| Author | Thread |
|
|
07/07/2008 10:32:58 PM · #1026 |
Hey I just found my copy of "The Gay Agenda"
The Gay Agenda
I know that many of you have heard Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell and others speak of the "Homosexual Agenda," but no one has ever seen a copy of it. Well, I have finally obtained a copy directly from the Head Homosexual. It follows below:
6:00 am Gym
8:00 am Breakfast (oatmeal and egg whites)
9:00 am Hair appointment
10:00 am Shopping
12:00 PM Brunch
2:00 PM
1) Assume complete control of the U.S. Federal, State and Local Governments as well as all other national governments,
2) Recruit all straight youngsters to our debauched lifestyle,
3) Destroy all healthy heterosexual marriages,
4) Replace all school counselors in grades K-12 with agents of Colombian and Jamaican drug cartels,
5) Establish planetary chain of homo breeding gulags where over-medicated imprisoned straight women are turned into artificially impregnated baby factories to produce prepubescent love slaves for our devotedly pederastic gay leadership,
6) bulldoze all houses of worship, and
7) Secure total control of the INTERNET and all mass media for the exclusive use of child pornographers.
2:30 PM Get forty winks of beauty rest to prevent facial wrinkles from stress of world conquest
4:00 PM Cocktails
6:00 PM Light Dinner (soup, salad, with Chardonnay)
8:00 PM Theater
11:00 PM Bed (du jour)"
Message edited by author 2008-07-07 22:50:15. |
|
|
|
07/07/2008 10:48:05 PM · #1027 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I cannot identify and know what marriages are real in God's eyes. |
That's the salient point. You seek to impose a defined standard on everyone, yet you cannot even know if your personal definition of marriage is valid. Indeed, it cannot be valid per your own acknowledgement that marriages existed before there was even a Bible to define the Christian concept of God. Note that you didn't actually address the paradox of your statement, but waved it off for God to sort out. It's interesting that you don't know which marriages are valid, but apparently do know which ones are invalid and seek to ban them rather than letting God sort those out, too. From a religious standpoint, you simply don't have the authority to make that call. :-/ |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 12:56:25 AM · #1028 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I cannot identify and know what marriages are real in God's eyes. |
That's the salient point. You seek to impose a defined standard on everyone, yet you cannot even know if your personal definition of marriage is valid. Indeed, it cannot be valid per your own acknowledgement that marriages existed before there was even a Bible to define the Christian concept of God. Note that you didn't actually address the paradox of your statement, but waved it off for God to sort out. It's interesting that you don't know which marriages are valid, but apparently do know which ones are invalid and seek to ban them rather than letting God sort those out, too. From a religious standpoint, you simply don't have the authority to make that call. :-/ |
In my belief system God IS and HAS ALWAYS been and is not a concept(no sense arguing about that) and is and has always been the same and unchanging. In my belief system right and wrong are not ever changing. In my belief system the homosexual sex act is sinful therefore any 'marriage' institution that confers righteousness to that act could not possibly be okay in God's eyes by his very nature. When I say that I cannot identify and know which marriages are real in God's eyes I was referring to those marriages which to all outward appearance could be but are not necessarily so. For instance say a 15 year old girl is placed in foster care and then is plied with drugs and money to have sex with her foster father and then at the age of eighteen under the influence of a drug addiction and under near complete mental and emotional control of that person they then get married when she turns the age of eighteen (adulthood). She does it because if she doesn't then he will stop providing for her drug addiction and living necessities and not because she loves the man. She has been conditioned to accept the abuse that is heaped on her by her 'husband'. Now this if I knew the facts it would be easy to determine that the marriage is not a valid one in the eyes of God because it would be against his very nature to accept this marriage which is based on abuse and manipulation. Not knowing the facts it could seem like a very valid marriage. I have already stated that just because a person is not a Christian it does not invalidate their marriage and their are examples in the Bible to back this up where it refers to non-Christian non-Jews as being married. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 01:01:26 AM · #1029 |
Originally posted by pjangel:
Hey I just found my copy of "The Gay Agenda"
The Gay Agenda
I know that many of you have heard Pat Robertson, Jerry Fallwell and others speak of the "Homosexual Agenda," but no one has ever seen a copy of it. Well, I have finally obtained a copy directly from the Head Homosexual. It follows below:
6:00 am Gym
8:00 am Breakfast (oatmeal and egg whites)
9:00 am Hair appointment
10:00 am Shopping
12:00 PM Brunch
2:00 PM
1) Assume complete control of the U.S. Federal, State and Local Governments as well as all other national governments,
2) Recruit all straight youngsters to our debauched lifestyle,
3) Destroy all healthy heterosexual marriages,
4) Replace all school counselors in grades K-12 with agents of Colombian and Jamaican drug cartels,
5) Establish planetary chain of homo breeding gulags where over-medicated imprisoned straight women are turned into artificially impregnated baby factories to produce prepubescent love slaves for our devotedly pederastic gay leadership,
6) bulldoze all houses of worship, and
7) Secure total control of the INTERNET and all mass media for the exclusive use of child pornographers.
