"Live Strong in Character - Don't Leave Your Family"



Bill Z. wrote:
>
> I think I made what I was saying pretty damn clear in the post Steven
> cited. As to your current "theory", that is even more idiotic. A
> "genetic mistake" is basically a mutation, and it is highly unlikely
> that you'd get the same mutation to repeat over and over again
> (without being propagated through offspring) to the point where it
> shows up in a few percent of the population. Can you point to any
> evidence that such a novel mechanism has ever been shown to exist,
> showing the exact location of said "break" for a trait exhibited by
> even one species on the face of the earth?
>

There are no genetic "mistakes" that don't quickly lead to death.
Especially if such a "mistake" is a "break", whatever that means. If
that refers to a break in a chromosome the result would be random fusion
of DNA ends, which leads to cancer, certainly not to alternate sexual
preference. As usual, Kunich doesn't know what he's talking about. He's
like the Peter Pan of RBR retards.
 
Bill Z. wrote:

> Your statement is a non-sequitor, since the issue was what was in the
> Bible or Koran, not the Sharia or the Wahabi interpretation of that.
> You do understand the difference, don't you?


RBR meme alert!
"I know how to spell non-sequitur, dammit!"


--
IT Management. Tel: +64 3 479 5478
Web and database hosting, Co-location. Web: http://www.wic.co.nz
Software development. Email: [email protected]
 
Stu Fleming <[email protected]> writes:

> Bill Z. wrote:
>
> > Your statement is a non-sequitor, since the issue was what was in the
> > Bible or Koran, not the Sharia or the Wahabi interpretation of that.
> > You do understand the difference, don't you?

>
> RBR meme alert!
> "I know how to spell non-sequitur, dammit!"


Sorry about a typo - I posted it just after a 5 hour drive. :)

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:

> "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> writes:


> > Of course, that won't stop Kunich from accusing me of being a queer
> > somewhere along the line ... He's done it in the past, he'll do it again.

>
> Well, as you pointed out in a subsequent post, it happened pretty
> quickly!


It's a pretty standard pattern. First he tries to act like the other person
in the discussion is stupid (e.g. "Real historian, aren't you?"), then he starts
wildly building strawmen, then he finishes with homosexual references. Because
anyone who disagrees with Tom must surely be a **** of the worst sort. Of
course, most of his "data" on homosexuality is taken from seriously suspect
sources, like Paul Cameron (booted out of the APA) or Don Boys. Or, more
correctly, plagiarized from those sources:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.bicycles.racing/msg/78255f77a2ea183f?hl=en&

Oh well, what else would you expect from am guy who seems to worship at the
alter of Fred Phelps?

Strange, then, that the guy who is so adamantly anti-homosexual seems to
mention penises so frequently.

--
tanx,
Howard

Butter is love.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?
 
Howard Kveck <[email protected]> writes:

> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
> > "Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> writes:
> > > Of course, that won't stop Kunich from accusing me of being a
> > > queer somewhere along the line ... He's done it in the past,
> > > he'll do it again.

> > Well, as you pointed out in a subsequent post, it happened pretty
> > quickly!

>
> It's a pretty standard pattern.
> <snip>
> Strange, then, that the guy who is so adamantly anti-homosexual seems to
> mention penises so frequently.


I don't think Sigmund Freud would have thought it was strange, but
rather the basis for a diagnosis! :)

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Kyle Legate wrote:

> Bill Z. wrote:
>>
>> I think I made what I was saying pretty damn clear in the post Steven
>> cited. As to your current "theory", that is even more idiotic. A
>> "genetic mistake" is basically a mutation, and it is highly unlikely
>> that you'd get the same mutation to repeat over and over again
>> (without being propagated through offspring) to the point where it
>> shows up in a few percent of the population. Can you point to any
>> evidence that such a novel mechanism has ever been shown to exist,
>> showing the exact location of said "break" for a trait exhibited by
>> even one species on the face of the earth?


There has been speculation though that if there is a genetic trait that
corresponds to a tendency towards homosexuality and if it was located in
the X chromosome then it could play different roles in female and male
offspring. If the supposed gene, for example coded for an increased
attraction towards men then the female offspring with this gene might
compensate for the male offspring's lack of propagation by an increased
drive to mate with men. More plainly imagine a female person who get's this
"genetic mistake" which leads to a greater attraction towards males. She
naturally mates many times and produces many children, some male and some
female. The male offspring that get this "genetic mistake" will have a low
probability of propagatin this gene because they will be attracted towards
men, not women. But the "genetic mistake" will still get propagated by the
female offspring who will be even more attracted to men than usual.

