GOP Candidate: Gays Like Alcoholics

0 GOP Candidate: Gays Like AlcoholicsNew TYT Network channels:

http://www.youtube.com/thetopvlog

http://www.youtube.com/tytsports

New TYT Facebook Page(!): http://www.facebook.com/tytnation

Subscribe to the FREE Video Podcast on iTunes: http://bit.ly/d0zlmP

Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/theyoungturks

http://www.theyoungturks.com/membership

DISCOUNTS: http://www.theyoungturks.com/godaddy

FREE Movies(!): http://www.netflix.com/tyt

Note: The above two links are for TYT sponsors.

Read Ana’s blog and subscribe at:

http://www.examiner.com/x-5445-Politics-in-Education-Examiner

TYT Network (new WTF?! channel): http://www.youtube.com/whattheflickshow

Duration : 0:2:14


Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

25 Responses to “GOP Candidate: Gays Like Alcoholics”

  • PossessDismiss says:

    @dadreamzworld You …
    @dadreamzworld You are so wrong in so many ways, I don’t know if I should try to correct you or just shake my head.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    You suggested that sexual orientation does not exist because, thus far, scientists couldn’t point to any genetic cause. Well, some other things exist, that nobody in his right mind would doubt, despite the fact that they are not fully explained. BECAUSE THEY CAN BE OBSERVED.

    No doubt christofascists in their endless love would exterminate gay babies once such genetic markers were discovered.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven What does being right or left-handed have to do with a deliberate choice to engage in homosexuality? I never suggested being homosexual was genetic. There many be a generic predisposition to a behavior, but one still chooses to engage in the behavior. You better hope the NEVER find a gay gene. The day they do, you will see abortions for being performed because the child had the gay gene. Then what will you think of abortion?

  • livin4jesus0225 says:

    Before these guys …
    Before these guys say it is a choice they should go ask actual gays, who will say it is not.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    Handedness, too, is not fully explained. Thus far, no single gene has been identified as it’s cause. So, following your logic, handedness would be a myth.

    Studies suggest that 70 to 90% of the world population are right-handed. Does that mean they are morally superior to left-handed people?

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven You cannot compare “gay” rights with the civil rights. Race and sexual preference are two totally different things. Most people who accept the mythology of sexual orientation simply have never looked at the facts. They accept the notion because they are told too. Yes, those liberal courts legalized the killing of over 50 million unborn children. What would we have done without them.

    I have discarded nothing. There is no data to support it, only that to some suggests it.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    Undoubtably, there exist many people who are against gay rights. However, your conclusion that most Americans or even most anti-gay people consider sexual orientation a myth is completely unwarranted.

    Thank God for “liberal courts”. Without them the ban on interracial marriage wouldn’t have been lifted in 1967.

    Thus far you haven’t provided “solid, objective, veriafiable facts”, you simply discard everything that disproves your points.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven Actually, most people agree with me. This is why gay marriage would not be approved by voters. It has to be imposed by the liberal courts. I have no negative “feelings” towards homosexuality. My opposition is based on a solid, objective, verifiable FACTS. If a person chooses to engage in homosexuality, that is their God given choice to do so. However, I do not have to allow it to promoted and rewarded within my society.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    And part of reality is that most people would disaggree with your assessment that sexual orientation is a myth.
    Your negative feelings towards homosexuality that inform your world view don’t prove anything, except moralistic delusions of grandeur.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven I actually bring the same amount of scrutiny to both. I don’t believe in religion, but I do believe in a relationship with God.

    I don’t. I am simply looking at the reality. Feelings prove nothing.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe
    It …

    @CommonSenseJoe
    It seems you don’t apply that same relentless scrutiny to religion that you apply to science (or at least those scientific answers you don’t care for).
    By the way, attraction is no requirement for having sex. That goes for men who find they are not into women after trying and for straight men in prison populations who have sex with men.
    Actually, you buying anything is irrelevant. Why do you consider your lack of experiences paramount to experiences of those who are gay?

