born gay or turn gay?

[zixxer]

are people born gay or do they turn gay through social/life experiences?

edit:
if you think it is sometimes both; pick which one you would think to be the 'deciding' factor or trend...

 

[Tab]

I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

 

[imported_ArtVandalay]

Like most complex human issues, I'd say it consists of a varying genetic succeptibility combined with varying life experience. But as Tab said, it's no one's business what others do in the privacy of their home, so long as it doesn't adversely affect others.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

Word.

 

[Genx87]

I have more important things to worry about.

 

[ahurtt]

Not P&N. Try off topic.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

 

[shrumpage]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

Try again, G. Bushe didn't bring the issue forward, advocates for same-sex marriage did.

BTW there shoudl be a third option, "combination of both."

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

your spelling is atrocious.

as i've said, it is of my opinion that a person is born gay with environmental factors not being an influence.

 

[oculus]

Doesn't matter really.

From what I've heard, observed, read, etc it seems more likely that everyone is somewhere on a line between straight and gay, with bisexual in the middle. I doubt many are completely gay or completely straight... and more often than we'd like to believe we are closer to the middle.

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: shrumpage

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

Try again, G. Bushe didn't bring the issue forward, advocates for same-sex marriage did.

BTW there shoudl be a third option, "combination of both."

Ha! Yes, the advocates of same sex marriage MADE George Bush want to completely ban gay marriage!

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

your spelling is atrocious.

as i've said, it is of my opinion that a person is born gay with environmental factors not being an influence.

Yes? You to be completely able to comprehend what I've said, it's irrevalent to me at this point.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

your spelling is atrocious.

as i've said, it is of my opinion that a person is born gay with environmental factors not being an influence.

Yes? You to be completely able to comprehend what I've said, it's irrevalent to me at this point.

please enroll in an English course.

 

[HBalzer]

I believe born with gay tendencies

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

your spelling is atrocious.

as i've said, it is of my opinion that a person is born gay with environmental factors not being an influence.

Yes? You to be completely able to comprehend what I've said, it's irrevalent to me at this point.

please enroll in an English course.

I should re-read my posts more often agreed, but I still don't care. It's interesting to see that you care more about the grammar of my posts rather than the actual subject at hand.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

chill out mr. self-righteous. he is asking a legitimate question.

and i believe "born gay"

:confused

You mean to tell me that it's not possible our sexsual perference isn't determined by our gentics and enviormental factors? It's a OKAY question, but he doesn't give me the opition of "Sexsuality may be influenced by gentics and enviormental factors".

Hence, I haven't voted into the poll.

your spelling is atrocious.

as i've said, it is of my opinion that a person is born gay with environmental factors not being an influence.

Yes? You to be completely able to comprehend what I've said, it's irrevalent to me at this point.

please enroll in an English course.

I should re-read my posts more often agreed, but I still don't care. It's interesting to see that you care more about the grammar of my posts rather than the actual subject at hand.

i have commented twice on the subject at hand.

 

[Czar]

http://www.shortpacked.com/d/20050722.html

interesting take on the subject

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

When's the last time you heard of any Bush-backed attempt to "ban" same-sex marriage?

I'll tell you when - last year, election time. Bush and his admin couldn't care less about same-sex marriage or the ban thereof, but because enough of the voting public did at the time, he took a stance on it and pushed it to the front-burner.

And what does that make him? A pandering politician, just like the rest of them, nothing more.

 

[Darkhawk28]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

When's the last time you heard of any Bush-backed attempt to "ban" same-sex marriage?

I'll tell you when - last year, election time. Bush and his admin couldn't care less about same-sex marriage or the ban thereof, but because enough of the voting public did at the time, he took a stance on it and pushed it to the front-burner.

And what does that make him? A pandering politician, just like the rest of them, nothing more.

I agree. Polticians use these "wedge issues" to get elected/re-elected but have no intention of actually pushing that agenda during non-election times. They NEED wedge issues, because voters don't keep themselves informed and get distracted by the next "shiny thing".

 

[Tab]

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: ahurtt
Not P&N. Try off topic.

George Bush disagrees, he alone has made the issuse of homosexsuality a huge political issuse. In effort for americans to focus on gays getting married rather than things that are actually important.

When's the last time you heard of any Bush-backed attempt to "ban" same-sex marriage?

I'll tell you when - last year, election time. Bush and his admin couldn't care less about same-sex marriage or the ban thereof, but because enough of the voting public did at the time, he took a stance on it and pushed it to the front-burner.

And what does that make him? A pandering politician, just like the rest of them, nothing more.

I guess I could agree with that, but that doesn't mean that before that Bush was gay for gay marriage? I highly doubt it...

Tell me, who's supporting the fundies who beileve that homosexsuals are destroying the sancity of marriage? Who's supporting that idea? To tell me that those who are pro-gay marriage MADE George Bush attempt to change to consitution to ban gay marriage is plain stupid. He is without a doubt pouring more gas on the fire...

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

 

[HBalzer]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: Tab
I'd say a combonation of both, but in reality I don't think it actually matters. It's none of your damn buissness if someone decides to be gay or not.

How do you know what his business is? I see nothing wrong with posting the question except that it has probably already been beaten to death.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: cKGunslinger

When's the last time you heard of any Bush-backed attempt to "ban" same-sex marriage?

I'll tell you when - last year, election time. Bush and his admin couldn't care less about same-sex marriage or the ban thereof, but because enough of the voting public did at the time, he took a stance on it and pushed it to the front-burner.

And what does that make him? A pandering politician, just like the rest of them, nothing more.

I guess I could agree with that, but that doesn't mean that before that Bush was gay for gay marriage? I highly doubt it...

Tell me, who's supporting the fundies who beileve that homosexsuals are destroying the sancity of marriage?

George Bush, at least he was...

He supports the "fundies" because they support him. If Bush had suddenly decided to support "free-thinking, liberal ideas that champion diversity," do you think that all the "liberal" voters would have suddenly decided to vote for him over Kerry? Of course not. Once you start down a political path, you pretty much have to continue down it to maintain your supporters. Changing will only lose you votes; rarely will you gain any.

So yeah, Bush may not personally be for same-sex marriage, but I'd guarantee you that he's not against as much as he played up to it during election time. Like Darkhawk mentioned, it's just a wedge issue that he jumped on for maximum support.