NATION

PASSWORD

Are homosexuals really born that way?

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Is there a gay gene?

Yes
218
33%
No
231
35%
More study is needed to determine
209
32%
 
Total votes : 658

User avatar
Mirage
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 445
Founded: May 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Mirage » Wed May 15, 2013 2:37 pm

Neutraligon wrote:There has to be a reason you believe it is a choice. Back up your belief. You might not be ruling out anything, but you made the claim you think it has a specific cause, now explain with evidence why you think it does.


As for the reason, out of all the possibilities, choice sounds much more of a possibility to me. That is all.

As for evidence to having a cause, i fail to see how "cause and effect" is not applicable here.

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40513
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Wed May 15, 2013 2:38 pm

Mirage wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:There has to be a reason you believe it is a choice. Back up your belief. You might not be ruling out anything, but you made the claim you think it has a specific cause, now explain with evidence why you think it does.


As for the reason, out of all the possibilities, choice sounds much more of a possibility to me. That is all.

As for evidence to having a cause, i fail to see how "cause and effect" is not applicable here.


Neither of those is evidence beyond I think it is so because it makes sense to me. What do you mean cause and affect? Why do you think it is much more of a possibility?
Last edited by Neutraligon on Wed May 15, 2013 2:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Wed May 15, 2013 2:38 pm

Mirage wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:Yes you are. You admitted yourself, you refuse to even read the sources you have been provided with.


No i am not, i even stated it clearly.

And as i said, i did read those sources.

But whatever...


No, you said that you skimmed the sources.

If you read them, then argue against their evidence with your own evidence.

If not, then don't claim that you did.

Either way, the burden of proof is now on you to prove that it is a choice, especially since that flies in the face of all modern scientific research into the topic. So link your evidence. Not just "This is what I believe", but explain why you believe it despite your belief contradicting every single major study regarding homosexuality, and additionally going against the statements of every major American medical organization. Where are your links to peer-reviewed studies, to papers, to evidence? Show us!

User avatar
Mirage
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 445
Founded: May 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Mirage » Wed May 15, 2013 2:39 pm

Mavorpen wrote:You should quit it with this persistent lying habit of yours.


Skimming :

4. To read or glance through (a book, for example) quickly or superficially

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/skimmed+over

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed May 15, 2013 2:39 pm

Mirage wrote:As for the reason, out of all the possibilities, choice sounds much more of a possibility to me. That is all.

So basically, when presented with evidence, you put your fingers into your ear screaming, 'LALALALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Nadkor
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12114
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Nadkor » Wed May 15, 2013 2:39 pm

Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Nadkor wrote:
Right enough, you're the Irish-born American wheelchair-bound Iraq vet in his late 20's/early 30s with several degrees (medicine, linguistics, and history, no? Or was one of them counter-terrorism?), a wife, and a couple of girlfriends, and who has delivered two babies, can dead-lift 250kg, who speaks seven languages fluently, and who, despite having no legs, paints his toenails?


Don't forget being born simultaneously in NI to RoI hating parents fleeing to abort him and also in the republic. It's a miracle.


Born in both Derry and Shannon, 175 miles apart, wasn't it?
economic left/right: -7.38, social libertarian/authoritarian: -7.59
thekidswhopoptodaywillrocktomorrow

I think we need more post-coital and less post-rock
Feels like the build-up takes forever but you never get me off

User avatar
The Emerald Dawn
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 20824
Founded: Jun 11, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby The Emerald Dawn » Wed May 15, 2013 2:40 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Mirage wrote:As for the reason, out of all the possibilities, choice sounds much more of a possibility to me. That is all.

So basically, when presented with evidence, you put your fingers into your ear screaming, 'LALALALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"

Why are you quoting the definition of Conservativism?
Last edited by The Emerald Dawn on Wed May 15, 2013 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Ovisterra
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16017
Founded: Jul 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ovisterra » Wed May 15, 2013 2:40 pm

Mirage wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:You should quit it with this persistent lying habit of yours.


Skimming :

4. To read or glance through (a book, for example) quickly or superficially

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/skimmed+over


I think he's alluding that you didn't skim either.
Removing the text from people's sigs doesn't make it any less true. I stand with Yalta.

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed May 15, 2013 2:41 pm

Mirage wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:You should quit it with this persistent lying habit of yours.


Skimming :

4. To read or glance through (a book, for example) quickly or superficially

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/skimmed+over

You said you claimed that you read it. Don't backpedal.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40513
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Wed May 15, 2013 2:41 pm

Nadkor wrote:
Fionnuala_Saoirse wrote:
Don't forget being born simultaneously in NI to RoI hating parents fleeing to abort him and also in the republic. It's a miracle.


