ARE YOU OR A LOVED ONE * * * ?

i have an idea of what the *** are referring to but my mind has many possibilities!

I notice that in all your comments concerning scientific "evidence" you use the word "suggest" and not "prove." I also notice the caveat "statistical" involved in much of it. I have addressed this situation elsewhere, but I will reiterate some here. I am very skeptical about genetic "evidence" in general. I think too often it is used to make excuses for people not making the "right" or "normal" choices and for evading facing the personality issues involved. I think this is particularly true with * * * because they have an agenda to defend as a group. To me, sexual activities and preferences are the most difficult of our living experience. It confuses the most fastidious of individuals and complicates relationships even in "well adjusted" individuals. That there are "genetic" or "physiological" differences in all individuals from the norm is something that I think is quite obvious, just as there are differences between all atoms of the universe in some indefinable way. But for the sake of unity, we must not only be compassionate and understanding of peoples' struggles to overcome their handicaps (and there are an infinite number of them), but we must not acquiesce to the point of accepting all aberrant or disruptive, anti-social behavior patterns because of this need in individuals to "overcome". The problem I see in this matter of * * * uality is that it has become a CAUSE CELEBRE forced upon those who are not so afflicted. It is counter productive to the general unity of the population (certainly at present) and -- as presented and made a "politically correct" agenda in the media and "leading spokespersons" -- will lead to more confusion on this already confusing situation. It will result in unnecessary multiplication of the practice and unnecessary distress in many borderline individuals. I think that for the individual * * *, this sort of pandering to this unnatural situation only contributes to the distress it causes. For one thing, it is a major (if not the primary) cause of the current epidemic of AIDS which is killing millions. There is a reason why God forbade this practice over history. It amazes me that so called Christians can continue calling themselves Christians and go to worship services when ignoring this very specific and damning practice (i.e. the Episcopal Church in particular). It is as if they feel they can now have their religion while dispensing with God as the Center of it. But aside from the religious issue (and I don't know of any religious scriptures that approve of * * *) I think that this matter is (even if somewhat genetically influenced) a sickness as much as tuberculosis or cancer (which have genetic factors contributing to them). People would do themselves and others a favor if they would stop using genetics as an excuse for not taking positive action regarding their lives and conduct. All criminals probably have genetic factors that "cause" their problems but I don't think we should start "being understanding" and make TV programs lauding their criminal activities (which is exactly what is happening now also).

I have no idea what the *** is...

kelldogg: Well let's hear them all.

Ginger: I find that hard to believe, but stay tuned and you will be enlightened.

Donald: During the early stages of research proof positive is hard to come by. At this point only "the evidence suggests". Take for example the relationship between cigarette smoking and cancer. At first the evidence suggested a link. Later on came proof positive. Science can't be rushed.

Thomas: I understand your point. But I do not see the relevancy other than to point out that there are necessary discrepancies in all individuals that are an essential part of our evolutionary development. To me, the issues involved currently about this business have nothing to do with how one person's handicaps work against him or her. We all have some kind of handicap. I am not physically endowed, for instance, to be a great NFL football star. So what? I need to get over it and be what I am equipped to be. * * * is a social disease that has toppled civilizations. To glorify it and not recognize it for what it is, is to bury one's head in the sand and hope that the tornado that is coming will pass by without touching you.

Donald: Thank you for your comments. I endeavor to be objective and unbiased. I think that is the scientific method.

Shirley: It may not be wise to base your understanding of my article on the comments of others. Just concentrate on my words, otherwise you could be led astray.

Shirley: I believe you are on to something.

Thomas,

It is a simple matter to determine just why persons who are **** produce a number of high achievers. It is because of the difficulties overcoming **** they develop the necessary traits to overcome other adversities and be hight achievers. The brains are exactly the same, IMHO. Actually, I have one (of a pair of identical twins) in my family with ****. Their grandmother did her best to "cure" the problem when they were young, to no avail.

Shirley: I have good news and I have bad news. Please come back later for both.

James: I wish I knew what you were talking about. Tentative studies have shown there is in fact a difference in the brains.

Yes Shirley. I will not tell you anything that is not supported by research.

This comment is to let you know that this content has reached at least ten comments, and as such has been removed from Comment Speedway! Congratulations!