Of course "mistake" carries negative connotations but in evolution we are
all "mistakes".
 
Konstantinos Koukopoulos <[email protected]> writes:

> There has been speculation though that if there is a genetic trait that
> corresponds to a tendency towards homosexuality and if it was located in
> the X chromosome then it could play different roles in female and male
> offspring. If the supposed gene, for example coded for an increased
> attraction towards men then the female offspring with this gene might
> compensate for the male offspring's lack of propagation by an increased
> drive to mate with men. More plainly imagine a female person who get's this
> "genetic mistake" which leads to a greater attraction towards males. She
> naturally mates many times and produces many children, some male and some
> female. The male offspring that get this "genetic mistake" will have a low
> probability of propagatin this gene because they will be attracted towards
> men, not women. But the "genetic mistake" will still get propagated by the
> female offspring who will be even more attracted to men than usual.


How does this model explain lesbians?

> Of course "mistake" carries negative connotations but in evolution we are
> all "mistakes".


That's basically my objection to Kunich's posts - the use of loaded
language that has no basis (in this case, in biology).

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
Bill Z. wrote:
> Howard Kveck <[email protected]> writes:
>
>
>>In article <[email protected]>,
>> [email protected] (Bill Z.) wrote:
>>
>>>"Steven L. Sheffield" <[email protected]> writes:
>>>
>>>>Of course, that won't stop Kunich from accusing me of being a
>>>>queer somewhere along the line ... He's done it in the past,
>>>>he'll do it again.
>>>
>>>Well, as you pointed out in a subsequent post, it happened pretty
>>>quickly!

>>
>> It's a pretty standard pattern.
>><snip>
>> Strange, then, that the guy who is so adamantly anti-homosexual seems to
>>mention penises so frequently.

>
>
> I don't think Sigmund Freud would have thought it was strange, but
> rather the basis for a diagnosis! :)
>

Envy?
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > Sorry I don't see it in there (which is possibly why someone called
>> > Richard Burton "suggests" it has something to do with it, as opposed
>> > to "stating" that it does). The references are just too vague.

>>
>> That must be why Wahabis commonly execute homosexuals in the public
>> squares
>> in Arabia.

>
> Your statement is a non-sequitor, since the issue was what was in the
> Bible or Koran, not the Sharia or the Wahabi interpretation of that.
> You do understand the difference, don't you?


I hate to point this out to someone so well versed as yourself, but Muslims
don't use ONLY the Koran as their total law.

> If you want to start a discussion about how "common" it is, however,
> you can start with some hard data - average number of executions per
> year. Surely that should be a matter of public record.


Why don't you look it up if you're interested?

> My real name backwards: tihS piD
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
>> >
>> >> In short Mohammed said: ""Kill the one that is doing it and also kill
>> >> the
>> >> one that it is being done to." (in reference to the active and passive
>> >> partners in gay sexual intercourse) "
>> >
>> > Where? We were talking about the Koran specifically, not everything
>> > Mohammed might have said.

>>
>> Bill, if you knew anything about Islam you'd know that they don't use the
>> Koran as their only source for Muslim law. But plainly you don't.

>
> As I said, the post I replied to specifically mentioned the Koran. Perhaps
> you'd make less of a fool of yourself if you'd learn to read with some
> minimal comprehension.


There you have it from Zaumen - dead men tell no tales.
 
"Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Bill Z. wrote:
>>
>> I think I made what I was saying pretty damn clear in the post Steven
>> cited. As to your current "theory", that is even more idiotic. A
>> "genetic mistake" is basically a mutation, and it is highly unlikely
>> that you'd get the same mutation to repeat over and over again
>> (without being propagated through offspring) to the point where it
>> shows up in a few percent of the population. Can you point to any
>> evidence that such a novel mechanism has ever been shown to exist,
>> showing the exact location of said "break" for a trait exhibited by
>> even one species on the face of the earth?
>>

> There are no genetic "mistakes" that don't quickly lead to death.


Perhaps you can tell that to those whose genetics were manipulated in the
womb by German measles virus and were born deaf. Or maybe you can explain
why blue-eyed white cats are usuall deaf but not all are?
 
"Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> How does this model explain lesbians?


Ask your mother about that.

>> Of course "mistake" carries negative connotations but in evolution we are
>> all "mistakes".

