Re: OT/ Being Gay Is NOT a Choice

In rec.arts.tv.soaps.cbs on Mon, 13 Aug 2007 16:28:13 -0700 in Msg.#
<1187047693.142908.202370@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Elmer
<ElmerCat@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Aug 13, 5:25 pm, DonnaB shallotpeel <shallotp...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Meanwhile, no one can stop you from whaling away at poor old dead 'on the
way to the glue factory' horsey, but it is not constructive in any way that
I can see for you to keep doing so. YMMV, though, as always.

Oh no!!! The glue factory!!! Elmer doesn't like the sound of that!

LOL, Elmer, glue, good one. <G>

Ladies, please take a few steps back. Donna, I'm generally on your
side, and Shirl, I've tried to be very supportive. I truly think
there's been much more agreement between everyone than you're both
recognizing. I see a problem in that some points have been blurred and
many people's postings have been misinterpreted:

Item #1 - People in general have different opinions about gay being a
choice.

Item #2 - The scientific community has not determined how biology
affects sexual orientation.

Item #3 - There is no disagreement in the scientific community that
being gay is not a choice.

I see that when people have responded to Shirl with item #3, she's
taken it as though they've said item #1 was not true. For her part,
Shirl has repeatedly pulled out item #2 and made an illogical
conclusion that #3 is false. Shirl sometimes takes people's comments
and stretches them beyond what was said. Besides getting upset
herself, doing this irritates the others. A typical example:

Thank you for your comments, here again, and your example. I spent some time
reading & thinking & trying to digest what you were illustrating & I believe
I understand what you mean. Things are a little blurry to me at the moment.

My point is, it's not always easy to convey everything using words
alone, yet within the newsgroup, words are all we have. Don't take
them always at 100% face value, or draw sweeping conclusions too
quickly. We are after all, only human, and therefore make mistakes in
forming our own words and interpreting those of others. More
importantly, when someone says, "that's not what I meant", before
saying, "oh, yes it is" and letting it hurt your feelings, slow down
for just a moment and consider their words and/or explanation once
again.

I think I can agree with all of this. Some golden words in here!

And, I do think that pushing back from the table is a good idea at this
point.

--
DonnaB shallotpeel

"And if the Supreme Court says that you have the right to consensual sex
within your home, then you have the right to bigamy, you have the right to
polygamy, you have the right to incest, you have the right to adultery. You
have the right to anything. Does that undermine the fabric of our society? I
would argue yes, it does. It all comes from, I would argue, this right to
privacy that doesn't exist in my opinion in the United States Constitution."
- Senator Rick Santorum, Republican from Pennsylvanian
.