|
|
| Author |
Message |
Megalo
Can't Stop Posting
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 682
|
 Posted: 02/26/04 - 21:01 Post subject:
|
|
|
Also, ask any gay person if there are other gay folks in their family, and you'll almost always get a "yes".
Why? A gene or genes was probably turned on generations ago. They believe you are only predisposed to becoming gay. Having the gene turned on, obviously, won't make everyone in your family gay.
Much like not everyone in your fam has red hair or is tall, etc.
Soon as people stop thinking we're somehow beyond the animal kingdom, and start understanding how it works, I think they'll be much less apt to be scared of the anomalies that sometimes come out of it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
 |
Pankrat
Can't Stop Posting
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 603
Location: Land of Paranoia
|
|
Posted: 02/26/04 - 21:21 Post subject:
|
|
|
Have read up on it in the past and just did some refesher (love google), and here's the deal. It's all over the place, its still being investigated and like many things in science there is no defintive answer. Political correctness makes pronouncements from science which scientists themselves would never make, and then go on as if it were dogma.
There are studies which show that there is a likely a strong hereditary factor in homosexual orientation, also fetal/hormonal developmental factors, and societal factors. Gay certainly does seem to run in some families, is that genetic or is it behavorial? Violent abuse runs in families as well and is a learned behavior (but aggressive tendencies can be genetic... but not everyone who is aggressive is a violent abuser).
As to animal studies - rats again, it seems the primary decider in rat **** behavior is 100% based on hormones and endocrine gland. This doesn't correlate to human **** behavior because human **** is much more complex and is not governed soley by the endocrine gland.
It's much more complex than "everyone who is gay was born gay". What about bisexuals, or those who become gay later in life. What about identical twins (genetic copies) where one is gay and the other isn't... you get my point.
I'm done here though, really this time =p
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Megalo
Can't Stop Posting
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 682
|
|
Posted: 02/26/04 - 21:29 Post subject:
|
|
|
I used rats as an example because everyone knows what lab rats are!
And yes, just like any theory out there, if it can be disproved by ONE species, then it's just that...a theory.
Fact still remains that given an overcrowded situation, nature will take over and do its best to remedy the problem.
Not unlike evolution if you think about it. Sun blasts your skin too much? We'll up the melanin content of your skin. Overcrowding you say? Well we'll just make sure you don't produce offspring!
I thank you for listening, Pank. I know you're a staunch religious guy, and I admire anyone who will at least look at things objectively from time to time.
Think i'm done posting for the night too.
Also, wanted to apologize to anyone I might have insulted. I'm kinda like a retarded child....i want to help SOOO badly, I'm just not always sure how to go about it. *shrug*
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Spink
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 1599
|
|
Posted: 02/26/04 - 22:29 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Megalo wrote: | MISCONCEPTION: increased disease (STD's and AIDS)
HISPANIC HETERO FEMALES are the fastest growing group contracting HIV/AIDS. Thx census info!
But I will agree with you that anytime you have *2* males in a given equation that contains f*****g, STD's are probably going to rise!
I just don't like the spin you added to it. Like gays are more dirty somehow.
Pank, that's just not true man. You probably don't have a single gay friend, so I feel obligated to clue you in.  |
I've heard of suppositories but I've never heard of pills for the p***y, this to me says that your body is more open to accepting stuff through the pooper such as diseases as well as cures.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/26/04 - 22:34 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Spink wrote: | | Megalo wrote: | MISCONCEPTION: increased disease (STD's and AIDS)
HISPANIC HETERO FEMALES are the fastest growing group contracting HIV/AIDS. Thx census info!
But I will agree with you that anytime you have *2* males in a given equation that contains f*****g, STD's are probably going to rise!
I just don't like the spin you added to it. Like gays are more dirty somehow.