>
> That's basically my objection to Kunich's posts - the use of loaded
> language that has no basis (in this case, in biology).


This from a biologist himself.
 
On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 19:29:37 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>I hate to point this out to someone so well versed as yourself, but Muslims
>don't use ONLY the Koran as their total law.


Here's a pretty good summary of Islam and homosexuality

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The Qur'an and Homosexuality:

There are five references in the Qur'an which have been cited as
referring to gay and lesbian behavior. Some obviously deal with
effeminate men and "masculine women." The two main references to
homosexual behavior are:

"We also sent Lut : He said to his people : "Do ye commit lewdness
such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye
practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a
people transgressing beyond bounds." Qur'an 7:80-81

"What! Of all creatures do ye come unto the males, and leave the wives
your Lord created for you? Nay, but ye are forward folk." Qur'an
26:165

Both references relate to gay sexual activities; lesbian practices are
not mentioned in the Qur'an.

Lut is referred to as "Lot" in the Hebrew Scriptures. This passage is
an apparent reference to the activities at Sodom and Gamorah. It seems
to imply that there was no homosexual behavior before it first
appeared in Sodom. This is a uniquely Islamic concept; it does not
appear in Jewish or Christian beliefs. The passage also links the sin
of Sodom (the reason for its destruction) to homosexuality. That
linkage is contradicted by other verses in the Hebrew Scriptures.

The Hadith and homosexuality:

The Hadith are collections of sayings attributed to Muhammad. Many
Hadiths (ahadith) discuss liwat (sexual intercourse between males).
Two examples are:

"When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes."

"Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being
done to." (in reference to the active and passive partners in gay
sexual intercourse)

There is at least one mention of lesbian behavior mentioned in the
Hadith:

"Sihaq (lesbian sexual activity) of women is zina (illegitimate sexual
intercourse) among them."


Traditionalist orthodox Muslims generally claim that the Hadith
literature contains the authentic sayings of Muhammad. Many liberal
Muslims doubt the authenticity of at least some of them. The latter
might point out that during the times of the first Caliphs, Muslims
did not know what to do with individuals guilty of "liwat/lutiyya".
No sahabi (companion) of Muhammad could quote a saying or decision of
Muhammad relating to this question.

Treatment of homosexuals within Islamic countries:

According to a pamphlet produced by Al-Fatiha, there is a consensus
among Islamic scholars that all humans are naturally heterosexual.
Homosexuality is seen by scholars to be a sinful and perverted
deviation from the norm. All Islamic schools of thought and
jurisprudence consider gay acts to be unlawful. They differ in terms
of penalty:

The Hanafite school (currently seen mainly in South and Eastern Asia)
teaches that no physical punishment is warranted.

The Hanabalites, (widely followed in the Arab world) teach that severe
punishment is warranted

The Sha'fischool of thought (also seen in the Arab world) requires a
minimum of 4 adult male witnesses before a person can be found guilty
of a homosexual act.

Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran
since their revolution in 1979. 10 public executions of homosexuals
have been performed in Afghanistan by the Taliban army.

Statment by the Islamic Society of North America:

Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi of the ISNA said: "Homosexuality is a moral
disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin and corruption... No person is
born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar or murderer.
People acquire these evil habits due to a lack of proper guidance and
education.""

"There are many reasons why it is forbidden in Islam. Homosexuality is
dangerous for the health of the individuals and for the society. It is
a main cause of one of the most harmful and fatal diseases. It is
disgraceful for both men and women. It degrades a person. Islam
teaches that men should be men and women should be women.
Homosexuality deprives a man of his manhood and a woman of her
womanhood. It is the most un-natural way of life. Homosexuality leads
to the destruction of family life."

Beliefs of www.islamic.org.uk:

They hold views which are very similar to those held by conservative
Christianity:
Homosexuality is considered sinful within Islam
Homosexuality is a profound mistake
Humans are all naturally heterosexual
Homosexuality is caused by environmental factors, particularly
near the time of puberty.
People can control their thoughts and steer themselves away
from homosexuality
Homosexuality is a chosen sexual orientation.
Any homosexual can become a heterosexual.

