Service.
I done manufactured enough kids.

Over the years I have read a number of scientific papers on the topic by authors who tried to distance themselves from the PC version of homosexuality. The PC version is that homosexuals are normal.

The main cause appears to be genetic. There are some strong other factors also such as the mother being subjected to high levels of stress during pregnancy. Certain hormones appear to "turn on" certain parts of development of the human body and stress hormones can trigger defects in normal development. Environment of upbringing plays a role also.

From Wiki:

The relationship between biology and sexual orientation is a subject of research. A simple and singular determinant for sexual orientation has not been conclusively demonstrated—various studies point to different, even conflicting positions—but research suggests that a combination of genetic, hormonal and social factors determine sexual orientation.[1][2] Biological theories for explaining the causes of sexual orientation are more popular,[1] and biological factors may involve a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment.[3] These factors, which may be related to the development of a heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual or asexual orientation, include genes, prenatal hormones, and brain structure.

From Thinkprogress

A new study suggests that homosexuality can be explained by biology, though not by genes specifically. Instead, the researchers propose that there are sex-specific epi-marks on the genes that are triggered during fetal development to maintain a hormone level balance. These switches cause fluctuations in DNA expression that impacts sexual development, including sexual identity and various other gender characteristics. These switches help protect both the fetus and the mother from the natural variation in sex hormone levels present during fetal development, which could help explain why homosexuality has evolved as a common variation of human identity.

yes, the kids are no reason for us to consider,, they never really are when our immediate desires are the issue,,,,

Have you seen how children are affected by same sex parents?? and are you against the marriage part of it or homosexuality all together??

STD's are not exclusive to gay men and women..Prevalence in gay men is not a reason to deny same-sex marriage...In fact, it could help to decrease occurance....

This incest flag you keep waving has no merit either...Talk about apples to oranges.....

Seriously.

And denying gay people the ability to marry is not going to stop them from having sex. I'm not sure why people seem to believe that.

Well, I don't 'condone' it in any way shape or fashion.

I believe the SCOTUS will make a ruling that offers all citizens marriage, regardless if they are deviant or not. I won't celebrate.

Nor will I tell them what to do, even though they are pushing their behavior into the normal sphere when it is not.

GOOD GRIEF


the point is not about stopping people from having sex

OF COURSE Thats not gonna happen

the point is not to make any and all sex COMMON And NATURAL and NORMAL within the culture,,,

which putting a government stamp on it would DO....


legally, schools would HAVE to teach about it, taxpayers would have to SUPPORT it, even religious organizations would be FORCED To accept and validate it

sex is a CHOICE, there is no need or reason to validate the homosexuals CHOICE to lie with each other, anymore than there would be to validate adult siblings CHOICE to lie with each other

if we are gonna say that any gender can marry, why not say any relation whatsoever regardless of biology and then why not say that we should have as many spouses as 'consent' to be our partner?

,,where do we end before the already struggling institution of marriage becomes a complete pointless jokes just costing society more and more money and children more and more stability,,,,

which, btw, IS not apples to oranges if all that matters is that people are 'consenting adults'....

well lets think about why they want to marry in the first place...its because they want to same rights as other married couples...they want their partners to be able to get the same benefits as others if and when one dies...why shouldn't they have the same rights as the rest of us?? perhaps if we relented on that the the push for same sex marriage would not be such a big thing right now...as far as children are concerned i honestly do not believe it makes a child bad or good or straight or gay. It is how they are raised. Children just want to be loved and protected...we live in a time where it really doesn't matter if its two men two women a man and a woman or just one parent alone. I feel the same about when people feel homosexuals should not adopt. I have yet to see proof where this hurts children. I have been working with children for over twelve years and I have seen all manners of children. In the end, they want someone to want them love them protect them...i have even watch children of various ages be raised in a home with a same sex couple from the time two of them were infants until their current age of 9 and 10. They have other siblings as well we were taken in by the couple when they were 5 7 and 13, now they are 15, 17, and 23. If were living in different times maybe I would feel differently about it, but we are not. We live in a world where there are a variety of people, cultures, and beliefs. Many of us who claim to believe in God and follow his ways are breaking one of his laws by casting judgement to begin with. The world is changing...we cannot stop it. I like to believe in the end it will be a positive change but I also know there is a possibility that people will allow their hate for change to interfere. By no means am I saying that anyone's opinion is wrong, thats the great thing about our country is our ability to speak our opinion. This one just happens to be mine. I guess my opinion would change if I actually worked with children who's lives have been destroyed by all this. Anyway I'm hopeful for the future that some day this will be one of those arguments that will be laid to rest because its getting old. Granted it could take many years for that to happen but its like I said...I'm hopeful because without hope there would be nothing. Have fab day everyone!