Pank, that's just not true man. You probably don't have a single gay friend, so I feel obligated to clue you in. |
I've heard of suppositories but I've never heard of pills for the p***y, this to me says that your body is more open to accepting stuff through the pooper such as diseases as well as cures. |
I am gonna take a wild guess and say they dont make p***y pills because its vulgar and the ass works just as well if swallowing isnt enough. Its just a matter of getting it into the blood stream.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nuldaan
Sir Postalot
Joined: 07 Nov 2002
Posts: 1179
|
|
Posted: 02/26/04 - 22:46 Post subject:
|
|
|
Wow...this topic really went off on a tangent. As to the original question, I suspect that the gay community is so tightly knit due to feelings of persecution. You can see the same thing in the Jewish community or in virtually any minority group for that matter. When/if homosexuality is eventually accepted as a societal norm, I would suspect that they would just be a part of the community like anyone else.
One thing I always found interesting is the typical stereotype of a gay man. Admittedly, I have met some guys that are WAAAAAYYYYY out there but the majority of gay men I've met are completely normal in every aspect except that they happen to be gay. In my experience, the 'flaming gay man' is a decided minority in the gay community. Although I'm hardly an expert so I could be wrong...
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 00:15 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Nuldaan wrote: | Wow...this topic really went off on a tangent. As to the original question, I suspect that the gay community is so tightly knit due to feelings of persecution. You can see the same thing in the Jewish community or in virtually any minority group for that matter. When/if homosexuality is eventually accepted as a societal norm, I would suspect that they would just be a part of the community like anyone else.
One thing I always found interesting is the typical stereotype of a gay man. Admittedly, I have met some guys that are WAAAAAYYYYY out there but the majority of gay men I've met are completely normal in every aspect except that they happen to be gay. In my experience, the 'flaming gay man' is a decided minority in the gay community. Although I'm hardly an expert so I could be wrong... |
No, you're pretty much right. I've lived/worked in an area with lots of gays my whole life, and the average gay male that I've known is pretty normal. There are some differences that you can usually spot, but otherwise they're normal.
The flaming queens are the ones who get all the attention, so usually that's what you see in the media.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tanaren
Luke Warm
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 210
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 00:39 Post subject:
|
|
|
I think it'll become a lot blander and more commercial, just like every other culture.
But since we're talking about the future, here's another question: If scientists isolated the gay gene(s) and could safely alter them, what would happen to the gay population?
My predictions
US - By that time, gays should be more accepted into culture. So some couples wouldn't. But I still think the majority would make sure their children were straight.
Worldwide - At first, it would only be available to the richer nations. Other nations aren't so tolerant. So once the technology becomes cheaper, I could see them buying mass quantities of a gay "vaccine" and distributing them. They might also get support from religious groups. I'd imagine some terrorist groups would try to put it in the water.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
quotison
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 1594
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 00:45 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tolanin wrote: | | theory is not fact. |
Note that megalo said scientific theory.
In the world of science, you can disprove something, but its very hard to prove something to be true. A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis or a random guess, its something grounded in facts and research. I don't know if what megalo is saying is a scientific theory or not, but I really don't care.
With that said, it is irrelevant what causes people to be gay. Government should protect our rights, not legislate morality. So if two of-age, consenting, males (or females) want to have ****, good for them.
Considering the precedent of allowing the same rights regardless of ****(mostly), a marriage in the civil sense should be defined to two people, regardless of ****.
I don't think gay marriages will impact society that much. I think they should be allowed in a moral sense- everyone should have the same rights. But I don't think it really makes that big of a difference with how the country (especially straight people) lives.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nahualli
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8461
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 00:46 Post subject:
|
|
|
Actually Pankrat, don't even consider me an EQ friend anymore. You've demonstrated that you are nothing more than a common bigot.
I don't associate willingly with bigots, in EQ nor anywhere else.
-Nah-
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lauren000
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3510
Location: colorado springs
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:09 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Pankrat wrote: | Eh you addressed that to the wrong person Goraz =p megalo was disagreeing with me.
