god vs. god MMV

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

HEY... it beat the no-joke on sightlesess thread . unless he pm's it me

[cowardly dj]

Re: miketpoto

this is from the high praise for madonnas....... thread

cowardly dj -
What will be her first single The Geriatric Jingle

Isnt she like 96 or something like that

I am sure that when Moses parted the Red Sea she was on the otherside fishing talking about Hey, whered the water go?

If anyone sees her ask her if they tipped well at The Last Supper



miketpoto -
Jesus Fucking Christ, enough with the fucking bible humor, it's not FUNNY!


so I, in good spirits and in fun joking way that I am and have been for years on this board, started this thread and put some actual jokes that are pertaining to religion for him and everyone to read. That being the first post in this thread. Then miketpoto responded with the pic that is in discussion here.

If one were to weigh the situation it weighs out like this:
1. I started the thread creation... intelligent design or happen chance
I suggest a read of the thread for a summary of the whole situation.

2. Since that post I have been bashed repeatedly by many for that thread and I seem to be defending myself over and over in the last few days. I have been accused (by bart) of thinking I am better than mike by saying I hope someone comes into his life and shows him the right way and I will pray for him. This after the tasteless pic in this thread.

3. The clossest thing that can be construed as insulting that I have posted is me saying bart makes thoughtless posts. I have not insulted mike in any way and for that fact anyone.

Mike's photo in this thread was tasteless and insulting. That is a fact in itself even if those who think it is funny do not agree. It is a direct insult to my core belief system. Now notice that I am not accusing mike of doing it intentionally as he has repeatedly said it was not intentional and I do not know mike so I take his word as it is until proven otherwise.

I have not insulted anyones core beliefs here. In fact if I remember reading right mike said he was a "gay homosexual". That is expressly forbidden in the Bible but I did not attack that as it is his core belief. If I wanted to talk to him about that I would have pm'd him because something that personal does not deserve public discussion IMO.

I did not say or do anything to deserve that photo and it is wrong period. No amount of saying this is why or that is why will justify that to anyone who has a shread of decency in them.

I do not think less of mike for posting that. As I said in this thread after his post that I feel sad for him. I was accused of being closed minded by bart, when in fact it is not me whose mind is closed here.

I have taken this with a grain of salt but it is creating much more than I intended when I started this thread. It was to be a joking thread and it has turned into an insuilting thread. Nonsense IMO.

I apologize mike and bart and to anyone else for anything that I have said that may have insulted anyones core beliefs. I would appreciate some curteousy extended to me as I have to this and the other threads and others posts.

I do not mind talking about anything and in fact that is the very reason I started the creation thread, but there is a clear line drawn between talking and arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Hos]

Re: miketpoto

I have not insulted anyones core beliefs here. In fact if I remember reading right mike said he was a "gay homosexual". That is expressly forbidden in the Bible but I did not attack that as it is his core belief. If I wanted to talk to him about that I would have pm'd him because something that personal does not deserve public discussion IMO.

hey, i think you'll find mike has no choice in the matter. his core belief? how can you compare sexuality to religion? sexuality is what you ARE, religion is what you believe in. people can CHANGE their faith. they can't change their sexuality.

[Bryanw24]

Re: miketpoto

Mike I loved the picture! Thought it was funny as hell. I'm not a religious person and I am totally comfortable with my life and I also know a good laugh when I see one.

[cowardly dj]

Re: miketpoto

hey, i think you'll find mike has no choice in the matter. his core belief? .

Everything a person acts on is a choice. That is a fact of humanity.

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

Sexual attraction . Same as in all species is a primeval urge . There are a few other species that have gay relationships and will have nothing to do with the opposite sex . Are they conscious of their decisions or are they born that way . And if they are capable of conscious decision why have they not been shown the light of god .And why do they not follow his teachings .. prove me wrong and i'll appologise

[cowardly dj]

Re: miketpoto

It has been argued through the ages, long before science was ever involved, that homosexuality is merely a choice. Many people state that gays only have homosexual relations because they choose to do so. Others profess that homosexuality is not a choice and due to the societal stigma which is associated with homosexuality very few would consciously choose a homosexual lifestyle and the discrimination that accompanies it. Some state that simply due to the genetic makeup of the human race it is very unlikely that homosexuality would be anything other than a choice. In An Analysis of Biological Theories of Causation, by Dr. Tahir I jaz, M.D., he states, "Of all animals, human beings are the most genetically indeterminate. In the words of Dr. Joseph Wortis, Department of Psychiatry, State University of New York: 'no complex high-level behavior of the human species can be reduced to genetic endowment, not language, not house building and not sexual behavior.' Preferential and exclusive homosexuality is not naturally found in any infrahuman mammalian species and it would be odd for such behavior in humans to be genetically determined." It is Dr. Tahir's opinion that homosexuality is completely a choice as it is not possible for it to be genetically determined. He further cites various accounts of leading psychologists and psychiatrists, such as Masters and Johnson, Dieber, Barnhouse, Socarides, Cappon, Hadden, Ribinstein and Leif, who have reported very high rates of success in curing individuals of their homosexual tendencies. Tahir does not believe that individuals could be helped if homosexuality were indeed genetic -- just as you would not be able to cure someone of his or her race or gender.

