Can someone explain homosexuality to me?

[Genesys]

http://www.youth.org/loco/PERSONProject/Resources/OrganizingResources/answers.html

thats nothing more than liberal propaganda that is pro homo!! nice try, but try posting some real scientific data instead of some stupid FAQ that is trying to make homosexuality more acceptable!

ah, and open mindedness means absolutly nothing! it only means that you havent [and wont] reach a decision on either side of an argument. to be 'open minded' relegates you to a fence sitting position.

 

[happyhelper]

Originally posted by: Genesys

http://www.youth.org/loco/PERSONProject/Resources/OrganizingResources/answers.html

Maybe you missed this part, at the bottom:
Brochure written by Stephen J. Blommer
Produced by the APA Office of Public Affairs



APA = American Psychological Association

thats nothing more than liberal propaganda that is pro homo!! nice try, but try posting some real scientific data instead of some stupid FAQ that is trying to make homosexuality more acceptable!

Actually it is more than pro-homo propaganda - it is the opinion of the vast majority of the science and medical fields. I'm sure you know a lot more about everything, expecially homosexuality, it's causes and effects on human psychology. This "stupid FAQ" is better than "some real scientific data" because:
A: you are not a scientist and wouldn't know how to accurately extract anything useful from said scientific data
B: there are 30 million or so scientific studies from which I could give you "some scientific data" and I'd be able to just pick and choose from what I felt would best serve my purpose
C: this is the overall consensus of actual scientists and therapists and clinicians in the field who do know how to use "some scientific data" to get useful results

Of course not every single member of the APA is in total agreement with every word on that "stupid FAQ" but it is very useful in that it shows what a vast majority of the community that has the most scientific knowledge on the topic of homosexuality has to say about it. Of course, they could be wrong, like Galileo who countered the establishment and God by saying the Earth was round. Oops, he was right.
Wow, after 29,700 years, the myth of the Earth being flat was questioned (and soon thereafter put to rest), and after 30,000 years the myth of homosexuals being defective little sinners was questioned (and will eventually be put to rest, as well).

ah, and open mindedness means absolutly nothing! it only means that you havent [and wont] reach a decision on either side of an argument. to be 'open minded' relegates you to a fence sitting position.

Well, there were gnostics, way back, who claimed to know everything about why they existed and their purpose here and all that - they were a religion. And there were the scientific agnostics, from which the word agnostic comes from, who weren't willing to just accept a bunch of crap as fact if they could not prove it. Gnostic means "to know" and agnostic means the opposite... they didn't claim to know something which they did not know - for which they could not show proof. The whole attitude toward knowledge of agnostics way back and agnostics today is that we (humans) are very ignorant, (just like religionists would like you to believe, too) that there is a whole lot more that we don't know (as individuals) and will never know than there is that we do know or will know, and that there is nothing wrong with sitting on the fence until enough evidence is available to make a fair and accurate judgment about something (exactly the opposite of what the religionists would like you to believe - they say, you'll never be able to find an answer by looking for it, but that they already have it so why bother looking any further).

You can jump on the first thing that sounds good to you, or you can have some good qualities instead, like integrity, humility, patience, wisdom, and wait for the truth instead of pretending you have already found it when you have not. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut once in a while... you can jump to conclusions about just about everything without enough evidence to be sure, and sometimes you will be right, but what's the advantage of being right sometimes simply because you didn't have the humility to say "I don't know" or the patience to really seek the truth or the integrity to not sell yourself short?

For example, you can be closed-minded and believe that everything George Bush says is true, and simply disregard everything that contradicts him, or you could be open-minded, think for yourself, hear the opposing viewpoints and eventually make a fair assessment. You, however, are too weak to do that; you depend on others to "give" you (some erroneous version of) the truth instead of putting forth the effort to find it yourself. Sucks to be you, know-it-all.

 

[happyhelper]

BTW, the gnostics have pretty much been proven to be wrong by scientific discovery about everything they believed in, as will the Christians and all the other hokey fairy tale religions, some day....

 

[Ryan]

Personally, I don't believe the issues is as black and white as people make it. It's not that you're either gay or not, but most people who claim to be homosexuals are actually bisexual, and the degree of their bisexuality varies greatly - which is why some people "claim" to have been converted from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but in reality they are just satisfying that portion of them attracted to the opposite sex and rejecting the portion attracted to the same sex.

