It's not the same thing.

Post #387,069 by mmoffitt 3/1/14 2:11:30 PM Reply	It's not the same thing. Sexual Orientation is plainly not the same type of thing as is race. Unless, of course, you can identify the biological basis for the establishment of sexual orientation.
Post #387,070 by Another Scott 3/1/14 2:19:24 PM Reply	Stanford study from 1995. http://news.stanford...50310Arc5328.html HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #387,077 by mmoffitt 3/1/14 3:49:29 PM 3/1/14 4:00:40 PM Reply	Read the follow-up studies over the past 20 years. It's still, at best, highly speculative that there is any relation to biology. For example, the APA (which had previously advocated for the biological case circa the time or your Stanford posting) reversed itself in 2009: There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. https://www.apa.org/...y/orientation.pdf Edit: Supported my claim. Edited by mmoffitt March 1, 2014, 04:00:40 PM EST Expand All History
Post #387,078 by Another Scott 3/1/14 4:03:06 PM Reply	Point me to a cite, please. Here's one for you - http://www.pnas.org/...03/28/10771.short Another - http://rspb.royalsoc...1/1554/2217.short Another - http://www.ncbi.nlm....v/pubmed/12836730 Not being able to explain it fully doesn't mean that the evidence isn't there. HTH. Cheers, Scott.
Post #387,149 by mmoffitt 3/3/14 11:25:05 AM Reply	That's not how that works. You make the claim that its biology that determines gayness. I don't have to show it isn't, you have to show it is. And thusfar, you can't.
Post #387,154 by Another Scott 3/3/14 11:37:12 AM Reply	Eh? Review http://forum.iwethey...iwt?postid=387069 I answered your query. You said it wasn't good enough based on your reading of the past 20 years. I gave you more, but you still haven't answered me - a cite that says it isn't biology. The burden's on you. HTH! Cheers, Scott.
Post #387,156 by boxley 3/3/14 12:04:47 PM Reply	thats the prove there is no gawd argument :-) Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #387,174 by folkert 3/3/14 9:44:44 PM Reply	So... when did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual? If it is a choice... then when did you choose to be a heterosexual? Come now, scared to answer it? It's ok, we all know your answer. You just have to tell the truth. -- greg@gregfolkert.net "No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
Post #387,187 by mmoffitt 3/4/14 9:28:10 AM Reply	This is my last on this, and only because I like you & Scott Holding that homosexuality is not provably based upon biology is not the same as saying it's a choice. I do not now, nor have I ever believed it was a choice. I believe it is most likely biologically based and multi-gene. I also believe that in 1973, well before the mapping of the human genome, we cut off a line of inquiry forever that might have helped solve the riddle. In today's political climate, who is going to dare ask for funding for a study of the genes responsible for mental illness among homosexuals? What if the interactions between those genes and others give rise to homosexuality? We'll never know because we deferred to a "vote" based upon the study of 30 individuals. If it is the case that homosexuality is related to mental illness, we'll never know it because we've chosen willful blindness.
Post #387,188 by pwhysall 3/4/14 9:54:42 AM Reply	What's the hypothesis, here? Before you go off and study the genes responsible for mental illness in a homosexual population, what would attract you to this line of investigation? There's no riddle. Some people like crazy buttsecks, or drinking from the furry cup. Some people don't. We is what we is. What would you do with the answer if you got one? Tell all those poor gays that it's OK, they're just insane in the brain? You might just as profitably investigate why some colonial weirdos like Vegemite and Superior Imperial Beings prefer Marmite. And finally: if it's not a choice, why do you advocate discriminating on the basis of it?
Post #387,189 by mmoffitt 3/4/14 10:13:16 AM Reply	Re: what would attract you to this line of investigation? Because it was once classified as a mental illness. Having it striken from the list of diagnoses had absolutely nothing to do with science.
Post #387,190 by boxley 3/4/14 10:21:05 AM Reply	exactly, same as being lefthanded is no longer considered a mental illness. Should have left it in for more study Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free American and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 58 years. meep
Post #387,195 by mmoffitt 3/4/14 11:45:25 AM Reply	Um. Somebody did continue study: http://www.medicalne...ticles/267047.php
Post #387,192 by pwhysall 3/4/14 10:24:30 AM Reply	So you want to check whether it still is a mental illness?
Post #387,194 by drook 3/4/14 10:29:52 AM Reply	If we must keep this up, new thread please? -- Drew
Post #387,197 by crazy 3/4/14 12:55:52 PM Reply	Because if it an illness, it might be fixable or prevented Normal vs not normal line of thought gets him in trouble. But if it is an illness, he can claim he simply wants sick people to get better as a rationalization for simply wanting to oppress those that make him uncomfortable. Here, I'll run with it. There are all kinds of genetic variations that may end up being harmful to the individual, while being beneficial to the population at large. Like sickle cell anemia, which protects against malaria. In this case (the "gay" gene (or groupings which tend toward it)), a portion of the population has ended up with genes that may be individually harmful (assholes abuse them because they carry this trait), while also being beneficial to society in general (it allows the rest of us to identify the assholes).
Post #387,198 by drook 3/4/14 1:03:24 PM Reply	New. Thread. Please. -- Drew
Post #387,071 by folkert 3/1/14 2:48:49 PM Reply	So, when did you choose to be Hetero-Sexual? -- greg@gregfolkert.net "No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible." --Stanislaw Jerzy Lec
Post #387,073 by malraux 3/1/14 3:12:46 PM Reply	Either way, it doesn't matter. Protected class is a protected class. Religion is also a protected class, but it doesn't have a biological basis. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #387,074 by mmoffitt 3/1/14 3:25:06 PM Reply	Concur.

Welcome to IWETHEY!