[jeffrey collins]

Re: miketpoto

I thought you were leaving this board.

[cowardly dj]

Re: miketpoto

Sexual attraction . Same as in all species is a primeval urge . There are a few other species that have gay relationships and will have nothing to do with the opposite sex . Are they conscious of their decisions or are they born that way . And if they are capable of conscious decision why have they not been shown the light of god .And why do they not follow his teachings .. prove me wrong and i'll appologise

Elaborate please.

Are you saying animals should or do have the same cognitive reasoning as humans?

[shosh]

Re: miketpoto

^^ i mean i agree with cdj...

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

CDJ do you realy want me to point to a hundred doctorates that say otherwise

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

Much of the past genetic research into male homosexuality had focused solely on the X chromosome, passed down to boys by their mother, according to lead researcher Dr Brian Mustanski.
His team looked at all 22 pairs of non-sex chromosomes of 456 individuals from 146 families with two or more gay brothers.
There is no one 'gay' gene.


Lead researcher Dr Brian Mustanski


They found several identical stretches of DNA that were shared among gay siblings on chromosomes other than the female X.
About 60% of these brothers shared identical DNA on three chromosomes - chromosome 7, 8 and 10.
Complex trait
If it were down to chance, only 50% of these stretches would be shared, said the authors.
The region found on chromosome 10 correlated with sexual orientation only when it was inherited from the mother.
The most important thing is that lesbian and gay men are treated equally.


Alan Wardle of Stonewall


Dr Mustanski said the next step would be to see if the findings could be confirmed by further studies, and to identify the particular genes within the newly discovered sequences that are linked to sexual orientation.
"Our study helps to establish that genes play an important role in determining whether a man is gay or heterosexual," he said, but added that other factors were also important.
"Sexual orientation is a complex trait. There is no one 'gay' gene.
"Our best guess is that multiple genes, potentially interacting with environmental influences, explain differences in sexual orientation."
Alan Wardle from the gay rights charity Stonewall said: "It's an interesting study that contributes further to the debate. "Regardless of whether sexual orientation is determined by nature or nurture or both, the most important thing is that lesbians and gay men are treated equally and are allowed to live their life without discrimination."

[Hos]

Re: miketpoto

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

Britain
The TimesOctober 13, 2004
So it is down to mother: gay gene survives because it boosts fertility
By Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent
THE biological enigma of how homosexuality evolved despite its obvious drawbacks for reproduction may finally have been resolved.
The genes that make men gay also help their female relatives to have bigger families, according to new research.
NI_MPU('middle');Scientists have discovered that gay men’s mothers, sisters and maternal aunts tend to have significantly more children than the norm — and that many of their nephews and male cousins are also gay.
The findings suggest that the same genes that trigger homosexuality in men also promote fertility in women, and that this could explain how they survive in the population when gay men themselves are unlikely to breed. The genes are instead passed on through the female line and the enhanced fertility they confer on these women ensures that they are inherited by plenty of children.
Some of these sons will grow up to be homosexual themselves. The study also revealed that gay men are more likely than heterosexuals to have a gay male relative, though only on their mother’s side of the family.
The results, from the University of Padua, in Italy, offer strong support for the theory that homosexuality is at least partly determined by a person’s genetic make-up, and is not just about personal choice or upbringing and environment. It also suggests an elegant solution to the biggest problem with this hypothesis — the “Darwinian paradox” that any genes that favour homosexuality ought to have died out through natural selection, as those that inherited them had fewer and fewer offspring.
Andrea Camperio-Ciani, who led the research, said: “Our data resolve this paradox by showing that there might be hitherto unexpected reproductive advantages associated with male homosexuality.”
The work also points to a likely location for the genes that have this effect: they almost certainly lie on the X chromosome, the package of DNA that men always inherit from their mothers.
In the study, published today in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society, Dr Camperio-Ciani’s team interviewed 98 homosexual and 100 heterosexual men in detail about their extended families. In total, more than 4,600 individuals were thus indirectly involved. They found that both the mothers and maternal aunts of the homosexuals were significantly more fertile than those of the straight men: the mothers had an average of 2.69 children compared with 2.32, and the aunts 1.98 children compared with 1.51.
Fertility rates among paternal relatives and among male relatives on the mother’s side were similar for both groups.
All this points to genes that influence both male homosexuality and female fertility being passed down along the maternal line. “The results hypothesise that genetic factors, transmitted in the maternal line, increase both the probability of being homosexual in males and fecundity in females,” Dr Camperio-Ciani said.
The study did not investigate lesbianism. The notion that homosexuality has at least some basis in biology is not now seriously disputed by scientists, though there is little consensus on what the causes might be. Some scientists think that genetics are critical, while others believe that conditions in the womb are all-important. The question of what causes homosexuality has long divided both the gay community and social conservatives who regard same-sex partnerships as wrong. Many gay activists think that identifying biological factors that contribute to homosexuality will prove that their sexual orientation is perfectly natural and encourage tolerance. Others fear that it will lead to greater hostility, with the risk that being gay will again be seen as a disorder that might one day be “cured”.

[bart_smastard]

Re: miketpoto

trust me there are litteraly thousands of pages and accredited scientists to support this theory . being homosexual is down to the person but he would be going against every instinct he was born with to be hetro