School Expels Girl for Having Gay Parents

[DGB454]

Originally Posted by L98Driver

FIRST OFF GAY PEOPLE ARE BORN THE WAY THEY ARE, it is not their fault if they are gay or lesbian,

I am open to look at the proof of that. I am also willing to change my belief when shown that positive proof.

So really there is nothing to be against, they are people to, and should have the same rights that straight couples do.

I agree they should have the same rights as anyone else in our society. They should be able to marry and get the same tax breaks and health benifits as everyone else. That being said...The Christian school also has rights to set up admission rules.

there are different interpretations of the bible on whether or not homosexuality is actually wrong for info on that visit www.religioustolerance.org/homosexu.htm , i have friends who are gay or lesbian and would defend them in a heartbeat, the guy who runs that school is a stupid conservative bush luving redneck prejudice pos of a person using his religion to justify his hatred of a certain group of people, i have no patience with folks like that

Sounds like you have a lot of hate issues yourself.

[DGB454]

Originally Posted by twospirits

I guess thats directed to me. Granted when I said "Christian Teachings" I should have said "Religious Teachings", I should not have singled out just one only. My Bad. Now don't get me wrong Tim, I think its wrong they expelled the kid,

How was it wrong to enforce the rules they set up?

I am a advocate for gay rights. What one does in the privacy of their home or the lifestyle should not not matter.

Completely agree

But, you cannot deny the fact that most (major) religions and their offshoots dislike the gay lifestyle since they interpret their religious scrolls/books as saying so. To me religion divides more than unites. Shoot, when followers of the religious texts take the following to heart.. Leviticus 18:22

Is it the job of religions to unite? No...Their job is to seperate.(chaff from wheat comes to mind) They seperate themselves from the people that don't believe as they do and set up places of worship and teachings. "For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness?", "Wherefore come out from among them, be ye separate, saith the Lord, " (2Cor.6:17-18)

It's only when they go back into the world that their role changes. Their job then is to bring people into their fold. In doing so these people are expected to follow their doctrine. If that doctrine does not suit them they can change religions till they find one that fits their beliefs.

I agree. Noone is trying to change the school or how it operates. Thats up to them to realize their injustices and correct themselves. We (or I) are just pointing out that in our view its wrong what they did and in our view its stup id.

"In our view" Thank you for that.

As for.. As stated above, alot of religious people take the sayings in their religous texts as the word of God and interpret it to their own fears, misconceptions and predejuices (sp). One of these interpretations is on homosexuality. This is not to say that all Christians, Catholics, Muslims etc are are like that, but (I've seen recently) alot do have that frame of mind since they have been brought up with such teachings and society as a whole consider many things taboo. Lately there has been word going around in the internet and media as well as a few here in AF that what happened with New Orleans is because God considers New Orleans as sinful in general with its annual Mardi Gras and Southern Decadence events and wiping it out like Sodom and Gomorrah. Its thoughts and comments like that (by a Christian I might add) tend to continue to divide folks rather than bringing them together.

I don't know anything about the whole New Orleans thing nor do I care.
As I stated earlier. It's not our jod to bring people together.

Later.

[Flatrater]

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

You talk about these "freedoms", yet you would restrict tax-paying citizens the right to pay for the best education possible. What if that is the best school in their town?

First you have to know when we enter any learning institution we check our freedoms at the door. Our children give up several rights when enrolled in a school. I dislike what happened to this child but in the end it would of been harder on her staying in that school. We are guaranteed a education in America, that is our right. That is why we have public schools but enter a private school you have to abide by their rules. What made this school the best one? What about one town over?

A local school district near me has a policy that states any child caught drinking beer will be expelled. It doesn't matter if it happens on school grounds or not. It doesn't matter if this takes place during the summer break. The children get expelled. This has been held up by the courts several times now. BTw this explusion comes after the court system is done with them. They pay for one crime 2 times and it's legal. FYI this is a public school.

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

You'd restrict the kid's freedom to learn because some people can't separate education from religion?

The child's right to an education isn't restricted. BTW the next statement you make made me laugh. We are talking about a religious school and you want them to seperate religion from education. Isn't the school system based on religion?

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

The two examples of tax-free organizations you gave might have some form of discrimination involved in each, but they also do not charge thousands of dollars per three months or so (semester).

I agree the 2 examples I gave charge nothing but how about Morehouse College in Altanta Georgia? BTW the college charges more than this school in question.

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

Religious insitutions, and your examples are tax-exempt for a reason: they are non-profit. You REALLY think private, religious schools do not make some kind of profit?

