Gays and science

1. 61

   mohamedhmmposted 14 years ago

   Does science agree with gays?
   What's science views and theory about gay person?
   To be gay is really choice or not?

   report
   1. 60

      countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I don't know how to say it but opening so many threads against Gays seems to border on "Hate Speech". Please learn to live and let live. If not me some body else might report you. This is a sincere suggestion my friend.

      report
      1. 63

         Lisa HWposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         The exact same thought occurred to me.  I was wondering what HubPages policy on this is.  I don't even happen to be gay, but so many, many, posts about gay people are making me pretty uncomfortable.  I don't think any gay folks on here should be subjected to this kind of thing ("free speech" or not).

         report
      2. 60

         packerpackposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I agree here and looks like you were defeated in your earlier thread on "Vote: no for same sex marriage" so you thought to start a new one. Looks like you are desperate to prove your point.

         report
         1. 92

            Amanda Severnposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            To raise this same issue over and over suggests an unhealthy fixation. Either that, or a lack of new ideas. The Bible offers a whole raft of difficult issues for these forums to explore. Try moving on from Sodom and Gomorrah. It's getting a little tiresome.

            report
   2. 0

      sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Is a person still gay if he/she has romantic feelings for another of the same gender but never physically displays any affection?
      
      Is the act of a man laying with another man truly the only factor that some find an "abomination"?
      
      There may not be any proof that anyone is born with a "homosexual gene variant", but there is proof and it is a fact that some are born with both male and female reproductive parts. 
      
      Now, because this is true a fact, is the person allowed to display affection for the gender that comes naturally to them?  Or is this something determined by external sources such as people, maybe a scientist who might conclude that a hermaphrodite is more male then female therefore against the persons natural feelings is told they must display those feelings for a female otherwise they are gay.

      report
      1. 59

         Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         There are a lot of questions here Sandra. I can answer all of them if you want me to. Just give me a minute

         report
         1. 0

            sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Sounds good to me.

            report
   3. 0

      Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Are you trying to figure it out because you want to know?  Or do you just like the number of posts you seem to generate?  I'm legitimately curious after so many of these.

      report
   4. 60

      usmanali81posted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Gays or Lesbians are not celebrated in science as well because these actions cause major health problems, for instance, cancer of anus and penis, syphilis, impotency etc.

      report
      1. 77

         frogdroppingposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Usman - seriously! C'mon - promiscuity and poor sexual health practice cause such things. Not bloody homosexuals! My brother once caught a non-serious STD - not because he was gay but because he couldn't keep it in his pants! He was a teen, with raging hormones and an underdeveloped sense of responsibility.

         report
   5. 61

      THE SOUR MANposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      What is this with you mohamedhmm ? Don't you like yourselve ?
      I mean , it's allright to be gay you know...
      We don't really care about what people do as consenting adults .
      Personnally I care more about young girls who must at all price (including sodomy) appear as virgins on their weddingnight.
      Get a close look at the world you're living in , and tell me , is it worth all the hypocrecies ?

      report
   6. 61

      THE SOUR MANposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I don't think science can answer your question . If a person chooses to be gay than his or her choice could be inspired by god,if a person is gay by nature it most certainly is the will of god.
      Good day to you mohamedmm .

      report
2. 79

   Uninvited Writerposted 14 years ago

   Either that or he has questions about himself

   report
3. 58

   Chris Fawthropposted 14 years ago

   I was thinking the same thing, but all the same, I would like to know his intent with posting all of these threads before I criticism him.

   report
   1. 79

      Uninvited Writerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      He started another post in the religion forum last week that got over probably a 1,000 comments. He would not listen to what anyone told him about gays and kept repeating over and over how wrong it is to be gay.

      report
4. 58

   Chris Fawthropposted 14 years ago

   Ah I see, forgive me then I did not know. In that case I would agree that this seems to be borderline hate speech.

   report
   1. 61

      tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I think it's a borderline fetish.

      report
5. 82

   LondonGirlposted 14 years ago

   He's not only a prejudiced idiot, he's a boring idiot at that.

   report
6. 59

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   For sure LondonGirl. Hey Mo... I am sooo over you

   report
7. 59

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   1) Think of sexual orientation as a scale. Kinsey came up with one, but it's a little too black and white  in my opinion. Gay, Straight, Lesbian, Bisexual... these are all labels. A lot of people don't like them because they are so black and white. So back to the scale. There are people on one end and the other, however in all actually this probably isn't most people. You can also think of the scale as possibly changing in a person's life. They may go from one end of the scale to the other. It depends on the individual. For some "gay" or "straight" people, they may just stay where they are their whole lives. Or even deny to themselves where on the scale they believe they should truly be.
   