I also subscribe to the idea that sexuality is a notion inaccurately created by humans to explain sexual preferences. It reality, everyone is bisexual, with most people ending up on the extreme ends of this spectrum, never acting on opposite urges. The degree of bisexuality varies from person to person.

 

[happyhelper]

Originally posted by: rbloedow
Personally, I don't believe the issues is as black and white as people make it. It's not that you're either gay or not, but most people who claim to be homosexuals are actually bisexual, and the degree of their bisexuality varies greatly - which is why some people "claim" to have been converted from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but in reality they are just satisfying that portion of them attracted to the opposite sex and rejecting the portion attracted to the same sex.

I also subscribe to the idea that sexuality is a notion inaccurately created by humans to explain sexual preferences. It reality, everyone is bisexual, with most people ending up on the extreme ends of this spectrum, never acting on opposite urges. The degree of bisexuality varies from person to person.

Hey man, I agree with this quite a lot. I told a friend of mine about 5 years ago this little theory.

About 98-99% of people are actually bisexual, or would be, without societal and familial conditioning which strongly discourages homo and bi sexuality. It is like a sexual spectrum - take all men, there will be a very small percentage, say 1% on one end of the spectrum, who only feel an attraction to (or have sexual impulses in the presense of) other men their entire life, and on the oppposite end, there are a small percentage of men who, during their entire lives have only had sexual impulses caused by women. Then the remaining 98% have had sexual impulses towards both men and women, some predominantly towards men and some predominantly towards women, and some perfectly even 50/50.

I think, due to persecution of homosexuals in just about every culture, that there are lower numbers on the homosexual end of the spectrum than there are on the heterosexual end of the spectrum, but I also think in a rational society, after a few generations, the numbers would become fairly even. I think the vast majority of homophobes fall into the bisexual part of the spectrum, where they are either 50/50 in impulses towards women and men, or closer to the heterosexual end but have had sexual impulses towards other men at some point(s) in their lives, and are just unwilling to admit those homosexual impulses have occured to themselves or to anyone else.

If you envision the sexual attraction spectrum like the spectrum of IQ scores... the average being around 100 for an IQ, there are a handful of people with IQ over 190 and just a few under 10... likewise there are very few men who are 100% heterosexual (in their thoughts throughout their lives) and very few who are 100% homosexual (in their thoughts, throughout their lives).

A lot of people might say I am crazy, that they have a "natural aversion" to the same sex, but I disagree with a lot of things that are said to be natural that are actually, in my view, engrained into people, beliefs that we've been conditioned to feel/believe in. Like a lot of people say there is a "natural tendency" to believe in God. Well, I wonder why people brought up in atheist homes don't feel that natural tendency but people brought up in Christian or Jewish or Muslim homes are the ones who say that? Likewise, people who are brought up in intolerant bigotted (Christian or otherwise) homes are far more likely to "puke just thinking about homosexual acts" than people who are brought up in tolerant homes where they are not taught that homoseuality is wrong and gross and the worst form of depravity ranked right next to incest and child molesting. So to me, that means "natural aversions" to homosexuality are actually learned aversions. Personally, I chose to unlearn most of the irrational crap that rubbed off onto me from my environment - family and culture.

 

[MonstaThrilla]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
ive done alot os searching, and so far the consensus is homosexuality is NOT genetic.

this is a good site

linky

That has to be the most hilarious site I've ever read. Thanks for the laugh! :beer:

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
I have friends who are openly gay, I've asked them do you want to be straight? He said to me....

"Hell yes, things would be alot easier. Being gay is something I don't wish upon someone. You'll only understand if you have to live with hiding it from your parents, and your friends."

That speaks volumes more than what any scientific study or what some one "thinks" is the right answer.

right and I have homosexuals who have asked me how anyone in their right mind could be straight and prefer women....and that they could never be straight..so I guess YMMV.

 

[DashRiprock]

Originally posted by: FrodoB
I think that IF it can be proven to be in the "genetics" of a person, all arguments about homosexuality being "against God" are illogical. Why would God create a person that is against God's nature? It doesn't make sense. Speaking of logic, it also doesn't make sense that God can be against any form of true love.

