Dear Joe,

I've been reading quite a few articles in science
magazines on various studies and what they tell us
about sexual orientation. One thing that seems to
emerge is that human DNA cannot predict who is
gay or heterosexual. That sexuality cannot be
pinned down by biology, psychology or life experiences.

Maybe this is because human sexual attraction is decided
by all these factors.

ttbn,

thanks for your input, your comments are exactly what I mean.
Any time I don't like or agree with anyone, and that's quite often, I don't go screaming off to mummy, just because little Johny took my bike.
I don't have many like minded souls here so I appreciate it whenever I find one.
I am however disappointed that Loudmouth found my comments displeasing.
I have always said that the things I say are quotes from historical articles or conversations, and so as to vindicate myself and shut the whingers up, I thought long and hard to dig up, just one of the articles I have taken my cues from.
Now if all my accusers will simply look at the link I have supplied earlier, all will be revealed.
As I have said before, if you don't like what I write, you can see the author at the bottom of each comment, don't read it, because it means you are too sensitive or precious to take it.
This article is but one of many.
If I am asked to produce more I can only try as they are all as I said, historical.
I hope they read the link.
Thank you.

Dear NNS,

It would seem you views are reinforced by the studies you are touting to the rest of us.

I mentioned how off the last one seemed with its emotive and flowery writing. You flagged it as conclusive evidence about the correctness of your own take on homosexuality, which would be fine if it were a proper independent scientific paper. It isn't.

I instead flagged it as bias, and after a little research it is obvious that is exactly what it is. But it is more than that, it is propagating the lie that the sexual abuse of minor by the Catholic clergy is because of homosexuals and their so called perverse and damaged psychologies.

Why?

Well the first of the authors is Richard Fitzgibbons MD.

“His work with married couples is strongly influenced by the writings and teaching of St. John Paul II, most especially Love and Responsibility. Dr. Fitzgibbons is a marital educator, offers a marital website on resolving conflicts in Catholic marriages”

“He has been an adjunct professor at the Pontifical John Paul II Institute for the Studies of Marriage and Family (The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC) and a consultor to the Vatican’s Congregation for the Clergy.”
http://www.catholic.com/profile/dr-richard-fitzgibbons

The second is Dale O’Leary, a freelance writer and lecturer whose books include “The Gender Agenda: Redefining Equality and One Man, One Woman” and articles such as “The transgender agenda: forcing us to lie”.

Their paper was published in the Linacre Quarterly a Catholic “Medical” Association publication. The Association has about 900 members.

Once again I ask you if you have anything more substantive than what you have offered to substantiate your claims about homosexuals?

SR, I have read an interesting article on this issue, in fact I have read many, because I was struck by the disproportionate number of adolescent boys who were abused by catholic clergy. All of the articles concluded that homosexuality was involved in many of these cases, not only because of the demographic of children abused but other factors, such as the fact that it was found in the 70’s that priests had AIDS infection at four times the level of infection in the general community. Also, the number of homosexual priests was far higher than in the general community, some studies suggested 30% or more priests were gay.
I have copied the web address for this article but I’m afraid I don’t know how to make it do a direct link. Perhaps, someone could direct me.

https://www.psywww.com/psyrelig/plante.html

To my detractors,

"once more unto the breach I go", just to put another nail in the coffin of my detractors.
Smarmy lot, keep demanding proof of what I speak.
I have always said I speak the truth, I just can't be bothered or can't remember where I came across many or most of the "outrageous" claims, statements or comments I have been attacked over.
So once more I dug deep into the memory banks and days later managed to find once more the evidence or proof of where I came up with the, OH so unbelievable and ridiculous claim made by the link listed below.
I don't know how to transfer properly but I think you can blue and cut and paste from memory.
Anyway, there's another article of proof giving me further rights my detractors have tried to refuse me of.
So, read em, n weep.
You should all be ashamed of yourselves, especially you SR, you have proven yourself to be the worst virtue signaller of all, trying to claim some self righteous posture as if the "keeper of the forum".
HAH! in your dreams.
So here's more proof YOU asked for so hopefully you will stop this overbearing compulsion of yours and get off your soap box and back IN your box, like all the rest.

https://www.earth-matters.nl/11/13949/verborgen-nieuws/complete-list-of-banks-owned-or-controlled-by-the-rothschild-family.html

I know you want to say it's crap, rubbish, fake news, because it doesn't suite you or your position.
Well you have every right to do so, only this time aim your vial indignations at the author of the article and not at me.
Stop trying to take the gutless way out.
If you have a problem with the articles, then question the authors, not me!
I research and look for controversial stuff that you guys would not even think about, and that's why you find it all too much, because it IS extreme and hard to believe.
But find enough articles and discover enough things which confirm and back up each other, makes it hard to dispute, so I put it out there for discussion, NOT DERISION!