   You can be a straight person but find someone of the same sex attractive. You can be a straight person who has had romantic relations with someone of the same sex in the past.
   
   Sorry if the scale is confusing, but that is the easiest way for me to explain.
   
   So is someone who has romantic feelings for someone of the same sex but doesn't act on them physically, gay? Honestly, it depends. They might be, but just didn't act on their feelings. Or they aren't and didn't act on anything physically because they aren't gay.
   
   2) As far as "abomination" is concerned, everyone has their own reason, if they do, for thinking being gay is wrong. It could be that having sex with a person of the same gender is wrong, or lusting, or having romantic feelings, or living with. All of these reasons are completely ridiculous.
   
   3) There are intersex people that are born with both male and female reproductive parts, yes. There are also particular conditions where someone may be born with an extra chromosome either male or female, or both. Klinefelter's syndrome, Turner's syndrome, XXYY, etc. are all examples of these. In these conditions the person may be sterile, and develop certain secondary sex characteristics (body hair, breasts, stature, facial appearance, etc.). What is difficult about both of these is how to raise children born with these conditions. Do the parents and/or the doctor decide what gender to raise the child? Or should the child be able to wait until they are old enough to identify with one or the other? It is very difficult for parents to make this decision.
   
   As far as their sexual orientation. Usually the label of gay, straight, is kind of socially constructed. If they look more male but are attracted to men, socially they may be seen as gay, even though biological they are not male. Part of it may be personal as well. Some people choose surgery to fit the gender role they identify with the greatest. To me it's not a matter of "are they allowed" to display affection. Whatever someone identifies as their gender, that should be ok. Whoever someone chooses to be attracted to should be ok.
   
   Some definitions:
   Biological Role: Chromosomes XX or XY or one of the conditions
   Gender: Male Female Androgynous
   Sexual Orientation: Gay Straight Bisexual (but again these are labels)
   Transexual: Someone with a condition where they identify with the opposite gender of which they were born
   Intersex: Someone with both male and female reproductive anatomy

   report
8. 59

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   I think we concentrate too much on placing labels on people and judging them for just trying to be happy and live their lives honestly. We should just learn as much as we can, and focus on our own problems. Hopefully we can foster caring and understanding.

   report
   1. 0

      sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      And I also agree.

      report
9. 59

   Colebabieposted 14 years ago

   Thanks sandra, I'm sorry my response was so long. Just kept on typin'

   report
   1. 60

      countrywomenposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Keep those responses coming colebabie. I hope at least a few folks get more educated by your posts (just like I do).

      report
      1. 59

         Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Thanks That means a lot to me.

         report
         1. 0

            issues veritasposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Educated you mean brain washed.
            There are no gays in the animal kingdom. We don't use the same process as the animal kingdom, survival of the most fit and natural selection. Over the years, our gene pools have been corrupted and that is a malfunction of the DNA.
            
            Once again, I find that these posts and hubs generate outlandish and scary positions, but worse than that is the way that the outlander doesn't like it when they receive, what they consider outlandish replies.
            
            If your private parts don't develop into a male or female and get stuck somewhere in between or develop both parts, that is a defect. If your brain doesn't get wired the same as your physical gender or your hormones are not consistent with it, then these are defects.
            
            Bipolar is not a choice, it is a defect and there is no difference between that kind of defect and sexual orientation.
            
            Now, report me, if you are that shallow and insecure, or take my reply as an honest argument to what you are selling here.
            
            If you want to write this stuff, then expect to be challenged.
            Everyone gets upset, when someone not black uses the N word, but where are those same kinds of reactions, when gays and their sympathizers refer to traditional people as homophobes? Gays and Lesbians have self upgraded, from Fags and Queers and at the same time now bash straight normal people ( not all straight people are normal ) calling them homophobes.
            
