secretsmile

Skye - you are saying that chemical reactions result in thoughts? I don't understand how that can be when thoughts are so random and complex? Don't you mean emotions? Do chemical reactions result in emotions? If so, do you think it also works the other way around and thoughts create chemical reactions? Sorry if I am not making a whole lot of sense, this is all very confusing for me. Someone said that emotions are largely subconcious so we cannot control them, but like Senexa said, if thoughts create chemical reactions - then we can choose how we feel. Right? Senexa, thank you for the article. =) I have one question though from what I have read: "The first results involving the hypothalamus in emotion were obtained by selective stimulation of various nuclei of this structure in awake and behaving animals. For example, stimulation of the lateral hypothalamus produces typical and integrated motor responses characteristic of 'anger.' (higher blood pressure, raising of hair, arching of the back...) This resulting behavior was termed 'sham rage' because of it's assumed lack of concious experience." Dosen't this actually contradict that thoughts (concious awareness of our thoughts) creates chemical reactions? Dosen't this prove the direct opposite? I'll continue reading. =) Take care, secretsmile

I read somewhere once that our thoughts create chemical reactions inthe brain which are 'emotions,' and I was wondering if this had been scientifically proven.

But you still can't grasp the concept of an abnormality. Homosexuality is an abnormality because the majority of the human race is heterosexual. It has nothing to do with the sex act itself. Birth-control, sterile people, etc.

Point made, I was ahead of myself there, I apologize. What I should have said was that is it a biological defect because it differes from the norm, it is a chemical imbalances and chromosomal disorder. No one seems to see what "abnormal" means; there isnt necessarily anything right or wrong, good or bad with abnormalities. All it means is that something is different from the norm. Cancer is found all throughout nature, but a tumor is still considered a cluster of abnormal cell source. Something is abnormal if it differs from the norm. Simply because something is a disease or not doesnt show that its abnormal or not cancerous cells are abnormal because the majority of the human body is made up of normal cells. Comparitively, homosexuality is abnormal because the majority of humanity is heterosexual, that is my point Skye. The primary biologic function of sex is to procreate. Humans have taken the act and indulged in the carnallity of it, but the main purpose of sex is to produce children. The fact remains: as a species that reproduces sexually rather than assexually, there is no biologic reason for homosexuality and that makes them abnormal. How is it unfounded and unflawed? How do they not make sense? Homosexuality is not an inherent trait. Its the after-effect of a process during the developmental stages of a persons life. This process may or may not be due to genetics, but it is an abnormal process. I cant prove alot of this, but can you disprove it? Can you prove your stance? Since no one can prove or disprove it, how can you be so sure that its not abnormal? Some scientists say one thing, others say another. The truth of the mater that there is no clear proof for one side or the other. However, there are theories, and this is one of them. Theories are considered valid until disproven. A biological variation is still abnormal... it differs from the average Cloning will destroy a genetic line, because the material used becomes less and less viable. think of it this way: a copy of a copy is never as good as the original. and thos things are traits; thats basic biology.

Alright, I admit that was my mistake - I should have said 'abnormality.' It is an abnormaliy in nature due to all the reasons I listed above.

What do you think is within chromsomes? Our genes, our blueprint. Homosexuality is not an inherent trait. It's the after-effect of a process during the developmental stages of a persons life. This process may or may not be due to genetics, but it is an abnormal process. A biological variation is still abnormal... it differs from the average. The main purpose of sex is to produce children, homosexuals can't produce children so there is no biological reason for them to be together in that sense they are abnormal. I suppose I should have been more clear with my title, I apologize. What I am saying is that homosexuality is a result from a chemical imbalances and chromosomal disorders as as such it is an abnormality in nature. Thre is no biological reason for homosexuals to be attracted to one another – they cannot reproduce. I was also making the point to people who use the point that some animals in nature are homosexual that chemical or genetic makeup of an animal (too much estrogen in males, too much testosterone in females, or genetic defects/mutations) during the developmental stages of its life, these animals can have a dimished, or even completely lose their, gender identity. I hope I have made myself clear this time.

I understand that you do not agree with my point of view but may I ask what is incorrect about any of the things I have said? ATinyMonkey - how is my use of the word 'mutation' an incorrect use? Mind you, there isnt enough scientific evidence to prove or disprove anything. however, ive based my theory on facts, theories, and observances in evidence. And no one seems to see what "abnormal" means; there isnt necessarily anything right or wrong, good or bad with abnormalities. All it means is that something is different from the norm. cancer is found all throughout nature, but a tumor is still considdered a cluster of abnormal cells

My point is that those chemical and genetic origins point to the fact that homosexuality is infact a mutation in the human race...

Just because homosexuality occurs in nature does not mean it is not an aberattion. I am not saying that we all have to be the same, but giving the examples I cited I am using them to demonstrate that homosexuality is the result of chemical imbalances and chromosomal disorders and as a result is a mutation porbably occuring from chemical stuff in utero.

So, basically no one here can refute my claims. Gotcha. ;-)

It's been said that homosexual behavior is natural in the sense that it is extensively found in nature. It has been observed in: antelopes, boars, bulls, chimpanzees, cows, ducks, cats, dogs, fruit flies, geese, gorillas, gulls, horses, humans, langurs, rams, sheep, macaques, monkeys, turkeys and vervets. Homosexuality exists in proven ratios in all mammal species....It is as natural as blue eyes, left-handedness, or the genetic predisposition to walk on two legs. Whiptail lizards, (Cnemidophorus neomexicanus) found in the American southwest, are all females. They reproduce by parthenogenesis. Unfertilized eggs develop, producing an exact clone of its mother. Even though no males exist, the females still exhibit sexual mating behavior. Those that attract a partner have been found to produce more and healthier eggs. Homosexuality exists in proven ratios in all However, chemical imbalances and chromosomal disorders are ABNORMALITIES in nature. blue eyes, left-handedness, etc are neither of these things, but simply inherent traits; they are part of our genetic makeup which was originally formed due to environmental conditions, but now is just code passed down through offspring. simply because its found in nature doesnt mean its natural. nature makes mistakes, to put it bluntly. defects, mutations, and abnormalities exist all throught the animal (as well as plant) kingdom; some more apparent than others. human beings, as do most animals, have two sexes to further the species through procreation. we are predispositioned to be attracted to the opposite sex in order to mate. since two memebers of the same sex cannot procreate, there is no bilogical reason for two like sexes to have a physical or chemical attraction to each other. It's also been stated by the left that Bruce Bagemihl, a biologist from Seattle, WA, found that in zoos, at least 5% of Humboldt penguin pairs are gay. He has prepared an encyclopedic survey of homosexual or transgender behavior among more than 190 species, including butterflies and other insects. However, due to a flaw in the chemical or genetic makeup of an animal (too much estrogen in males, too much testosterone in females, or genetic defects/mutations) during the developmental stages of its life, these animals can have a dimished, or even completely lose their, gender identity. when courting (a step towards mating), the animal will either court both sexes or the like sex, depending on the severity of the mutation. as for physical differences, its been shown that differnt parts of the brain are either more or less active in homosexuals than in heterosexuals. likewise, some parts of the brain can be larger or smaller in comparison. as for the whole butterfly thing, its irrelevent. they reproduce in a totally differnt way than humans. we do not produce clones, as the genetic line will eventually fray and produce mutations (this is why incest is illegal). the fact remains that homosexuals are abnormalities in the species.