Sexual orientation knows no political ideology

Enough with the flame wars regarding whether X is gay or Y is not gay or whether X's homosexuality is insulting or whether insinuating Y's sexuality in one way or another is homophobic or not homophobic etcetera etcetera etcetera times infinity. It is childish and idiotic and devoid of all rational thought.

Republicans can be gay.

Terrorists can be gay.

Pedophiles, murderers, priests, psychopaths, and penguins can be gay.

Decent people can be gay, saints can be gay, Lincoln was probably gay, and heroes can be gay. Superman was definitely gay.


Homosexuality, heterosexuality, bisexuality, and any other "ality" are a product of genetic predisposition, and possibly environment as well, and is never a choice. Period. End of story. Nothing to see here. Move on.

Should we allow parents to abort fetuses with this predisposition if the parents do not want a gay offspring?

What do you say?

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

such a thing beforehand.

Personally, I would never allow such a thing to happen, and I doubt many others would.

nt

First, it's highly unlikely that a single gene - or even a single cluster of genes - determines sexual orientation.

Second, what do you think? You're new around here. Us oldtimers are waiting to hear your opinion....

I would say there are more gays in the Democratic party, simply because the republican party is not accepting of gays.

A lot more gays in the republican party are still in the closet

thing I understand even less than a black rethug is a gay rethug. Talk about voting against your self interest. Race and orientation may not be a choice, but political affiliation sure as hell is.

Yes, I know you know that. But I just felt compelled to say it.

My first response was "Well, Duh!" and it didn't look as interesting.

:D

n/t

Rights should not be based upon any kind of genetic predisposition. I think that the "I can't help myself, it's genetic" or "that's the way I am" is a slippery slope. What if it is proven that being a sociopath has a genetic predisposition, or a pedophile? Using genetic predisposition to justify a sexual preference that does not need justification should not be necessary. Rights are rights.

I don't care if anyone is gay (unless it is a cute guy, but that's not relevant to the point I'm making.) What I do care about is if a gay person is in a position of power and is using that power to eliminate what fundamental civil rights I have as a gay man. Those closet-case hypocrites MUST be driven from power for the good of humanity. If outing them as hypocrites will do the job, then I'm all for it.

And you've always been an ally to us as far as I've seen.

But the flame wars aren't about who can and can't be GLBT. They're about the practice some engage in of insinuating people they detest are "gay" or "transgender" as an insult (or outright saying they are). It's childish and it hurts GLBT people.

for being the adult here, who has the balls to stand up and say something about all the x is gay, y is gay, it's a choice shit. I appreciate your thoughtful post. :thumbsup:

Politicians who get elected in part due to their homophobic platforms and who are then found to be gay deserve to be castigated as the hypocrites they are. Same for pundits, etc.