I remember when parents had a chit fit about sex ed too...

"Churches" have knowingly accepted gays into their congregations for years!...They even ask them to tithe!

Same sex marriage had little (if anything) to do with creating the "struggling institution of marriage" (whatever that is)...Straight couples "screwed" it up all by themselves.....

And the rest of it we've already covered and covered and covered.......

and we have covered all of it over and over, never changes,, those who define people by preference above gender and those who see people as people with males and females,,,

What about those of us who do not consider sexual orientation a preference?...

than hopefully those will support the 'rights' of pedophiles, beastie(or whatever they are called), and those oriented to be attracted to family members,,,

sexual behavior is a choice, however its chalked up, and its not a choice government should bbe promoting or encouraging (legalizing) or discouraging (criminalizeing) except when it involves continuing the species,,,,and providing the most ideal and solid foundation for future children to be brought up in,,,

than hopefully those will support the 'rights' of pedophiles, beastie(or whatever they are called), and those oriented to be attracted to family members,,,

sexual behavior is a choice, however its chalked up, and its not a choice government should bbe promoting or encouraging (legalizing) or discouraging (criminalizeing) except when it involves continuing the species,,,,and providing the most ideal and solid foundation for future children to be brought up in,,,

Again, you're comparing very different things. You just cannot compare homosexuality with sex with children or animals. It just makes no sense.

if the argument is based on the idea that people cant 'help' what they are attracted to, or whom and should be equally protected under the law,,,,

it is totally valid to compare other types of 'preferences' and 'attractions'

bottom line is the opposition is to SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, not preference or orientation,,,

preference, by its definition, is a choice, whether we are born with ovaries or testicles is not a choice

its not a PREFERENCE

it is protected

we cant be discriminated against because of what gender we were born


preference, by its definition, is a choice, whether we are born from african or european ancestors is not

it is not a PREFERENCE

it is protected

we cant be discriminated against because of what gender we are born

we cannot say people cant marry based upon race, and we cant say they cant marry based upon gender

men and women of every race can marry men or women of any race

,, not sure why this seems so hard for pro same sex marriage proponents to catch on to,,,,

whats being proposed is that in addition to allowing all men and women of any race to marry, we also have to take into consideration the mate they would PREFER to have,, regardless of gender

so why not also take into consideration the mate all PREFER to have,,,whether its a consenting sibling or parent?

or a consenting, emancipated, minor?

if the argument is based on the idea that people cant 'help' what they are attracted to, or whom and should be equally protected under the law,,,,

it is totally valid to compare other types of 'preferences' and 'attractions'

bottom line is the opposition is to SEXUAL BEHAVIOR, not preference or orientation,,,

preference, by its definition, is a choice, whether we are born with ovaries or testicles is not a choice

its not a PREFERENCE

it is protected

we cant be discriminated against because of what gender we were born


preference, by its definition, is a choice, whether we are born from african or european ancestors is not

it is not a PREFERENCE

it is protected

we cant be discriminated against because of what gender we are born

we cannot say people cant marry based upon race, and we cant say they cant marry based upon gender

men and women of every race can marry men or women of any race

,, not sure why this seems so hard for pro same sex marriage proponents to catch on to,,,,

whats being proposed is that in addition to allowing all men and women of any race to marry, we also have to take into consideration the mate they would PREFER to have,, regardless of gender

so why not also take into consideration the mate all PREFER to have,,,whether its a consenting sibling or parent?

or a consenting, emancipated, minor?