We are pleased to announce that as of March 4, 2025, an updated Rich Text Editor has been introduced in the MyFitnessPal Community. To learn more about the changes, please click here. We look forward to sharing this new feature with you!
These are disgusting
Replies
-
You know... I get hung up on the whole "choice" debate.
On one hand, I know and realize that it is difficul, and often times painful, to deny a particular aspect of your personality, but then again, I know men who are obviously gay, but completely deny it, and at least according to them, live a heterosexual lifestyle.
Maybe it is just denial, and maybe they are unhappy or unsatisfied with their lives, but they choose a heterosexual lifestyle just the same.
I'm not saying anyone should ever have to live that way, but at the same time, I'm not making that choice for them.
Maybe they make that choice because of societal pressure, and in that case, I agree that society needs to change their views. But those who are actively denying their homosexuality, and pursuing a heterosexual lifestyle, are still making that choice.
But they are, as you put it, "obviously gay." This means that the choice they are making is to act on their natural inclination rather than choosing to have said inclination.
Yeah, but that's what I mean (and at this point, it should probably be obvious that I am thinking of someone in particular that I know in IRL).
He is choosing to not be gay. So it's not that a choice does not exist. But like I said from the beginning, I do not believe anyone should have to go against their own nature, but this particular individual feels that he has to (he's actually a pastor so its probably due to his own religious beliefs more than anything). But at the same time, he's a diva and he's single.
I do think it's sad that he feels it necessary, but I still have to respect his choice. This is why I struggle with the "choice" debate.
He's not choosing to "not be gay"; he's choosing who he marries/sleeps with/etc. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner, not choosing his orientation.
You can go against natural inclinations all the time, for varying reasons. That doesn't mean it's actively choosing a "new" inclination.
I mean, I can see where you are coming from. Even though, he is choosing to deny it, he still is because otherwise it wouldn't be apparent to the world.
But it's still a choice that he has made about his sexuality, which is the heart of the debate, right?
I don't know... it hurts my head.
Do bisexual people who form a monogamous relationship with a same sex partner (or opposite sex partner) then choose to be straight or gay? Because they're only limiting themselves to one person, correct?
No. They still feel attraction towards both sexes. Or a pansexual feels attracted to all forms of sex or gender expression.
He's not choosing his sexuality. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner.
Of course, this is all based on his "obvious homosexuality," which might just be you thinking this based on stereotypes, or because he's not with women often...?0 -
You know... I get hung up on the whole "choice" debate.
On one hand, I know and realize that it is difficul, and often times painful, to deny a particular aspect of your personality, but then again, I know men who are obviously gay, but completely deny it, and at least according to them, live a heterosexual lifestyle.
Maybe it is just denial, and maybe they are unhappy or unsatisfied with their lives, but they choose a heterosexual lifestyle just the same.
I'm not saying anyone should ever have to live that way, but at the same time, I'm not making that choice for them.
Maybe they make that choice because of societal pressure, and in that case, I agree that society needs to change their views. But those who are actively denying their homosexuality, and pursuing a heterosexual lifestyle, are still making that choice.
But they are, as you put it, "obviously gay." This means that the choice they are making is to act on their natural inclination rather than choosing to have said inclination.
Yeah, but that's what I mean (and at this point, it should probably be obvious that I am thinking of someone in particular that I know in IRL).
He is choosing to not be gay. So it's not that a choice does not exist. But like I said from the beginning, I do not believe anyone should have to go against their own nature, but this particular individual feels that he has to (he's actually a pastor so its probably due to his own religious beliefs more than anything). But at the same time, he's a diva and he's single.
I do think it's sad that he feels it necessary, but I still have to respect his choice. This is why I struggle with the "choice" debate.
He's not choosing to "not be gay"; he's choosing who he marries/sleeps with/etc. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner, not choosing his orientation.
You can go against natural inclinations all the time, for varying reasons. That doesn't mean it's actively choosing a "new" inclination.
I mean, I can see where you are coming from. Even though, he is choosing to deny it, he still is because otherwise it wouldn't be apparent to the world.
But it's still a choice that he has made about his sexuality, which is the heart of the debate, right?
I don't know... it hurts my head.
Regardless of whether you can tell if he is gay or not, the fact that he is choosing to act on his inclinations does not translate into homosexuality being a choice. The reaction to societal stigma attached to being "different" is his choice, not his state.
So what you are saying is that he is unique. I suppose I can understand that.0 -
You know... I get hung up on the whole "choice" debate.