            If God wanted Gays, then there would only be one gender.

            report
            1. 82

               LondonGirlposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               There are lots of gays in the animal kingdom.

               report
               1. 74

                  cheaptrickposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  you should meet bosko my cross eyed cat,hes indiscriminate,he'll hump anything,even if it doesn't move......

                  report
            2. 0

               Leta Sposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               While this may be true in part, in technical terms, a physician friend of mine once told me that ALL PEOPLE literally have quote, quote, "physical defects," according to medical definitions.  Yes, yes, even the most perfect model, hetero sexual specimen of our race....There's also a lot of incorrect 'scientific' info. here, but I don't feel like un-knotting it..
               
               They say what separates Man from animal kingdom (my definition--one drawn from philosophy and literature)is our awareness and ability to reason; our ability for empathy.  They used part of the same definition when human rights statements were written--or even the U.S. constitution and other documents, during the Age of Reason.

               report
               1. 61

                  THE SOUR MANposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  I've seen with my own eyes homosexueal behaviour with gorillas living in the free in Rwanda , Don't affirm things you don't really know about . By the way , how do you determine if something is a defect or natural behaviour ?

                  report
                  1. 92

                     Amanda Severnposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Sexual activity is a natural behaviour. We are programmed to procreate, to continue a cycle, but that doesn't make homosexuality wrong. It's just a variation on a theme.

                     report
            3. 59

               Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Before you call me brainwashed please get educated on the topic you are posting about. There are "gays" in the animal kingdom. And there is proof. Since we are in the SCIENCE forum, I would hope you knew that. Over the years our gene pool has changed, that is not just malfunction of DNA, malfunction of DNA would cause an organism not to exist, in some cases this is true but there are more reasons for genetic variability.
               
               I have no idea what you are trying to say with your second comment. The OP has been going on a rant about homosexuality. If he would like to be educated, and have his questions truly answered, I would do so, however he refuses to listen to me and my knowledge. So forget him!
               
               Intersex is not a defect, it is a condition. If you were a sensitive person you would say it as so. Certain biological conditions where the body doesn't develop normally (or in the case of bipolar disorder, a section of the brain) shouldn't be seen as defects. Sexual orientation is not a "defect." If, and I say if, someone was born sexually orientated to someone of the same sex then that is a part of their life. You can't attribute people's differences to "defects." Does that make sense? People can still live healthy "normal" lives. No one would call their condition a "defect," except maybe you. Do you not know anyone who isn't perfect?
               
               "Gays and sympathizers" do not use the term homophobic unless their is a strong case for it. A lot of the time it isn't a true hatred of the gay population but rather a lack of education and understanding. Saying that the gay population has upgraded from "Fags and Queers" shows a lack of education and understanding on your part.
               
               As far as your comment on God, move over to the religion forum, because I don't want to hear it here.

               report
            4. 79

               Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Nope - that is one thing that Colebabie is not
               
               
               
               See the other responses - yes there are.
               
               
               Whilst humanity has the ability to manipulate the external environment, we are still subject to the same selection pressures.
               
               
               
               No malfunction - sexual reproduction causes mixing of the genes.
               
               
               
               No problem with you expressing your opinion.
               
               
               
               Why is bipolar necessarily a defect. Some of the most creative and innovative people have had bipolar disorder. Therefore it is no defect, and neither is the broad range of human sexuality. Defect is a very judgemental word - what you see as a defect may be a strength to another.
               
               
               
               No reporting here - you are free to express your opinion, however misguided.
               
               
               
               Must admit, I have never been called homophobic - if you have been called homophobic, maybe that is because you are.
               
               
               
               Foolish argument - if we are bringing God up in the science forum, the logical counter-argument is that gays exist, therefore God meant for them to exist.
               
               EDIT - Looks like we crossed posts, Colebabie

               report
10. 59

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    Agreed! To the 100000000 power

    report
11. 77

    bgpappaposted 14 years ago

    If God created all and has a plan, the God created homosexuals?  And he loves them.
    
    MO, if you feel so strongly on these issues, then write a hub.  Put your facts out there.  Then the long debate can begin there.  Otherwise, this is just the rantings of a bigot.
    
