall dont).  But I do not believe God would say homosexuality is an abomination and yet intentionally create people to be gay (thus condemning them to hell).  It contradicts the Christian belief of Free Will.  Its my opinion that God created people and gave them free will.  Again, i know you reject this.  But its what I believe and no science has ever been shown to change my mind.  Lotta theories but no proof.  

B: Because I am a creationists and believe in the Bible.  (I've discussed this many many times before).  While I do believe that creatures on earth do evolve to a degree... so-called cave men (Neanderthal, Java or whatever) dont even look human to me.  Their bone structure is different.  They look more like apes to me.  So what if they could use tools back then?  Chimps can use tools too and they arent human.  You can even teach dogs and lab rats to manipulate tools to get what they want.

They arent homo sapien.  They are something else.  Its like saying Guiness and burnt motor oil are the same.  They may taste the same.  But they arent the same.
................
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r49/DrHesper/Misc/TributeMartinGrelle.jpg
Quote   
07/12/2011 10:47 am

Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/20/2010
Topics: 63
Posts: 949
OFFLINE



Interesting eh?  Lots of these so-called scientific theories are just bunk.
................
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r49/DrHesper/Misc/TributeMartinGrelle.jpg
Quote   
07/12/2011 12:15 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE
Gah, that damn old fallacy.  Creationist organizations keep (presumably intentionally) mis-representing the science to attack evolution.  No one is arguing that we're descended from Neanderthals, they may share a common ancestor, but they took a different path than Homo Sapien.  How do you explain the trends we see in DNA between different species?

If you ever feel interested in learning what most scientists actually think I'd recommend reading something by Don Prothero, from my experience he's usually fairly easy to follow.

BTW, encase you didn't get it the crap-throwing homo politicus was a joke.
Quote   
07/12/2011 2:46 pm

Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/20/2010
Topics: 63
Posts: 949
OFFLINE
Yeah, that image i posted was meant to be a joke.  Lol!

But the truth (for me) is that as a somewhat educated individual (went to college, had decent enough grades though I didnt major in anthropology), I have seen nothing, absolutely nothing conclusive that we descended from apes (or chimps or whatever).  On the contrary, I have studied intelligent design and believe with all my heart that it is true.

While I concede that evolution within species can happen, I reject the theory that it happens with different species.  For example, I dont think dogs came from...turtles or that man evolved from fish so to speak.  Lol!

We creationists are often accused by evolutionists as dreaming up fanciful origins for humanity.  But when you really look closer, I find that evolutionists are the ones living in a fairy-tale world.

................
http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r49/DrHesper/Misc/TributeMartinGrelle.jpg
Quote   
07/13/2011 7:51 am

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE
i believe in ID and evolution as the mechanism through which life exists. first, i have to stress again that the theory regarding humans isn't that we came from monkeys or any other species of currently living primates, but that we and some currently living primates share an ancient ancestor.

dennis, i don't know how some people can say they believe in intra-species evolution, but then can't take that a step further to understand how this is the process by which we derive species. the greater the change, the longer the amount of time. i don't think we can really look at species as set in stone. what we see as a species of plant or animal, is really just a snapshot of a particular point in time, of the continual process of change that occurs from generation to generation. there's really no buffers that stops this change. it's not as if god says, "whoa, your'e starting to change too much into another species, so no more genetic inputs to your offspring." it would either be that a species can't change enough to keep pace with environmental factors and the evolution of other species around it (such as predators), or it would be a successful design. some species are designed so well (or have evolved so well), that they don't change for millions of years. like crocodiles and alligators. yet even so, these species didn't come from no where. there wasn't just all of a sudden crocodiles. they came from other crocodillian ancestors that looked very similar to them.

i believe in the godly simulation. that is, the entirety of what we call the physical realm (our universe) is just a massively complex simulation (or at least the approximation of a simulation) that began with the big bang - god breathing existence into the universe. and the scientific processes that we know of, are the methods by which everything unfolded after that point.

through gravitation, stars are born from the matter left over from extinct stars. the greater the size, the greater the gravity, the more stuff gets pulled in. the stars themselves are made of the lighter materials, such as helium and hydrogen. the heavier stuff begins to circulate around the gravity created by the new star in great rings, similar to those of saturn. and through gravity again, these bits begin to coalesce into larger and larger pieces, which gives them more and more gravity, to suck up even more bits of material. eventually, these pieces form into planets. the reason this process repeats itself (as we now know of other planets revolving around other stars) is because this is the natural reaction of matter to the laws of physics. in other words, the same processes occur all across the universe, because they are all subject to the same laws of physics.

so in other words, the mightiest of stars and planets are formed from the tiniest bits of dust and debris.

similarly, i believe this is the same manner in which life springs up, all across the universe, because evolution is the law of physics for life. all life, over extreme periods of times - time scales we can't fully grasp in our heads - arises from the simplest of creatures. if conditions are right, there will be life. if conditions are right amino acids will coalesce into forming simple proteins. these proteins then form into what we would call single cell organisms, which themselves are fairly complex (if you remember biology class). these single celled organisms become multi-celled polyps and from there, it's just a matter of complexity and different arrangements of organisation. it's really the same way humans are created unto this world. we start from a single cell, and this cell multiplies, and those cells multiply and so on.

really, to my eyes, the ingeniousness of everything is how such complexity arises from such simplicity. to my thinking, this is the hand of god.
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
07/13/2011 1:07 pm

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE
Hm, this is starting to sound like the good-ol' fundamentalist/modernist debate thats been raging for the last 100 years!
Quote   
07/13/2011 1:59 pm

Moderator
Administrator
Senior Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 296
Posts: 1121
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Bryant Platt:
Hm, this is starting to sound like the good-ol' fundamentalist/modernist debate thats been raging for the last 100 years!



you're right. not much to do with gay history is it?
................
Whatever's Clever
Quote   
07/14/2011 2:24 am

Forum Expert


Regist.: 02/20/2011
Topics: 132
Posts: 521
OFFLINE
If anyone gets board this may evoke some interesting discussion.

http://www.discovery.org/v/1711
Quote   
07/14/2011 5:50 am

Forum Expert


Regist.: 11/17/2010
Topics: 131
Posts: 466
OFFLINE

Originally Posted by Dennis Young:



Interesting eh?  Lots of these so-called scientific theories are just bunk.



Why does Modern Man look like he's wearing sunglasses? :-P
Quote   
Page 2 / 4 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 « previous | Next »
Login with Facebook to post
Preview