What's the result if a brother and a sister (who are truly in love) have a baby together? "It doesn't make sense." Talk about genetics and against God's nature.

 

[0roo0roo]

did you choose to be heterosexual? was your first crush a conscious choice? do you choose to be hungry? if you don't have an answer, i don't know what to say.

 

[Ryan]

Originally posted by: happyhelper

Originally posted by: rbloedow
Personally, I don't believe the issues is as black and white as people make it. It's not that you're either gay or not, but most people who claim to be homosexuals are actually bisexual, and the degree of their bisexuality varies greatly - which is why some people "claim" to have been converted from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but in reality they are just satisfying that portion of them attracted to the opposite sex and rejecting the portion attracted to the same sex.

I also subscribe to the idea that sexuality is a notion inaccurately created by humans to explain sexual preferences. It reality, everyone is bisexual, with most people ending up on the extreme ends of this spectrum, never acting on opposite urges. The degree of bisexuality varies from person to person.

Hey man, I agree with this quite a lot. I told a friend of mine about 5 years ago this little theory.

About 98-99% of people are actually bisexual, or would be, without societal and familial conditioning which strongly discourages homo and bi sexuality. It is like a sexual spectrum - take all men, there will be a very small percentage, say 1% on one end of the spectrum, who only feel an attraction to (or have sexual impulses in the presense of) other men their entire life, and on the oppposite end, there are a small percentage of men who, during their entire lives have only had sexual impulses caused by women. Then the remaining 98% have had sexual impulses towards both men and women, some predominantly towards men and some predominantly towards women, and some perfectly even 50/50.

I think, due to persecution of homosexuals in just about every culture, that there are lower numbers on the homosexual end of the spectrum than there are on the heterosexual end of the spectrum, but I also think in a rational society, after a few generations, the numbers would become fairly even. I think the vast majority of homophobes fall into the bisexual part of the spectrum, where they are either 50/50 in impulses towards women and men, or closer to the heterosexual end but have had sexual impulses towards other men at some point(s) in their lives, and are just unwilling to admit those homosexual impulses have occured to themselves or to anyone else.

If you envision the sexual attraction spectrum like the spectrum of IQ scores... the average being around 100 for an IQ, there are a handful of people with IQ over 190 and just a few under 10... likewise there are very few men who are 100% heterosexual (in their thoughts throughout their lives) and very few who are 100% homosexual (in their thoughts, throughout their lives).

A lot of people might say I am crazy, that they have a "natural aversion" to the same sex, but I disagree with a lot of things that are said to be natural that are actually, in my view, engrained into people, beliefs that we've been conditioned to feel/believe in. Like a lot of people say there is a "natural tendency" to believe in God. Well, I wonder why people brought up in atheist homes don't feel that natural tendency but people brought up in Christian or Jewish or Muslim homes are the ones who say that? Likewise, people who are brought up in intolerant bigotted (Christian or otherwise) homes are far more likely to "puke just thinking about homosexual acts" than people who are brought up in tolerant homes where they are not taught that homoseuality is wrong and gross and the worst form of depravity ranked right next to incest and child molesting. So to me, that means "natural aversions" to homosexuality are actually learned aversions. Personally, I chose to unlearn most of the irrational crap that rubbed off onto me from my environment - family and culture.

Wow - someone who actually understands what I'm talking about! FINALLY! If people accept this idea about what sexuality is, there would be no controversy about "choosing to be homosexual" but rather, choosing to embrace one's sexual urges and not letting society pigeon-hole them into a group or side, supressing their natural urges. There is no choice to choose one form of sexuality, no genetic dispositions.

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
ive done alot os searching, and so far the consensus is homosexuality is NOT genetic.

this is a good site

linky

That has to be the most hilarious site I've ever read. Thanks for the laugh! :beer:

what is hilarious is in your little laugh fest there is nothing refuting the data presented on that site or on many others.



from a darwinian perspective, homosexuality would be an obstruction to the perpetuation of the species. if everyone were a strict homosexual, the human race would die out.

LOL!

 

[TheBDB]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
ive done alot os searching, and so far the consensus is homosexuality is NOT genetic.

this is a good site

linky

That has to be the most hilarious site I've ever read. Thanks for the laugh! :beer:

what is hilarious is in your little laugh fest there is nothing refuting the data presented on that site or on many others.



from a darwinian perspective, homosexuality would be an obstruction to the perpetuation of the species. if everyone were a strict homosexual, the human race would die out.