2:30 PM Get forty winks of beauty rest to prevent facial wrinkles from stress of world conquest
4:00 PM Cocktails
6:00 PM Light Dinner (soup, salad, with Chardonnay)
8:00 PM Theater
11:00 PM Bed (du jour)" |
I haven't and if you felt that I was meaning something in regards to what others have said or if it implied that I apologize. I did not realize the word agenda carried a negative meaning. DP. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 06:26:46 AM · #1030 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I haven't and if you felt that I was meaning something in regards to what others have said or if it implied that I apologize. I did not realize the word agenda carried a negative meaning. DP. |
Don't take on so much of this for yourself.
You're the only "Defender of the Faith" who's actively subjecting himself to the firing line right now.......8>)
Agenda didn't always have a negative connotation, but these days in casual conversation, it seems to.....
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 06:37:31 AM · #1031 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system God IS and HAS ALWAYS been and is not a concept(no sense arguing about that) and is and has always been the same and unchanging. In my belief system right and wrong are not ever changing. In my belief system the homosexual sex act is sinful therefore any 'marriage' institution that confers righteousness to that act could not possibly be okay in God's eyes by his very nature. |
Let me ask this......is there any possibility in your mind that there may be erroneous information in the Bible?
The word, as it were, maybe not exactly put down as it should have been due to the views or interpretation of the writer?
An awful lot has changed in 2000 years, and I have heard many interpretations of various passages.
Are you open to the possibility that some parts may not be as intended?
In my mind, I do not trust that man gets it right all the time, therefore I question the rigid adherence, especially where principles fly in the face of good and decent treatment of other people.
There has been too much of that over the last couple milleniums.
The Inquisition comes to mind........these were people who honestly believed that they were doing the bidding of God when they were burning people at the stake.
It just seems so much better to take into account the feelings and needs of our fellow man, to know that behavior such as loving and caring is God's will, and leave judgement in His hands.
For me to judge another of God's children based on 2000 year old writings is abhorrent.
I know how my relationships with others become when I'm good and decent to them.
I know when I feel from the heart and soul that I'm doing right, because I must put all of me into it........and I truly believe that God lets me know when I get it right.
I need no book for that to be evident.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 08:54:08 AM · #1032 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system God IS and HAS ALWAYS been and is not a concept(no sense arguing about that) and is and has always been the same and unchanging. In my belief system right and wrong are not ever changing. In my belief system the homosexual sex act is sinful therefore any 'marriage' institution that confers righteousness to that act could not possibly be okay in God's eyes by his very nature. |
Let me ask this......is there any possibility in your mind that there may be erroneous information in the Bible?
The word, as it were, maybe not exactly put down as it should have been due to the views or interpretation of the writer?
An awful lot has changed in 2000 years, and I have heard many interpretations of various passages.
Are you open to the possibility that some parts may not be as intended?
In my mind, I do not trust that man gets it right all the time, therefore I question the rigid adherence, especially where principles fly in the face of good and decent treatment of other people.
There has been too much of that over the last couple milleniums.
The Inquisition comes to mind........these were people who honestly believed that they were doing the bidding of God when they were burning people at the stake.