Born in both Derry and Shannon, 175 miles apart, wasn't it?


Nadkor enough please. There is no reason to keep doing this.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Azaflaza
Senator
 
Posts: 4862
Founded: Jun 13, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Azaflaza » Wed May 15, 2013 2:41 pm

People seriously ......yolo

User avatar
Neutraligon
Game Moderator
 
Posts: 40513
Founded: Oct 01, 2011
New York Times Democracy

Postby Neutraligon » Wed May 15, 2013 2:42 pm

Azaflaza wrote:People seriously ......yolo


That's nice, your point?
Last edited by Neutraligon on Wed May 15, 2013 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.
If you want to call me by a nickname, call me Gon...or NS Batman.
Mod stuff: One Stop Rules Shop | Reppy's Sig Workshop | Getting Help Request
Just A Little though

User avatar
Ovisterra
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16017
Founded: Jul 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ovisterra » Wed May 15, 2013 2:42 pm

Azaflaza wrote:People seriously ......yolo


Exactly, and I'm damned if I'm going to sit here and let people be ignorant for the next 70 years.
Removing the text from people's sigs doesn't make it any less true. I stand with Yalta.

User avatar
Blekksprutia
Negotiator
 
Posts: 5957
Founded: Mar 21, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Blekksprutia » Wed May 15, 2013 2:42 pm

Probably not. More scientific research needed. I know some gay people who have no other gay people in their family, and vice versa.
KILLUGON and BERNIE SANDERS and my moirail, ERIDEL.
Founder of Kotturheim, home to my GAY POLECATS, who are TOO FABULOUS FOR YOU.
Arg: Blekk does that. The topics of same sex marriage and the human race's fight against idiocy motivate him to write some truly impressive and glorious rants that deserve to be remembered and sigged.
Zott: I see our Blekky has discovered the joys of amphetamines.
Horus: blekky you are blekky i am horus
Rio: Blekky you are the best person on this website. Figuratively, kiss me.
Blekky is like a bunny. He looks adorable, yet he might bite you till it hurts.
Veccy: you're the worst blekky
The Balkens: Blekk does that, he has been taught by NSG's greatest practitioners of Snark to Snark combat.
Napki: Marry me, Blekk
Aeq: Blekk, you are Jesus!!!

User avatar
Mirage
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 445
Founded: May 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Mirage » Wed May 15, 2013 2:43 pm

Neutraligon wrote:Neither of those is evidence beyond I think it is so because it makes sense to me. What do you mean cause and affect? Why do you think it is much more of a possibility?


You asked for reason to why i believe what i believe, not prove something. I am not presenting a it as a fact to provide proofs.

Cause and effect as it needs to have a specific cause.

Because that is my opinion or belief on the subject and regardless, it is still a possibility as it has not been rules out conclusively yet.

Mavorpen wrote:
Mirage wrote:As for the reason, out of all the possibilities, choice sounds much more of a possibility to me. That is all.

So basically, when presented with evidence, you put your fingers into your ear screaming, 'LALALALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"


One has to present an evidence first. (Don't bother with quoting yourself again)

User avatar
Ovisterra
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16017
Founded: Jul 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ovisterra » Wed May 15, 2013 2:44 pm

Mirage wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:Neither of those is evidence beyond I think it is so because it makes sense to me. What do you mean cause and affect? Why do you think it is much more of a possibility?


You asked for reason to why i believe what i believe, not prove something. I am not presenting a it as a fact to provide proofs.

Cause and effect as it needs to have a specific cause.

Because that is my opinion or belief on the subject and regardless, it is still a possibility as it has not been rules out conclusively yet.


So you believe things without proof. So you admit you are wildly illogical and believe fairy tales.

Mavorpen wrote:So basically, when presented with evidence, you put your fingers into your ear screaming, 'LALALALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"


One has to present an evidence first. (Don't bother with quoting yourself again)


So you admit he did present evidence.
Removing the text from people's sigs doesn't make it any less true. I stand with Yalta.

User avatar
Mirage
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 445
Founded: May 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Mirage » Wed May 15, 2013 2:44 pm

Mavorpen wrote:
Mirage wrote:
Skimming :

4. To read or glance through (a book, for example) quickly or superficially

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/skimmed+over

You said you claimed that you read it. Don't backpedal.


Skimming is reading!!!