Actually, gays getting married would "in theory" decrease AIDS and STD's among gays because then they would only be having **** with their partner right? =p
No, what I was saying that when gay becomes completed accepted by society (which is really what this is all about anyway), it will have the effect of making **** morals irrelevant (but they almost are anyway), so that there will be large increases in the newer generation identifying as bi-****, and mainly just very ****.
Lots of promiscuity, etc, leads to... STD's and pregnancy ( in the case of hetero ****) not to mention the emotional damage it can do to people.
People do what society says is acceptable. You can already see this in action, following the Brittney and Madonna kiss on MTV, middle schools all over the country reproted a pandemic of 10-13 yr old girls saying they are "bi" and making out with other girls.
As to the gay is genetic argument, geez that's a whole other can of worms.
There can certainly be a genetic component to who turns gay and who doesn't but this is undoubtedly majorly influenced by environmental factors and NO ONE fully understands how it works.
The only 100% genetically hard wired "gays" are those who are truly genetically cross gendered, aka XXY chromosone's aka Lauren (if this is the case for him/her). And they apparently can identify with one **** or the other more strongly and go either way.
The percentage of people born like that is like 1 in 100,000 or maybe even 1 in 1 million. The percentage of gays in the population is about 2%. |
I know some very permiscuis gay youth. I also know a lot of gay youth who are virgins. I know some very permiscuis heterosexual youth. I know some heterosexual youth who are virgins. Even if being homosexual has no stigma attached to it, being a w***e aka having **** with multiple partners is still going to be undesirable. The occurence of intersexed babies is about 1 in 2000 with ambigious genitals and roughly 1 in 500 natal 'males' will have klinefelter's (xxy). I don't have the statistics for adrenal gland hyperplasia off the top of my head, but it happens about as often as klinefelter's.
If you read some homosexual studies there is a strong link between population density and homosexuality. Obviously people adapt to the over populated regions by becoming homosexual. If being homosexual was just some undesirable birth defect (if you believe in evolution) it should have been bred off now by natural selection. You can actually cause homosexuality in apes if you give them certain antidepressants. Prozac will cause apes that aren't predisposed to being an alpha male to become an alpha male. Other medications than antagonize serotonin cause apes to be more submissive. Interesting literature if you like it.
The thread question was pertaining to 'gay people being more interesting'. Yes and no, once anything becomes more 'normal' it starts to lose that new almost trendy feeling to it. It's sad that prepubescent girls think being bi is 'cool' and a choice rather than just the way it is. But hey what can you do. Being gay has a hype around it atm that isn't all that great. Most gay people are like everyone else and just blend in, and the rest are still afraid of getting beat up so they keep to themselves and stfu. It'll be nice when gay people aren't afraid of being beat up anymore, and it'll be nice when gay people stop acting like they're something special.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:13 Post subject:
|
|
|
| quotison wrote: | | Tolanin wrote: | | theory is not fact. |
Note that megalo said scientific theory.
In the world of science, you can disprove something, but its very hard to prove something to be true. A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis or a random guess, its something grounded in facts and research. I don't know if what megalo is saying is a scientific theory or not, but I really don't care.
With that said, it is irrelevant what causes people to be gay. Government should protect our rights, not legislate morality. So if two of-age, consenting, males (or females) want to have ****, good for them.
Considering the precedent of allowing the same rights regardless of ****(mostly), a marriage in the civil sense should be defined to two people, regardless of ****.
I don't think gay marriages will impact society that much. I think they should be allowed in a moral sense- everyone should have the same rights. But I don't think it really makes that big of a difference with how the country (especially straight people) lives. |
govt can suport your rights as much as they want, if gays want civilunions with every f*****g benefit of marriage i am fine with that, i just dont want them to have the name. To me thats all this is about. Mariage is limited between a man and a woman and has been forever, but i really dont see anything that wrong with being gay so civil unions are imo fine.
