Anything is possible today. We need to keep an open mind. If the Seminary President is correct, there should be a go ahead to test the theory on the offspring of people like Dobson, Haggerty and so many other Evangelicals. I happen to be an Evangelical, which proves there are many approaches, not just the Ultra-Conservative ones on the front pages of the news.

I can't even begin to comment on this shitstain-why does he hate fetuses so much?

What if a biological cause is found, but there is no treatment to reverse it?
Would selective abortion be biblically justified?

And Batty Pukkkannon would be "biblically justified" in beating him to death with his own Bible.

Maybe we can prove that there is a biological basis for Baptism, and let homosexual doctors perform prenatal treatment to reverse such a horrific defect.

I thought they were still insisting it was a choice.

Practice that, and maybe it will evolve into a way of nipping the formation of Bushes and Cheneys while still in the womb. Zap 'em with some sort of sonogram ray, and maybe they'll decide not to become Republicans or other kinds of terrorists. Teach them good old Murrican/Christian values while they're still in the womb, and maybe we could spend future election seasons watching games and sitcoms. herm

Unbelievable.

Maybe we can prove that there is a biological basis for Baptism, and let homosexual doctors perform prenatal treatment to reverse such a horrific defect.

Joe, that was so good it needed to be repeated!

=FF

"Same-sex activity is considered disordered," Fessio said. "If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb, and a way of treating them that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science."

Screwing with the kid before it's even born on a presumption that an invisible sky-person would be upset otherwise.

Real dignifying.

That bunch has all the dignity of a 2 dollar hooker during Fleet Week in New York.

I guess Hey is quietly trying to figure out how to hurl invective at homosexuals while at the same time discounting this preacher's contention that a biological cause might be proven very soon.

We have to be careful -the animal becomes more dangerous when boxed into an epistemological corner.

Good find Haecus!

Man, the arrogance and stupidity of these people is unbelievable to Spud some days.

""Same-sex activity is considered disordered"

...Sed the guy who believes an invisible man in the sky.

Homosexuality is found in nature.

Religion is the sole conceit of man.

"Maybe we can prove that there is a biological basis for Baptism, and let homosexual doctors perform prenatal treatment to reverse such a horrific defect."

...and thus does Joe get a FF from Spud!

Quo Valis? Ha! Valis is make Valid point...

"I guess Hey is quietly trying to figure out how to hurl invective at homosexuals while at the same time discounting this preacher's contention that a biological cause might be proven very soon."

Caught that did ya?

Yup they went from declaring outright and for a fact that being gay is something that happens due to liberal parenting, ready access to moisturisers and too-early exposure to Bette Midler albums to admitting that it is innate and now they wanna play god wif li'l gay babies.

Where do they find these Haggards and Dobsons and Reeds and such? Wot rocks are they turning over specifically?

Where on the map?...

In olden times on maps where they didn't really know wot was there they used to write sommat that Spud is write right now...

"Here Be Monsters"

And Spud AINT talkin' about them gay babies.

Be Well.

PS: Why don't Southern Baptists have sex standing up?

Don't want anyone to think they're DANCING!

This world be a pathetic place without gays. To think that someone would even suggest altering a 'gay' fetus to make it not 'gay' just shows how little they really do love and appreciate life. If there is a God that decided that 11% of the population should be gay, who is to challenge God and say that homosexuality is unnatural. Obviously homosexuality is completely natural. Religion and sex always go together. It's the religious persons conflicted feelings over their own sexuality that drives them to find fault with others. Always pointing the finger at someone else in the hope that others won't figure them out. But they are all just hypocrits. People should stop listening to these preachers and start thinking for once and remember that in America you are guaranteed Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Only a matter of time and ol' Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr's gonna be caught buying meth from a male "escort" that he never did anything with. "Ok, there was that one time. Sure, but it wasn't really sex. Oh, you know about that other time, too? FIne then!" He'll then issue an apology of sorts like this famous one:

"The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality, and I take responsibility for the entire problem. I am a deceiver and a liar. There's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring with it all of my adult life."

Then check into Rehab fand become straight again.

No need for genetic engineering, see? A good visit with Exodus and no more "problem."

People like this guy scare the shit out of me.

