For what it's worth. Wheaton, Il is home to Wheaton College, a fundie college (http://www.wheaton.edu/). I'm doing lazy research, but I'm also guessing that Victor Books is somehow affiliated with the College or with the fundies. Now, this doesn't necessarily imply bias in the aforementioned rigorous scholarly tome, but it raises the spectre of, shall we say, a taint of bias.
I notice you are unable to provide any references to gainsay it. Actual science is far superior to quoting LGBT activists without any scientific degree which is all your side has been able to come up with so far.
Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.
Anyone interested in what kind of "science" this tome propounds may Google it to find it listed among myriad fundie xtain bibliographies...
Does being quoted by such make him wrong, any less of a scientist or a doctor?
Quite possibly, yes. Runtu did my follow up, so Q.E.D.
Love to stay and chat, but I've got anti-mormon bile to spread. Good lord! It's 9:30 and I've yet to tell a single atrocity story!
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
The possibility of raising children is the only compelling reason to marry.
Book of Mormon wrote:
I understand that your statement suggests that the only compelling reason that heterosexual couples marry is to raise children. That seems rather absurd to me!
bcspace replied:
Only because your slight change from what I actually said fundamentally changes the meaning.
How did I change your meaning?
Can someone else help me out here? I seriously don't see how me restating what bcspace said changed the fundamental meaning.
I'm also not certain if bcspace believes the elderly should not wed?
bcspace, I have to say I'm unimpressed. Would you use this guy as an expert on Mormonism?
Perhaps your inability to read and understand references is why MAD limited your posts. Did I quote anything from this person? Or did I find a scientific reference within a reference? Read more carefully.
bcspace wrote:I see you have no science to contradict the references I gave. Your traffic comment shows that you are the one who is spinning (because you have no references).
OMG! bcspace is the only one who has science. The rest of us are neanderthals who have no science. Let's crawl back into our caves now.
Modern studies show direct links between homosexuality and conditions in the womb. That's got very little to do with genetics.
Then you should be able to provide a reference.
Here, I'll help:
Anthony F. Bogaert
From the Cover: Biological versus nonbiological older brothers and men’s sexual orientation
PNAS 2006 103: 10771-10774
Not according to science....Bernard J. Klamecki, “Medical Perspective of the Homosexual Issue” in J. Isamu Yamamoto, ed., The Crisis of Homosexuality (Wheaton, IL: Victor Books, 1990) 116-123.
Anyone interested in what kind of "science" this tome propounds may Google it to find it listed among myriad fundie xtain bibliographies...
Does being quoted by such make him wrong, any less of a scientist or a doctor?
He is a freaking proctologist! He works with people's assholes, pardon me! How does it make him an expert in lesbianism, STDs, and cervical cancer, I ask you once again? Does having an M.D. automatically make a person omniscient or something?
bcspace, I have to say I'm unimpressed. Would you use this guy as an expert on Mormonism?
Perhaps your inability to read and understand references is why MAD limited your posts. Did I quote anything from this person? Or did I find a scientific reference within a reference? Read more carefully.
I actually read the stuff from Klamecki. Are you suggesting that a proctologist's anecdotal evidence of dangers that are not specific to homosexuality bolsters your point?
I'll ignore the insult, which unfortunately is becoming de rigeur with you, for some reason.
I see you have no science to contradict the references I gave. Your traffic comment shows that you are the one who is spinning (because you have no references).
OMG! bcspace is the only one who has science. The rest of us are neanderthals who have no science. Let's crawl back into our caves now.
Or back under the rock or back into the closet, yes.
Then you should be able to provide a reference.
Here, I'll help:
Anthony F. Bogaert From the Cover: Biological versus nonbiological older brothers and men’s sexual orientation PNAS 2006 103: 10771-10774
You've got to be joking. Do you even read your own references? The keyword is "may". Next!