It just seems so much better to take into account the feelings and needs of our fellow man, to know that behavior such as loving and caring is God's will, and leave judgement in His hands.
For me to judge another of God's children based on 2000 year old writings is abhorrent.
I know how my relationships with others become when I'm good and decent to them.
I know when I feel from the heart and soul that I'm doing right, because I must put all of me into it........and I truly believe that God lets me know when I get it right.
I need no book for that to be evident. |
Wow I really kinda expected to get blasted but you have come back with a very civil and reasonable and rational post. I can agree that translation and bias does make it's way into various versions of the Bible. I don't agree with all translations of the Bible as being accurate enough. I do attribute this to a more liberal interpretation of the Bible to suit a more liberal Christian which seems to be the trend. For instance the New International Version frequently refers to sexual immorality without specifically stating what that exactly means. Under this translation it would seem to be up to the reader what is sexually immoral. It could mean anything. I have done some study on the particular passages that involve homosexual behavior in the King James version which corroborate my beliefs that the homosexual act is one of many ways that man sins against God. I would like to point out that I don't judge the individual as I can't possibly know their heart. If a gay person were a Christian and in his heart it grieved him that his actions were sinful or was fully convinced that his actions were not sinful then I would think there is a very real possibility that his sins would be forgiven. That is up to God to determine. I can judge the act itself as being wrong or sinful regardless but God calls me to love all. I do my best much as I think you do (towards me in particular). I don't condemn anyone for acting on their lusts. I have acted on my own lusts and sinned as well. Some think it is a sin to smoke cigarettes or drink alcahol even in moderation. I smoke but am convinced it is not a sin. I drink (very occasionally maybe once or twice a year) in moderation and am convinced it is not a sin. I think it would be very hard for me to come to the conclusion that gay sex is okay in the eyes of God but I am willing to pray on this and study more closely this issue. Are there any Christian gay people who could elucidate to me on their thinking or interpretation of the Bible? |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 09:24:07 AM · #1033 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
Wow I really kinda expected to get blasted but you have come back with a very civil and reasonable and rational post. |
I have my moments.......8>)
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I can agree that translation and bias does make it's way into various versions of the Bible. I don't agree with all translations of the Bible as being accurate enough. I do attribute this to a more liberal interpretation of the Bible to suit a more liberal Christian which seems to be the trend. For instance the New International Version frequently refers to sexual immorality without specifically stating what that exactly means. Under this translation it would seem to be up to the reader what is sexually immoral. It could mean anything. |
That's kind of the situation I'm in.....I'm neither a scholar, nor convinced that I have any insight that makes me comfortable with any concrete ideals as per its reference in my day to day life.
I can appreciate many passages as metaphors and allegories, but doing that I have to be aware that I am operating on my own interpretation. That can always be problematic. I figure that on that premise, I had best be concerned about my own accountability and be careful about holding others to my perceived standards.
Some days it's tough to be a good human!.......8>)
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I have done some study on the particular passages that involve homosexual behavior in the King James version which corroborate my beliefs that the homosexual act is one of many ways that man sins against God. |
My problem with that is that having many gay people as not only acquaintences, but people whom I interact, seek counsel, participate in their lives, and they in mine, I have trouble with the concept that these good people, who are homosexual by their makeup, not as a choice, are sinful and/or immoral people.
I'll reply to more of this but I have to go submit some entries to the township summer photography contest.......back later.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 09:44:37 AM · #1034 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I have done some study on the particular passages that involve homosexual behavior in the King James version which corroborate my beliefs that the homosexual act is one of many ways that man sins against God. |
As one who has done a bit of studying on the translation issue (however, I am by no means a scholar in this area), I would caution you to not revert back to the King James version for a "more accurate" translation. It was written with specific poetic prose in mind. While it is my favorite, it may not be the most linguistically correct.
One other point. The people who translated the KJV of the Bible were careful to give the correct interpretation as they understood it. However, since there was indeed mans interpretation interspersed with poetic wording, it can be argued that it had a heavier dose of interpretation than some other translations.