    If you genuinely feel this way, put it out there logically is all I am saying.

    report
12. 66

    darksideposted 14 years ago

    mohamedhmm has an intense and overwhelming interest in homosexuality.
    
    It makes me wonder if he's got a stash of gay porn magazines under is mattress.

    report
13. 74

    cheaptrickposted 14 years ago

    to this very moment no one knows how the brain works.research is like the story of the four blind men who felt different parts of an elephant and tried to describe it,nothing but confusion.the anomalies in the human psyche are endless.the only reason gays are bashed is cause there the minority...Alexander the great was gay,gay,gay....oh,I'm not ,umm,just needed to let you know that lol...peace...

    report
14. 80

    earnestshubposted 14 years ago

    I do not care what someone else's sexuality is, and nor do many other people.This biased view of mohamedhmm's is not supported by anything more substantial than religious bigotry. It has no place in any science forum that is credible.

    report
    1. 74

       cheaptrickposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       never say never my friend.new sciences are born every day.perhaps the science that deals with sexual identity is not mature yet.we shall see...peace...

       report
15. 77

    frogdroppingposted 14 years ago

    Mohamed. Hmm.
    
    Seriously, you need a word with yourself.
    
    You're not a very nice boy are you?
    
    *which ultimately may be the crux*

    report
16. 74

    Eaglekiwiposted 14 years ago

    So this is what I missed in Science when I bunked classes!
    
    
    Still makes a change Science getting blamed for a change ( I spose)

    report
17. 0

    Leta Sposted 14 years ago

    Sourman, if that was indeed addressed to me, please note the term 'in part.'  And I never affirm things I don't know about, even though I imagine, lol, you perceive me as younger than you (and I probably am).  Nonetheless, I do usually know something of what I'm saying--or at least am relatively assured I can make a valid contribution--or I don't type anything. 
    
    Yep, not just Gorillas, but the study of Bonobo monkeys is very interesting, too...
    
    This is a complex issue--encompasses behavioral, physiological and human cultural aspects.  Obviously all cannot be said here in a forum post. The main problem here, I think, is the inability of people to read around, beneath and above sound bytes.

    report
18. 0

    pgrundyposted 14 years ago

    Lots of animals exhibit sexual behavior with same sex animals. But that's not germane anyway because people are people and other animals are other animals.
    
    Sexual mores are what we as a society make them. I personally find male dominance to be aberrant and disturbed but we've had that for thousands of years even though it is by no means a biological given. I don't hear religious people railing against men who beat up and rape women--that's natural I guess--but two guys in bed? Horrors! How unnatural!
    
    I think there's a direct relationship. Male homosexual behavior threatens heterosexual male dominance. Sex is supposed to be about dominance, not about men loving men. That's what seems unnatural, but maybe we should have a bit more of it.

    report
    1. 62

       Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Actually it IS about dominance, at least same gender sex between animals. Pretty much like humans have it in prisons...

       report
       1. 61

          THE SOUR MANposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          OK, but is it natural ? Is there no element of dominance in heterosexual behaviour at all ?
          Why don't you consider humans as animals ? Because in my opinion we are ...

          report
          1. 0

             pgrundyposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             I think to some degree, for primates, dominance is naturally connected to sex and it is hard to change that, at least when it comes to heterosexual sex. I think the reason for it is that women can pretty much have sex whenever, but men have to be ready. Also testosterone has real physiological effects and some of them have to do with aggression.
             
             That said, what we tolerate is up to us. My point was that we tolerate violence against women and blame it on testosterone and the way men are, but when men have sex with each other we say it is unnatural and horrible and so forth, when actually in some ways it is a bit nicer and LESS threatening (physically).
             
             I think people are indeed animals, but comparing us to other animals to make some moral point is not a good argument. I also think that unlike animals people can make choices about what to tolerate and what to label deviant. I don't think homosexuality is deviant behavior. It just makes some heterosexual persons massively uncomfortable.
             
             Sexual violence, in my view, is deviant--even though it has a biological underpinning. But we don't hear as much objection to it.
             
             I was just playing Devil's Advocate and trying to show it is more complex than, "Is this natural?"

             report
             1. 61

                THE SOUR MANposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                I think I get your point and that we agree on the essentials.

                report
          2. 62

             Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Your questions one by one:
             
             It happens in nature, therefore natural.
             