And maybe a part of the amendment would make marriage between a man and a woman, and prohibit any sort of union between more than 2 people or non-humans, then give gays civil unions w/ rights respected in all states. This is an amendment that NEEDS to be passed, these judges are still a sign of letting the door open to doing whatever the f**k you want and if gays are let in that door then it needs to be slammed shut and bricked up right after.
Honestly I dont like to think of myself as rascist and until some other conservative can tell me why being gay is wrong ill stick to this line, I see it as a genetic flaw yes but its not dangerous afaict. I will however never until i die and they nail my coffin shut be for gay marriage.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lauren000
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3510
Location: colorado springs
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:17 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tolanin wrote: | | quotison wrote: | | Tolanin wrote: | | theory is not fact. |
Note that megalo said scientific theory.
In the world of science, you can disprove something, but its very hard to prove something to be true. A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis or a random guess, its something grounded in facts and research. I don't know if what megalo is saying is a scientific theory or not, but I really don't care.
With that said, it is irrelevant what causes people to be gay. Government should protect our rights, not legislate morality. So if two of-age, consenting, males (or females) want to have ****, good for them.
Considering the precedent of allowing the same rights regardless of ****(mostly), a marriage in the civil sense should be defined to two people, regardless of ****.
I don't think gay marriages will impact society that much. I think they should be allowed in a moral sense- everyone should have the same rights. But I don't think it really makes that big of a difference with how the country (especially straight people) lives. |
govt can suport your rights as much as they want, if gays want civilunions with every f*****g benefit of marriage i am fine with that, i just dont want them to have the name. To me thats all this is about. Mariage is limited between a man and a woman and has been forever, but i really dont see anything that wrong with being gay so civil unions are imo fine.
And maybe a part of the amendment would make marriage between a man and a woman, and prohibit any sort of union between more than 2 people or non-humans, then give gays civil unions w/ rights respected in all states. This is an amendment that NEEDS to be passed, these judges are still a sign of letting the door open to doing whatever the f**k you want and if gays are let in that door then it needs to be slammed shut and bricked up right after.
Honestly I dont like to think of myself as rascist and until some other conservative can tell me why being gay is wrong ill stick to this line, I see it as a genetic flaw yes but its not dangerous afaict. I will however never until i die and they nail my coffin shut be for gay marriage. |
I don't think bush shares your same ideas about a civil union or he'd just say civil union- no marriage and be done with it.
Heterosexual means 2 people of opposite ****.
Homosexual means 2 people of the same ****.
So let marriage be the union of 2 people of the opposite ****.
And let civil union be the union of 2 people of the same ****.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
kireol
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 9517
Location: Royal Oak, MI
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Nahualli wrote: | Actually Pankrat, don't even consider me an EQ friend anymore. You've demonstrated that you are nothing more than a common bigot.
I don't associate willingly with bigots, in EQ nor anywhere else.
-Nah- |
maybe before you go throwing around words like bigot, you should look them up and see what they mean.
No where was he intollerant to anyone outside of his own group, religion, race, or politics or partial to his own.
stupid f*****g f****t
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| lauren000 wrote: | | Pankrat wrote: | Eh you addressed that to the wrong person Goraz =p megalo was disagreeing with me.
Actually, gays getting married would "in theory" decrease AIDS and STD's among gays because then they would only be having **** with their partner right? =p
No, what I was saying that when gay becomes completed accepted by society (which is really what this is all about anyway), it will have the effect of making **** morals irrelevant (but they almost are anyway), so that there will be large increases in the newer generation identifying as bi-****, and mainly just very ****.
Lots of promiscuity, etc, leads to... STD's and pregnancy ( in the case of hetero ****) not to mention the emotional damage it can do to people.
People do what society says is acceptable. You can already see this in action, following the Brittney and Madonna kiss on MTV, middle schools all over the country reproted a pandemic of 10-13 yr old girls saying they are "bi" and making out with other girls.
As to the gay is genetic argument, geez that's a whole other can of worms.