On one hand, I know and realize that it is difficul, and often times painful, to deny a particular aspect of your personality, but then again, I know men who are obviously gay, but completely deny it, and at least according to them, live a heterosexual lifestyle.
Maybe it is just denial, and maybe they are unhappy or unsatisfied with their lives, but they choose a heterosexual lifestyle just the same.
I'm not saying anyone should ever have to live that way, but at the same time, I'm not making that choice for them.
Maybe they make that choice because of societal pressure, and in that case, I agree that society needs to change their views. But those who are actively denying their homosexuality, and pursuing a heterosexual lifestyle, are still making that choice.
But they are, as you put it, "obviously gay." This means that the choice they are making is to act on their natural inclination rather than choosing to have said inclination.
Yeah, but that's what I mean (and at this point, it should probably be obvious that I am thinking of someone in particular that I know in IRL).
He is choosing to not be gay. So it's not that a choice does not exist. But like I said from the beginning, I do not believe anyone should have to go against their own nature, but this particular individual feels that he has to (he's actually a pastor so its probably due to his own religious beliefs more than anything). But at the same time, he's a diva and he's single.
I do think it's sad that he feels it necessary, but I still have to respect his choice. This is why I struggle with the "choice" debate.
He's not choosing to "not be gay"; he's choosing who he marries/sleeps with/etc. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner, not choosing his orientation.
You can go against natural inclinations all the time, for varying reasons. That doesn't mean it's actively choosing a "new" inclination.
I mean, I can see where you are coming from. Even though, he is choosing to deny it, he still is because otherwise it wouldn't be apparent to the world.
But it's still a choice that he has made about his sexuality, which is the heart of the debate, right?
I don't know... it hurts my head.
Do bisexual people who form a monogamous relationship with a same sex partner (or opposite sex partner) then choose to be straight or gay? Because they're only limiting themselves to one person, correct?
No. They still feel attraction towards both sexes. Or a pansexual feels attracted to all forms of sex or gender expression.
He's not choosing his sexuality. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner.
Of course, this is all based on his "obvious homosexuality," which might just be you thinking this based on stereotypes, or because he's not with women often...?
True. I see your point.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
1.) It's illegal to execute people in America for being gay even if that's you interpretation of what he is saying.
2.) Salvation Army just opened a community center down the street in my historical gay community. Along with its awesome gym, indoor soccer and basketball court, free childcare, 3 story adventure zone, indoor/outdoor splash park, media, arts, music center and being the lowest membership in town for any fitness center...It has an indoor pool with a 3 story water slide.
3 mother ****ing story water slide.
The owner can say he likes to give chickens oral sex. I don't care. Here is my monthly membership to his gym with a 3 freaking story indoor water slide for when I feel like being a kid again.0 -
must be a boring day on MFP........
where did you hear it? on the internet? oh then it must be true.0 -
Nice to be open minded and believe in free speech...just one correction - being gay is not a choice. Nobody just hits their pre-teens and decides to be attracted to the same sex. If people could choose, a lot of gay/lesbian/bisexual people would not be so because of the bullying, judgement and violence many have dealt with.
There are many factors that could sway a person's lifestyle choice. MANY! One of them may be genetic but one thing is certain and that is that there is not one single factor that determines a person's sexual orientation. Again, there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation.
So you need to check your facts before making correcitons/ And, when you boil it down, EVERYTHING we do, whether is sexual orientation or eating carbs, is a choice!!
sure there may be a very tiny percentage who choose a gay lifestyle but for the overwhelming majority it is not a choice and to think otherwise is foolish.
Until you provide scientific evidence, your statement reeks of arrogance. My comments were based on scientific studies. Those studies confirmed that there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation. And its not a tiny percentage or a overwhelming majority. They simply don't know.
You made no scientific points. Your statement pretty much sums up to, "A lot of things influence each other." Allow me to ask you this, at what age did you choose your particular sexual orientation? What was your thought process?
I am not obligated to make scientific points. I'm not the scientist. I was referring to scientific studies that have been done on the matter. If you have an issue with the studies, take it up with them not me.
So...you make a comment with no scientific references, tell someone taking issue with your comment that they need to provide scientific evidence to refute your comment, then when it is pointed out that you referenced no scientific studies you tell them to take it up with the scientists because you do not need to make scientific points. Brilliant!
I'm just waiting for you to provide the scientific references that every gay is born with this inclination. I'm waiting because I know it will be brilliant.
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/burden-of-proof0 -
You know... I get hung up on the whole "choice" debate.
