Retard is truly a kind of being. They did not choose to be retarded. We do not tolerate homophobic slurs, why? Because the homosexuals are born that way. Just as many retards were born that way. Choose your words better.

Homosexuals are not born that way. If there was gay dna at birth they would have found it.

>>2
I really like you as poster but sometimes you are just sad. Now you will use the Bible as the reason for your hatred of homosexuals.

>>3
I don't hate anyone. That nobody is born gay is a scientific fact. If you can't handle the truth you shouldn't talk about the topic (of course you can, but that will only make you angry).

I don't use retard as an insult, btw. You brought homosexuals into this so I just pointed out the logical error.

>>4

That nobody is born gay is a scientific fact.

There's nothing more hilarious than religious right-wingers trying to use science to justify their ignorance.

True, but as anon said, some people a just born retarded...

What does politics have to do with this post?

There is no scientific fact on this , bar people being all born differently, with different hormone balances etc etc, and in the wildlife homosexuality is normal in many specifies.

Are we born straight, gay or bi.

Fuck knows, no one has proved it..

Sorry if I have replied to anon.

I am replying to that unfounded quote.

Come on, guys, whether they're born that way or not is irrelevant to this discussion, which is about using slurs. You don't use slurs, no matter what you think of the people involved.

Yes I know.

anon so no left winger believes in God? That is pretty large brush you are painting with.

>>11
In the UK loads of religious are left wing.

>>4
"That nobody is born gay is a scientific fact."

Source?

Indeed, I'd like to hear his source, lol. The absence of evidence for The Gay Gene is not evidence for it not being true.

I'm gonna take a guess and say he got it from a 'study" from a Christian conservative site.

That nobody is born gay is a scientific fact.

Is it the same for gay ducks ?

Actually, he is right. There is no "gay gene". An infant cannot be gay, as an infant is not sexual in any way. One's sexual preferences develop as a child.

That doesn't mean there is no predisposition at birth that makes us more likely to later be straight or gay.

There is no "gay gene".

That's a ridiculous statement seeing there are millions of genes which we don't know what they do yet. Also psychological traits are determined not just by one gene but by many little things and it's all very complex how that works. Your view on the matter is extremely simplistic.

Would you mind pointing out the straight dna?

I knew this would cause a temper in a teapot with the tunnel visioned and now I'm supposed to argue for something I'm not for? I'm not for determining someone's sexuality with dna, so why should I support there being "straight" dna? Dolf says these kinds of things all the time, claiming something is just like that with no multiple variables. I think he meant born gay in a very literary sense, as if people are robots destined to act a certain way with no will of their own or influence from others (even using pseudo-religion to support his claim).

Just to make it clear, you believe people are neither born straight or gay?

I wouldn't phrase it like that but when put as broad it is an argument not as idiotic as claiming "people are born gay" as if the situation was equal to someone with Down Syndrome, for instance (and that was the case with anon's op).

What anon means is it's a mix of both (what you are born with and how you grow up). Both play a role but it's impossible to determine how big and it's obviously going to be different for every person (like if someone experiences something very traumatizing as a child it could have a big influence on his sexuality later).

I tried to stop you anon But at least you stand your ground. I do not think there is a gay gene.

Uh, you were the one that made the claim of there was no evidence for people being born gay, when that's hardly the case. I'm not gonna say it's one percent verified in the scientific community, but the evidence isn't exactly in your favor. Sounds like you either get your "science" from questionable sources or just completely made that up.

Science is a leftist/atheist/Muslim/Russian conspiracy.

>>26
And Marxist, don't forget that.

How could I forget that? Particularly as I'm currently attempting to read The Communist Manifesto, which ironically is just as repetitive and mind-numbingly tedious as our boy here.

You can be born intelligent or bad tempered, does this mean there's a specific gene for those things ?

Which part of retard don't you understand retard?