Monday, September 8, 2014

Love Is All You Need: Insights from the Longest Longitudinal Study on Men Ever Conducted

The Art of Manliness ^ | 09/02/2014 | George Vaillant 

Why do two men from very similar socioeconomic and educational backgrounds sometimes take very different life paths?
Is nature or nurture more important in determining a man’s success in his relationships and career?
What physiological and psychological traits present in a man’s younger years predict his chances of living a long, flourishing life?
In 1938, researchers at Harvard’s medical school began a study that aimed to answer these fascinating questions and discover what factors lead to an “optimum” life. The study recruited 268 of the university’s sophomores from the all-male classes of 1939-1944, and set out to examine every aspect of their lives for at least a couple decades. The men selected were healthy in body and mind, and deemed likely to capitalize on their potential and become successful adults. While many of them came from well-off families, some were intelligent students who had been plucked from poor households and given full scholarships.
(Excerpt) Read more at ...

Homosexuality Has No Genetic Cause!

BarbWire ^ | September 5, 2014 | Jonathon Moseley 

A genetic cause for homosexuality is not scientifically possible. A homosexuality gene, if it existed, would quickly die out. However, it gradually becomes clear that liberals and progressives are poorly-educated about science. They passionately believe in evolution, yet they don’t understand it.

Public discussion is driven by an assumption that one may be “born homosexual.” Being ‘born’ homosexual is a medical impossibility unless there is a specific gene causing it. That is, heterosexuals would have one genetic DNA sequence while homosexuals have a different DNA sequence in its place.

I discovered something debating this topic: One central point simply escapes the understanding of liberal activists. Homosexuality powerfully reduces reproduction. It is a lack of sexual desire for the opposite sex. Any individual who lacks desire to engage in sexual activity that results in children will have dramatically fewer children. Duh.

Robert Oscar Lopez reported on the controversy here Wednesday at, “Yes, Gay is a Choice. Get Over it.” A college professor expressed her opinion in a newspaper editorial that homosexuals can choose to stop being homosexual. The University of Toledo fired Crystal Dixon. Lopez points out how liberals reduce people to the level of animals with no self-control. Lopez also recounts his personal transition from gay man to heterosexual husband celebrating twelve years married to his wife.

However, a gene that dramatically reduces one’s likelihood of having childhood would quickly become extinct. The gene would die out whether you believe in evolution as The Origin of Species (Darwin’s book) or whether you believe in simple mathematics.

Homosexual activists totally ignore the role that sexuality plays in having children and the fact that one’s genes can only be passed on if they have children. A gene determining homosexuality is fundamentally different from hair color, eye color, height, skin color, etc. If there were a gene that reduced fertility by 80% to 90%, that ancestral line would quickly die out.

According to the Hypothesis of Evolution, every detail of a living specimen must have started somewhere at some time. Life began as a single-cell organism, they say. But genetic mutation (errors) created variations. Helpful mutations survived and persisted because the variation was ‘better’ than the previous model. Unhelpful mutations cause that line to die out.

Advocates of the idea that homosexuals are just born that way cannot wrap their head around the teaching of evolution (which they subscribe to) that every detail about human beings had to start somewhere. They debate this topic as if a homosexual gene came out of nowhere. (Note that most ‘homosexual activists’ are themselves not homosexual, but simply enemies of Christianity hijacking the conversation.)

Under Evolution, if a person is actually “born” homosexual, there was a point in time in one particular geographic location on Earth when that genetic mutation first occurred in one particular individual human. There was a point in time when everyone else on Earth had the normal heterosexual plan in their DNA. But there was one (1) (count them, one) individual with a genetic mutation causing them to desire the same sex instead of the opposite sex.

Remember how Evolution supposedly works: (1) Genetic mutations occur (which are neither good nor bad, no pejorative meaning is intended). (2) Some variations are “better” in terms of survival and continue. (3) Some variations are “worse” and die out. (4) “Survival” and “better” are defined as only the individual with the mutation having more children who carry on the genetic variation across successive generations. (5) Nothing else counts but the number of offspring. In evolution, “survival” and “better” mean absolutely nothing except more children perpetuating the genetic mutation over succeeding generations. (6) The very definition of the Hypothesis of Evolution is that a genetic change which reduces the number of offspring is at a disadvantage and will eventually die out.

