Soy Makes You Gay

[feral]

Soybean products are feminizing

I'm addicted to soy crisps, and I still won't wear pink. Wonder what's up with that...

 

[Arnold_Philips]

Hey feral, haven't seen you around in a while.

 

[gratis]

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327

Quote: "A devil food is turning our kids into homosexuals."

It's articles like these that can either make you laugh with the absurdity of it, or cry that there may be quite a few people who agree with this opinion.

Quote: "The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape them anymore. "

How many theories about homosexuality can be trotted
out like jackets to be tried on? First it's a "choice", then it's because the little boy didn't have a close relationship with his father, now it's... (dramatic music) SOY!

Enjoy.

It's quite true people. Soy is a plant with estrogenic properties. And just incase you don't know, growing boys should not have too much estrogen, even if it comes from plants.

However, if you eat fermented soy it doesn't quite do the same.

 

[Bananafish]

It's quite true people. Soy is a plant with estrogenic properties. And just incase you don't know, growing boys should not have too much estrogen, even if it comes from plants.

However, if you eat fermented soy it doesn't quite do the same.

But steak shot up with horomones is okay, right? Because it's masculine...

 

[gratis]

But steak shot up with horomones is okay, right? Because it's masculine...

Actually most of the food is not good for us - but that's another subject. But if you want a healthy steak look for a homegrown cow that is free range and grass fed.

Soy, is actually one of the most toxic foods (aside from the estrogen factor) because it is mass produced, using genetically modified beans. And because it is so widely mass produced it is saturated with herbicides, pesticides and fungicides.

The only time it may be good for a person in large amounts is if it is organically grown, fermented and if you are post menopausal.

 

[Ave Maria]

I seriously doubt that the cause of homosexuality is soy. I believe there are multiple factors that cause homosexuality such as genetics and environment that one is raised in.

 

[Isis-Astoroth]

Wow. Soy is a gay food. What next?

 

[Lynden1000]

Wow. Soy is a gay food. What next?

Next we'll see SpongeBob eating soybeans, and then we'll really know something's up.

 

[Shemjaza]

It's quite true people. Soy is a plant with estrogenic properties. And just incase you don't know, growing boys should not have too much estrogen, even if it comes from plants.

However, if you eat fermented soy it doesn't quite do the same.

I think you are probably quite right that the estrogen in crappy mass produced soy is bad for growing children (particularly boys); but there is still absolutely no evidence that it would make them more likely to be gay.

In the 1950s dosing gay men up with either testosterone or estrogen was used to attempt to make them straight... neither did anything but damage their bodies and minds. (Poor Alan Turing, a hero of WWII, was driven to suicide by these barbaric 'treatments'.)

 

[christalee4]

No, I don't usually find someone being in error laughable with absurdity. People get wrong notions all the time. Some people have mental challenges too, I don't point at them and laugh either.

So, you're feeling sorry for the man and for the people who agree with him? I am sure HE doesn't think he's mentally challenged, and it's apparent that he thinks he is absolutely correct, based on what he has read.

But more to the point, what can be disheartening to observe are people that mock others because of arrogance or just mean spiritedness.

Do you think I was meanspirited in pointing out the 1) the absurdity of his claim and 2) the outrageousness that people would actually believe this, in the same way that people believe that homosexuals, adulterers, disobedient children and heretics should be stoned to death by Biblical law for sinning, or that slavery should be permitted, because the Bible says it's okay? http://www.patriarchspath.org/Articles/Docs/Stoning_Disobedient_Children.htm
http://www.serve.com/thibodep/cr/slavery.htm

I've seen worse arrogance and meanspiritedness directed towards gays and others who support their civil rights by those who profess to be highminded men of God.

The piece is an editorial, did you catch that part?
What about the rest of the editorial?
No, I don't agree with the article in parts, but this thread isn't for talking about all the parts and what is agreed on/disagreed... or is that an incorrect assumption by me?

Go ahead and talk away - it didn't stop other people from voicing their opinion pro and con. Which parts of his editorial did you agree with or disagree with?

 

[ChristianCenturion]

So, you're feeling sorry for the man and for the people who agree with him? I am sure HE doesn't think he's mentally challenged, and it's apparent that he thinks he is absolutely correct, based on what he has read.

Hmm... well I suppose first off, I would say that how or what someone 'thinks they are' has little to do with objectiveness. But I didn't really imply that the author was mentally challenged either, did I?

I don't have to 'feel' anything for the man.
I disagree with some of the material, other parts I found interesting and still others I don't know and don't really care much to pursue.
Perhaps I just chose not to give an emotive response. That is an option for some of us.

Do you think I was meanspirited in pointing out the 1) the absurdity of his claim and 2) the outrageousness that people would actually believe this, in the same way that people believe that homosexuals, adulterers, disobedient children and heretics should be stoned to death by Biblical law for sinning, or that slavery should be permitted, because the Bible says it's okay? http://www.patriarchspath.org/Articles/Docs/Stoning_Disobedient_Children.htm
http://www.serve.com/thibodep/cr/slavery.htm

1) I don't see anything given from you that even remotely 'points out' any absurdity.
I see pointing and something involved, but I do not see the 'pointing out' as in what I can respect in the way of presenting persuasive substantiation in rebuttal or for consideration.