They actually sell some really interesting Bibles with two (or more) translations next to one another on a page. I've found these to be really eye-opening. I would urge you to pick a favorite (or contraversal) verse and examine closely two or more translations. It's eye opening to say the least. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 09:47:01 AM · #1035 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
That's kind of the situation I'm in.....I'm neither a scholar, nor convinced that I have any insight that makes me comfortable with any concrete ideals as per its reference in my day to day life.
I can appreciate many passages as metaphors and allegories, but doing that I have to be aware that I am operating on my own interpretation. That can always be problematic. I figure that on that premise, I had best be concerned about my own accountability and be careful about holding others to my perceived standards.
Some days it's tough to be a good human!.......8>)
|
I must say, if more people approached their faith this way, we may have a much more united Church. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 10:32:30 AM · #1036 |
Who am I to disappoint when someone's waiting for a good blasting?
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system God IS and HAS ALWAYS been and is not a concept(no sense arguing about that) and is and has always been the same and unchanging. |
1,500 years ago, your belief system observed guidelines that you would find abhorrent today. 3,000 years ago, your belief system didn't exist. 7,000 years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone on the planet who believed in only one god, let alone yours. So, while you can claim all you want that something always existed, that claim rests entirely on a belief system that hasn't.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't agree with all translations of the Bible as being accurate enough. I do attribute this to a more liberal interpretation of the Bible to suit a more liberal Christian which seems to be the trend. For instance the New International Version frequently refers to sexual immorality without specifically stating what that exactly means. ...I have done some study on the particular passages that involve homosexual behavior in the King James version which corroborate my beliefs... |
You seem to imply that newer (or merely different) versions of the Bible are more open to interpretation or errors than other versions. How then did you conclude that the King James Version, authored directly between the Spanish Inquisition and Salem Witch Trials, is the correct guide for all moral matters?
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system right and wrong are not ever changing. |
Right is always right, and wrong is always wrong, but the guidelines that define right and wrong are subject to interpretation (see above) and have changed radically over the centuries. Prior to 1545, marriage itself was considered a private matter that consisted of nothing more than declaring that you were married- there WASN'T any church or state oversight.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system the homosexual sex act is sinful therefore any 'marriage' institution that confers righteousness to that act could not possibly be okay in God's eyes by his very nature. |
In your belief system, pretty much anything considered "different" gets classified as sinful, and the very same arguments were last used to fight interracial marriages *gasp*. The example you gave of an invalid marriage is completely irrelevant- the discussion is about two consenting adults who love each other, not abuse and manipulation... or is love against God's very nature, too? Not all homosexual couple even HAVE sexual relations- some are just great friends, and whether they do or not is none of my business. One would think that if a high priority were placed on love between opposite sexes, that Jesus would have had a girlfriend... unless ALL sex is sinful and we should therefore stop having children immediately! :-O
Message edited by author 2008-07-08 10:34:01. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:15:22 AM · #1037 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Prior to 1545, marriage itself was considered a private matter that consisted of nothing more than declaring that you were married- there WASN'T any church or state oversight. |
You mean in Christian Europe, right? I'm not sure this statement applies to China, India, Africa, South America, or the rest of the world, which comprised a large majority of the world's population at the time. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:22:19 AM · #1038 |
| Well neither am I for or against Homosexuality. I do beleive it is a different strife than say racism since one is a behavior and one is a color. Wether you beleive The belief that homosexuality is a learned or inherant trate is debatable. Not sure of which school is correct. It is probably somewhere in the middle. But what I do know is no one should be dicriminated upon based on any reason other then their ability to do the job at hand. Private clubs should be able to set their own rules. A good example is smoking and resterants. The owner should be able to allow smoking in their enviroment and if you choose not to except this then they will not get your business. That way economics takes over. we tend to forget that our rights only extend until the infringe on someone elses rights. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:22:28 AM · #1039 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Who am I to disappoint when someone's waiting for a good blasting?