The extinction of a homosexuality gene would occur in only one generation were it not for some cultural factors. The very first person to have a homosexuality gene – there being one and only one individual when the genetic variation first occurred – would have no children (zero). The very definition of the gene is a lack of desire for the opposite sex. And remember this was all happening at least 2,000 to 3,000 years ago if not earlier, when we do see historical references.

However, a homosexual man or woman would – in some cultures more than others – be expected to marry and have children. So, many people having a homosexuality gene would have some offspring, not zero. But they would have far fewer offspring than heterosexuals, even in the context of a culturally-encouraged marriage.

First, the original genetic mutation would never spread very far from the one single individual who experienced the first genetic mutation for homosexual desire. The population having the gene would never grow very large to begin with.

Second, even those in an opposite-sex marriage would still have sex capable of producing offspring far less often than heterosexuals – by definition.

So it might take as long as a thousand years (20 to 25 generations) for the gene to die out. But homosexuality would be steadily decreasing in frequency and would eventually become extinct. And that ignores the fact that the gene could never become widespread to start with.

We also can’t forget that during most of human history, survival was difficult, without the luxuries we enjoy today. Child mortality was high. Suppose a heterosexual couple has four children, two of whom die before reaching child-bearing age. Then suppose a marriage including a homosexual partner motivated by social convention has two children, of whom all two die. That leaves no children to reach child-bearing age.

Also, a homosexuality gene would be concentrated in one geographic location on Earth and in the ethnic group where it started. Of course that is radically in conflict with the observable evidence. We don’t observe any such concentration.

We would also see no homosexuality at all in cultures where people were not pressured into a heterosexual marriage. Ironically, in cultures where people were free to follow their desires, homosexuals would have no offspring and the genetic line would die out almost immediately. But even when homosexuals were pressured into a heterosexual marriage they would – by definition – engage in a lower frequency of heterosexual sex.

The human body is pervasively designed around sexual reproduction. Homosexual orientation is not an alternative like blue versus brown eyes. Just switching one genetic DNA sequence with another would not create a homosexual. The human design is pervasively heterosexual.

By contrast, a developmental cause for homosexuality is consistent with the very low but uniform frequency we actually see spread throughout all ethnic groups, all geographic locations, and all time periods. The evidence contradicts any genetic cause of homosexual desires.

Homosexuals are not born that way. Homosexuality results from emotional and psychological development. It is not “a choice” so much as hundreds of little choices growing up, including choosing how to react to various incidents, relationships and opportunities. Many little choices create circumstances that reinforce sexual feelings. The resulting habits – fueled by pleasure – can feel extremely powerful and seem to be beyond one’s control, as intensely as being addicted to any pleasure-inducing chemicals.


Breitbart ^ | 7 Sep 2014 | by TONY LEE 

ABC News reporter Jim Avila showed how easy it is to illegally cross Mexico's southern border: It took him just five dollars to bring three others with him from Guatemala. "We found in Guatemala just last month makeshift rafts, filled with immigrants crossing illegally into Mexico heading to the U.S.," Avila revealed on a segment on ABC's This Week. "I boarded one with no papers, no IDs checked. Cost me $5 to bring three people over here from Guatemala to Mexico. " Nearly 75 percent of the nearly 63,000 illegal immigrant juveniles who have been detained at the border since October of last year have come from Central America. "Most go through Guatemala to get to Mexico" while "some find their way to Mexico through Belize," according to the ABC News report. As Breitbart News reported, Mexico agreed to issue Regional Visitor permits that will "allow Guatemalans to enter the country without a passport and stay for up to three days in any of the 81 bordering municipalities located throughout the states of Chiapas, Tabasco and Quintana Roo." And "those permits can essentially be tickets to ride the death train, because 72 hours is plenty of time to ride the 1,000 miles to the U.S.-Mexico border." In recent weeks, though, Mexico has been conducting raids near the Death Train and even yanking migrants off of it to try to deter more illegals from hopping on board.
(Excerpt) Read more at ..

The Real Deal!

Voter I.D.

Good Boy!



Which is worse?



Taking over Florida!

Love Affair

Leadership Lessons

Gates of Hell

The Obama Doctrine