Where does it stop? What else would they change so they could get morally acceptable babies?

And if you believe in a soul, how can that be related to genetics? Can a gene corrupt the soul? How does that work?

*headdesk*

Is this guy saying being Gay is how you are born?

Like as in your "birthright"?

Oh Bosh -"birthright" only refers to Stuff -land, cars, houses, slaves, Christian media empires, etc.

It's all about Life, Liberty, and Pursuit of Happiness, and since no homosexual can possibly be happy, they're honor-bound to do whatever it takes to de-gayify us. It's God's will.

If there is a God that decided that 11% of the population should be gay, who is to challenge God and say that homosexuality is unnatural. Obviously homosexuality is completely natural.

* * * *

Well, that's a weak argument though. Muscular dystrophy and pattern baldness are natural, too, but we are trying all kinds of things to cure them.
If you believe homosexuality is a biological trait, something akin to blond hair, that is best left alone, say so. But this is going to be an issue in the near future, irrespective of your views on homosexuality. If a 'gay gene' is identified, should parents be allowed to abort the child in a country where abortion on demand in legal in all 50 states? If genetic engineering of said gene is possible, should it be permitted? Why or why not? And all the railing against the Ted Haggard's and James Dobson's of the world isn't going to change the dilemma in which the gay rights lobby will soon find themselves.

It may come down to a single gene but the problem is much more grand than this single idea.

a single gene may control and function many aspects of bodily interactions not just gayness.

Hormones depending on emotional outputs, stress, love, anger and how the body adapts to physical environment as well. Colds, flu, virus's and all the cycles of physical exertion all interact and this outcome would never be projected in the know for many many years to come.

If a 'gay gene' is identified, should parents be allowed to abort the child in a country where abortion on demand in legal in all 50 states?

No. Homosexuality is not a disease.

MD and other associated genetic abnormalities are.

Genetic "Difference" -- I much prefer Genetic "Difference"

Like some are born blond and some redheads. It is just a genetic Difference.

Gays are born gay -- it is just who they were born to be -- it is their birthright.

Spud,


Hate is a disease.

It's spread through religion.


Interesting. I was raised a Catholic. I was never taught how to hate. In fact, forgiveness and acceptance were the 2 most commonly focused themes.


I am going to fix your quote:


Hate is a disease.

It's sometimes spread through religion as well as other ways.



There. We wouldn't want to be accused of using sweeping generalizations, or of being bigoted toward a certain group now would we?

OK, just so I understand: the liberals here would deny abortion rights to a woman who just found out her child is gay. But you would approve of it for almost any other reason?

Spuddish question fer RIR...

Would you cause a baby to be aborted if you knew it was gonna be born gay?
* * * *

No. Then again, I don't believe in abortion at all except in cases where the mother's life is in danger.

But in this case, we'll see that "pro-choice" takes on a double-edged sword: if true that homosexuality is genetic, it is likely that a "gay gene" will eventually be identified while still in the womb. And it's a rather curious policy formulation the liberals are taking when they say you have a right to abort a child who will inconvenience your career prospects, but not a child who is certain to not give you grandchildren.

I wouldn't deny anyone abortion rights. Would i prefer they allow their baby go to term? YES (just as i would if the baby didn't have the "gene"). I don't think any pro-choice individual would approve looking into the reasons why a person gets an abortion to determine whether it is appropriate. Their body, their choice. I just wish people didn't make that choice.

The irony of all of this is that probably most people would opt for the orientation changing treatment were it available. Most gay people would not want thier own children to have to exist in a straight world as gay people because of the problems associated.
I think I want to find the gene that cause people to give a crap what the orientation is of others. I think it is probably called the busybody gene.

One thing for sure...this Baptist minister...will vote REPUBLICAN in 08

And it's a rather curious policy formulation the liberals are taking when they say you have a right to abort a child who will inconvenience your career prospects, but not a child who is certain to not give you grandchildren.
Posted by rightisright at 2007-03-15 08:48 AM

Religious conservatives probably have more abortions since pre-marital sex is hyper-restricted. Liberal families are more reasonable and accepting of an "unwanted" pregnancy, and their children are more educated regarding sex which prevents the situation in the first place. Reasons for abortion are varied, but I rather doubt that it's just a weekend stopoff, inbetween shoe shopping and Cinnabon. These women aren't eagerly anticipating it. They aren't goulish or uncaring. You are insensitive to say the least.

