Well, I can find just as many scientific links debunking the "gay gene" Theory as you can find supporting it, and same goes for the link between childhood abuse and homosexuality. But I did find this interesting one, that shows arguments from doctors on both sides. http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questionID=000029

My point is it is a theory, just like the gay gene is a theory; both have support, and both need further studies.

As far as the whole sin/Christian/Athiest thing goes, we'll leave that alone. You're not going to change my mind, and I'm not going to change yours. I'll respect your beliefs (or, I guess, lack thereof) as you respect mine on that issue.

Ok....

1. Do you blame the media, or the women that allow themselves to be in Cosmo? I mean, it's not like men are MAKING them pose for these pictures. They CHOSE to do it. To me, that's not a victim.

2. The ONLY reason men aren't in mags and tv wearing little to no clothes is because it doesn't sell all that well. The reason? Men are much more visual than women. If women were as visual as men, and enjoyed looking at pictures of men wearing little clothes, believe me, it would be all over the place too.

My point is there is no real victim here. It is win/win/win. The women who do it enjoy doing it, and make money off it. The companies that use the pictures and images sell their product. The men that like looking at the women's pictures like getting the opportunity to look at them. Win/win/win.

I agree women should not be victims of sexual discrimination, harrassment, or abuse (just like men shouldn't either, but it happens). But I don't think you successfully argue that it's directly related to Cosmo magazine.

By your own argument, men are just as victimized as women in the media. Look at the sitcoms. King of Queens, Everybody Loves Raymond, etc. They all show the men as dumb, lazy, sports-watching goofballs who need their wives to keep them in line.

So stop with the "females are the only victim" stuff. Men are portrayed in just as bad, if not worse, stereotypes in the media.

SMEG-HEAD!!

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.

I CANNOT believe this argument is this close. "The American Public" should have WAY more support than blaming fast food restaurants. And I don't wanna hear about how we are being fooled by the FDA, or the restaurants, etc. If you did a nation-wide poll, asking people "do you think McDonalds greasy hamburgers, fries, and shakes are good for you", how many people would say yes? Probably the same percentage of retards we have in this Country. So people KNOW it's not healthy, but we CHOSE to eat it anyway. The fast food chains provide a service; we are free to chose which services to buy from. And the argument about how people can't afford anything other than McDonalds? That doesn't hold any water either, because as cheap as Mcdonalds may be, it's still more expensive than buying your own groceries and eating at home.

Now, I'm an overweight American. I'm 5'7, 220 lbs. I'm a chubby guy. And you know who's fault it is? It's MY FATASS fault. Not McDonalds, not Pizza Hut, not George Bush, not Obama, not Taco Bell, not the terrorist, not my parents for not giving me enough hugs, etc..... It's MINE. We need to STOP blaming other people for our own problems in this Country!

First off, I never stated I had a problem with homosexuals. My first wife was a homosexual/turned bi woman. Plenty of grade school friends of mine "came out of the closet" later on in life, and they are still my friends, etc. But anyway....

I don't think homosexuality is a CHOICE. I don't think someone wakes up one morning and says, "you know what? I'm gonna try gay today". However, I do believe it is more nurture than nature. But, I'm interested in your response to the murder thing (and no, I was not trying to make a direct correlation between the two). But your point about some people more prone, due to their genes. Science has also found the same regarding things like alcohol; that some people are more prone to becoming alcoholics than others. That doesn't mean they all WILL become one; just that they are more prone to. That's kind of where I lean with the whole homo/hetero thing. I think there may be some people more prone to being homosexual. I also believe that situations/issues from early childhood (nurture) can play a role.

I will say this; I believe homosexuality is a sin. But you know what? I'm sure I've sinned quite a few times today myself. Just because I may not agree with an aspect of someone's lifestyle doesn't mean I have a problem with that person. I'm sure many of my friends (gay or straight) don't agree with every decision I make.

pussy

The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.

a woman with a flat ass. I need a GHETTO booty!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes. With the state required testing, TAAS, TASP, or whatever your state has, all the teachers do these days is "teach the test". Because the government has set it up that whichever schools get the best results on this test, that school gets more government money, that's all the school is worried about. They don't care what/if you learn, as long as you can do good on this one test.

"A lot of vegetarians are not just vegetarians because they don't want to kill living things"

Huh, interesting. And here all these years I thought plants WERE living things........