Tax exempt schools are required by law not to make a profit. All money taken in is spent and if any money is left over most places can be creative on how to spent the money.

Originally Posted by carrrnuttt

Speaking of admission. Did they not talk to the parents of the child before they admitted her? Or did they just want that large enrollment fee that I'm sure they charge?

My son for one year was in a private school run by the church in town. Yes I also paid the large tution bill that went with that. I never set one foot into the school beofre my child started in it. It wasn't till 10 weeks into school that I finally showed up in the school. It's not required for both parents to be in school to enroll a child. But the school did supply a nice book of rules to follow.

[Flatrater]

Just because we may disagree on the rule being enforced by this school doesn't mean they don't have the right to determine their own direction and purpose. They are allowed to make any rule that they want to.

No where in our laws does it say that we are given the right to attend the best school. Our only right is to a free education.

Now what if I opened up a school for only homosexual kids or kids of homosexual parents. I would deny admission of non gay kids and parents. After several years the school I opened became the best school in the county. Now the non gay kids wanted in after I established the school with a set rule. One child managed to get in claiming he was gay and I later found out he wasn't gay and expelled him. Would you guys be complaining the same way this time too?

I think some of you guys see gay and right away jump on the discrmination band wagon even tho it has nothing to do with discrimination.

Before you jump on me claiming I am a gay hater or gay basher know that I work for a gay woman and I have gay relatives. Know that I have an excellent relationship with my boss. Being gay has nothing to do with how I treat anyone.

[L98Driver]

DGB454, omfg, you are asking me for proof that gay people are born the way they are, doesn't everyone know that, i mean my god, how damn ignorant can you be, i'm laughing so hard right now at ur stupidity, i mean i've talked to dumb ppl, but this is ridiculous, my friends dog is gay, if you want proof that gay people are born the way they are here is a timeline, u may research it further if you like: 1899 Germany's pioneering researcher Magnus Hirschfeld writes that being gay or lesbian is biologically determined, 1991 a study of twins reveals that genes and biology are markers for homosexuality researchers find that 52% of identical twin brothers of gay men were also gay, compared with just 22% of fraternal twins and just 11% of adoptive brothers, 1991 Simon LeVay after studying the brains of dead gay men and straight men publishes a paper in Science arguing that homosexuality is biologically based, 1991 HERES THAT BIG ONE in a major study that spurs cultural battles, researchers say that they have identified a gene pattern that determines male homosexuality A national cancer institute geneticist suggests that a gay gene resides in the X chromosome, which men inherit from their mothers, 1995 and 2005 A 1995 stuyd focuses on male fruit flies that began mating with each other after their body chemisty was changed In June 2005 scientists in Vienna report that a genetically altered female fruit fly attempted to mate with another female fruit fly instead of a male, suggesting sexual attraction is genetic, PLUS YOU IDIOT EVERYONE KNOWS THAT SEXUAL CHEMISTRY HAS TO DO WITH "CHEMICALS" hint Chem-istry, why do you think most gay men say that they just can't do it with women, that they can't get it up, and enjoy attraction towards a woman, it's because chemically they are attracted to men, same thing goes for str8 ppl, a str8 man can't suddenly feel attraction towards another man, 1999 A university of texas researcher finds that the tones produced by the inner ears of lesbians are weaker and not as numerous as those produced by str8 women, 2000 researchers find further evidence linking sexual orientation with birth order Men with same-sex attraction seem to be born later than their str8 brothers in families with multiple male children, 2003 Psychologists measure eye blink reactions after subjecting gay and str8 men and women to loud noises. The reactions of gay and str8 members of each gender are found to be significantly different and linked to an area of the brain that determines sexuality. They conclude that a person's sexual orientation is determined before birth, 2005 A genome researcher in Chicago says he has found a group of genes not a singe gene, but a group of genes that strongly affect whether a man is homosexual the university of illinois at chicago and the nih scientists report having looked at the genes of 456 men, each of whom had atleast two gay brothers, from 146 families The finding that a variety of genes are common to most gay men echoes other recent gene research, From 1899 to 2005 scientific evidence of the biological roots of sexual orientation has continued to grow, still don't believe me visit this link www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/000402.php , or even ask any doctor, psycologist, i guarantee u that 95 percent of them tell u that they agree that gay or lesbian people are born the way that they are and that it is not a choice, even liberal catholic churches that i know of in my area have their own gay/lesbian groups, using your religion to act like a friggen nazi just isn't right, HATE ISN"T RIGHT, yes a private school has a right to make their own rules, but if they make rules like this, i would change their name from being a christian school to that of a nazi school!!!

