Don't Ask, Don't Tell

[thegreekdog]

This might be the weirdest thread I've ever read. Weird and disturbing.

In the interest of full disclosure, I never opened that thread on the people that like to bang people dressed up as animals.

[Frigidus]

Umm.. Those gays are dressed like that...

Didn't you argue that they should be allowed to dress like that? and that a convicted murderer and attempted rapist should be transfered to a women's prison because he dressed like that??

I did argue that, but more because you guys were so up in arms about it than that I actually felt strongly one way or another. Some low hanging fruit troll-wise.

And of course they can dress like that if they want. But outside of gay pride parades (and maybe beaches?) I've never seen a gay guy walking around in a speedo.

[Juan_Bottom]

In the interest of full disclosure, I never opened that thread on the people that like to bang people dressed up as animals.

Please don't. It's.... embarrassing to CC.

Holy shit, either we're being trolled or this is the most telling gay thread I've ever read.

agreed

There's no conclusive research which indicates that this is the case. Most of the studies which are taken are coming from the world view that there is in fact a gay gene and that the purpose of the study is to find it.

Nobody has...

Except for Dr. Dean Hamer.

[GabonX]

Umm.. Those gays are dressed like that...

Didn't you argue that they should be allowed to dress like that? and that a convicted murderer and attempted rapist should be transfered to a women's prison because he dressed like that??

I did argue that, but more because you guys were so up in arms about it than that I actually felt strongly one way or another. Some low hanging fruit troll-wise.

And of course they can dress like that if they want. But outside of gay pride parades (and maybe beaches?) I've never seen a gay guy walking around in a speedo.

I guess I used a poor choice of words as they should be 'able' to dress like that.

With that said, if people see this sort of thing in a public setting it is offensive as they (and potentially their children) are being subjected to an extreme form of homosexual perversion.

[Frigidus]

Umm.. Those gays are dressed like that...

Didn't you argue that they should be allowed to dress like that? and that a convicted murderer and attempted rapist should be transfered to a women's prison because he dressed like that??

I did argue that, but more because you guys were so up in arms about it than that I actually felt strongly one way or another. Some low hanging fruit troll-wise.

And of course they can dress like that if they want. But outside of gay pride parades (and maybe beaches?) I've never seen a gay guy walking around in a speedo.

I guess I used a poor choice of words as they should be 'able' to dress like that.

With that said, if people see this sort of thing in a public setting it is offensive as they (and potentially their children) are being subjected to an extreme form of homosexual perversion.

All right, I can sort of see that. I feel the same way about graphic images of abortion. If you argued that you oppose gay pride parades because they're offensive I'd be more inclined to listen than (I have heard this said multiple times IRL, I'm not saying you feel this way) because those homosexuals disgust you.

[GabonX]

There's no conclusive research which indicates that this is the case. Most of the studies which are taken are coming from the world view that there is in fact a gay gene and that the purpose of the study is to find it.

Nobody has...

Except for Dr. Dean Hamer.

From what I'm reading, Dr. Hamer is a homosexual (which may cloud his perspective on this) who also postulated that there is a "God gene" which predisposes people to be religious.

There is absolutely an agenda to convince the public that gays are born gay, but there is no conclusive evidence to support this.

Hamer's findings were based on a supposed link between the Xq28 genetic marker and homosexuality. His claims have since been disputed.

Xq28 is a genetic marker on the X chromosome found by Dean Hamer and others in 1993. Hamer's study found a link between the Xq28 marker and male homosexuality,[1] but the original study's results have been disputed.[2]
Contents
[hide]

* 1 1993 study
* 2 1999 study
* 3 See also
* 4 References

[edit] 1993 study

The 1993 study by Hamer examined 114 families of gay men in Italy and found supposed increased rates of homosexuality among maternal uncles and cousins, but not among paternal relatives. Genetic linkage was studied in 40 of the families, in which there were two gay brothers. A correlation to Xq28 and other microsatellite markers was found in approximately 64% of the cases. A similar study by the same team conducted in 1995, again based on Italian material corroborated these results, but failed to find a link to the Xq28 gene among homosexual females.[3]
[edit] 1999 study

A further study of these results in 1999 disputed the results. Studying Canadian material consisting of 52 pairs of gay brothers, George Rice and others found no statistically significant linkage in alleles and haplotypes and concluded against an X-linked male homosexuality gene.[4]

When the refuting study was published in Science, Hamer disputed it, standing by his original results.[5]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xq28

[Snorri1234]

What really makes a black man different from a white one? Skin tone? Definitely. Diction? Perhaps for some. Shared cultural past? Maybe. Living in a ghetto? Not every black family is poor. Jail time? That is an arguable point, although that me be more because of situation over predisposition. The only real difference here is that their skin is a different color, their hair grows differently, they sometimes talk and dress funny. There is nothing there to preclude them from working/living in close proximity with other races, or even producing a family with other races.