British Muslim group Al-Muhajiroun

According to RainbowNetwork.com, the British Muslim group
Al-Muhajiroun issued a fatwa (religious decree) on 2001-JUL-16 against
a Muslim homosexual rights group Al-Fatiha. The alleged fatwa said:
"The very existence of Al-Fatiha is illegitimate and the members of
this organisation are apostates. Never will such an organisation be
tolerated in Islam and never will the disease that it calls for be
affiliated with a true Islamic society or individual. The Islamic
ruling for such acts is death. It is a duty of the Muslims to prevent
such evil conceptions being voiced in the public or private arena."
 
Expressing the reality of the Muslim world isn't going to make much of a
dent in Zaumen.

"Jack Hollis" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sun, 14 Aug 2005 19:29:37 GMT, "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>I hate to point this out to someone so well versed as yourself, but
>>Muslims
>>don't use ONLY the Koran as their total law.

>
> Here's a pretty good summary of Islam and homosexuality
>
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> The Qur'an and Homosexuality:
>
> There are five references in the Qur'an which have been cited as
> referring to gay and lesbian behavior. Some obviously deal with
> effeminate men and "masculine women." The two main references to
> homosexual behavior are:
>
> "We also sent Lut : He said to his people : "Do ye commit lewdness
> such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye
> practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a
> people transgressing beyond bounds." Qur'an 7:80-81
>
> "What! Of all creatures do ye come unto the males, and leave the wives
> your Lord created for you? Nay, but ye are forward folk." Qur'an
> 26:165
>
> Both references relate to gay sexual activities; lesbian practices are
> not mentioned in the Qur'an.
>
> Lut is referred to as "Lot" in the Hebrew Scriptures. This passage is
> an apparent reference to the activities at Sodom and Gamorah. It seems
> to imply that there was no homosexual behavior before it first
> appeared in Sodom. This is a uniquely Islamic concept; it does not
> appear in Jewish or Christian beliefs. The passage also links the sin
> of Sodom (the reason for its destruction) to homosexuality. That
> linkage is contradicted by other verses in the Hebrew Scriptures.
>
> The Hadith and homosexuality:
>
> The Hadith are collections of sayings attributed to Muhammad. Many
> Hadiths (ahadith) discuss liwat (sexual intercourse between males).
> Two examples are:
>
> "When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes."
>
> "Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being
> done to." (in reference to the active and passive partners in gay
> sexual intercourse)
>
> There is at least one mention of lesbian behavior mentioned in the
> Hadith:
>
> "Sihaq (lesbian sexual activity) of women is zina (illegitimate sexual
> intercourse) among them."
>
>
> Traditionalist orthodox Muslims generally claim that the Hadith
> literature contains the authentic sayings of Muhammad. Many liberal
> Muslims doubt the authenticity of at least some of them. The latter
> might point out that during the times of the first Caliphs, Muslims
> did not know what to do with individuals guilty of "liwat/lutiyya".
> No sahabi (companion) of Muhammad could quote a saying or decision of
> Muhammad relating to this question.
>
> Treatment of homosexuals within Islamic countries:
>
> According to a pamphlet produced by Al-Fatiha, there is a consensus
> among Islamic scholars that all humans are naturally heterosexual.
> Homosexuality is seen by scholars to be a sinful and perverted
> deviation from the norm. All Islamic schools of thought and
> jurisprudence consider gay acts to be unlawful. They differ in terms
> of penalty:
>
> The Hanafite school (currently seen mainly in South and Eastern Asia)
> teaches that no physical punishment is warranted.
>
> The Hanabalites, (widely followed in the Arab world) teach that severe
> punishment is warranted
>
> The Sha'fischool of thought (also seen in the Arab world) requires a
> minimum of 4 adult male witnesses before a person can be found guilty
> of a homosexual act.
>
> Al-Fatiha estimates that 4,000 homosexuals have been executed in Iran
> since their revolution in 1979. 10 public executions of homosexuals
> have been performed in Afghanistan by the Taliban army.
>
> Statment by the Islamic Society of North America:
>
> Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi of the ISNA said: "Homosexuality is a moral
> disorder. It is a moral disease, a sin and corruption... No person is
> born homosexual, just like no one is born a thief, a liar or murderer.
> People acquire these evil habits due to a lack of proper guidance and
> education.""
>
> "There are many reasons why it is forbidden in Islam. Homosexuality is
> dangerous for the health of the individuals and for the society. It is
> a main cause of one of the most harmful and fatal diseases. It is
> disgraceful for both men and women. It degrades a person. Islam
> teaches that men should be men and women should be women.
> Homosexuality deprives a man of his manhood and a woman of her
> womanhood. It is the most un-natural way of life. Homosexuality leads
> to the destruction of family life."
>
> Beliefs of www.islamic.org.uk:
>
> They hold views which are very similar to those held by conservative
> Christianity:
> Homosexuality is considered sinful within Islam
> Homosexuality is a profound mistake
> Humans are all naturally heterosexual
> Homosexuality is caused by environmental factors, particularly
> near the time of puberty.
> People can control their thoughts and steer themselves away
> from homosexuality
> Homosexuality is a chosen sexual orientation.
> Any homosexual can become a heterosexual.
>
> British Muslim group Al-Muhajiroun
>
> According to RainbowNetwork.com, the British Muslim group
> Al-Muhajiroun issued a fatwa (religious decree) on 2001-JUL-16 against
> a Muslim homosexual rights group Al-Fatiha. The alleged fatwa said:
> "The very existence of Al-Fatiha is illegitimate and the members of
> this organisation are apostates. Never will such an organisation be
> tolerated in Islam and never will the disease that it calls for be
> affiliated with a true Islamic society or individual. The Islamic
> ruling for such acts is death. It is a duty of the Muslims to prevent
> such evil conceptions being voiced in the public or private arena."
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> >
> >> > Sorry I don't see it in there (which is possibly why someone called
> >> > Richard Burton "suggests" it has something to do with it, as opposed
> >> > to "stating" that it does). The references are just too vague.
> >>
> >> That must be why Wahabis commonly execute homosexuals in the public
> >> squares
> >> in Arabia.