[DGB454]

Originally Posted by L98Driver

DGB454, omfg, you are asking me for proof that gay people are born the way they are, doesn't everyone know that, i mean my god, how damn ignorant can you be, i'm laughing so hard right now at ur stupidity, i mean i've talked to dumb ppl, but this is ridiculous, my friends dog is gay, if you want proof that gay people are born the way they are here is a timeline, u may research it further if you like: 1899 Germany's pioneering researcher Magnus Hirschfeld writes that being gay or lesbian is biologically determined, 1991 a study of twins reveals that genes and biology are markers for homosexuality researchers find that 52% of identical twin brothers of gay men were also gay, compared with just 22% of fraternal twins and just 11% of adoptive brothers, 1991 Simon LeVay after studying the brains of dead gay men and straight men publishes a paper in Science arguing that homosexuality is biologically based, 1991 HERES THAT BIG ONE in a major study that spurs cultural battles, researchers say that they have identified a gene pattern that determines male homosexuality A national cancer institute geneticist suggests that a gay gene resides in the X chromosome, which men inherit from their mothers, 1995 and 2005 A 1995 stuyd focuses on male fruit flies that began mating with each other after their body chemisty was changed In June 2005 scientists in Vienna report that a genetically altered female fruit fly attempted to mate with another female fruit fly instead of a male, suggesting sexual attraction is genetic, PLUS YOU IDIOT EVERYONE KNOWS THAT SEXUAL CHEMISTRY HAS TO DO WITH "CHEMICALS" hint Chem-istry, why do you think most gay men say that they just can't do it with women, that they can't get it up, and enjoy attraction towards a woman, it's because chemically they are attracted to men, same thing goes for str8 ppl, a str8 man can't suddenly feel attraction towards another man, 1999 A university of texas researcher finds that the tones produced by the inner ears of lesbians are weaker and not as numerous as those produced by str8 women, 2000 researchers find further evidence linking sexual orientation with birth order Men with same-sex attraction seem to be born later than their str8 brothers in families with multiple male children, 2003 Psychologists measure eye blink reactions after subjecting gay and str8 men and women to loud noises. The reactions of gay and str8 members of each gender are found to be significantly different and linked to an area of the brain that determines sexuality. They conclude that a person's sexual orientation is determined before birth, 2005 A genome researcher in Chicago says he has found a group of genes not a singe gene, but a group of genes that strongly affect whether a man is homosexual the university of illinois at chicago and the nih scientists report having looked at the genes of 456 men, each of whom had atleast two gay brothers, from 146 families The finding that a variety of genes are common to most gay men echoes other recent gene research, From 1899 to 2005 scientific evidence of the biological roots of sexual orientation has continued to grow, still don't believe me visit this link www.seanbonner.com/blog/archives/000402.php , or even ask any doctor, psycologist, i guarantee u that 95 percent of them tell u that they agree that gay or lesbian people are born the way that they are and that it is not a choice, even liberal catholic churches that i know of in my area have their own gay/lesbian groups, using your religion to act like a friggen nazi just isn't right, HATE ISN"T RIGHT, yes a private school has a right to make their own rules, but if they make rules like this, i would change their name from being a christian school to that of a nazi school!!!

Do I need to respond to this ? Nope. Learn to debate and discuss like you actually have some form of education or at the very least act like you are not a 10 year old.

[L98Driver]

i simply gave u what u wanted, you wanted proof that gay ppl are born the way they are, the reason you are comparing me with a ten year old is cuz i'm right, and you are frustrated with that, sorry, i just had to win, the reason u typed "do i need to respond to this" is because you can't, i gave you factual information, something that someone with some form of education is capable of doing, ur a dick, please no more non legitimate, bs, or bad arguments that won't hold water, i really don't want to have to rip you another, again for a secondtime, but really i don't need to, it seems you are allready quite skilled at making urself look ignorant all by yourself

[Muscletang]

Originally Posted by L98Driver

i simply gave u what u wanted, you wanted proof that gay ppl are born the way they are, the reason you are comparing me with a ten year old is cuz i'm right, and you are frustrated with that, sorry, i just had to win, the reason u typed "do i need to respond to this" is because you can't, i gave you factual information, something that someone with some form of education is capable of doing, ur a dick, please no more non legitimate, bs, or bad arguments that won't hold water, i really don't want to have to rip you another, again for a secondtime, but really i don't need to, it seems you are allready quite skilled at making urself look ignorant all by yourself

I could say a whole lot of things but I'm not going to. Learn to debate and talk to people nicely or you'll be the one getting a new one ripped by one of our mods.