That sure is progressive if this were the 1890s and you were in North Carolina.

Actually, not even then.

[Ray Rider]

There's no conclusive research which indicates that this is the case. Most of the studies which are taken are coming from the world view that there is in fact a gay gene and that the purpose of the study is to find it.

Nobody has...

Except for Dr. Dean Hamer.

Many laymen now believe that homosexuality is part of who a person really is ­ from the moment of conception.

The "genetic and unchangeable" theory has been actively promoted by gay activists and the popular media. Is homosexuality really an inborn and normal variant of human nature?

No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.
...
Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.

[GabonX]

Umm.. Those gays are dressed like that...

Didn't you argue that they should be allowed to dress like that? and that a convicted murderer and attempted rapist should be transfered to a women's prison because he dressed like that??

I did argue that, but more because you guys were so up in arms about it than that I actually felt strongly one way or another. Some low hanging fruit troll-wise.

And of course they can dress like that if they want. But outside of gay pride parades (and maybe beaches?) I've never seen a gay guy walking around in a speedo.

I guess I used a poor choice of words as they should be 'able' to dress like that.

With that said, if people see this sort of thing in a public setting it is offensive as they (and potentially their children) are being subjected to an extreme form of homosexual perversion.

All right, I can sort of see that. I feel the same way about graphic images of abortion. If you argued that you oppose gay pride parades because they're offensive I'd be more inclined to listen than (I have heard this said multiple times IRL, I'm not saying you feel this way) because those homosexuals disgust you.

I'm pretty mixed on the issue and I don't care that much to be honest. I sympathize with both homosexuals and the people who don't want to see graphic depictions of homosexuality become mainstream.

What upsets me most about the debate is the seeming abundance of misinformation put forth by proponents of the homosexual cause and there lack of willingness to have their views applied to scrutiny. Though I believe that there is strong evidence that global warming is influenced by man, I have the same issue with that debate.

[Snorri1234]

There's no conclusive research which indicates that this is the case. Most of the studies which are taken are coming from the world view that there is in fact a gay gene and that the purpose of the study is to find it.

Nobody has...

Except for Dr. Dean Hamer.

Many laymen now believe that homosexuality is part of who a person really is ­ from the moment of conception.

The "genetic and unchangeable" theory has been actively promoted by gay activists and the popular media. Is homosexuality really an inborn and normal variant of human nature?

No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.
...
Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.

Of course I could point out that "genetic" and "born with" aren't the same but why bother?

[Juan_Bottom]

There is absolutely a conservative Christian agenda to convince the American public that gays are evil and icky, but no conclusive evidence supports this.

His claims have since been disputed.

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.

Seriously dude, just stop talking. Please just stop. Stop.

And none of the research claims there is.

Bill Mauer: So you've found the Gay Gene?
Dr. Hamer: Yes

[Ray Rider]

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.

Seriously dude, just stop talking. Please just stop. Stop.

Actually I'm not the one who said that; if you had read the link I posted, you would have seen that it's a quote from Scientific.

I find this quite revealing:

Why does Ray Rider hate gay people so much?

There is absolutely a conservative Christian agenda...

Seriously dude, just stop talking. Please just stop. Stop.

You aren't interested in debating this subject, you just want to generalize and label anyone who disagrees with you so that you can dismiss their viewpoints.

[isaiah40]

There is absolutely a conservative Christian agenda to convince the American public that gays are evil and icky, but no conclusive evidence supports this.

You mean Extreme Christian agenda don't you. I for one don't like their lifestyle, and at the same time I don't mind working with them. They are people too, just a different lifestyle. That doesn't mean they have the right to ram their way of living down my throat, and I don't have the right to ram my way living down their throats. As a matter of fact I have met Homosexuals that acted more like Christians than a lot of Christians I know. The don't ask, don't tell policy goes as far back as at least 1987 when I went into the Air Force, who knows how much further back it goes.

[Snorri1234]

That doesn't mean they have the right to ram their way of living down my throat,

Hur hur.

[mpjh]

Is that the sound of snorii choking?

[Snorri1234]

You aren't interested in debating this subject,

Nobody is. This thread is about the military policy of tolerating gays if they keep quiet about it. If you want to debate about your backwards views on homosexuality start a new thread or search for an old one.

[john9blue]

Having a biblical avatar is far too much for him. He's choking on his own hypocrisy.

[F1fth]

Is that the sound of snorii choking?

One of three:
1. The sound of snorri choking
2. The sound of snorri chuckling
3. The sound of snorri agreeing ("hear, hear")

I strongly doubt its the first.

