Homosexuality: Chosen or Genetic?

Originally posted by whobdamandog
I only know about two studies..which were found to be rather inconclusive in linking homosexuality to genetics.

One study that was conducted a bit back, suggested that homosexuals actually had two "X" chromosomes..as opposed to the standard male "XY" combination. I believe this kind of started the whole "genetic theory." This was fed to the public by the media for many years..and continues to be done so today, even though it has been found that many males who were "heterosexual", also were born with two X chromosomes.

The other study involved exposing male "phermones" to gay males..and observing the different chemical reactions that their brains/bodies produced after being exposed to them. This was really a silly experiment, seeing as how the participants had been practicing homosexuals for many years, and were obviously accustomed to having interactions with such phermones.

To put things in perspective..it would be like if I was to wave a pizza in front of an individual who ate pizza for 20 years. When the person responded to wanting the slice of pizza, I could then state that the endorphins released from their bodies after seeing the pizza..were the reason as to why they desired it. Silly stuff.

Anyway..there is no conclusive evidence linking homsexuality to "genetics"...and I doubt there ever will be any.

Also, I'm fairly certain that all people have an extra X chromosome but it's "shut off" (in a process known as X deactivation) and left as Barr bodies, though I could easily have bungled that, as AP Biology was some time ago.

As there is no conclusive evidence to link Homosexuality, or sexuality in fact, to choice,
Gay couples raise straight children and straight couples raise gay children.

Originally posted by Tptmanno1
As there is no conclusive evidence to link Homosexuality, or sexuality in fact, to choice,
Gay couples raise straight children and straight couples raise gay children.

Argumentum ad ignorantiam..🙄

This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

Moving on..there is proof..that many homosexuals/lesbians have been molested as children, grown up in abusive environments/or ones without fathers. Regardless of the circumstances, one is still responsible for their actions.

Many straight people have, too. Do you have a point?

Let me ask you. Did you chose to be straight? When did you make this choice?

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Argumentum ad ignorantiam..🙄

[b]
This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

Moving on..there is proof..that many homosexuals/lesbians have been molested as children, grown up in abusive environments/or ones without fathers. Regardless of the circumstances, one is still responsible for their actions. [/B]

You misused the fallacy (shocker).

He isn't assuming something is true because it hasn't be proven false, he's assuming something is FALSE because it hasn't been proven to be true. He didn't say WHAT caused homosexuality, as such he isn't assuming anything to be true, simply that the statement of "it's a choice" doesn't have any evidence to support it, he didn't deem anything to be true.

Besides, weren't you the one complaining when Adam Poe (properly) pointed out fallacies in YOUR arguments, and now you're (trying) to do the same thing.

Originally posted by whobdamandog
Argumentum ad ignorantiam..🙄

[b]
This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false. For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.

Moving on..there is proof..that many homosexuals/lesbians have been molested as children, grown up in abusive environments/or ones without fathers. Regardless of the circumstances, one is still responsible for their actions. [/B]

Ok.

You: "Flying reindeer Exist"
Me "No they don't"
You: "Prove it"

So now I have to go take every single reindeer and throw them off a cliff in order to prove that none of them can fly. But when I come back you can just say that it has to be on the third tuesday in Febuary on a full moon after eating cabbage, or something like that.

But the moral of the story is that it is IMPOSSIBLE to prove something false. There can allways be conditions when attempting to prove the fallicy of something.
Therefore the burden of proof is on you, because if the conversation went like this.

You: "flying Reindeer exist"
Me: "Prove it."

Then all you have to do is find ONE flying reindeer, or one piece of evidence, and your argument becomes valid.

The flying reindeer argument!

Oh, man, has it been a while since I've seen that in use....I miss The Omega....

Originally posted by BackFire
You misused the fallacy (shocker).

He isn't assuming something is true because it hasn't be proven false, he's assuming something is FALSE because it hasn't been proven to be true.

Backfire..Backfire..read again. Carefully. Tpt is trying to suggest this statement as being "True."

Originally posted by Tptmanno1
...there is no conclusive evidence to link Homosexuality, or sexuality in fact, to choice..

Because he has yet provided nothing to prove it as being false. That's Argumentum ad ignorantiam..my friend. Pretty easy to see. To make matters worse, I've actually provided evidence supporting my position, while Tpt has not.

Moving on. I don't have a problem with anyone using a fallacy..as long as it makes sense when they are doing so, and they aren't trying to dodge answering a question with an obvious answer.

Example of using a fallacy to dodge a question with an obvious answer.