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system God IS and HAS ALWAYS been and is not a concept(no sense arguing about that) and is and has always been the same and unchanging. |
1,500 years ago, your belief system observed guidelines that you would find abhorrent today. 3,000 years ago, your belief system didn't exist. 7,000 years ago, you'd be hard pressed to find anyone on the planet who believed in only one god, let alone yours. So, while you can claim all you want that something always existed, that claim rests entirely on a belief system that hasn't.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I don't agree with all translations of the Bible as being accurate enough. I do attribute this to a more liberal interpretation of the Bible to suit a more liberal Christian which seems to be the trend. For instance the New International Version frequently refers to sexual immorality without specifically stating what that exactly means. ...I have done some study on the particular passages that involve homosexual behavior in the King James version which corroborate my beliefs... |
You seem to imply that newer (or merely different) versions of the Bible are more open to interpretation or errors than other versions. How then did you conclude that the King James Version, authored directly between the Spanish Inquisition and Salem Witch Trials, is the correct guide for all moral matters?
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system right and wrong are not ever changing. |
Right is always right, and wrong is always wrong, but the guidelines that define right and wrong are subject to interpretation (see above) and have changed radically over the centuries. Prior to 1545, marriage itself was considered a private matter that consisted of nothing more than declaring that you were married- there WASN'T any church or state oversight.
Originally posted by dponlyme:
In my belief system the homosexual sex act is sinful therefore any 'marriage' institution that confers righteousness to that act could not possibly be okay in God's eyes by his very nature. |
In your belief system, pretty much anything considered "different" gets classified as sinful, and the very same arguments were last used to fight interracial marriages *gasp*. The example you gave of an invalid marriage is completely irrelevant- the discussion is about two consenting adults who love each other, not abuse and manipulation... or is love against God's very nature, too? Not all homosexual couple even HAVE sexual relations- some are just great friends, and whether they do or not is none of my business. One would think that if a high priority were placed on love between opposite sexes, that Jesus would have had a girlfriend... unless ALL sex is sinful and we should therefore stop having children immediately! :-O |
You did not disappoint. Good blasting. I am however stating all of my opinions based on what I believe. I do disagree with you of course. My 'belief system' is belief in the one true God creator of heaven and earth and as such has existed forever (from the beginning when God created man) just as he has. I really only adopt the 'belief system' tag so as not to incur as much 'blasting' from those who are atheist. I'll make no bones about it if you wish... I know the truth of the matter in regards to God and his existence and the fact that Jesus was his only begotten son sent as sacrifice for everyone who believes in him for the remission of sins. You may not like it or agree with it but that is the nature of faith is it not. I cannot have any doubt about it or I would have a very weak faith. Who has faith in that which they are unsure of. You cannot logic me out of my faith as it does not adhere to the type of logic as you wish to impose on it by it's very nature. Please, I have been careful not to proselytize. I would ask that you not try to convince me that I have faith in something that does not exist. I think we have been down that road and come up empty. Good blasting though... very well thought out.
edit King James version: The Holy Spirit guided me to that version
interpretation of right and wrong change for a lot of reasons but right and wrong are determined by God and are unchanging.
As far as my belief system believing anything different is sinful: please provide examples.
As far as Jesus having a girlfriend. If he had been in any type of relationship with a woman she most assuredly would have driven him to sin and blown the whole deal... he learned from Adam's mistake.(this said tongue in cheek)
Message edited by author 2008-07-08 11:33:09. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:31:00 AM · #1040 |
| Now I am against Homosexuals on Welfare!!! Live your lifestyle on your own dime. Of course I am against Heterosexuals on welfare also. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:31:55 AM · #1041 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I cannot have any doubt about it or I would have a very weak faith. Who has faith in that which they are unsure of. |
To me, the very unsurety is what makes my faith. I have to believe what's I interpret as signs and guidance as evidence of my faith, therefore I have to rely on what I see, feel, and experience everyday to bolster, or ask for reassurance of my faith.
To me, it's the ultimate question on a daily basis......what does God and life have in store for me today?
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:34:34 AM · #1042 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
I do beleive it is a different strife than say racism since one is a behavior and one is a color. |
Uh, no.
Homosexuality is NOT a behavior, it is an inherent trait.
Message edited by author 2008-07-08 11:34:54.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:40:15 AM · #1043 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I cannot have any doubt about it or I would have a very weak faith. Who has faith in that which they are unsure of. |
To me, the very unsurety is what makes my faith. I have to believe what's I interpret as signs and guidance as evidence of my faith, therefore I have to rely on what I see, feel, and experience everyday to bolster, or ask for reassurance of my faith.