LOL!

Which is why evolution did not lead to EVERYONE being a homosexual. There are numerous examples of traits that hurt the individual or a minority of a species and are still selected for. LOL! You have no clue what you are talking about.

 

[rbV5]

Why would God create a person that is against God's nature?

If "God" cared about God's nature, we'd all be homosexual.

 

[Ornery]

AMERICAN PSYCHIATRIC ASSOCIATION BOLSTERS CONDEMNATION OF REPARATIVE THERAPY' TO CHANGE' GAYS

• The American Psychiatric Association was the first mental health organization to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973. In August 1997, the American Psychological Association overwhelmingly passed a resolution at its convention that asserted that there is no sound scientific evidence on the efficacy of "reparative therapy," which seeks to "cure" homosexuals.

The APA Resolution on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation

• Attempts to use psychological interventions to change sexual orientation are based on the discredited claim that homosexuality is a disease, a notion that represents an attempt to use the language of science to promote antigay prejudice. That view is completely inconsistent with the bulk of scientific research and with the official policies of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the American Psychiatric Association.
  
  
  It is highly doubtful that the so-called "conversion therapies" and "reparative therapies" are actually able to change a person's sexual orientation. Claims about their success are based on scattered anecdotal reports, not on rigorous scientific studies that have been subjected to review by other scientists...

Organizations of US Mental Health Professionals Are Unanimous:

• Perhaps the best rebuttal to claims that gay or lesbian people can "change" their orientation is citation of the many organizations of health care professionals who have officially condemned "conversion" therapies. These include the following:
  
  American Academy of Pediatrics (1993):
  "Therapy directed specifically at changing sexual orientation is contraindicated, since it can provoke guilt and anxiety while having little or no potential for achieving changes in orientation."
  
  American Psychiatric Association (1998):
  "The potential risks of 'reparative therapy' are great, including depression, anxiety and self-destructive behavior. . . . [T]he American Psychiatric Association opposes any psychiatric treatment, such as 'reparative' or 'conversion' therapy, which is based upon the assumption that homosexuality per se is a mental disorder or based upon a prior assumption that the patient should change his/her homosexual orientation." In response to Dr. Spitzer's new research (described below), the APA issued a statement affirming its position and cautioning that "there is no published evidence supporting the efficacy of reparative therapy as a treatment to change one's sexual orientation." The APA removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1973.
  
  American Psychological Association (1997):
  "No scientific evidence exists to support the effectiveness of any of the conversion therapies that try to change sexual orientation." The association removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1975.
  
  National Association of Social Workers (2000):
  "No data demonstrate that reparative and conversion therapies are effective, and in fact they may be harmful. . . . uch treatment potentially can lead to severe emotional damage." The association removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1977.
  
  Cohler & Galatzer-Levy Report (commissioned by the American Psychoanalytic Association) (2000):
  "The mental health community must confront the ethics of directed efforts at changing sexual orientation. Generally these efforts are not successful. . . . uch purportedly therapeutic efforts do not work and may cause harm." The association removed homosexuality from its list of disorders in 1991.

 

[0roo0roo]

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
ive done alot os searching, and so far the consensus is homosexuality is NOT genetic.

this is a good site

linky

That has to be the most hilarious site I've ever read. Thanks for the laugh! :beer:

what is hilarious is in your little laugh fest there is nothing refuting the data presented on that site or on many others.



from a darwinian perspective, homosexuality would be an obstruction to the perpetuation of the species. if everyone were a strict homosexual, the human race would die out.

LOL!

you don't know much about darwinian perspective. primates live in groups. rearing children is a very costly task in all areas. having some non reproducing hunters/gatherers in a group increases a groups survivability as there is more food to go around. breeding like jackrabbits alone doesn't work for resource and time heavy child/family support required by human societies in resource scarce or limited enviroments, which is basically all enviroments until modern day. what do you think of left handedness, color blindness? should be bred out right? but having 1 left handed in a hunter group helps with coverage, having one color blind hunter increases ability to spot camoflaged prey.

think a little before u post

 

[sMiLeYz]

Originally posted by: bozack

Originally posted by: sMiLeYz
I have friends who are openly gay, I've asked them do you want to be straight? He said to me....

