Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,153
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 58:
Line 58: +
Talk:Homosexuality and Genetics (view source)
Revision as of 02:45, April 24, 2009
, 02:45, April 24, 2009→Censorship on this article
::::The NARTH article does nothing but support the position of this wiki in a way that liberals are unable to deny. It not only quotes the head of the human genome project, who is more qualified than anyone else to make these claims, it also cites specific studies that support its conclusion that genetics have a minor influence on homosexuality, which can be easily overcome with [[Essay:Quantifying_Mental_Strength|mental strength]]. You are undermining the quality of this encyclopedia by removing vital proof of its positions, and leaving it vulnerable to liberal [[deceit]]. Yours in Christ, --[[User:JWeatherman|JWeatherman]] 20:18, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
::::The NARTH article does nothing but support the position of this wiki in a way that liberals are unable to deny. It not only quotes the head of the human genome project, who is more qualified than anyone else to make these claims, it also cites specific studies that support its conclusion that genetics have a minor influence on homosexuality, which can be easily overcome with [[Essay:Quantifying_Mental_Strength|mental strength]]. You are undermining the quality of this encyclopedia by removing vital proof of its positions, and leaving it vulnerable to liberal [[deceit]]. Yours in Christ, --[[User:JWeatherman|JWeatherman]] 20:18, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::P.S. it is spelled "embrace." Please sign your comment as well, I was not aware that I was responding to you until I checked the edit history, Conservative. At first I thought it was a liberal parodist and responded perhaps too harshly. I apologize if I have offended you in any way. Yours in Christ, --[[User:JWeatherman|JWeatherman]] 20:21, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::P.S. it is spelled "embrace." Please sign your comment as well, I was not aware that I was responding to you until I checked the edit history, Conservative. At first I thought it was a liberal parodist and responded perhaps too harshly. I apologize if I have offended you in any way. Yours in Christ, --[[User:JWeatherman|JWeatherman]] 20:21, 23 April 2009 (EDT)
:::::Does NARTH say that a person does not enter into homosexuality as a result of choice? If you do your research you will find out that is NARTH's position. Secondly, the material says that homosexuality is PARTLY a result of genetics and that is simply not true. I do recall Dr. Satinover claiming that boys who are "clutzy" are found somewhat more likely to become homosexuals because they supposedly are less likely to be socialized into manhood but even if this is true (and I believe there are professional football players who are homosexuals) that would not mean homosexuality is genetic in origin. In short, you have not shown that genetic theories are not better explained by environment and volition. Show me all the Amish and ultra orthodox Jews who are homosexual and your arguments would be far more compelling. :) [[User:Conservative|conservative]] 22:45, 23 April 2009 (EDT)