“This isn't science.”
You have evidence their methodology is bad? Their sample eize is small?
Or you don’t like the conclusion?
“It's psychobabble mumbo-jumbo, where somehow our potty training or our breast-feeding or our spankings have shaped our most deeply held adult beliefs.”
Yes, psychoanalysis is scary if you don’t understand it, huh?
Especially if you only know enough to mock it.
“The same liberals who complained it was utterly unscientific for Sen. Bill Frist to diagnose Terri Schiavo's medical condition from the Senate floor think it's scientific to guess about the "unconscious" things that conservatives have hidden from themselves inside their own brains.”
Well if this study comes from the Senate Floor, yes.
How much have you looked into the actual study, though?
“ What if you're a religious parent who feels that the homosexual lifestyle is sinful, at odds with what God intended for humanity?”
The study has not claimed that innate desires are The ONLY reason to be a homophobic idiot. But if you’re taking the study personally, one has to ask why?
"These academics don't like to discuss religion, except by implying that religious parents are "controlling" and "authoritarian" and prompt "hateful" attitudes.”
That’s not discussing religion. That’s discussing assholes. Taking that personally, too?
“Secular leftists hate it when conservatives bring religion into politics, arguing it's unfair to say God favors the Republican agenda.”
We can quote the Sermon on the Mount to SHOW that god doesn’t approve of the Republican agenda.
"But then they turn around and bring science into politics, insisting that science favors the liberal agenda, that "reality has a liberal bias."”
Well, yeah. You guys hate change, the more we learn the more we see that change is necesary or justified.