"Hell yes, things would be alot easier. Being gay is something I don't wish upon someone. You'll only understand if you have to live with hiding it from your parents, and your friends."

That speaks volumes more than what any scientific study or what some one "thinks" is the right answer.

right and I have homosexuals who have asked me how anyone in their right mind could be straight and prefer women....and that they could never be straight..so I guess YMMV.

Either way, that proves my point. Having homosexual urges isn't a choice. It's absolutely genetics.

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Tabb
Yes, but in no way does the bible approve of gay sex. You can be gay, just don't peform gay acts.

Onanism is against the Christian faith as well, but if that was the case Hell would be one big sausage party

 

[Shad0hawK]

Originally posted by: 0roo0roo

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK

Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla

Originally posted by: Shad0hawK
ive done alot os searching, and so far the consensus is homosexuality is NOT genetic.

this is a good site

linky

That has to be the most hilarious site I've ever read. Thanks for the laugh! :beer:

what is hilarious is in your little laugh fest there is nothing refuting the data presented on that site or on many others.



from a darwinian perspective, homosexuality would be an obstruction to the perpetuation of the species. if everyone were a strict homosexual, the human race would die out.

LOL!

you don't know much about darwinian perspective. primates live in groups. rearing children is a very costly task in all areas. having some non reproducing hunters/gatherers in a group increases a groups survivability as there is more food to go around. breeding like jackrabbits alone doesn't work for resource and time heavy child/family support required by human societies in resource scarce or limited enviroments, which is basically all enviroments until modern day. what do you think of left handedness, color blindness? should be bred out right? but having 1 left handed in a hunter group helps with coverage, having one color blind hunter increases ability to spot camoflaged prey.

think a little before u post

i did. perhaps it would behoove you to follow your own advice as what you said here has nothing to do with what i said.


i did not say said "some" i said "everyone" also if a particular individual was better suited to survival, but did not mate the traits he possesed would not be passed on to his offspring for the simple reason he would not have any offspring.

 

[Gaard]

homosexuals should also be considerate to those of us who arent, and keep to themselves

huh?

 

[Nitemare]

Originally posted by: Gaard

homosexuals should also be considerate to those of us who arent, and keep to themselves

huh?

He means he wishes that they would stop having sex with him. He's getting tired of it.

 

[classy]

Originally posted by: Q36ExplosiveSpaceModulator

If homosexuality was a choice, I could go suck a guys dick right now and enjoy doing it.

I don't see that happening. I don't think I could choose to enjoy that.

Don't see which part happening, the doing or the enjoying?

LOL OMG hehehehehehehehe

 

[ITJunkie]

smoking and drinking are legal. one could EASILY make the case that BOTH smoking and drinking are greater threats to society than homosexuality EVER will be. so leaving aside your biblical arguments, what exactly is it about homosexuality that puts it ABOVE smoking and drinking on your agenda?

Good question :beer:

 

[classy]

There are lots of different kinds of sex. Sex and the desires of different kinds of sex acts either will be embraced or rejected because of pleasure. So having sex with someone is a choice and if you like the type of act you'll do it over and over again. Its a proven fact. We all have a sex profile. And the profile is developed through experimentation. Thats how you get perverts and all other kinds of what is called sexual deviants. They get the urge to try something, then they enjoy it and bingo the rest is history. Thats why I have hard time buying the "I was born this way". And most homosexuals were raised where there was a lack of influence of one of the genders. Many have had tramatic experiences with the opposite sex and think they way to keep safe is to not engage the opposite sex again.

 

[PhilsPhan]

I don't think you are the only one confused:

A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation.

Hamer DH, Hu S, Magnuson VL, Hu N, Pattatucci AM.

Laboratory of Biochemistry, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.

The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.

then a complete contradiction

Male homosexuality: absence of linkage to microsatellite markers at Xq28.

Rice G, Anderson C, Risch N, Ebers G.