The nature of sexuality is what Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr. promotes changing while promising a "better future" for religious believers. Armed with only the barest thread, yet spouting radical claims and acting as if the study of sex is their sole property, and the future of sexuality religions domain. It never has been, and I rather doubt could ever be.

Religious conservatives probably have more abortions since pre-marital sex is hyper-restricted.

Sure.....whatever you say.

Christians are against abortion.
Christians will do in-vitro.
Now, they are willing to change gods genes? You must preserve life, because humans are not god and cannot say who lives or dies, yet they are willing to artifically create and change life. Conundrum?

this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice.

Hey

Thank you very much for straightening it out for us.

this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice.

do you have evidence of this?

"this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice."

hey, when did you choose a non-gay lifestyle (assuming that, of course)?

Hans

If a woman has a right to do what she wants with her own body, and if the fetus is a part of her body, why wouldn't she have the right to alter the fetus' "orientation?"

Doesn't a woman have a fundamental right to do this?

"The fact is I am guilty of sexual immorality, and I take responsibility for the entire problem. I am a deceiver and a liar. There's a part of my life that is so repulsive and dark that I have been warring with it all of my adult life."

And WOW, three weeks later I am completely hetrosexual and they are sending the wife and me to college.

Praise be to Jesus!

Ted Haggart

this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice.

Posted by HEY

You know everything HEY, don't you.
Talk about way off.

Hopefully they have find a gene for X-ray vision so I can look at girls boobies. Or if I "choose" to be gay then I can look at something else.

""this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice.""

When morons post nonsense like this as if they have any way of really knowing it makes me think that they must be "choosing" not to live a gay life style by remaining in the closet. Hey HEY, how do you like it in there???
Kinda small and dark wouldn't you say???
Come on out and find out what it is like to not be a coward.

this guy is way off. there is no gay gene, it is a lifestyle choice.
Posted by HEY at 2007-03-15 09:28 AM

But, if there were, wouldn't you be interested in understanding it's function? In it's completion sexuality is an amazingly simple directive. You could put in a couple new ones, customize the type of mate-attractability, like "must exude fabulous wit", or "blonde bombshell" for Sixes, "Trektastic" and "Klingon gammar" for Seven of Nineses.

Yup they went from declaring outright and for a fact that being gay is something that happens due to liberal parenting, ready access to moisturisers and too-early exposure to Bette Midler albums to admitting that it is innate and now they wanna play god wif li'l gay babies.

Posted by dethspud at 2007-03-14 11:50 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e


lol, Spud, I just about fell out of my chair on that one. Bravo!

Yeah, that's our Al Mohler. I happen to live in Louisville and have been exposed to Al's rants for years now. He's like God - he's everywhere!

To be honest, though, his latest position - however odd and rife with eugenic overtones - strikes me as a crack in the veneer. He's at least acknowledging the possibility that gayitude is not a choice. Al recently had a serious health scare, and I think it has set him to pondering life's big questions anew. The way I see it, he's trying to open his mind.

It's like trying to get Old Uncle Festus to stop using the N word when talking about African-Americans. One step at a time, children, one step at a time!

Danni is make good point here...

"it makes me think that they must be "choosing" not to live a gay life style by remaining in the closet"

It's the only explanation that makes sense to Spud, too,

If yer a gay, self-loathing person, particularily in a family full of intolerant religious assholes, living a lie and staying in the closet in order to keep up appearances and satisfy everybody elses expectations of you but yer own then, of course, you will cling bitterly to the notion that it is actually a choice despite all evidence to the contrary.

And Ted Haggard thinks he's "cured" after 3 weeks?

Wot a maroon!

These people are seriously delusional.

Be Well.

So, if homosexuality is acknowledged by evangelicals to be genetic and is still considered sinfull, wouldn't the next step be to say that the devil created the baby? In any event isn't the rational of Christians that homosexuality is a sin derived from a part of the old testiment that allegedly requires the stoning of homosexuals? If I am correct wouldn't the most direct biblical solution be to stone to death or otherwise put to death the known homosexual fetus?

