In article <15445@optilink.COM> cramer@optilink.COM (Clayton Cramer) writes: >In article <1993Apr16.174605.21907@a.cs.okstate.edu>, kennejs@a.cs.okstate.edu (KENNEDY JAMES SCOT) writes: >#  ># So, what can we deduce from these figures?  Are there a lot ># less male homosexuals than there used to be or are men ># (perhaps women too) not as honest as they used to be about ># there sexuality?  Presumably, the people that were polled in > >You mean, in the 1940s, men and women were much more open about >their homosexuality than today?  Want to try that one again? >  That probably is not true.  But today it may not be much better for the gay population in general.  > >You mean, ignore study after study, so that we can continue to  >accept a study (Kinsey's) that is obviously wrong?   >  Where are all of these studies?  You have cited a few, and my research shows that there are not that many.  Do Not Confuse a survey as a study, there is a big difference.  Asking people outside of a polling booth and adding up numbers is NOT a study.  ># as easily of been gay I suppose.  One of the big debates about ># homosexuality is whether or not it's a type of behavior that is ># learned or if one is just born that way.  IMHO, the more likely ># explanation is that it's some combination of the two. > >Based on what, besides your own warm fuzzy feelings?  But this is what you base most of your conclusion upon. Warm fuzzy feelings.  Maybe he has stated an educated opinion based upon the studies that involve genetics and psychological influence.  There are a lot of those types of studies, aren't there?  Try reading some. > ># Here's something to ponder upon:  have any of you gay-bashers out ># there ever considered that homosexuals probably deem their sexual ># orientation as being a state of affairs that is just as much an ># intrinsic and "natural" part of their life as heterosexuals do ># about their own sexuality?  In other words, someone who is *truly* > >Alcoholics share that feeling, until they hit bottom.  This is a crap statement and comparison.  Many people use this sad and stupid argument.  There is not relationship between alcoholics and people's sexual orientation- except that some may find what it really is when they are drunk (repressed inhibition released). > >Unless, of course, the problem is that homosexuality is a form >of mental disorder, caused by childhood sexual abuse, as a number of >recent works suggest.  Nonsense- this simply is not true.  I suppose it is a waste of time to try and tell you to understand what a study presents.  Most of what you cite does not extrapolate anything, you do.  > >If homosexuals would stop using the government to impose their >morality on others (antidiscrimination laws) and leave our children  If people in general would stop using irrational position to oppress other's and leave our private lives to ourselves, I would have no support for laws and rules to protect people form this.  But we need only look at post such as yours to see that they lack rational thought and intelligent outlooks.  >alone, I wouldn't care in the least what they did in private.  But >until they get over the liberal notion that the proper role of  >government is to tell peaceful people how to live, I have no choice >but to continue to point out that homosexuality is not an "alternative >lifestyle," but a sickness. >