Ex

Does the Buddhist Government state that Buddhism is a "religion" on their website?

answer: Fallacy of appeal to authority...the government is not an "authority" on Buddhism.

Silly stuff.

But I'm glad you gave me an opportunity to educate you once again. 😉

Again..Tpt was the one asserting the position of..

"since their is no evidence to prove that it is "not choice" then you are wrong whob."

I..on the other hand..have suggested that there is evidence demonstrating that it is "choice"..and that there is no evidence linking it to genetics. Only one of us has made a positive statement to support our position. And it was not Tpt.

So if we wanted to apply the Flying Reindeer example to this scenario..it would kind of go like this.

Whob: Reindeer can fly. I have evidence supporting this.
Tpt: You don't have any proof that reindeer can not fly whob..therefore you are wrong.

Simple stuff to understand. You guys are wrong. And once again I am right. Feel free to give me a thumbs up anytime. 😉

Uhh wrong,
My argument is that there is no evidence to prove that it is your choice.
And your so called evidence is some un-sourced "experiments" which you debunk with some strange "pizza" metaphor...
not exactly the most rock solid evidence if I do say so myself..

Sorry try again another day! 😉

Whob, if you think it's down to choice, would you care to answer my questions?

If homosexuality is a choice, then surely heterosexuality is, correct? So when did you choose to be straight? Why did you make this choice?

Originally posted by Tptmanno1
Uhh wrong,

My argument is that there is no evidence to prove that it is your choice.

You don't prove your point..by attempting to disprove mine. That's using a "negative" to prove something. As you Evolutionist's and junior debator's like to call it. Give me evidence to support your point..and you'll maybe you'll have something.

And your so called evidence is some un-sourced "experiments" which you debunk with some strange "pizza" metaphor...
not exactly the most rock solid evidence if I do say so myself..

Sorry try again another day! 😉

Well, there's the pheremone example/the chromosonal example..which were both rather inconclusive experiments. I'll have to find something on them and post it for you guys to see how silly they were. Then there's also the common sense evidence...such as the purpose of the rectum, colon, and the mouth. I shouldn't have to provide evidence for you on these..unless of course you want me to.

I don't believe I need to post evidence

You do, because you are claiming it's a choice. We are saying that it is not. You're making the positive claim here, not us.

Originally posted by Lana
You do, because you are claiming it's a choice. We are saying that it is not. You're making the positive claim here, not us.

And I've provided evidence. As mentioned in the previous post.

-Functions of the anus, colon, and mouth.

-Scientific studies which were inconclusive regarding homosexuality being related to "genetics."

-those who engage in homosexuality having experienced child/emotional/sexual abuse. As well as coming from broken homes.

What more do you want. I can provide links to sites if you would like. Now..why don't you all give me some substantive evidence supporting why it is "genetic." No more semantics. Just give me some hardcore evidence.

Ready..set..Go!!

Originally posted by Lana
Whob, if you think it's down to choice, would you care to answer my questions?

If homosexuality is a choice, then surely heterosexuality is, correct? So when did you choose to be straight? Why did you make this choice?

Originally posted by FeceMan
I think whob is saying that homosexuality is a choice to depart from what is natural and pursue the unnatural; that is, one's natural inclination is to heterosexuality and homosexuality is a chosen path away from it.

In so many words yes. I didn't make my posts to convuluted did I?

I did only stated the "natural" functions of various body parts 100's of times..😉

Originally posted by whobdamandog
And I've provided evidence. As mentioned in the previous post.

-Functions of the anus, colon, and mouth.

-Scientific studies which were inconclusive regarding homosexuality being related to "genetics."

-those who engage in homosexuality having experienced child/emotional/sexual abuse. As well as coming from broken homes.

What more do you want. I can provide links to sites if you would like. Now..why don't you all give me some substantive evidence supporting why it is "genetic." No more semantics. Just give me some hardcore evidence.

Ready..set..Go!!

I'm not saying it's genetic; simply that it's not a choice.

Functions of the mouth/anus are irrelevant. It isn't something that has been extensively studied. And many heterosexual people had abusive childhoods and/or came from a broken home.

None of your points prove anything.

Originally posted by FeceMan
I think whob is saying that homosexuality is a choice to depart from what is natural and pursue the unnatural; that is, one's natural inclination is to heterosexuality and homosexuality is a chosen path away from it.

If one is chosen, then surely the other must be though, correct?

And btw, whob, I must tell you right now that many of the people in this thread are in a far better position to back up their arguments than you are.

I'm really curious as to the exact date and time you chose your sexuality whodamandog.

Holy shit it's Tex 😱

He won't answer that 😉