« From the department of can this possibly be right |
| Better in there than out here »
For all of the oiks who laughed at suggestions that environmental estrogenic compounds may be a biological contributor to homosexuality, now scientists are worried it could be linked to how much we drink....
Posted by iwishart on January 05, 2008 at 01:25 AM in Science | Permalink
| Save to del.icio.us
A mate has often told me that the difference between a gay guy and a straight one is just a few beers.
Fairfacts Media |
January 05, 2008 at 03:36 AM
What a queer thing to say as getting drunk has nothing to do with this disgusting disorder. I enjoy a beer with my mates and any talk of poofter antics is strictly out of the question. Hell’s bell’s there are still good moral characters on earth that still detest fruit bat faggots.
Researchers have finally pinned down a physical difference between male flies that are engineered to behave homosexually and those that are not: the tweaked variety is missing a small cluster of nerve cells in the brain.
Do gay men have blowflies around their zips? The mere thought of thought of sex with another man revolts me to such a degree that I feel sick in the stomach. .
Of course this is my opinion and if my excoriating critique of homosexuality offends anybody then they must realise that some on the conservative right detest homosexuality and view it as a mental disorder.
I base my opinion on Romans 1 v27; “ the same way men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.”
January 05, 2008 at 08:58 AM
haha oh boy, there's a theory for everything.
May come back in here after all the homo supporters start squealing at D4J.
Gets the page hits up I suppose. hahaa
January 05, 2008 at 12:18 PM
Yep! Burn em at the stake for the Lord soooooooo loved them all....
"Homos smoulder while Peter Burns"
January 05, 2008 at 02:49 PM
Come on guys it's been 6 hours already! No takers?
Ok how about this...
If straight guys turn gay after drinking beer, what beverage turns gays straight?
And if sexual orientation can be changed by a drink, why the hell are we handing out extra rights to drunks mascarading as gays?
Anyone? anyone? Bueller?
January 05, 2008 at 06:16 PM
All this experiment tells you is that drunk fruit flies can't tell the difference between male and female. A quick trip to a singles bar would confirm this in humans :-)
January 05, 2008 at 06:41 PM
Probably more to do with inhibitions being loosened by drink - so I'm not sure what the reverse would entail.
January 05, 2008 at 06:52 PM
Yep....if its unwanted homosexual attraction you are after hanging about the clergy is a sure bet to getting it.....;-)
January 05, 2008 at 09:55 PM
where it says:
"Anyone versed in psychopharmacology is aware that ethanol (the alcohol found in adult beverages) causes a release of GABA (gamma amino butyric acid). GABA levels are also increased during sex. Repeated increase and decrease of GABA levels in the blood of humans (and flies!!) will induce GABA-seeking behaviors in the GABA-deprived state. Thus, ethanol- (GABA-) deprived flies and humans will engage in behaviors that attempt offset this chemical imbalance at any cost."
January 05, 2008 at 10:23 PM
peter - a GABA a day keeps the gays at play . I think I'll just stick to swatting flies thank you very much .
January 05, 2008 at 10:32 PM
Its obvious! why do you think they call them "fruit" flies?
dave crampton |
January 05, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Interesting comment from Cliff Richard:
How is that fundamentalists?
January 05, 2008 at 11:39 PM
And here is a link for Daddy 4 in particular, but also for you Andrei.
The reader is challenged to answer this question:
DID YOU CHOOSE YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION?
January 05, 2008 at 11:59 PM
The link for my last post:
January 06, 2008 at 12:01 AM
peter, homosexuality is a persistent preoccupation with erotic encounters involving members of the same sex, which may or may not be acted out with another person . Put it another way, as I know you struggle with things peter, it is making a deliberate plan to entertain and co-operate in sex, which is vastly different from questioning our sexual orientation because of the presence of occasional same – sex attractions.
Having the attractions (whether it be a fruit fly or a pissed politician, drunken sailor etc.…) are obviously part of the torment and struggle, but they are not something for which we are morally responsible. It’s when we begin planning to entertain the attractions in fantasy or behaviour that we cross the line.
I believe many research studies that have failed to prove that people are born homosexuals. It is pure myth and many research findings show that nongenetic factors play a significant part in shaping sexual preference. The research also shows a “significantly higher percentage of alcohol and drug use “ among both males and females who participate in homosexual activities (pp.110-111 Straight and Narrow)
“Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brothers eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye”
Jesus’words remind us that if we see others’ sin without seeing our own more deeply, then we’ve negated our right and privilege to invite them to a different kind of life. Therefore, I must base my efforts on being a better Christlike friend to those struggling with homosexuality on the confession and growing demise of my own self righteousness.
I have cleansed myself from the unsavoury world of kiwiblog so it should be that much easier to seek my objective.
January 06, 2008 at 07:45 AM
Yours is a noble attempt to tap into your intellect, but really it takes the discussion no further than where it has always been.
You are in good company however, because luminaries like Andrei and Ian consistently miss the point as well.
The principal argument is not whether same sex orientation is defined at birth, or later. It is not about relationships between father and son (or perhaps mother and daughter?) that may or may not be influential.
It is a matter of human rights - what we selfishly claim for ourselves and what we may deny another.
Christian churches have been notoriously unjust when in comes to human rights. For example when debates about homosexual ministers have been happening at Presbyterian and Methodist assemblies - it seems that God has been answwering prayers giving 60 per cent support to one side and 40 per cent to the other!
Meanwhile the Roman Catholic leadership persist in their gay old way (while claiming homosezuality is sin) as they lead half the world's Christian population all over the highway.
Meanwhile, Christian fundmentalists desperately try to retrofit a few insignificant verses from a very outdated Bible onto contemporary thought with no success at all.
All fundamentalists should be put on notice that the issue is dead, decided, encoded in law these past 20 years. Move on from this senseless handwringing that is sending a simple message to all NZ parents - don't meddle with Christianity!!!
January 06, 2008 at 08:40 AM
Interesting comment from Eddie Van Halen:
How is that fundamentalist homo activists?
January 06, 2008 at 08:40 AM
Good Day to you all,
Perhaps an experienced trapper can help me:
I would like to trap some homo's to put in the zoo. I have dug a large hole in the park near the public toilets, but am unsure of the correct bait. Will some rotting fruit do?
Thanks in Advance,
Prof. Von Glinkerhoffen
The New Comtemporary Zoo of Acceptance.
Prof. Von Glinkerhoffen |
January 06, 2008 at 08:45 AM
To argue that ethanol aka booze is a cause of homosexuality is futile. We are responsible for conduct so if the libido is misdirected correct it.
The New Testament is clear homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. The old Mosaic law is irrelevant. We can legislate as much as we like but we cannot nullify God's instructions.
January 06, 2008 at 09:04 AM
"Yours is a noble attempt to tap into your intellect, but really it takes the discussion no further than where it has always been."
Really Peter .
Peter Joseph Burns .
January 06, 2008 at 09:05 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.