OT: so this is what our soldiers are dying for in Afghanistan?

[raty4R]

Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)

[SK in CV]

[quote=martink110]Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)[/quote]

Originally because the Taliban gave safe harbour to AQ. Made some sense. I don’t really remember exactly when the Taliban fell and fled. But since then, not so much. Much like I thought about the folly in Iraq, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=martink110]Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)[/quote]

Originally because the Taliban gave safe harbour to AQ. Made some sense. I don’t really remember exactly when the Taliban fell and fled. But since then, not so much. Much like I thought about the folly in Iraq, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=martink110]Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)[/quote]

Originally because the Taliban gave safe harbour to AQ. Made some sense. I don’t really remember exactly when the Taliban fell and fled. But since then, not so much. Much like I thought about the folly in Iraq, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=martink110]Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)[/quote]

Originally because the Taliban gave safe harbour to AQ. Made some sense. I don’t really remember exactly when the Taliban fell and fled. But since then, not so much. Much like I thought about the folly in Iraq, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan.

[SK in CV]

[quote=martink110]Well myth wise – time will tell… The polictics part was in response to other posts blaming Bush or the left or right. Why do you believe the US is in Afghanistan?(honest question)[/quote]

Originally because the Taliban gave safe harbour to AQ. Made some sense. I don’t really remember exactly when the Taliban fell and fled. But since then, not so much. Much like I thought about the folly in Iraq, there is no such thing as victory in Afghanistan.

[ocrenter]

what this article really demonstrate is this:

male sexual desire for female is healthy and should not be discouraged. for if females are removed from the equation (ie in prison, in priesthood, or by completely covering them up and making them walk around in bed sheets as if they are pretending to be ghosts on Halloween), the result is the same everywhere: that deviant and perverse sexual behavior will then start to emerge.

now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment

in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.

[ocrenter]

what this article really demonstrate is this:

male sexual desire for female is healthy and should not be discouraged. for if females are removed from the equation (ie in prison, in priesthood, or by completely covering them up and making them walk around in bed sheets as if they are pretending to be ghosts on Halloween), the result is the same everywhere: that deviant and perverse sexual behavior will then start to emerge.

now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment

in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.

[ocrenter]

what this article really demonstrate is this:

male sexual desire for female is healthy and should not be discouraged. for if females are removed from the equation (ie in prison, in priesthood, or by completely covering them up and making them walk around in bed sheets as if they are pretending to be ghosts on Halloween), the result is the same everywhere: that deviant and perverse sexual behavior will then start to emerge.

now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment

in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.

[ocrenter]

what this article really demonstrate is this:

male sexual desire for female is healthy and should not be discouraged. for if females are removed from the equation (ie in prison, in priesthood, or by completely covering them up and making them walk around in bed sheets as if they are pretending to be ghosts on Halloween), the result is the same everywhere: that deviant and perverse sexual behavior will then start to emerge.

now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment

in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.

[ocrenter]

what this article really demonstrate is this:

male sexual desire for female is healthy and should not be discouraged. for if females are removed from the equation (ie in prison, in priesthood, or by completely covering them up and making them walk around in bed sheets as if they are pretending to be ghosts on Halloween), the result is the same everywhere: that deviant and perverse sexual behavior will then start to emerge.

now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment

in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]
now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment
[/quote]

Interesting article ocrenter. The article deals with treating female homosexuality, not male homosexuality.

I also wonder if the food we eat that is full of hormones and pesticides contribute to chemical imbalances. We know that females are having breasts at a younger age.

I’ve also noticed that American adolescents and young adults in their 20s definitely look 10 years older than in Europe or Asia.

For example, Britol Palin and her boyfriend look old for just being 19.

[quote=ocrenter]
in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.[/quote]

I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]
now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment
[/quote]

Interesting article ocrenter. The article deals with treating female homosexuality, not male homosexuality.

I also wonder if the food we eat that is full of hormones and pesticides contribute to chemical imbalances. We know that females are having breasts at a younger age.

I’ve also noticed that American adolescents and young adults in their 20s definitely look 10 years older than in Europe or Asia.

For example, Britol Palin and her boyfriend look old for just being 19.

[quote=ocrenter]
in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.[/quote]

I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]
now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment
[/quote]

Interesting article ocrenter. The article deals with treating female homosexuality, not male homosexuality.

I also wonder if the food we eat that is full of hormones and pesticides contribute to chemical imbalances. We know that females are having breasts at a younger age.

I’ve also noticed that American adolescents and young adults in their 20s definitely look 10 years older than in Europe or Asia.

For example, Britol Palin and her boyfriend look old for just being 19.

[quote=ocrenter]
in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.[/quote]

I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.

[briansd1]

[quote=ocrenter]
now this is completely different than homosexuality, which I believe is completely biological. we have a lot of scientific evidence to suggest this.

however, this does not make science a friend of the GLBT community, as this article demonstrates:

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/15/news/sns-health-adrenal-treatment
[/quote]

Interesting article ocrenter. The article deals with treating female homosexuality, not male homosexuality.

I also wonder if the food we eat that is full of hormones and pesticides contribute to chemical imbalances. We know that females are having breasts at a younger age.

I’ve also noticed that American adolescents and young adults in their 20s definitely look 10 years older than in Europe or Asia.

For example, Britol Palin and her boyfriend look old for just being 19.

[quote=ocrenter]
in fact, by refusing to admit that homosexuality is biological, the church is in fact allowing homosexuality to continue. whereas science, by recognizing homosexuality is in fact a condition caused by too much exposure of the wrong hormone in utero, we might head down toward a path of finding a treatment that may prevent future homosexuals.[/quote]

I don’t see why homosexuality should be prevented. Gays lead perfectly happy, creative lives, if only we just let them.

Gays have created great things and we would lose a lot if homosexuality were prevented.

To me, heterosexuality or homosexuality are equally as healthy.

I believe we are all bi-sexual but that we lean one way or the other. The environment then reinforces certain behavior. As you pointed out, availability has a lot to do with desire. Males, or females, people generally make do with what they can get.

[Author]

Posts