2) I don't really know what Bible you are referring to, but I'll share that I believe homosexual acts, adultery, cursing their mother or father, heresy, etc. deserve the penalty of being stoned to death. Seeing as I did not start out in this world as a Christian, I suppose it is a good thing for both me and others that grace, repentance and forgiveness is the situation we find ourselves. If you were talking about the Christian Bible, then perhaps you should read more of it and you will see where your 'because the Bible says it is OK' was missing much as well as perhaps not grasping the topic of slavery.

I've seen worse arrogance and meanspiritedness directed towards gays and others who support their civil rights by those who profess to be highminded men of God.

Ah, that would explain much here.
What was that supposed to mean, exactly?
I mean, why bring that up at all - as if it were supposed to express a point. What are people supposed to infer by the particular grouping?
I wasn't talking about gays or men of God at all, but here you do.

So gays are the good guys and men of God would be what, the bad guys?

I assume that you understand the terms prejudice, transference of hostility, bigotry, etc. They have application when it deals with clinging to hostilities, bitterness, resentment, etc. only to direct it at labeled groups.

Go ahead and talk away - it didn't stop other people from voicing their opinion pro and con. Which parts of his editorial did you agree with or disagree with?

'It' didn't stop other people?
I don't have a clue what that was supposed to be saying.
But as for the editorial, a few posters have already covered points I might have... I may post something different if I wish to later.
And I infer that you are giving your blessing in that. OK... thanks, I guess.

 

[wanderingone]

Soo.... if soy is so "feminizing" as if that explains (sexual orientation) how come my daughter isn't straight? We use tofu almost daily. And how come areas where tofu is used often don't have a much higher incidence of homosexuality?

 

[christalee4]

1) I don't see anything given from you that even remotely 'points out' any absurdity....
....
2) I don't really know what Bible you are referring to, but I'll share that I believe homosexual acts, adultery, cursing their mother or father, heresy, etc. deserve the penalty of being stoned to death.

I do thank you for and appreciate your honesty. Not many other people of faith would admit that they believe in the same thing; in fact, they do the opposite, they try to deny it or hide it. I'd like to pursue this further in another thread though, if you don't mind.

That said, most citizens in this country, of faith and without, could not even consider the notion that stoning people to death for sins such as homosexuality, adultery, heresy, etc., would even be remotely moral, acceptable, allowable or a preferred goal of societal achievement in the realm of law - I being one of them - and therefore it's understandable that you, as a believer in stoning people to death, may not also place as absurd the notion that soy turns men gay.

Ah, that would explain much here.
What was that supposed to mean, exactly?
I mean, why bring that up at all - as if it were supposed to express a point. What are people supposed to infer by the particular grouping?
I wasn't talking about gays or men of God at all, but here you do.

So gays are the good guys and men of God would be what, the bad guys?

If only life were so simple. But all men of God aren't hostile to gays, nor are for their stoning, and not all gays are mild passive victims who aren't capable of saying mean and cruel things. I think it's safe to say that most people go for the middle ground; they want to live and let live, live in peace, not prevent the other from exercising his or her religion and at the same time, give those who don't practice the majority religion or any religion at all freedom from religious tyranny.

But as for the editorial, a few posters have already covered points I might have... I may post something different if I wish to later.
And I infer that you are giving your blessing in that. OK... thanks, I guess.

Double scoops of soy sprinkles on my blessing for you!! Let's hear it!

 

[christalee4]

Oops - wrong thread.

 

[ScarletWitch]

first of all, i think that the 'soy makes boys gay' notion is completely ridiculous and simply not true. however, IF young boys were given large amounts of female hormones then why would they be gay? sure, it might mess up their male reproductive organs but gay? get real. a person's homosexuality or heterosexuality is based on their heart and who they love. they might be physically attracted to one gender over the other but whether or not they're gay or straight has to do with love.

 

[gratis]

first of all, i think that the 'soy makes boys gay' notion is completely ridiculous and simply not true. however, IF young boys were given large amounts of female hormones then why would they be gay? sure, it might mess up their male reproductive organs but gay? get real. a person's homosexuality or heterosexuality is based on their heart and who they love. they might be physically attracted to one gender over the other but whether or not they're gay or straight has to do with love.

You are quite right. Some wisdom could be used here. Soy doesn't make boys gay.

But it can contribute to them becoming effeminate, which of course is not healthy and can cause a myriad of problems from physical to social.

Why would we want to take a chance and do that to our young developing boys?

 

[christalee4]

You are quite right. Some wisdom could be used here. Soy doesn't make boys gay.

But it can contribute to them becoming effeminate, which of course is not healthy and can cause a myriad of problems from physical to social.

Why would we want to take a chance and do that to our young developing boys?

Maybe you could do better than the man who provided the WND editorial and provide some substantive evidence, backed by real science, that soy makes boys "effeminate". Also, could you describe how "effeminate" causes physical and social problems? I think kids and parents are more acceptive of different personalities and behaviors than they used to be, thanks to society's greater acceptance of gay culture in general.

 

[KarateCowboy]

Hahahahaahaha right that's why Japanese male pop-stars are so girly, SEE?!?!:

SOY SAUCE EMASCULATES!

*Ahem*. On a more serious note, if soy made us gay then we should eat soy. We'd be the happiest people in the world

 

[The Gregorian]

Dude... soy's totally gay.

 

[christalee4]

Dude... soy's totally gay.

But does it make you gay? That's the question. And if it doesn't, what's the next theory in line?