Genetics and the Homosexual Agenda (part 3)

Here we dismantle ALL arguments on the genetic level concerning the Homosexual agenda where homosexuals and supporting atheists spread lies through pseudo science.

My First Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjekVu-yScE

My Second Video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzDERBgdt5c

True Origins "The Gay Gene with all references at the bottom:

http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp

The Human Genome Project:

http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/Human_Genome/home.shtml

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/genome/guide/

About William Byne:

http://borngay.procon.org/viewsource.asp?ID=002860

My Old videos on Homosexuality:

Refuting spearmaster:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AzPkTIdW41c&feature=channel_page

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7sPIYqD0zk&feature=channel_page

Refuting xxxthepeachxxx:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qh4Ucz6WMMc&feature=channel_page

Refuting Coughlan666:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y_YgxqmrjH4&feature=channel_page

Refuting ZOMGitsCriss:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSFM1Xl0pU8&feature=channel_page

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• genetics
• homosexual
• gay
• gene
• agenda
• Brain
• structure
• hormonal
• study
• brain
• plasticity
• twin
• environment
• mikelibertarian
• smpunditz
• xxxthepeachxxx
• Krazie316
• refute
• debunk
• liberal
• morons

[ThinkerResearcher]

the real question is : why the hell do people care about if gay people are to "blame" or to "pity" ? both sides of the debate are stupid ! Wether there is a gay gene or not, the truth is that gay people don't concern heterosexuals, and trying to make their life miserable based on a 6000 old book is plain bigotry. If it's a choice, good for them. If they're born like that, ditto. If you're not a closet gay person, having this debate is useless to you. Keep your "morals" out of other people's life

[Krazie316]

@ThinkerResearcher Uh...Where in this video was a 6,000 year old book cited? See you start all your posts with some attack against the bible weather or not it's even mentioned. This is a video to debunk the claims of those misguided by their biases.

Furthermore who is applying their morals to other people's lives?

[Deliciouschoc]

It's crazy to see people do the exact same thing you're doing using references from research and science to dimiss your research and references from science. We can use science to refute anything else but when it comes to homosexuality we ignore the information presented and just yell "Oh you're just showing hate, you're just showing hate". There shouldn't be any double standards or caping for one over the other. Homosexuals shouldn't be exempt.

[ThinkerResearcher]

@ThinkerResearcher Believe me, it's justified here. What i meant, is that the whole debate about homosexuality is, in fact, a religious debate. And this since the religion decreted it as non acceptable with the story of Sodom, My comment is : on one size, people want to prove that it's a choice, on the other, that's it's inherent. This all debate starts with the assumption that homosexuality is bad (because of religion) thus i cited the "6000 years old book". am i wrong in doing so ?

[TheGameJedi]

@johnthethinker Why, indeed?

[pussiestroker]

Well done. I also find the deliberate dissemination of disinformation about the gay gene repugnant; yes, it is a primary item on their agenda to use whatever means they can to blur the lines and subvert our morals. I am glad you recognize this being their agenda. Such disinformation needs to be pulverized and vaporized.

I've read about the information you discussed prior to this video; I also want to add that Hamer *also conducted a similar study in 1995 and failed to reproduce the results.

[Krazie316]

@FortisConscius There was no peer preassure, and no my argument is not about choice it's about psycho social factors over a period of time. this does not infer choice all of a sudden

[Krazie316]

@FortisConscius the penguind were not bisexual they were never having sex. We all know the male penguin waits for the mother to return and takes care of the egg/baby until then.

I know they were two different responses, same subject one you made a baseless unfounded assertion, the other you said something different you went the "maybe" route.

[Krazie316]

@FortisConscius I've done several research as well addressing the claims of those that try to claim genetic without proof, factual proof.

I haven't missed out on anything nothing you addressed is new to me. I was just at work and couldn't be very informative or lengthy

[FortisConscius]

@Krazie316 About the pengiuns, yes, about the people you mentioned, no. Look again. 2 topics, 2 responses.

Peer pressure, perceived negative punishment, conditioning to the contrary and fear of isolation are all excellent factors that exist to argue againt choice. "choice never exited my mouth nor was ever entered in text" yes I know, but if it is not a priori natural determination, then the inference is choice. Please enlighten me; how else I should view your argument?