Homosexuality: Chosen or Genetic?

Started by whobdamandog324 pages

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Researcher Simon LeVay

"At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role."{7}

{7} LeVay, Simon (1996). Queer Science, MIT Press.

...in the well-known LeVay brain study which measured parts of the hypothalamus, your colleagues perform a series of autopsies on the brains of some dead people who, they have reason to believe, were basketball players.

Next, they do the same with a group of dead nonbasketball players. Your colleagues report that, on average, "Certain parts of the brain long thought to be involved with basketball playing are much larger in the group of basketball players."

A few national newspapers pick up on the story and editorialize, "Clearly, basketball playing is not a choice. Not only does basketball playing run in families, but even these people's brains are different."

You, of course, as a scientist, are well aware that the brain changes with use...indeed quite dramatically. Those parts responsible for an activity get larger over time, and there are specific parts of the brain that are more utilized in basketball playing.

Now, as a scientist, you will not lie about this fact, if asked (since you will not be), but neither will you go out of your way to offer the truth. The truth, after all, would put an end to the worldwide media blitz accompanying the announcement of your findings.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

From Dennis McFadden, University of Texas neuroscientist:
"Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if it were not true for homosexuality."{8}

{8} "Scientists Challenge Notion that Homosexuality's a Matter of Choice," The Charlotte Observer, August 9, 1998.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

But before we consider the specifics, here is what serious scientists think about recent genetics-of-behavior research. From Science, 1994:

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute."{1}

{1} Mann, C. Genes and behavior. Science 264:1687 (1994).

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Homosexual Twin Studies

Two American activists recently published studies showing that if one of a pair of identical twins is homosexual, the other member of the pair will be, too, in just under 50% of the cases. On this basis, they claim that "homosexuality is genetic."

But two other genetic researchers--one heads one of the largest genetics departments in the country, the other is at Harvard--comment:

While the authors interpreted their findings as evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality, we think that the data in fact provide strong evidence for the influence of the environment.{2}

The author of the lead article on genes and behavior in a special issue of Science speaks of the renewed scientific recognition of the importance of environment. He notes the growing understanding that:

... the interaction of genes and environment is much more complicated than the simple "violence genes" and intelligence genes" touted in the popular press.The same data that show the effects of genes, also point to the enormous influence of nongenetic factors.{3}

{2} Billings, P. and Beckwith, J. Technology Review, July, 1993. p. 60.

{3} Mann, C. op. cit. pp. 1686-1689.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

"Gay gene" researcher Dean Hamer was asked by Scientific American if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology. He replied:

"Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors."{4}

Dean Hamer and his colleagues had performed a common type of behavioral genetics investigation called the "linkage study." Researchers identify a behavioral trait that runs in a family, and then:

a) look for a chromosomal variant in the genetic material of that family, and

b) determine whether that variant is more frequent in family members who share the particular trait.

To the layman, the "correlation" of a genetic structure with a behavioral trait means that trait "is genetic"-in other words, inherited.

In fact, it means absolutely nothing of the sort, and it should be emphasized that there is virtually no human trait without innumerable such correlations.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

There are only two major principles that need to be carefully understood in order to see through the distortions of the recent research. They are as follows:

1. Heritable does not mean inherited.

2. Genetics research which is truly meaningful will identify, and then focus on, only traits that are directly inherited.

Almost every human characteristic is in significant measure heritable. But few human behavioral traits are directly inherited, in the manner of height, for example, or eye color. Inherited means "directly determined by genes," with little or no way of preventing or modifying the trait through a change in the environment.

Originally posted by whobdamandog

Things that animals "Do" and "Do not" do

They do not rationalize.

They do not have mercy on those weaker than themselves.

They do not cover themselves in clothing, to hide their nakedness.

They do not cook their food to make sure that all the contaminents have been taken out of it.

They allow their wounded kin to be devoured by predators,
when it best suites their purpose of survival.

They don't bury their kin...or perform relgious rights.

They sniff the behinds of other animals.

They sometimes eat defication.

They sometimes eat their young.

They rub their behinds against trees.

They play with their defication.

Their sole purpose in life is one of survival, not recreation.

Thus "sexual behavior" in animals, or any behavior represented by animals for that matter..can not be equated to human behavior due to the innumerable amount of differences in the general behaviors of both.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
I mean it.