User avatar
Nadkor
Postmaster-General
 
Posts: 12114
Founded: Jan 22, 2004
Ex-Nation

Postby Nadkor » Wed May 15, 2013 2:44 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
Nadkor wrote:
Born in both Derry and Shannon, 175 miles apart, wasn't it?


Nadkor enough please. There is no reason to keep doing this.


I just find it all very interesting.
economic left/right: -7.38, social libertarian/authoritarian: -7.59
thekidswhopoptodaywillrocktomorrow

I think we need more post-coital and less post-rock
Feels like the build-up takes forever but you never get me off

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed May 15, 2013 2:44 pm

Mirage wrote:One has to present an evidence first. (Don't bother with quoting yourself again)

I love how you ADMIT that I've presented evidence, while claiming that I haven't.

And you seriously expect me to believe that you read them?
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Yumyumsuppertime
Retired Moderator
 
Posts: 28799
Founded: Jun 21, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Yumyumsuppertime » Wed May 15, 2013 2:44 pm

Mirage wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:Neither of those is evidence beyond I think it is so because it makes sense to me. What do you mean cause and affect? Why do you think it is much more of a possibility?


You asked for reason to why i believe what i believe, not prove something. I am not presenting a it as a fact to provide proofs.

Cause and effect as it needs to have a specific cause.

Because that is my opinion or belief on the subject and regardless, it is still a possibility as it has not been rules out conclusively yet.

Mavorpen wrote:So basically, when presented with evidence, you put your fingers into your ear screaming, 'LALALALALALALALA CAN'T HEAR YOU!"


One has to present an evidence first. (Don't bother with quoting yourself again)



The evidence has been presented.

You skimmed it, remember?

The fact that you couldn't be bothered to read it in any detail doesn't mean that it wasn't presented.

User avatar
Azaflaza
Senator
 
Posts: 4862
Founded: Jun 13, 2012
Ex-Nation

Postby Azaflaza » Wed May 15, 2013 2:45 pm

Neutraligon wrote:
Azaflaza wrote:People seriously ......yolo


That's nice, your point?

Just live your life doing stuff you care about and want to do and forget everyone else...

User avatar
Mavorpen
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 63266
Founded: Dec 20, 2011
Ex-Nation

Postby Mavorpen » Wed May 15, 2013 2:45 pm

Mirage wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:You said you claimed that you read it. Don't backpedal.


Skimming is reading!!!

Which isn't what you said. You stated that you SAID that you read it. You didn't. You said that you skimmed it. The two words aren't synonymous and they represent two different meanings.
"The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I'm saying? We knew we couldn't make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders. raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did."—former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman

User avatar
Ovisterra
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 16017
Founded: Jul 17, 2010
Ex-Nation

Postby Ovisterra » Wed May 15, 2013 2:45 pm

Azaflaza wrote:
Neutraligon wrote:
That's nice, your point?

Just live your life doing stuff you care about and want to do and forget everyone else...


Other people play a big part in my life. I can't ignore them.
Removing the text from people's sigs doesn't make it any less true. I stand with Yalta.

User avatar
Norstal
Post Czar
 
Posts: 41465
Founded: Mar 07, 2008
Ex-Nation

Postby Norstal » Wed May 15, 2013 2:46 pm

Mirage wrote:
Mavorpen wrote:You said you claimed that you read it. Don't backpedal.


Skimming is reading!!!

Ok. I'll skim your posts from now on.
Toronto Sun wrote:Best poster ever. ★★★★★


New York Times wrote:No one can beat him in debates. 5/5.


IGN wrote:Literally the best game I've ever played. 10/10


NSG Public wrote:What a fucking douchebag.



Supreme Chairman for Life of the Itty Bitty Kitty Committee

User avatar
Mirage
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 445
Founded: May 08, 2013
Ex-Nation

Postby Mirage » Wed May 15, 2013 2:46 pm

Ovisterra wrote:So you believe things without proof. So you admit you are wildly illogical and believe fairy tales.

So you admit he did present evidence.


On the contrary :

1) I don't believe things without proof.
2) I said he didn't present any.


Mavorpen wrote:
Mirage wrote:One has to present an evidence first. (Don't bother with quoting yourself again)

I love how you ADMIT that I've presented evidence, while claiming that I haven't.

And you seriously expect me to believe that you read them?


I love how you try to put words in my mouth. I said you didn't present any evidence as your sources are not evidence.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: American Legionaries, Atrito, Cannot think of a name, Des-Bal, El Lazaro, Fartsniffage, Juansonia, Ortodoxo, Perchan, Port Caverton, Stellar Colonies, Trump Almighty, Tur Monkadzii

Advertisement

Remove ads