I am afraid that because i don't subscribe to the current political correct attitude to homosexuality i am frowned upon. I strongly believe no one has the right to tell anyone else how to live their life (except for serial killers, thieves, and pedophiles as Leigh stated etc etc), however i believe everyone should be free to have an opinion and be allowed to express it to anyone willing to listen. I also think we are all being manipulated by the media, schools etc into thinking a prescribed way to some extent or another. And political correctness is a powerful tool for this. ie if you rationally try criticize some aspect of homosexuality you are branded "homophobic" or if you criticize apartheid and atrocities in Israel you are branded anti-semitic, regardless. whether it is a fair or unfair criticism. I think there are some compelling arguments against homosexuals adopting and having children, also some for them doing so.
I don't know much about most things but i do know a little about zoology and evolution. If you think about it logically :- if there was a homosexual gene in a population it would be naturally dissipate as their genes would be less likely to be inherited by the next generation, and over time it would all but disappear. Relatively speaking not many things are 100% genetic or 100% environmental as there is usually one kind of ratio between genetic/culture-environment or another ie some are 50/50 , 95/5 etc. And for the people who don't like what i am thinking and saying and casually dismiss my argument because it threatens them in some way by saying i am talking poop, then do a google or yahoo search for "homosexual gene" and you will see a huge list of newspaper and scientific reports completely dismissing this idea. Most homosexuals and everybody would like to have there lives justified by genetics or gods or something rather than accept responsibility for it themselves, hence why there was some bad "science" trying to say that there is a "gay gene". You can believe this if you want it is your choice, i prefer to listen to 99% of unbiased geneticists rather than randomly choose to believe in a myth.
Instead of sating "i don't know what i am talking about" try do some research yourself, read some scientific papers or at very least do a google search or read this like i found that gives a very good overview and names of the ropey scientists and their flawed methods that invented this myth:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=28505
I also agree that homosexuals don't necessarily have psychological problems, just through various life experiences they choose their lifestyle, whether it was consciously or subliminally , however absolutely everything when it is taken to the extreme becomes dangerous and should be questioned. Getting extremely invasive surgery that leaves scars and disfigures and leaves the person not quite male and not quite female is highly questionable. And i can guarantee that some of them can be helped with a psychiatrist rather than a surgeon. I bet if you asked a million sane people if they would prefer to have a loving mother and father or a loving mother and semi-mother/father inbetweeny, what would most or all say?
Before when i was talking about some things being irrefutably real and other thing being unreal, it is hard to make sense as we dont have words and the language to talk about it unlike Asian Indians and Chinese, Japanese and even north American indians and probably many others i don't know. ie
Toa vs manifestations
Nagual vs Tonal
I don't know the Hindi maybe arhatship vs samsara ?
etc etc It is therefore easy for us to dismiss what i was trying to say as we don't even have the language to discuss it properly. But my argument is that homosexuality is part of the tonal or the myriad of manifestations or the samsara. If i used the word "toa" or Nagual , most people would not understand and some would think i am a religious nutter hehe. I utterly despise organized religions but have nothing but respect for spiritual people following their own spiritual path be it Buddhist, Hindi,
gnostic Christians and any other gnostics. There is a BIG difference between religious and spiritual, organized religions =
"He who joyfully marches to music rank and file, has already earned my contempt. He has been given a large brain by mistake,since for him the spinal cord would surely suffice."
The Toa that can be followed is not the eternal Toa,
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.
The nameless is the origin of heaven and earth
While naming is the origin of the myriad of things.
Therefore, always desireless, you see the mystery
Ever desiring, you see the manifestations.
These two are the same--
When they appear they are named differently.
The sameness is the mystery,
Mystery within mystery;
The door to all marvels
Two men were arguing about a flag flapping in the wind. "It's the wind that is really moving," stated the first one. "No, it is the flag that is moving," contended the second.
A Zen master, who happened to be walking by, overheard the debate and interrupted them. "Neither the flag nor the wind is moving," he said, "It is MIND that moves."
they aren't gonna get pregnant same goes with 2 guys...