There can certainly be a genetic component to who turns gay and who doesn't but this is undoubtedly majorly influenced by environmental factors and NO ONE fully understands how it works.
The only 100% genetically hard wired "gays" are those who are truly genetically cross gendered, aka XXY chromosone's aka Lauren (if this is the case for him/her). And they apparently can identify with one **** or the other more strongly and go either way.
The percentage of people born like that is like 1 in 100,000 or maybe even 1 in 1 million. The percentage of gays in the population is about 2%. |
I know some very permiscuis gay youth. I also know a lot of gay youth who are virgins. I know some very permiscuis heterosexual youth. I know some heterosexual youth who are virgins. Even if being homosexual has no stigma attached to it, being a w***e aka having **** with multiple partners is still going to be undesirable. The occurence of intersexed babies is about 1 in 2000 with ambigious genitals and roughly 1 in 500 natal 'males' will have klinefelter's (xxy). I don't have the statistics for adrenal gland hyperplasia off the top of my head, but it happens about as often as klinefelter's.
If you read some homosexual studies there is a strong link between population density and homosexuality. Obviously people adapt to the over populated regions by becoming homosexual. If being homosexual was just some undesirable birth defect (if you believe in evolution) it should have been bred off now by natural selection. You can actually cause homosexuality in apes if you give them certain antidepressants. Prozac will cause apes that aren't predisposed to being an alpha male to become an alpha male. Other medications than antagonize serotonin cause apes to be more submissive. Interesting literature if you like it.
The thread question was pertaining to 'gay people being more interesting'. Yes and no, once anything becomes more 'normal' it starts to lose that new almost trendy feeling to it. It's sad that prepubescent girls think being bi is 'cool' and a choice rather than just the way it is. But hey what can you do. Being gay has a hype around it atm that isn't all that great. Most gay people are like everyone else and just blend in, and the rest are still afraid of getting beat up so they keep to themselves and stfu. It'll be nice when gay people aren't afraid of being beat up anymore, and it'll be nice when gay people stop acting like they're something special. |
on the genetics side of things its very interesting, whether being gay is something subconcious thats decided by the person after viewing the population around them after birth would be feasible to me. But if they are born gay on the genetic level then its very very interesting, it would imply that our genes have some sort of intelligence, they can tell using the host (mother or father) observations how populated a region is and create homosexuals if needed. I dont think theres many other factors it could be based on, a lack of food maybe would cause the change but i dont think that would be right either since most americans are well fed and still we have gays. Very interesting if you ask me. I dont see any other way it could be done unless the hosts observation somehow causes a different model egg or sperm cell to be produced.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
kireol
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 02 Aug 2003
Posts: 9517
Location: Royal Oak, MI
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:22 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
and for why there are more gays where populations get larger, I'm sure it has more to do with people seeing other gays and feeling ok to come out of the closet to be with their own than it has to do with anything else.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Pankrat
Can't Stop Posting
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 603
Location: Land of Paranoia
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:23 Post subject:
|
|
|
Took an EQ break, well thanks for clearing up the stats on the cross gendered Lauren... you obviously know a lot more about it than I do.
Sorry you feel that way Nah, I personally don't believe I'm a bigot, but can't change if you think I am, but I'll definetely give it some thought.
I respect you for being a decent person, being charismatic and fun, having a good sense of humor, having a sense of fairness, and usually being willing to debate issues on their merits.
From my religious side I believe that the gay lifestyle is sinful, but then I believe that everyone is a sinner, including myself. If in your opinion, that makes me a bigot... 
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:24 Post subject:
|
|
|
| lauren000 wrote: | | Tolanin wrote: | | quotison wrote: | | Tolanin wrote: | | theory is not fact. |
Note that megalo said scientific theory.
In the world of science, you can disprove something, but its very hard to prove something to be true. A scientific theory isn't a hypothesis or a random guess, its something grounded in facts and research. I don't know if what megalo is saying is a scientific theory or not, but I really don't care.