DOGMAN

I've worked on software that radiologists use to work with ultrasound images. I'm picturing a work order to add a checkbox for whether or not the baby is gay and I can't keep a straight face.

To determine the sexual orientation of fetuses all that would be required is a Gaydar machine.

Well, that's a weak argument though. Muscular dystrophy and pattern baldness are natural, too, but we are trying all kinds of things to cure them.
If you believe homosexuality is a biological trait, something akin to blond hair, that is best left alone, say so. But this is going to be an issue in the near future, irrespective of your views on homosexuality. If a 'gay gene' is identified, should parents be allowed to abort the child in a country where abortion on demand in legal in all 50 states? If genetic engineering of said gene is possible, should it be permitted? Why or why not? And all the railing against the Ted Haggard's and James Dobson's of the world isn't going to change the dilemma in which the gay rights lobby will soon find themselves.

Posted by rightisright

THANK YOU!!! There had to be one dummy to step forward and defend this crap.

I think you gotta kill em. It's the only way to be sure.

DOGMAN

if true that homosexuality is genetic, it is likely that a "gay gene" will eventually be identified while still in the womb.

Most likely several genes.

Homosexuality is found in nature.

Religion is the sole conceit of man.

It cannot be stated better.

If I am correct wouldn't the most direct biblical solution be to stone to death or otherwise put to death the known homosexual fetus?

With what? Little tiny stones? A pea shooter?

So what if you could change the genetic code and prevent homosexuality but unfortunately that would cause the busybody gene to activate and cause the child to be one of these assholes who worries about what other folks do in their own bedrooms.

THANK YOU!!! There had to be one dummy to step forward and defend this crap.

Posted by geezer1

* * * *

I'm not. I don't believe in genetic engineering, or abortion. I was just wondering whether or not the libs' devotion to the pro-choice agenda is limited to heterosexual fetuses.

"I don't believe in genetic engineering..."

That's okay. It believes in you.

Meanwhile, some genetically engineered crops that have already been approved for sale:

I thought GOD didn't make any mistakes....

DA Vinci would turn in his grave...oh wait, he's reincarnated as a woman now ~ but who?

""DA Vinci would turn in his grave...oh wait, he's reincarnated as a woman now ~ but who?""

Gosh, I've been outed.

How can you tell if a fetus is gay?
Does he walk funny?(DO fetuses walk? I doubt it) Cry with a lisp? Is his hair always perfect?
If it's female-I don't know.
It's ridiculous on it's face.
Good luck getting anyone on the rethuglicon kool-aide to see the bs for what it is.

Gay fetuses are constantly re-decorating the womb.

How to tell if a fetus is gay:

1) Pray about it a little bit. if you're an indespensible and highly-contributing believer, God will answer you personally with the evaulation of fetus-gaity.

2) Get busted by your wife while spanking your monkey to some bi or gay porn. Feeling guilty, you can redeem your pathetic self by "fixing" some potentially gay fetuses, thus rescuing them from their forthcoming lives of sin and despondency.

3) Go to a Christian "counselor" for therapy, and discuss your long-forgotten feelings of actually enjoing that circle jerk at the church camp. Take out your frustrations with your own fagged-out nature by starting a campaign to end all human copulation, thus assuring the destruction of all other closet fags like yourself.

Writing their names on the wall in pink crayon.

You know, I might have to re-think this preacher if he slammed Ann for her Edwards remark. I was offended by that, too. As if we'd let a useless tit like Edwards into the gay community...

Think about the paranoid nutjob that would actually pay to have his/her unborn child genetically tested for homosexuality.

Yecch

Christians and Muslims are some of the most violent groups in history. There is very little difference between the two. Because Christian leaders support and protect child molesters, I think its flock is leaving in droves. Because Muslims kill child molesters on the spot, their flocks are growing. Who on earth would go to church to let a priest molest their child and watch as the leaders of the religion protect them and try to make you appear your delusional. Only idiots. Hence it is what it is. Maybe when Christians begin to revolt and stand up against child molestation and tell their leaders to shape up or lose their jobs so they vote for their own leaders will Christians see their numbers increase. Until them, the bottom line is expect to see more empty chairs in churches