             I think it is in hetero sex too, it is just much more obvious in homo.
             
             Who told you that? We definitely are...

             report
       2. 0

          sandra rinckposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          *gulp* yikes. lol.

          report
          1. 62

             Mishaposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             LOL Sandy, you as a female might find this kind of heterosexual domination more attractive: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYp_Xi4AtAQ

             report
       3. 58

          Bob Cedarposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Sometimes it's about more than dominance, like getting an extra carton of cigarettes. All this talk of the science behind being gay, I can just see it now: "From the company that brought you Viagra, comes Hetrocil the little blue pill that guarantees your son will be straight, play football and shoot deer. Call in the next 15 minutes to receive a sample packet."

          report
          1. 61

             tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             That's crazy, you can't shoot deer while playing football.

             report
             1. 58

                Bob Cedarposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                If you took Hetrocil it would be easy. Besides haven't you ever heard of the shotgun formation.

                report
                1. 79

                   Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   It would make the Superbowl interesting - imagine trying to kick a match-winning field goal with a herd of angry deer bearing down upon you.

                   report
                2. 61

                   tksenseiposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                   .....................fan

                   report
                   1. 58

                      Bob Cedarposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                      Right back at ya:)

                      report
    2. 86

       Everyday Miraclesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       Pam, although I don't consider myself "religious" I still have "a religion" (I suppose that would be the correct terminology). I have a personal preference for a dominant male (but that's just me hah!), and biblically speaking male leadership (not domineering behavior or even, necessarily, "dominance" is supported).
       
       Rape and wife beating are not supported. In fact, the Bible tells men to love their wives the way that Christ loved the Church. Christ would never rape or beat His Bride, so there you go.
       
       I can't quote the exact passage but I believe the Bible actually does refer to rape as an abomination. I am possibly wrong, but what I do know (for sure) is that the God in Whom I believe doesn't support these things.
       
       I have no opinion, by the way, on the "gay issue." Most of my good friends are homosexual and I love them for who they are. I don't happen to believe that Christ would have discriminated against them based on their preferences (whether or not they are something that can be helped, something about which I am still in the air -- and I identify as bisexual).

       report
19. 59

    Colebabieposted 14 years ago

    Haha thanks sufidreamer. I just woke up and started typing. I have no problem defending my arguments, but I always appreciate it when a friend tries to do it for me

    report
    1. 79

       Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       No worries, Colebabie - You certainly have no problem with defending yourself, as we have seen!

       report
       1. 59

          Colebabieposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Yup, no problem at all. I pick my battles though, if I know about it I have no problem saying what I know. Thanks again. Have a great day!

          report
20. 62

    Mishaposted 14 years ago

    ROFLMAO, that's hysterical Bob, you just got a brand new fan

    report
21. 58

    Bob Cedarposted 14 years ago

    

    report
22. 57

    Dame Scribeposted 14 years ago

    Phobias can sometimes bring out the worst in people but it's usually just fear ... I think pedophiles, rapists and women beaters are far worst than gays. I have friends that are gay and they are quite ordinary

    report
23. 73

    Research Analystposted 14 years ago

    Thats just like asking will water and oil ever mix?

    report
24. 58

    Bob Cedarposted 14 years ago

    Sufidreamer my friend, throw a keg of beer in there and you have just invented the sweetest sport to grace this Earth.

    report
    1. 79

       Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

       This needs to be in the Olympics - the campaign starts here!
       
       Drink a keg of beer, dodge the deer and then try to kick the field goal.

       report
       1. 58

          Bob Cedarposted 14 years agoin reply to this

          Forget campaigning this to go to the Olympics, lets campaign to get you a Nobel Prize in Sports (they have that right?)

          report
          1. 79

             Sufidreamerposted 14 years agoin reply to this

             Sadly not - maybe they could get rid of the Nobel Prize for chemistry, because nobody actually cares, and replace it with a prize for sport.
             
             I seek no personal glory, just a lifetime supply of beer from the keg sponsors. One keg per day should do it
             
             You deserve recognition too - the licensing rights to Heterocil.

             report