With that said, it is irrelevant what causes people to be gay. Government should protect our rights, not legislate morality. So if two of-age, consenting, males (or females) want to have ****, good for them.
Considering the precedent of allowing the same rights regardless of ****(mostly), a marriage in the civil sense should be defined to two people, regardless of ****.
I don't think gay marriages will impact society that much. I think they should be allowed in a moral sense- everyone should have the same rights. But I don't think it really makes that big of a difference with how the country (especially straight people) lives. |
govt can suport your rights as much as they want, if gays want civilunions with every f*****g benefit of marriage i am fine with that, i just dont want them to have the name. To me thats all this is about. Mariage is limited between a man and a woman and has been forever, but i really dont see anything that wrong with being gay so civil unions are imo fine.
And maybe a part of the amendment would make marriage between a man and a woman, and prohibit any sort of union between more than 2 people or non-humans, then give gays civil unions w/ rights respected in all states. This is an amendment that NEEDS to be passed, these judges are still a sign of letting the door open to doing whatever the f**k you want and if gays are let in that door then it needs to be slammed shut and bricked up right after.
Honestly I dont like to think of myself as rascist and until some other conservative can tell me why being gay is wrong ill stick to this line, I see it as a genetic flaw yes but its not dangerous afaict. I will however never until i die and they nail my coffin shut be for gay marriage. |
I don't think bush shares your same ideas about a civil union or he'd just say civil union- no marriage and be done with it.
Heterosexual means 2 people of opposite ****.
Homosexual means 2 people of the same ****.
So let marriage be the union of 2 people of the opposite ****.
And let civil union be the union of 2 people of the same ****. |
on bushs side its a bid for conservative suport, I think so far he has been an ok president and his policy is decent, but every new thing he does its like when I here it I am looking and waiting for him to trip and fall on his face (or let the country fall on its face) When i think of bush policy I think of someone stumbling along more and more, so far i think we have been ok but its only a matter of time =/ I am more and more a wavering republican =/
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:27 Post subject:
|
|
|
| kireol wrote: | | and for why there are more gays where populations get larger, I'm sure it has more to do with people seeing other gays and feeling ok to come out of the closet to be with their own than it has to do with anything else. |
but on the animal side of things do you think that apes feel that they can come out of the closet when there are more homosexual apes ;p. Generally speaking what applies to animals applies to humans in the evolutionary defense mechanism category. So if in high pop density animals start to go gay its gotta be more than just feeling comfortable.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Pankrat
Can't Stop Posting
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 603
Location: Land of Paranoia
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:37 Post subject:
|
|
|
Read some stuff on environment affecting gene sequences - I think it goes something like this. There are certain environmental cues that if persistent can cause certain gene sequences to turn on or off. All that "junk" DNA you used to hear about apparently isn't so junky. Some genes are expressed, and some are suppressed, there are genetic markers which tell which sequences to run and which to leave dormant.
They have found that extended exposure to certain environmental conditions can cause dormant genes to be "switched" on. Note, this isn't genetic mutation, it's a preprogrammed sequence that allows a species great versatility in adaptation. The sequence of on and off genes is then heritable to the offspring, so the condition of the DNA gets passed along.
This is what happens when a domestic pig goes feral and becomes a wild boar, the boar then has boar offspring. If the offspring is captured and domesticated, the pig can revert to a "normal" domestic pig, who will then have domestic offspring.
Hope that was informational to someone at least =p
Does this play a role in animal "homosexuality" in response to overpopulation, I don't know... maybe, maybe not.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Tolanin
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 16 Oct 2002
Posts: 3551
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:40 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Pankrat wrote: | Read some stuff on environment affecting gene sequences - I think it goes something like this. There are certain environmental cues that if persistent can cause certain gene sequences to turn on or off. All that "junk" DNA you used to hear about apparently isn't so junky. Some genes are expressed, and some are suppressed, there are genetic markers which tell which sequences to run and which to leave dormant.
