No, they have not. Do not tell me that I do not understand your arguments. That is very rude and you employ rudeness to compensate for your weak arguments at your own peril.

Yeah sure that's what you TRIED TO DO, but you don't mention that you completely failed in your attempt to show that people had no choice in their sexual behavior. You did not expose logical flaws in "such thinking", you only exposed that you dismiss disagreement with your opinion as not "honest" and not "straightfoward" even when they are presented in an honest and straightforward fashion.

I could be gay if I wanted to. I choose not to be. How can you disprove this?

I never held that up as proof, so you're making a strawman argument. I do offer as proof the conduct of convicts, and how they will be gay when they want and straight when they want as evidence of the voluntary nature of homosexual behavior.

I'm glad you "exactly" agree that your tactics are identical to the ones you condemn.

Being straight does not rule out one from promoting homosexuality, which is what you propose.

Actually, it still isn't germane. I belong to no organized religion, so religion is not a common factor.

That's correct. My contention that homosexuality is wrong is also correct.

__________________
"Of course the fact that a person believes in racial equality doesn't prove that he's a communist...but it certainly makes you look twice, doesn't it? You can't get away from the fact that racial equality is part of the communist line." - Joseph McCarthy

Political Forum Diplomacy Game Map (In Progress)
Current Diplomacy thread

A girl who has been sexually abused by a male in her youth can be psychologically scarred resulting in one of several possible outcomes. She can become frigid and abstain from sex. She can go to the other extreme and become very promiscuous. Or she can be revolted by men and become a lesbian.

It does not follow from this that ALL lesbians are lesbians due to some twist in their psychology!

This is what is known as an inductive fallacy.

Here is an example of an inductive fallacy that may make things more clear:
1. Having arrived at www.politicsforumpoliticalworld.com, I see someone post a pro-choice topic.
2. All posters on www.politicsforumpoliticalworld.com are pro-choice.

Just because there are homosexuals who are homosexual due to some psychological defect, it does not mean all homosexuals have a psychological defect.

Just because you can choose to be gay does not mean all gay people did. A gay person can choose to be heterosexual, that does not mean you did. You have stated plainly that you are naturally attracted to women and not attracted to men. This is not something you choose. Choice only comes into it when you choose to go against your natural heterosexual preference. It simply makes no sense that every homosexual somehow chose to go against a heterosexual preference. You are pre-supposing they all actually prefer women over men but have chosen to be gay.

As for the rest of your argument, it seems as though your anger is carrying you away and you are holding your power to ban over me like a weapon. So I am at a disadvantage.

Well I think that if one is willing to speculate on the unknown about homosexuals in their bedrooms, one might as well speculate on the unknown in convict homosexuals in their jail cells. So why would you know about homosexuals in society, but not about those in jail? That's a strange line to draw. As for the statistics, I don't have any on me right now, no.

Well I don't believe that anything at all has been CONCLUSIVELY shown in this international debate about biology and homosexuality, so if you are looking for conclusive evidence, then there probably is none at all.

Your second paragraph is a misrepresentation of my argument, which does not argue that homosexual behavior is based upon biology but upon choice. Obviously, it is false for you to argue that when I make my argument about choice, different choices lead to changes in people's bodies, as that's not what I've argued. If you disagree, then show me where I argued that.

I took a look at the first citation in this link that had any depth to it.

http://www.dafml.unito.it/anatomy/pa...PanzicaJEI.pdf

This study is not strong support for your argument for two reasons:

* It only mentions possibilites and evidence for possibilities, it does not definitively state that homosexuality is gentic

* The data that the researchers worked on appears to be rats and Japanese quails, not humans. I'm not changing my beliefs about gays due to what some scientists said is possible about rats and quails.


WEB

__________________
"Of course the fact that a person believes in racial equality doesn't prove that he's a communist...but it certainly makes you look twice, doesn't it? You can't get away from the fact that racial equality is part of the communist line." - Joseph McCarthy

Political Forum Diplomacy Game Map (In Progress)
Current Diplomacy thread

I did warn you not to make personal attacks. You reply by making additional personal attacks as well as making accusations of moderator bias. That is a violation of forum rule 5:

Due to your aggressiveness in breaking forum rules in order to further your political beliefs, you are permanently banned.

__________________
"Of course the fact that a person believes in racial equality doesn't prove that he's a communist...but it certainly makes you look twice, doesn't it? You can't get away from the fact that racial equality is part of the communist line." - Joseph McCarthy

Political Forum Diplomacy Game Map (In Progress)
Current Diplomacy thread

What is it exactly did I speculate about regarding homosexuals?
I think you misunderstand. My point was that physiological differences between gays and straights are indisputable and that your argument of homosexuality being only a matter of choice and action is false unless they result in physiological changes. I was pointing out that your argument does not account for this matter and is therefore fundamentally flawed as a result.

I did not say that homosexuality was genetic. In fact I specifically said that there was no proof that that it is genetic, environmental or hormonal. What I did say was that there were physiological differences between gays and straights and that in my opinion that weakens your argument of it being a matter of choice at least not among all homosexuals. Here is the full text of my comment.

I saw no reference to rodents in the study although I only skimmed it. Either way, one cannot so easily dismiss the list of physiological, cognitive and behavioral differences between gays a straights. I'm sure if they did not exist they wouldn't documented in the first place.

Edit: I underlined an unfinished comment in my post although I did not change the post itself.

__________________
Proof of media bias? A mistake by the major networks they don't want you to know about. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/media...als_04-24.html

WEB, I think I understand what you are saying, in that anyone can choose to participate in any kind of behaivor they want too.
Therefore anyone can choose to be gay or straight or asexual etc..

I frankly have no freakin' idea if being gay is biological or soley a chosen behaivor. But maybe I need to back up and offer a definiton of being gay. (or lesbian as the case may be)

I identify myself as a lesbian (this just in)---to me that means my basic orientation is to be attracted, emotionally and physically toward women.
I like guys and have many guy friends. I truly enjoy the companionship of males, be they straight or gay. Same with women.
But, I simply have no interest in men sexually.
To be perfectly blunt, yes, I have had heterosexual sex, but it just wasn't what I was interested in.

I suppose one could say I am choosing to be gay, in that I choose to pursue my attraction to women, have chosen to be with my GF, live with her, form a partnership etc...however, I personally have never felt like my attraction to women was a choice.
My actions, yes, but the feelings behind the action, doesn't quite feel like a choice to me.
I know this is not a scientific answer, but at the moment it's the best I've got.
The questions about prison intrigued me and once I get some more coffee, I'm gonna share my thoughts on those.

__________________


"If you can't do something smart, do something right."

Even though he is banned. I would like to see you answer his question from earlier. If you did answer it, I would apreciate it if you can point me to where.

"When did you choose to be attracted to women."

And no comment on my last post?

__________________
"America is not at war. The U.S. military is at war. America is at the
mall."

Use common sense. It's 5 vs 1. I'm going to take a powder.

__________________
"Of course the fact that a person believes in racial equality doesn't prove that he's a communist...but it certainly makes you look twice, doesn't it? You can't get away from the fact that racial equality is part of the communist line." - Joseph McCarthy

Political Forum Diplomacy Game Map (In Progress)
Current Diplomacy thread

I am sorry, I do not understand what you are trying to say. Does this mean you choose to end the debate? Or is it something else?

__________________
"America is not at war. The U.S. military is at war. America is at the
mall."