To me, it's the ultimate question on a daily basis......what does God and life have in store for me today? |
I have the same feelings on 'what does God have for me today' but you must have an absolute certainty on the fact that God exists... do you not. You'd just about have to if you feel your getting signs and such. When I take things to God in prayer I ask for his will to be done and I ask unwavering and with complete certainty that it will be done. It may not be what I wish to be done but In any event I know it is God's will. Without fail when what I want to happen does not I find out down the line that I am better off for it. I trust his plan for me. If I felt uncertain about God I don't think I could trust him with my life. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:45:19 AM · #1044 |
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by coronamv:
I do beleive it is a different strife than say racism since one is a behavior and one is a color. |
Uh, no.
Homosexuality is NOT a behavior, it is an inherent trait. |
I would say that same sex attraction may very well be an inherent trait but the act of homosexual sex is a behavior that is based on that attraction. One does not have to act. One chooses to act. It is also the case that a person has such a strong lust that it is near impossible to say no. I have experienced that a time or two. Still it is a choice I made to act on my lust and the same applies to homosexual sex. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:51:40 AM · #1045 |
Well with respect there are two different beliefs on that one school believes it is a learned behavior another believes it is inherant. I actually don't agree or disagree with either. There is actually doctors/scientist that claim it is a chemical imbalance and can be treated. Not that I agree/diagree with that either.
But whether or not it is a learned or inherant it is a behavior and should not be grouped with racism.
Originally posted by NikonJeb:
Originally posted by coronamv:
I do beleive it is a different strife than say racism since one is a behavior and one is a color. |
Uh, no.
Homosexuality is NOT a behavior, it is an inherent trait. |
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:54:10 AM · #1046 |
| A trait is a distinct phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between. So far as I have researched they have not found gene that is the gay gene... |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:55:48 AM · #1047 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
It is also the case that a person has such a strong lust that it is near impossible to say no. I have experienced that a time or two. Still it is a choice I made to act on my lust and the same applies to homosexual sex. |
You have the option of marrying the object of your lust -- why shouldn't everyone? |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 11:55:54 AM · #1048 |
Originally posted by dponlyme:
I have the same feelings on 'what does God have for me today' but you must have an absolute certainty on the fact that God exists... do you not. |
Okay.....I may not have been clear about that.....
I have *NO* doubt that there is a wondrous and loving God.
Otherwise, my best efforts at trashing my life and myself would have yielded far different results.
The fact that my dumb ass is still here is abundant proof of his benevolence.
Because of that alone, I feel, and believe, that there's something that God has in mind for mwe.
Trouble is, I haven't seen any sign that we're going to have a chat over coffee.
I believe that I have to search for the answers as part of my spiritual development.
I don't think that life and free will come as a free luch.......or with a handbook.
Furthermore, all I have to do is just take one look at my daughter, and think about who she is, and I know that I am a recipient of God's grace. She is the most wonderful creature I have ever had the privilege to know. I am very humbled by the stewardship of this delightful creature, and I thank God for her every day.
|
|
|
|
07/08/2008 12:06:47 PM · #1049 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
A trait is a distinct phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between. So far as I have researched they have not found gene that is the gay gene... |
When they DO find it, I'd like to get half of one.
My wife would still be enticing, but I'd dress better, go to the gym, and not dance like a nerdy white guy! (that isn't mean, its the TRUTH!)
edit to add: this is very obviously a joke, and a jab at my own shortcomings in life. in no way do i believe these things to be absolute. well, the parts about me are true.
sheesh guys, lighten up - I was just tryin to add some levity by joking about myself :D :D :D
Message edited by author 2008-07-08 13:43:16. |
|
|
|
07/08/2008 12:12:49 PM · #1050 |
Originally posted by coronamv:
A trait is a distinct phenotypic character of an organism that may be inherited, environmentally determined or somewhere in between. So far as I have researched they have not found gene that is the gay gene... |
Okay, you've quoted a definition of a trait.
You haven't disproven my position that people are not homosexual by choice.
|
|