> >
> > Your statement is a non-sequitor, since the issue was what was in the
> > Bible or Koran, not the Sharia or the Wahabi interpretation of that.
> > You do understand the difference, don't you?

>
> I hate to point this out to someone so well versed as yourself, but Muslims
> don't use ONLY the Koran as their total law.


Still dissembling? As I told you, the *person I was replying to*
mentioned "ONLY the Koran." The issue was *not* what Muslims believe
but what another poster said. Is there any real reason that you
can't get that through your thick scull?


> > If you want to start a discussion about how "common" it is, however,
> > you can start with some hard data - average number of executions per
> > year. Surely that should be a matter of public record.

>
> Why don't you look it up if you're interested?


(He probably did look it up and found the number to be small.)

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >> > "Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> >
> > As I said, the post I replied to specifically mentioned the Koran. Perhaps
> > you'd make less of a fool of yourself if you'd learn to read with some
> > minimal comprehension.

>
> There you have it from Zaumen - dead men tell no tales.


There you have it from Kunich - he thinks dead people post on usenet.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Kyle Legate" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Bill Z. wrote:

>
> > There are no genetic "mistakes" that don't quickly lead to death.

>
> Perhaps you can tell that to those whose genetics were manipulated in the
> womb by German measles virus and were born deaf.


What makes you think the German measles virus has any effect on genes?
It may disrupt the development of the brain, eyes or (specifically)
hearing, but you don't have to modify genes to do that.

> Or maybe you can explain why blue-eyed white cats are usuall deaf
> but not all are?


Because multiple genes may be involved? Or the genes encode the rates
for various processes but the outcome is still somewhat nondeterministic?
I'll leave the details to Kyle, but you don't have to assume a "genetic
mistake" that arises via some mutation to explain that.



--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > How does this model explain lesbians?

>
> Ask your mother about that.


Back in your 7th grade boys locker room again? Is that your way
of saying that something doesn't fit your preconceptions?

> >> Of course "mistake" carries negative connotations but in evolution we are
> >> all "mistakes".

> >
> > That's basically my objection to Kunich's posts - the use of loaded
> > language that has no basis (in this case, in biology).

>
> This from a biologist himself.


Now what are you babbling about?

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 
"Tom Kunich" <[email protected]> writes:

> "Bill Z." <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > I've ~ don't tell
> > people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a personal
> > decision.

>
> Anyone who believes this raise their hand.


What I actually posted was:

I've actively opposed mandatory helmet laws, and don't tell
people whether to use a helmet or not, viewing it as a
personal decision.

Why he felt compelled to snip it mid sentence is not clear.

If our proven liar Tom Kunich wants to claim otherwise, perhaps he can
deign to produce a message ID to back up his statement. Or perhaps he
wants to pretend that writing to my elected representative and
providing reasons not to pass a mandatory helmet law somehow does not
qualify as opposing such legislation.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
 

Similar threads

B
Replies
13
Views
429
Road Cycling
Alex Rodriguez
A