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven I admited no such a thing. What I said was that “attraction’ is nothing more than an emotion. My explanation of these men is simply that they changed their attractions. Why or how I do not know or care to know. You can call it “self-awareness” , but I don’t buy it for a second. No man spend 30 years having sex with a woman without some attraction. The same is true of men in prison who have sex with other men and then are released. They go back to having sex with women.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe
    So …

    @CommonSenseJoe
    So, you freely admit that, based on your personal beliefs, you whimsically apply very different standards when selectively demanding for scientific evidence.
    You take for granted that a family man coming out of the closet must have had a sudden change in sexual attraction. You disregard the possibilty that he had always been attracted to men yet married a woman to conform to heterosexist social norms or that reaching self-awareness for some takes more time than for others.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven Actually, daily experience contradicts the whole notion of one being born with a sexual orientation other than their own biology. The whole notion is dependent on the “feelings” that an individual has. As I said before, there are those who have wives and children, yet suddenly decide that they are now “gay”. What changed was their feelings, not their “orientation”.

    The discussion is not about my belief in God. I see evidence of God, but it is always a matter of faith.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    The evidence is everybody’s (minus yours) daily experience with their respective sexual orientations.
    Your claim that political pressure plays any part in this is completely bogus. Scientists began considering the concept of a sexual orientation at a time when society as a whole was even more hostile towards homosexuality.
    You are quite selective about your demands for scientific evidence. Where’s your evidence for god?
    By the way, where is your scientific evidence for god?

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @Arete2day
    Good …

    @Arete2day
    Good for you.
    But, if you actually made a conscious decision regarding your sexual orientation you are a rare exception, indeed.

  • pr0pr0 says:

    Ugh… I hate it …
    Ugh… I hate it when people who know nothing about biology start debating weather or not homosexuality is a choice.

    Let’s just keep a few things in mind:

    -Dominant / Recessive genes.
    -gene combinations that determine a trait
    and of course:
    “inactive” genes, which can “turn on” under the right conditions

    Nature vs Nurture is a RETARDED debate, because genetics can be affected by BOTH.

  • Arete2day says:

    @BjoernarEricSven i …
    @BjoernarEricSven i choose to be straight because i like pussy.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven All I am asking for is actual scientific evidence for sexual orientation. I accept science when it is based on evidence and not political pressure.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe

    @CommonSenseJoe
    And there was a time when people considered the earth flat because otherwise, according to their “objective” perspective, people would fall off the face of the earth. And they persecuted those who disaggreed.

    I guess I prefer the overwhelmingly common experts’ opinion over your lone layman’s assessment, that, once more, dismisses science on a whim.

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven They have NO IDEA where is comes from or if it really is fixed at birth. I am basing my definition on OBJECTIVE fact, not politically correct scientific “consensus”. We are born males and females, excluding the odd birth defect. We reproduce heterosexually. Attraction is totally subjective. It is nothing more than a feeling if that. To assign a deeper meaning to it than mere emotion is childish.

  • BjoernarEricSven says:

    @CommonSenseJoe
    A …

    @CommonSenseJoe
    A (yet) missing all-encompassing explanation for what causes a phenomenon is not proof for it’s non-existence.

    There is not really any debate among scientists IF sexual orientation exists. Fact is some people are exclusively attracted to their own gender, some to the opposite gender, yet some others to both. Sexual orientation is a daily reality for everybody except you.

    Trying to define the world based on your personal likes and dislikes is a childish attitude.

  • elmirasahar says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven Scientific consensus is not by itself a scientific argument. And what community of scientist are you basing it off?

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @TMBrd89 Who are?
    @TMBrd89 Who are?

  • CommonSenseJoe says:

    @BjoernarEricSven …
    @BjoernarEricSven I am not denying any evidence. Even those who advocate for the concept of sexual orientation will admit that there is no direct, objective evidence for it. They cannot point to any physiological or genetic difference between those who are gay and straight. They will talk about studies that “suggest” a genetic component but do not prove one. They will talk about studies comparing the brains of women with gay men that “suggest” a physiological link. Suggesting is not proof

Leave a Reply