[carrrnuttt]

Originally Posted by Muscletang

I could say a whole lot of things but I'm not going to. Learn to debate and talk to people nicely or you'll be the one getting a new one ripped by one of our mods.

What he said.

L98, no one is above anybody in here. We might dislike each other's stances on different things, but we need to check the name-calling a bit. You have to learn to be subtle about things.

[L98Driver]

ok i will behave, lets talk about having compassion for not only this girl's feelings but for her mother, and her mother's partner's feelings. Maybe they wanted their daughter to have a christian upbringing, and to be christians themselves, as i said before there are two different interpretations to the bible when it comes to these issues, anyway gay, lez, str8, blue, black, purple, whatever that is their right!!! Yes i was rude earlier because no one wants to stick up for the people who were really hurt here, everyone would rather hide from their fear by coming up with bs reasons to justify this, rather than to open their minds and realize hey it won't be the end of the world if they gay and lesbian couples have the same rights we do, if they have the same rights, and the abilities to get the same types of insurance coverage, when their partners are actually legally considered their spouses, i bet that girl's parents feel horrible that they can't change something that isn't their fault, I bet the person in charge of that school probably had the option of not enforcing that rule, the person in charge of expelling that girl was denying her parents the right to simply be themselves

[DGB454]

Carrrnutt
Thank you for responding so quickly.

Now for the retort.

l98driver.

If you would have read what I said rather than what you wished I said you would have noticed I mentioned I was open to proof and willing to change my belief in that area. I seem to be a tad bit more open minded about things than do you it seems. Not a problem...I can work around a closed mind if need be. I am willing to discuss this topic further if you wish but first I insist on a civil discussion. Hopefully you are capable of that. If not then we have nothing further to discuss. Please also refrain from the hate remarks because you obviously have much more hate issues than the ones you imagine I do.


Thank you.

Below is a clip from a write up you should find interesting. I am not claiming it to be any type of proof either way. It mearly throws up more questions on the subject.

The following excerpt is from Dr. Jeffrey Satinover's chapter, entitled, "The Biology of Homosexuality: Science or Politics?" which provides a very comprehensive review of the biological research on homosexuality. <HR>It is important to note that serious research on the biology, innateness, or genetic determinants of homosexuality has only just recently begun. Exactly opposite to what the public is being led to believe, the research that has been done thus far suggests that genetic factors account for, at most, but a small proportion of the risk. J. M. Bailey and R. C. Pillard, two of the major researchers most widely cited as having demonstrated that "homosexuality is genetic," were forced to admit otherwise by the results of their own research. They themselves wrote:

These studies were designed to detect heritable variation, and if it was present, to counter the prevalent belief that sexual orientation is largely the product of family interactions and the social environment.... Although male and female homosexuality appear to be at least somewhat heritable, environment must also be of considerable importance in their origins.{1}