On one hand, I know and realize that it is difficul, and often times painful, to deny a particular aspect of your personality, but then again, I know men who are obviously gay, but completely deny it, and at least according to them, live a heterosexual lifestyle.
Maybe it is just denial, and maybe they are unhappy or unsatisfied with their lives, but they choose a heterosexual lifestyle just the same.
I'm not saying anyone should ever have to live that way, but at the same time, I'm not making that choice for them.
Maybe they make that choice because of societal pressure, and in that case, I agree that society needs to change their views. But those who are actively denying their homosexuality, and pursuing a heterosexual lifestyle, are still making that choice.
But they are, as you put it, "obviously gay." This means that the choice they are making is to act on their natural inclination rather than choosing to have said inclination.
Yeah, but that's what I mean (and at this point, it should probably be obvious that I am thinking of someone in particular that I know in IRL).
He is choosing to not be gay. So it's not that a choice does not exist. But like I said from the beginning, I do not believe anyone should have to go against their own nature, but this particular individual feels that he has to (he's actually a pastor so its probably due to his own religious beliefs more than anything). But at the same time, he's a diva and he's single.
I do think it's sad that he feels it necessary, but I still have to respect his choice. This is why I struggle with the "choice" debate.
He's not choosing to "not be gay"; he's choosing who he marries/sleeps with/etc. He's choosing an opposite-sex partner, not choosing his orientation.
You can go against natural inclinations all the time, for varying reasons. That doesn't mean it's actively choosing a "new" inclination.
I mean, I can see where you are coming from. Even though, he is choosing to deny it, he still is because otherwise it wouldn't be apparent to the world.
But it's still a choice that he has made about his sexuality, which is the heart of the debate, right?
I don't know... it hurts my head.
Regardless of whether you can tell if he is gay or not, the fact that he is choosing to act on his inclinations does not translate into homosexuality being a choice. The reaction to societal stigma attached to being "different" is his choice, not his state.
So what you are saying is that he is unique. I suppose I can understand that.
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.0 -
I'm just waiting for you to provide the scientific references that every gay is born with this inclination. I'm waiting because I know it will be brilliant.
I'm going to field this one.
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=study-says-brains-of-gay
Of course, I also know for a fact that the brain can be altered from experience. They have documented changes in the brain from PTSD, and it has been documented that certain parts of the brain are shaped and formed differently in a racist than in someone who is not.
Of course, changes to the brain in PTSD is due to trauma, and racism is a learned mechanism. This doesn't really definitively address whether or not people are homosexual by nature or by nurture, but this does prove a biological component toward the inclination to be gay. Or in other words, they may or may not be born gay, but it is not within their control either.0 -
Nice to be open minded and believe in free speech...just one correction - being gay is not a choice. Nobody just hits their pre-teens and decides to be attracted to the same sex. If people could choose, a lot of gay/lesbian/bisexual people would not be so because of the bullying, judgement and violence many have dealt with.
There are many factors that could sway a person's lifestyle choice. MANY! One of them may be genetic but one thing is certain and that is that there is not one single factor that determines a person's sexual orientation. Again, there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation.
So you need to check your facts before making correcitons/ And, when you boil it down, EVERYTHING we do, whether is sexual orientation or eating carbs, is a choice!!
sure there may be a very tiny percentage who choose a gay lifestyle but for the overwhelming majority it is not a choice and to think otherwise is foolish.
Until you provide scientific evidence, your statement reeks of arrogance. My comments were based on scientific studies. Those studies confirmed that there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation. And its not a tiny percentage or a overwhelming majority. They simply don't know.
I like to think I have a beautiful penis. But I have not yet seen any penis besides mine which I find so pretty that I look at it and go "OMG! I MUST have it inside me!" or "oh hey! I know I am a straight man but I wonder how it tastes like".
So yes, maybe its a choice, maybe you're born with it. Who cares. I choose to eat pecan pie and choose to not like Apple pie? Since when is a choice illegal? I mean, you're not harming anyone else with either choice of being straight or gay so... whats it to you? Nobody has to prove anything to anyone scientifically. Atheists don't have to prove to others that God don't exists. Believers don't have to prove that God does exist. Gays don't have to prove that its a choice or not. People should just let be.
^ Honestly, Taunto, I agree with you on this 100%. Leave people alone. All of this over-analysis of people's choices, or their genetics, or even their choices of words, demeans them, IMHO. Is it somehow better that someone is born gay rather than making the choice to be gay? Should it matter? Isn't that being damned judgmental one way or the other? "Oh, you were born that way, okay, that's cool" but "Oh, you made a choice? Well then, your choice is wrong!"