They have found that extended exposure to certain environmental conditions can cause dormant genes to be "switched" on. Note, this isn't genetic mutation, it's a preprogrammed sequence that allows a species great versatility in adaptation. The sequence of on and off genes is then heritable to the offspring, so the condition of the DNA gets passed along.
This is what happens when a domestic pig goes feral and becomes a wild boar, the boar then has boar offspring. If the offspring is captured and domesticated, the pig can revert to a "normal" domestic pig, who will then have domestic offspring.
Hope that was informational to someone at least =p
Does this play a role in animal "homosexuality" in response to overpopulation, I don't know... maybe, maybe not. |
interesting, but i only really care about the gene that makes me get old an die, they need to find and fix that one.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
lauren000
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3510
Location: colorado springs
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 01:53 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tolanin wrote: |
on bushs side its a bid for conservative suport, I think so far he has been an ok president and his policy is decent, but every new thing he does its like when I here it I am looking and waiting for him to trip and fall on his face (or let the country fall on its face) When i think of bush policy I think of someone stumbling along more and more, so far i think we have been ok but its only a matter of time =/ I am more and more a wavering republican =/ |
I'd be a republican if they stopped hating on gays.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
quotison
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 13 Oct 2002
Posts: 1594
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 02:19 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Tolanin wrote: | | And maybe a part of the amendment would make marriage between a man and a woman, and prohibit any sort of union between more than 2 people or non-humans, then give gays civil unions w/ rights respected in all states. This is an amendment that NEEDS to be passed, these judges are still a sign of letting the door open to doing whatever the f**k you want and if gays are let in that door then it needs to be slammed shut and bricked up right after. |
Unfortunately, while Bush feels its a federal duty to ban gay marriages nation wide, its perfectly okay to leave civil unions up to the states...
If you want civil unions to be equal to marriage, then you must have every state allow them (I think its been noted one issue with civil unions is that it doesn't apply in other states).
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Nahualli
RealPoor Master of Posts
Joined: 11 Oct 2002
Posts: 8461
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 04:17 Post subject:
|
|
|
| kireol wrote: | No where was he intollerant to anyone outside of his own group, religion, race, or politics or partial to his own.
|
Actually I think he was being most of those things.
-Nah-
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Valhal
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 778
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 04:52 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
I support gay marriages because Christians oppose it.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Valhal
Toomuchtimeonhands
Joined: 15 Oct 2002
Posts: 778
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 04:56 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
All in all why the hell are humans so concerned with controlling the lives of other humans - when those lives don't affect their own, in reality..
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Guest
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 05:06 Post subject:
|
|
|
What happens to gay society if gay marriage is legalized?
hey I can answer this
NOTHING
The ones who would be married now are already living together anyway.
Shrug they are the minority of minorities.
And news flash they LIKE d**k...Never letting em marry isnt gonna make em straight ever.
If they are good citizens, let em marry who gives a shit.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Yellow Journalist
RealPoor Sensei
Joined: 20 Oct 2002
Posts: 1973
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 05:24 Post subject:
|
|
|
hi
Last edited by Yellow Journalist on 04/01/04 - 01:21; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Silvermouse
RealPoor Jedi
Joined: 12 Oct 2002
Posts: 11015
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 21:31 Post subject:
|
|
|
|
It's funny. They are trying to amend the Constitution to ban gays from getting married, but I'd rather see an amendment that forces priests to be screened before they are "let loose" upon our children.
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
Docter
RealPoor Guru
Joined: 21 Oct 2002
Posts: 3420
|
|
Posted: 02/27/04 - 21:32 Post subject:
|
|
|
| Silvermouse wrote: | | It's funny. They are trying to amend the Constitution to ban gays from getting married, but I'd rather see an amendment that forces priests to be screened before they are "let loose" upon our children. |
I'll 2nd that!!!
One other thing...is the priest scandals only centered on the US or also in other countries...if only in the US...why???
|
|
|
Back to top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