[Frigidus]

That doesn't mean they have the right to ram their way of living down my throat,

Hur hur.

[Juan_Bottom]

You mean Extreme Christian agenda don't you.

Yeah. Rush and the Ilk.

Actually I'm not the one who said that; if you had read the link I posted, you would have seen that it's a quote from Scientific.

And mine was a quote from the scientist who did claim just that.

You aren't interested in debating this subject, you just want to generalize and label anyone who disagrees with you so that you can dismiss their viewpoints.

No, every time you are shown to be saying idiotic things, you just change the subject that you're talking about. Rather than saying "gee I never thought of that," "well what about this then," or "hey, maybe I am wrong." You're labeling yourself as a homophob, not me.
Just stop. Please just stop.

And BTW this quote:

There is absolutely a conservative Christian agenda...

Was clearly not directed at you.

If you want to debate about your backwards views on homosexuality start a new thread or search for an old one.

Seconded.

He's choking on his own hypocrisy.

Says the gay-basher who claims to have a gay friend.

[thegreekdog]

I'm pro-homosexual rights. Regardless of whether homosexuality is genetic or a choice, I think people have the right to do whatever the hell they want and they should have the same rights as everyone else. There, got that off my chest.

So, that being said...

No, every time you are shown to be saying idiotic things, you just change the subject that you're talking about. Rather than saying "gee I never thought of that," "well what about this then," or "hey, maybe I am wrong." You're labeling yourself as a homophob, not me.
Just stop. Please just stop.

This, this right here? That doesn't advance the issue. That's not an argument. It's intellectually bankrupt to say this. I really hate when people marginalize someone like this. Now, you may say, "but thegreekdog, I don't want to lend credence to this ridiculous argument." And that's fair, but it's not going to change minds and it makes you look like a stuttering jackass who can't actually argue or articulate why homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals. If I were arguing with these people, I'd say, "our Constitution, as interpreted by the US Supreme Court, grants certain rights to people, regardles of their choice in sexual partners." I wouldn't say, "Just shut up you homophobe." Because, really, that makes you no better than a homophobe. You're a homophobephobe.

[Juan_Bottom]

Juan_Bottom wrote:No, every time you are shown to be saying idiotic things, you just change the subject that you're talking about. Rather than saying "gee I never thought of that," "well what about this then," or "hey, maybe I am wrong." You're labeling yourself as a homophob, not me.
Just stop. Please just stop.



This, this right here? That doesn't advance the issue. That's not an argument. It's intellectually bankrupt to say this. I really hate when people marginalize someone like this. Now, you may say, "but thegreekdog, I don't want to lend credence to this ridiculous argument." And that's fair, but it's not going to change minds and it makes you look like a stuttering jackass who can't actually argue or articulate why homosexuals should have the same rights as heterosexuals. If I were arguing with these people, I'd say, "our Constitution, as interpreted by the US Supreme Court, grants certain rights to people, regardles of their choice in sexual partners." I wouldn't say, "Just shut up you homophobe." Because, really, that makes you no better than a homophobe. You're a homophobephobe.

Are you making a joke that went over my head? Because my irony meter is going "bing bing bing."
You kinda just did what I did (only worst)and directed it at me.

[thegreekdog]

Are you making a joke that went over my head? Because my irony meter is going "bing bing bing."
You kinda just did what I did (only worst)and directed it at me.

I kinda just did what you did to whomever, yes. However, I also gave you reasons why you shouldn't do it (unlike what you did) and gave you what you may want to argue instead (unlike what you did).

[Juan_Bottom]

Are you making a joke that went over my head? Because my irony meter is going "bing bing bing."
You kinda just did what I did (only worst)and directed it at me.

I kinda just did what you did to whomever, yes. However, I also gave you reasons why you shouldn't do it (unlike what you did) and gave you what you may want to argue instead (unlike what you did).

I gave him gold!

Rather than saying "gee I never thought of that," "well what about this then," or "hey, maybe I am wrong." You're labeling yourself as a homophob, not me.

You peace + love hippy-crit.

[thegreekdog]

Are you making a joke that went over my head? Because my irony meter is going "bing bing bing."
You kinda just did what I did (only worst)and directed it at me.

I kinda just did what you did to whomever, yes. However, I also gave you reasons why you shouldn't do it (unlike what you did) and gave you what you may want to argue instead (unlike what you did).

I gave him gold!

Rather than saying "gee I never thought of that," "well what about this then," or "hey, maybe I am wrong." You're labeling yourself as a homophob, not me.

You peace + love hippy-crit.

Here's the deal dude. You think one guy doesn't like homosexuality because he's an idiot. He thinks you like homosexuality because you're an idiot. Makes for a great debate.