Let's be honest, human sexuality is a complex subject, and it's probably best to speak of a continuum rather than "gay" vs. "straight." But, in any event, let people live their ives. Stay out of their bedrooms, decisions, and genetics. Mind your own business.
Get off my lawn!!!! :bigsmile:0 -
I'm not a devout anything, but I am a big proponent of truth. I don't believe everything people put on the internet, and neither should you.
For people like me who are skeptical of nonsense and have a pretty decent bs meter, I am glad there are organizations like Snopes. I'm also glad there is Google and that I can read.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/sexuality/salvationarmy.asp
Is the Salvation Army is a Christian organization? Yes, of course it is.
Does it support execution of gay parents? No. Of course not.
Arguments like this based on a big pile of propaganda don't do a whole lot to validate an argument.
I use snopes all the time because majority of everyone I know believes everything they read on the internet, kinda like what appears the vast majority of the forums here does.0 -
Nice to be open minded and believe in free speech...just one correction - being gay is not a choice. Nobody just hits their pre-teens and decides to be attracted to the same sex. If people could choose, a lot of gay/lesbian/bisexual people would not be so because of the bullying, judgement and violence many have dealt with.
There are many factors that could sway a person's lifestyle choice. MANY! One of them may be genetic but one thing is certain and that is that there is not one single factor that determines a person's sexual orientation. Again, there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation.
So you need to check your facts before making correcitons/ And, when you boil it down, EVERYTHING we do, whether is sexual orientation or eating carbs, is a choice!!
sure there may be a very tiny percentage who choose a gay lifestyle but for the overwhelming majority it is not a choice and to think otherwise is foolish.
Until you provide scientific evidence, your statement reeks of arrogance. My comments were based on scientific studies. Those studies confirmed that there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation. And its not a tiny percentage or a overwhelming majority. They simply don't know.
You made no scientific points. Your statement pretty much sums up to, "A lot of things influence each other." Allow me to ask you this, at what age did you choose your particular sexual orientation? What was your thought process?
I am not obligated to make scientific points. I'm not the scientist. I was referring to scientific studies that have been done on the matter. If you have an issue with the studies, take it up with them not me.
So...you make a comment with no scientific references, tell someone taking issue with your comment that they need to provide scientific evidence to refute your comment, then when it is pointed out that you referenced no scientific studies you tell them to take it up with the scientists because you do not need to make scientific points. Brilliant!
I'm just waiting for you to provide the scientific references that every gay is born with this inclination. I'm waiting because I know it will be brilliant.
Present ANYTHING to defend your initial comment....anything....at all.....0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.0 -
Therefore, it is an individual's God given right to be gay or practice whatever lifestyle choice they choose.
Credibility is out the window if you think being gay is a choice in my opinion.
There are many factors that could sway a person's lifestyle choice. MANY! One of them may be genetic but one thing is certain and that is that there is not one single factor that determines a person's sexual orientation. Again, there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation.
So you need to check your facts before tossing someones creditibily out the window. And, when you boil it down, EVERYTHING we do, whether is sexual orientation or eating carbs, is a choice!!
Ok, then. Go watch some gay pornography and *kitten* to it. If it is a choice you should be able to do it successfully.
Also, why exactly would someone choose to be a marginilised part of society that is often demonised and in some countries killed for their 'lifestyle choice.' It's completely illogical.0 -
Yes!It honestly doesn't matter if you have a personal objection to it or not... It's civil rights law. Denying a service animal entry is illegal. There are very few circumstances in which an establishment may ask a patron and their service animal to leave.
These circumstances have everything to do with behaviors that are occurring not behaviors you suspect might occur (e.g., the dog has to be posing a safety risk or acting out of control... you can't just say "I think the dog MIGHT pose a safety risk")... Services animals are even legally allowed to enter food prep establishments where health codes specifically prohibit pets because they are not considered "pets."
the laws are the same in canada?0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.
Yes, I get that.0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.
Yes, I get that.
Then I am not sure where your trouble with the "choice" argument is?0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.
Yes, I get that.
Then I am not sure where your trouble with the "choice" argument is?
I get that now that you guys have explained it to me. Like I said, I get hung up on the "choice" debate because I know this man actively chooses against his nature. But its still his nature, and its just a choice to deny. I get that now.0 -
The word "choose."