Neuroanatomic Research In 1991, newspapers primarily on both coasts trumpeted the discovery of a brain difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. Although the research finding itself was reported fairly accurately, the accounts universally concluded that the discovery had social-policy implications. Commentators triumphantly claimed that the discovery would halt any remaining uncertainty that homosexuality was either a choice, or a consequence of factors in upbringing. Therefore, they claimed, to continue to support anything less than full acceptance of homosexual behavior would be proof positive of prejudicial hatred. What precipitated this outpouring? In August of 1991, a San Francisco neuroanatomist, Simon LeVay, published an article in the respected journal Science. It reported his finding that a localized cluster (a "nucleus") of cells in the brains of "homosexual" men was twice as large by volume on autopsy as in "heterosexual" men.{2} "Homosexual" and "heterosexual" are in quotations here because in this particular study the definitions of each were extremely imprecise, nor was there any way of verifying sexual orientation, as the subjects were dead. But this was not the first such discovery. One year before a group reported in Brain Research that they had found a similar difference in both volume and number of cells in a different brain nucleus.{3} The media did not report this first study because Brain Research, unlike Science, is read only by neuroscientists. And in contrast to journalists, the neuroscientists themselves genuinely understood the research and its limitations, and saw no reason to make grand pronouncements. More recently, yet another difference in another part of the brain was reported, also in a prestigious publication, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America. This study claimed that a difference between male homosexuals and heterosexuals was found in the anterior commissure, a structure that divides the left and right halves of the brain. The authors found that the anterior commissure was larger in women and homosexual men than in heterosexual men. This was a group statistical difference, however: the size of the anterior commissure in 27 of the 30 homosexual men actually fell within the range of sizes found among the 30 heterosexual men. As did LeVay, these authors used brain samples obtained preponderantly from men who died of AIDS, introducing another uncontrolled variable into their work.{4} The only other study to examine morphological differences in the anterior commissure--published in 1988 and not mentioned by the press--found, in part, precisely the opposite. Namely it found that the anterior commissure was larger in men than in women.{5} The Brain's Structure Changes with Use Even if actually present, however, the discovery of brain differences per se is on a par with the discovery that athletes have bigger muscles than nonathletes. For though a genetic tendency toward larger muscles may make it easier to become an athlete, and therefore one will more likely become an athlete, becoming an athlete will also certainly give one bigger muscles. The layperson, encouraged by press accounts, is apt to assume that brain differences must be innate and unchangeable, especially differences in the number of cells as contrasted with the simple volume occupied by a collection of cells. We tend to think of mind as "software" and brain as "hardware," the former plastic and changeable, the latter fixed at birth. We have used this analogy already to good advantage. But the analogy breaks down at a certain point. Various processes go on throughout life: the selective death of brain cells in response to training or trauma, the establishment of new connections between cells, dramatic increases or decreases in the "thickness" of connections between cells as a result of learning, the loss of interneuronal connections through "pruning." Very unlike our modern computers, the brain's software is its hardware. We know from animal studies that early experience, and especially traumatic experience (this has special pertinence with respect to the childhood histories of male homosexuals as we will discuss later), alters the brain and body in measurable ways. Thus infant monkeys who are repeatedly and traumatically separated from their mothers suffer more or less permanent alterations in both blood chemistry and brain function.{6} A similar piece of research on homosexuals with a similarly indeterminate meaning is the recent finding of a protein--an Alpha1-Antitrypsin variant--in the blood of homosexual, but not heterosexual men. Again, we have no way of determining whether this is an innate or an acquired difference, or whether it is even replicable.{7} There is a major current theory about the developmental causes of depression and the interaction of genetics with development. It claims that under conditions of early trauma, a genetically based susceptibility to stress creates a greater vulnerability to intense stress-responses later in life.{8} Furthermore, this "vulnerability" is represented physiologically as measurable alterations in the brain. Because what constitutes "stress" depends on one's subjective interpretation of events, the brains in individuals with the same genetically determined biology may respond quite differently. One may demonstrate no brain changes; another may demonstrate very significant changes.{9} Some Lifestyle-Induced Brain Changes Likewise, in individuals who became blind as adults and then learned Braille, the part of the brain governing the right index finger became progressively enlarged. And just this year, researchers reported measurable increases in brain tissue associated with learned sexual activity in rats.{10} The editor of Nature commented on the LeVay research:

Plainly, the neural correlates of genetically determined gender are plastic at a sufficiently early stage.... Plastic structures in the hypothalamus allowing the consequences of early sexual arousal to be made permanent might suit [those who claim an environmental origin to homosexuality] well.{11}

And of course all this presumes that the research itself was of high quality. Was it? Writing in Technology Review, published at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, two prominent geneticists commented on the quality of the LeVay research. Paul Billings and Jonathan Beckwith write: LeVay "could not really be certain about his subject's sexual preferences, since they were dead."{12} His "research design and subject sample did not allow others to determine whether it was sexual behavior, drug use, or disease history that was correlated with the observed differences among the subjects' brains."{13} LeVay's very method of defining homosexuality was very likely to "create inaccurate or inconsistent study groups."{14} Firmer and more rigorous findings than these are nonetheless sure to be forthcoming because all aspects of human behavior are influenced by our genetic makeup...Almost all, however, tell us nothing about origins, nor of the range of freedom of expression we have apart from influencing factors. Thus we can guess that we probably will find genetic factors that correlate with homosexuality. But we should not even call such factors "an innate predisposition." In the proper and precise language of science, they are merely "risk factors."

