In regards to what topic? Do more than 50% of the heterosexual public at large engage in homosexual sex persistently?
Why do you keep bringing up 'more than 50%', or 'the majority'? I thought you said you don't define normality by what the majority does.
And behavior does not necessarily equal orientation.[/QUOTE]
I tend to not look at behavior as simplistically as what you would emotionally consider "normal".
I simply recognize that 'normal' is an incredibly subjective term.
Freud for example considered homosexuality rooted in paranoia. You going to ignore his research and call him stupid too?
Paranoia? Sigmund Freud would ascribe biological and psychological factors in explaining the principal causes of homosexuality. He openly thought that humans were born bi-sexual, and that orientation was influenced a a large but still unkown number of factors.
In fact, he even said:
"Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis. "
You have dodged numerous times within this very thread. It is what it is /shrug
You have failed numerous times to put of a cohesive argument. It is what it is.
Projection and butthurt noted
Dodge noted
Dodge noted. Trying to appear arrogant and mocking people is not an argument.
4 dodges so far in one post. You're on a roll. A new record. Gratz.
Once again, you drop a tremendous amount of fail in one post.
Gay Parents Study Suggesting Downside For Kids Draws Fire From Social Scientists
Which in reality are outward signs of the emotional and psychological trauma unfolding within these people. Why would you deny a child their right to be raised by their biological parents in a low conflict household? There is no doubt it is the best environment to raise children in. Why deny them their birthright?
Did you even read your own article?
"The study defined same-sex parenting by asking participants if their parents had ever had same-sex relationships, and whether they had lived with the parent at that time."
"Instead, Regnerus categorized all people who said their parents were once in a same-sex relationship in the same group, even if those people had also experienced major childhood upheavals. About half of the people whose parents had ever been in gay or lesbian relationships also said their parents had once been in a heterosexual marriage, suggesting that a great many of these children were the products of a heterosexual relationship in which one parent later came out as gay or bisexual. Fifty-eight percent of those raised by moms who'd indicated a lesbian experience said their mother once left the household during their youth, and 14 percent said they'd spent time in foster care."
The only thing Regnerus found was that instability in the family is bad.
****ing shocked, I tell you.
/laugh you're small potatoes
You're another insignificant hack who exists purely to be beaten into the ground and then laughed at when you try to rise to defend yourself.
Please, don't pretend you're actually a good debater. It's insulting to the trolls out there that actually try.