Department of Clinical Neurological Sciences, University of Western Ontario, 339 Windermere Road, London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 5A5. grice@julian.uwo.ca

Several lines of evidence have implicated genetic factors in homosexuality. The most compelling observation has been the report of genetic linkage of male homosexuality to microsatellite markers on the X chromosome. This observation warranted further study and confirmation. Sharing of alleles at position Xq28 was studied in 52 gay male sibling pairs from Canadian families. Four markers at Xq28 were analyzed (DXS1113, BGN, Factor 8, and DXS1108). Allele and haplotype sharing for these markers was not increased over expectation. These results do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality.

Ya might want to see what happened the last time this was raised:
http://forums.anandtech.com/message...adid=1029228&FTVAR_MSGDBTABLE=arc&STARTPAGE=2

 

[happyhelper]

Originally posted by: rbloedow

Originally posted by: happyhelper

Originally posted by: rbloedow
Personally, I don't believe the issues is as black and white as people make it. It's not that you're either gay or not, but most people who claim to be homosexuals are actually bisexual, and the degree of their bisexuality varies greatly - which is why some people "claim" to have been converted from homosexuality to heterosexuality, but in reality they are just satisfying that portion of them attracted to the opposite sex and rejecting the portion attracted to the same sex.

I also subscribe to the idea that sexuality is a notion inaccurately created by humans to explain sexual preferences. It reality, everyone is bisexual, with most people ending up on the extreme ends of this spectrum, never acting on opposite urges. The degree of bisexuality varies from person to person.

Hey man, I agree with this quite a lot. I told a friend of mine about 5 years ago this little theory.

About 98-99% of people are actually bisexual, or would be, without societal and familial conditioning which strongly discourages homo and bi sexuality. It is like a sexual spectrum - take all men, there will be a very small percentage, say 1% on one end of the spectrum, who only feel an attraction to (or have sexual impulses in the presense of) other men their entire life, and on the oppposite end, there are a small percentage of men who, during their entire lives have only had sexual impulses caused by women. Then the remaining 98% have had sexual impulses towards both men and women, some predominantly towards men and some predominantly towards women, and some perfectly even 50/50.

I think, due to persecution of homosexuals in just about every culture, that there are lower numbers on the homosexual end of the spectrum than there are on the heterosexual end of the spectrum, but I also think in a rational society, after a few generations, the numbers would become fairly even. I think the vast majority of homophobes fall into the bisexual part of the spectrum, where they are either 50/50 in impulses towards women and men, or closer to the heterosexual end but have had sexual impulses towards other men at some point(s) in their lives, and are just unwilling to admit those homosexual impulses have occured to themselves or to anyone else.

If you envision the sexual attraction spectrum like the spectrum of IQ scores... the average being around 100 for an IQ, there are a handful of people with IQ over 190 and just a few under 10... likewise there are very few men who are 100% heterosexual (in their thoughts throughout their lives) and very few who are 100% homosexual (in their thoughts, throughout their lives).

A lot of people might say I am crazy, that they have a "natural aversion" to the same sex, but I disagree with a lot of things that are said to be natural that are actually, in my view, engrained into people, beliefs that we've been conditioned to feel/believe in. Like a lot of people say there is a "natural tendency" to believe in God. Well, I wonder why people brought up in atheist homes don't feel that natural tendency but people brought up in Christian or Jewish or Muslim homes are the ones who say that? Likewise, people who are brought up in intolerant bigotted (Christian or otherwise) homes are far more likely to "puke just thinking about homosexual acts" than people who are brought up in tolerant homes where they are not taught that homoseuality is wrong and gross and the worst form of depravity ranked right next to incest and child molesting. So to me, that means "natural aversions" to homosexuality are actually learned aversions. Personally, I chose to unlearn most of the irrational crap that rubbed off onto me from my environment - family and culture.

Wow - someone who actually understands what I'm talking about! FINALLY! If people accept this idea about what sexuality is, there would be no controversy about "choosing to be homosexual" but rather, choosing to embrace one's sexual urges and not letting society pigeon-hole them into a group or side, supressing their natural urges. There is no choice to choose one form of sexuality, no genetic dispositions.

yea, finally, it's cool that someone else gets it. I could be wrong, no one else said anything, lol. But maybe new ideas are just scary... Who knows? I think I'm right, and you're right, too. Don't get too excited, I've noticed plenty of things this world has all "wrong", and it doesn't seem to be getting any closer to "right".