[Flatrater]

Originally Posted by L98Driver

ok i will behave, lets talk about having compassion for not only this girl's feelings but for her mother, and her mother's partner's feelings. Maybe they wanted their daughter to have a christian upbringing, and to be christians themselves, as i said before there are two different interpretations to the bible when it comes to these issues, anyway gay, lez, str8, blue, black, purple, whatever that is their right!!! Yes i was rude earlier because no one wants to stick up for the people who were really hurt here, everyone would rather hide from their fear by coming up with bs reasons to justify this, rather than to open their minds and realize hey it won't be the end of the world if they gay and lesbian couples have the same rights we do, if they have the same rights, and the abilities to get the same types of insurance coverage, when their partners are actually legally considered their spouses, i bet that girl's parents feel horrible that they can't change something that isn't their fault, I bet the person in charge of that school probably had the option of not enforcing that rule,

Hey I'm not totally against gay rights, some rights are needed. Even if the gay people had all the same rights as straight people than the private school would still have the same right to remove that child from it's school. No matter what rights you have the school still has the right to refuse people it doesn't want.

The biggest right I feel a gay couple should have is the same right to pay the marriage penalty that I pay for being married.

[L98Driver]

there is still the presence of other studies Gay "Animals come out of the closet"
> By Mark Ledsom, swissinfo.com from the Web, May 10, 2003
>
> ZURICH -- The crowd that gathered for the first tour comprised a
predictable mix of homosexual humans and their curious heterosexual
counterparts.
>
> “I have kids at school who think that homosexuality is unnatural,” one
young teacher told swissinfo, “so I wanted to come along and get some facts
to prove them wrong.”
>
> “I’m just interested in animals and nature, and of course I’m gay,” said
one of the men waiting for the tour, “so I just wanted to hear the arguments
and of course see the gay animals.”
>
> Common
>
> Unfortunately the decision to schedule the tour for the early evening
meant that most of the zoo’s inhabitants were favouring sleep over any form
of amorous activity. But, despite the lack of first-hand evidence, tour
guide Myriam Schärz assures her audience that gay and lesbian activity is a
common part of animal life.
>
> “I don’t know of any species that is exclusively heterosexual,” says
Schärz. “There are studies of this going back hundreds of years, although
scientists were previously reluctant to explore the matter further for fear
that they would themselves be branded gay.”
also, exclusively gay people are known for not being able to have the same chemical attractions towards women, how can we explain that?, the 1993, 95, etc. studies that i referred to still have their credibility, so i mean it's alos been said that very few ppl are either just str8 or gay, and some are in percentages,most all ppl arein one of four categories, and if this homosexual behavior occurs in nature with other animals then we should expect it to happen with humans

[DGB454]

"Biological Causation
“As this survey indicates, research currently cited in support of a biological model of human sexuality is methodologically deficient, inclusive, or open to contradictory theoretical interpretations. In addition, much of such research concentrates on animal studies and therefore has little relationship to human behavior which is generally affected by cultural values. Therefore, this paper basic question is: How convincing is the biological evidence that details of human sexuality are directly due to innate traits and processes? The answer is the evidence is far from persuasive. We may conclude that the biological perspective on human sexuality has not yet made a substantial contribution to the “balanced biosocial synthesis” that the Baldwins (1980) have recommended This conclusion is not intended to imply that biology has nothing to do with human sexuality (since the two, are of course, inextricably intertwined). It means simply this: The claim that biological factors have an immediate, direct influence on such things as sexual identity, behavior, or orientation remains unproven. When biology seems to be critical in such matters, an intervening cultural factor is often more immediate.” (De Cecco and Shively, Bisexual and Homosexual Identities: Critical Theoretical Issues p.150-151) "


There is no positive proof. Only educated guesses at this point. Don't mistake my non belief on this matter as a dislike towards homosexuals.
I do believe as I stated earlier in their right to the same freedoms of sexual expressions and all the rights that hetrosexuals enjoy. I have a hard time justifying legislated morality. That's why I believe so much in the seperation of the church and it's institutions from the mainstream. I believe they have the right to seperate themselves from what they don't find favorable. I believe they have the right to worship and believe any way they wish without fear of persecution from those outside the church. I also believe all people have this same right. I won't persecute a homosexual individual for his beliefs but I will however try and bring him into believing the way I believe. That's what I am called to do. That's my belief. Does that mean that I think homosexuality is a sin punishable by seperation from God? Absolutely not. If he says he is a Christian and knows Christ as his personal savior then who am I to judge the honesty of his testamony? I don't know what's in the hearts of men. God knows the hearts of men. He will be the judge. I can compare what God says is good and what He says is not good to what people do and judge their actions to be either good or evil but that doesn't mean I can or should judge their standing with God.

[Oz]

big0ts r b0ring lolz0r5