Thomas: I appreciate your objective, "scientific" approach. However, whether we are dealing with stem cell research or the a-bomb, the matter of ethics comes into play in how we deal with what we have learned. The a-bomb without ethics or morality is a disaster waiting to happen. I propose that this is what I have been addressing in this issue. In addition, it is a matter of history that what is "scientific" today is "fantasy" tomorrow. My problem with the * * * issue is not the how but the why and "so what." Like I tried to say above (and apparently was not understood) is that regardless of the causes and logical reasons, to blithely pretend that this is not a matter of serious moral, ethical, and religious concern that can effect the very foundation and quality of our civilization is to "waltz" into a century "of disaster." I, for one, am perfectly willing to accept, unchallenged, the expressed advice and admonitions of God. That plus the fact that I find what is currently happening on this issue is not only offensive to me and a preponderance of others but a practice that unchallenged and unchecked will destroy what is good in this world. If I had the financial resources, I would be willing to organize a broad ecumenical legal challenge to force the media to stop perpetrating this shameful propagandizing in the media at all levels in favor of a small minority of viewers.

Donald: Your views are noted. Thank you.

I need a few more comments before I reveal all.

Thomas,

"Tentative studies" is about as generic and non convincing as possible maybe isn't it? I don't know how to explain what I was talking about any more fully. The **** is a definite handicap in certain ways and it must be struggled against to overcome its damage, this builds skills which will help in overcoming various adversities through life. It's kind of like Epilepsy which was the curse of Alexander the Great, Julies Cesar and Napoleon. They overcame the problem and achieved greatness.

Were you born with ****, Thomas?

James: You have me as confused as ever. I have read both of your comments over several times and I still do not know to what you refer. I even did some research into aspects of your comments but that got me nowhere. Why did you select those 3 historical personages in particular? Yes, all 3 suffered from epilepsy, however they all also had other conditions in common. I have concluded that you are, perhaps, pulling my leg. I would be most grateful if you would drop your **** and I will do likewise, hopefully tomorrow.

James: Regarding your question - was I born with ****. How can I answer that when I have no idea what **** is? My article is about * * *, and you talk about ****. They are not the same thing. Please elucidate and I will provide you with an answer. Thanks.

Congratulations on winning the Sleigh Me Caption Contest

I assume it's the 3-letter word that used to mean HAPPY...
I'm not - nobody in my family to my knowledge either.
But I have friends and co-workers who are - not a problem for me - just let people be who they are and be happy.
Same with inter-racial and inter-religion relationships - just let them be happy...

Tony: You have a good attitude. Please check back for the surprise of your life.

Thomas,

I type with a southern drawl and that makes it a little longer! So drop the last * and we'll be talking exactly the same thing.

I think you are the one trying to pull my leg in this instance! That's okay, it's been done many times before.

James: I assure you that I was not attempting to spoof you or anyone else with this article. I was merely attempting to ascertain your position on the matter. I place a great value on all of your comments. In view of the fact that Alexander, Julius and Napoleon were all left handed then I will assume that you and I are both on the same track. Please see my further comments below, and also a new article to be published later today on this same subject.

Shirley: Here is the comment I promised you. This article pertains to left-handedness and nothing else whatsoever. The full title of the article should read "Are You or a Loved One Left-Handed?" Please replace all the * * * with either "left-handed" or "left-handedness". The other matter I promised to tell you about is the fact that there is a small co-relation between left-handedness and homosexuality, small enough to be of very little concern. Please see my new article explaining this relationship more fully. Thank you for participating in this discussion.

Ha. Very interesting discussion you had there.

Thank you Katie.

You're right Thomas, we were on exactly the same track!

Yes, James. We usually are. Now, jump to my article entitled "Sexual Orientation and Sinistrality".

I love how the majority of commentors were jumping on the "Bash Gays Bandwagon." My brother is left handed and he is not gay. I remember a time when the world was going to end because of Rock n Roll. If I werent so tired I would roll on the floor laughing.
Good job Thomas!

Thank you, Mary.

well im glad i tuned in when it was said it was left handed. my mom and my brother are both left handed. my brother and mom seem as normal as anyone else.

Chelsea: And I'm sure they are.