I just hate the whole argument. I don't want to buy into it. People should be allowed to live their lives as best they can, love who they love and not worry about whether their feelings are a choice or biology. Love is too important an emotion for there to be argument as to whether it is by choice or biology. It is LOVE, for goodness sake! Just love and let others love.0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.
Yes, I get that.
Then I am not sure where your trouble with the "choice" argument is?
I get that now that you guys have explained it to me. Like I said, I get hung up on the "choice" debate because I know this man actively chooses against his nature. But its still his nature, and its just a choice to deny. I get that now.
Ah, okay. I misunderstood. :cheers:0 -
No, I am saying that he does not fit into societal norms and humanity tends to drive away those who are different from the norms. Therefore, people feel pressured, either passively or actively, to at least act as though they fit within these norms. The big secret, though, is that none of us really fit in these norms.
Yeah, I get that if he is gay, then he is choosing to deny it. I just always get tripped up on that debate because of my knowledge of him, but the reality is, he is the outlier, so therefore, a blanket statement on the "choice" to be gay cannot be made for the whole gay population.
But...if he is gay and chooses to not act on it...he is still gay. The choice is not in the state but the reaction to the state.
This.
I can chose to paint my face green but it doesn't change that underneath that green paint, my natural skin color white. The choice I've made doesn't change what I was born as.
He can chose to maintain a heterosexual relationship but it doesn't change that underneath that relationship, his natural sexual attraction is to the same sex.0 -
Yes!It honestly doesn't matter if you have a personal objection to it or not... It's civil rights law. Denying a service animal entry is illegal. There are very few circumstances in which an establishment may ask a patron and their service animal to leave.
These circumstances have everything to do with behaviors that are occurring not behaviors you suspect might occur (e.g., the dog has to be posing a safety risk or acting out of control... you can't just say "I think the dog MIGHT pose a safety risk")... Services animals are even legally allowed to enter food prep establishments where health codes specifically prohibit pets because they are not considered "pets."
the laws are the same in canada?
The laws are not uniform across the provinces (not are they in the US from what I understand) I believe, from a previous similar discussion, that there are differences in what is considered a service dog and what it can be used for.
Several provinces have legislation that define and protect the use of service animals. New Brunswick does not have anything that I can find.
If anyone has a link I'd be interested to read this. I saw this story a few days ago and wondered about the legalities behind it.0 -
Some of us are smack dab in the middle of the homosexual/heterosexual continuum do in fact choose. Although we generally just want the whole buffet sausages and clams and cant make a choice.0
-
Some of us are smack dab in the middle of the homosexual/heterosexual continuum do in fact choose. Although we generally just want the whole buffet sausages and clams and cant make a choice.
You choose who you are attracted to or which ones you decide to pursue?0 -
Nice to be open minded and believe in free speech...just one correction - being gay is not a choice. Nobody just hits their pre-teens and decides to be attracted to the same sex. If people could choose, a lot of gay/lesbian/bisexual people would not be so because of the bullying, judgement and violence many have dealt with.
There are many factors that could sway a person's lifestyle choice. MANY! One of them may be genetic but one thing is certain and that is that there is not one single factor that determines a person's sexual orientation. Again, there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation.
So you need to check your facts before making correcitons/ And, when you boil it down, EVERYTHING we do, whether is sexual orientation or eating carbs, is a choice!!
sure there may be a very tiny percentage who choose a gay lifestyle but for the overwhelming majority it is not a choice and to think otherwise is foolish.
Until you provide scientific evidence, your statement reeks of arrogance. My comments were based on scientific studies. Those studies confirmed that there is not one single factor that that determines a person's sexual orientation. And its not a tiny percentage or a overwhelming majority. They simply don't know.
You made no scientific points. Your statement pretty much sums up to, "A lot of things influence each other." Allow me to ask you this, at what age did you choose your particular sexual orientation? What was your thought process?
I am not obligated to make scientific points. I'm not the scientist. I was referring to scientific studies that have been done on the matter. If you have an issue with the studies, take it up with them not me.
So...you make a comment with no scientific references, tell someone taking issue with your comment that they need to provide scientific evidence to refute your comment, then when it is pointed out that you referenced no scientific studies you tell them to take it up with the scientists because you do not need to make scientific points. Brilliant!
Haha, beat me to it.
I think he just divided by zero and got an answer! :laugh:0 -
I'd just like to add, "lol."0
-
I just want to say that I am a xenophonbe. Everyone who is not me should be killed, or exiled.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 260.5K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 442 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 16 News and Announcements
- 927 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions