John:

I agree with you.  A GENETIC predisposition has never been proved but 
sociological ones have.  Its been my experience that those who defend 
homosexuals do so because they are rationalizing how a good friend or 
relative can be one.  Its easier to think homosexuals can't help themselves 
because of genetics than to just admit they are sinful and depraved 
sexually.  Bottom line, the Bible condemns homosexuals for what ever reason 
they are one whether genetic or not.  Romans 1:22-32.  Case closed.

On a side note read an article about the new ECUSA Primate in Time Magazine 
at the doctor's office today.  Her answers to some questions put to her 
really made me sick.  All social Gospel and not an ounce of Christianity.

Bill+

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John S. Longcamp" <jlongcamp@...>
To: <faithandlife@...>
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 2:57 PM
Subject: Re: [FaithandLife] Homosexuality


> But even this study does not show a GENETIC predisposition--only a 
> possible sociological one.
>
> John+
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "gc_mccomas McComas" <gc_mccomas@...>
> To: <faithandlife@...>
> Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 11:49 AM
> Subject: RE: [FaithandLife] Homosexuality
>
>
>> The only study that currently holds promise for the "born gay" argument 
>> has yet to be replicated, and it reports that the likelihood that one has 
>> being a gay male is about 2%  if you have two older brothers by the same 
>> mother, as opposed to 50% less chance (about 1%) otherwise (that 2% 
>> holding true for those raised apart from any older brothers). I wouldn't 
>> be surprised if it holds up, but it's not much.
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, send ANY message to: 
> faithandlife-unsubscribe@...