The biological determinist Left takes in on the chin again..

[_beastie]

So, droopy, did you email Thama and obtain the actual study, and read it?

[_antishock8]

I guess Bonobo monkeys sucking each other off should be dismissed as "conditioning".

It should be understood for what it is: instinctual programming and/or learned behavior the monkeys find pleasurable and so...do.

The Monkeys, however, not having the intellectual capacity to make choices between alternatives, and having no conception of concepts like "sexual orientation" or "sexual identity' or "gender", are not relevant to this discussion.

In other words, human homosexuality has no relation to animal homosexual behavior.

And believe me shock, you set yourself up with this post big time, but I resisted the fiery darts of the Adversary and I forebear (but it was almost to tempting to pass up).

You mean homosexuality in the animal kingdom isn't disputed? Or are you attempting to say that we need to anthropomorphize animals since homosexuality, apparently, is a human condition and not a natural one?

[_EAllusion]

Lots of smarm, very little substance, as per usual. You guys really need to do some wider reading. Something say, other than Mother Jones and The Gay Advocate.

I majored in biology and psychology. I've at least written one research paper on twin studies and trait theory, which involved actually reading about and understanding things like heritability. I'm sure that's no match for your extensive research that involves reading anti-gay websites like NARTH. Nonetheless, in this one instance, you absolutely abused the concepts of heritability and inheritance to say something that was roughly equal parts incoherent and false. It was explained why.