Really, they are.

It so obvious to me.

If homosexuality was a genetic thing, then more than 10% of the people on the planet would be gay.

If homosexuality was a genetic thing, then it would naturally co-exist with heterosexuality.

(my opinion, it doesn't, since at the basic level, it would be detramental, by not promoting the growth of the species through pro-creation.)

It may be a genetic [B] defect , but it isnt a humans natural state to have sex with a member of the same sex.

It is unnatural.(i.e....sperm cannot fertilize anything in an anus/mouth, and ovaries are not fertilized by saliva)

Our reproductive organs/functions are given to us at birth.
That is whats natural. We know what they are meant to do.

Human biology shows us what we meant for.

(I'm not saying that people cant do what the hell they feel like, but it isn't the "natural" state of things.)

But, the pendejos will never listen.

They will continue to piss on my leg and tell me its raining. 😛 [/B]

Address this:

Homosexuality is natural in the sense that it:

[list][*]is present in or faithfully represents nature or life.

[*]is a phenomenon expressive of natural conditions.

[*]conforms to the usual and ordinary course of the material world and its phenomena.[/list]
Illustrating that homosexuality is natural is the fact that it extensively occurs in nature; homosexuality has been documented in over 190 species and can be observed in nearly all sexually reproducing organisms, the only exception being bacteria.

Studies of human sexuality indicate that sexual orientation is fixed and unchangeable, and current research suggests that sexual orientation is in place before birth and is caused by genetic and biological factors:

In 1991, Simon LeVey, neuroanatomist for the Salk Institute, found that the INAH3 structure of the hypothalamus in homosexual men is twice as small as those of heterosexual men, more closely resembling those of heterosexual women.

Seven years later, findings published in the March edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by researchers at the University of Texas - Austin report that the cochlea structure in homosexual women more closely resembles that of heterosexual men.

In both studies, the difference in the structures of homosexuals is attributed to hormone exposure in the womb, evidence that sexual orientation has a biological substrate.

A fingerprint study by J.A.Y. Hall and D. Kumura at the University of Western Ontario at London ON Canada found that a significant percentage of homosexuals have excess ridges on their left hand digits compared to their right hand digits, a characteristic that was not shared by heterosexuals.

This study shows a genetic link to sexual orientation that is determined before birth as fingerprints are fully developed in a fetus before the 17th week and do not change thereafter.

A study by Psychologist Michael Bailey of Northwestern University and Psychiatrist Richard Pillard of Boston University found that if one sibling is homosexual the likelihood of an identical twin also being homosexual is 52%, the likelihood of a fraternal twin being homosexual is 22%, and the likelihood of a genetic or non-genetic sibling being homosexual is 10%.

They also found that in most instances in which identical twins are separated at birth and one twin is homosexual, the other twin is also homosexual.

This study shows that sexuality has a genetic component and is not determined by life experiences.

Dean Hamer at the National Cancer Institute examined the DNA of 40 homosexuals and found that ALL shared a genetic marker in the Xq28 region of the X chromosome.

Camperio-Ciani of the University of Padua - Italy found that there is no single "gay gene" but rather several genes responsible for sexual orientation. He identified that genetic components are indeed linked to the X chromosome and that there are other components likely to be on other chromosomes as well.

Findings published in the March issue of the biomedical journal Human Genetics by Brian Mutanksi of the University of Illinois at Chicago in conjunction with Pennsylvania State University, the University of California - Los Angeles, the University of California - San Diego, the National Institutes of Health, and the National Science Foundation report, after combing the entire human genome for genetic determinants of male sexual orientation, identifying them in stretches of DNA on chromosomes 7, 8, and 10.

Furthermore, according to extensive research by the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, and the American Psychological Association there is currently no scientific evidence that sexual orientation is learned or can be changed.

It's been adressed..many times..

What do the Professionals Think About Homosexuality..Genetics or Choice?

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

From the American Psychological Association
"[M]any scientists share the view that sexual orientation is shaped for most people at an early age through complex interactions of biological, psychological and social factors."{6}

From "Gay Brain" Researcher Simon LeVay
"At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role."{7}

From Dennis McFadden, University of Texas neuroscientist:
"Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if it were not true for homosexuality."{8}

From Sociologist Steven Goldberg
"I know of no one in the field who argues that homosexuality can be explained without reference to environmental factors."{9}

As we have seen, there is no evidence that homosexuality is simply "genetic"--and none of the research itself claims there is.

Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.

{6} The American Psychological Association's pamphlet, "Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality."

{7} LeVay, Simon (1996). Queer Science, MIT Press.

{8} "Scientists Challenge Notion that Homosexuality's a Matter of Choice," The Charlotte Observer, August 9, 1998.

{9} Goldberg, Steven (1994). When Wish Replaces Thought: Why So Much of What You Believe is False. Buffalo, New York: Prometheus Books.

okay enough..i just wanted to prove that I could repost my points too..😉

Originally posted by whobdamandog
taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Researcher Simon LeVay

"At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality] is that multiple factors play a role."{7}

{7} LeVay, Simon (1996). Queer Science, MIT Press.

...in the well-known LeVay brain study which measured parts of the hypothalamus, your colleagues perform a series of autopsies on the brains of some dead people who, they have reason to believe, were basketball players.

Next, they do the same with a group of dead nonbasketball players. Your colleagues report that, on average, "Certain parts of the brain long thought to be involved with basketball playing are much larger in the group of basketball players."

A few national newspapers pick up on the story and editorialize, "Clearly, basketball playing is not a choice. Not only does basketball playing run in families, but even these people's brains are different."

You, of course, as a scientist, are well aware that the brain changes with use...indeed quite dramatically. Those parts responsible for an activity get larger over time, and there are specific parts of the brain that are more utilized in basketball playing.

Now, as a scientist, you will not lie about this fact, if asked (since you will not be), but neither will you go out of your way to offer the truth. The truth, after all, would put an end to the worldwide media blitz accompanying the announcement of your findings.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

From Dennis McFadden, University of Texas neuroscientist:
"Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if it were not true for homosexuality."{8}

{8} "Scientists Challenge Notion that Homosexuality's a Matter of Choice," The Charlotte Observer, August 9, 1998.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

But before we consider the specifics, here is what serious scientists think about recent genetics-of-behavior research. From Science, 1994:

Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated. "Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute."{1}

{1} Mann, C. Genes and behavior. Science 264:1687 (1994).

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Homosexual Twin Studies

Two American activists recently published studies showing that if one of a pair of identical twins is homosexual, the other member of the pair will be, too, in just under 50% of the cases. On this basis, they claim that "homosexuality is genetic."

But two other genetic researchers--one heads one of the largest genetics departments in the country, the other is at Harvard--comment:

While the authors interpreted their findings as evidence for a genetic basis for homosexuality, we think that the data in fact provide strong evidence for the influence of the environment.{2}

The author of the lead article on genes and behavior in a special issue of Science speaks of the renewed scientific recognition of the importance of environment. He notes the growing understanding that:

... the interaction of genes and environment is much more complicated than the simple "violence genes" and intelligence genes" touted in the popular press.The same data that show the effects of genes, also point to the enormous influence of nongenetic factors.{3}

{2} Billings, P. and Beckwith, J. Technology Review, July, 1993. p. 60.

{3} Mann, C. op. cit. pp. 1686-1689.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

"Gay gene" researcher Dean Hamer was asked by Scientific American if homosexuality was rooted solely in biology. He replied:

"Absolutely not. From twin studies, we already know that half or more of the variability in sexual orientation is not inherited. Our studies try to pinpoint the genetic factors...not negate the psychosocial factors."{4}

Dean Hamer and his colleagues had performed a common type of behavioral genetics investigation called the "linkage study." Researchers identify a behavioral trait that runs in a family, and then:

a) look for a chromosomal variant in the genetic material of that family, and

b) determine whether that variant is more frequent in family members who share the particular trait.

To the layman, the "correlation" of a genetic structure with a behavioral trait means that trait "is genetic"-in other words, inherited.

In fact, it means absolutely nothing of the sort, and it should be emphasized that there is virtually no human trait without innumerable such correlations.

taken from http://www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html

There are only two major principles that need to be carefully understood in order to see through the distortions of the recent research. They are as follows:

1. Heritable does not mean inherited.

2. Genetics research which is truly meaningful will identify, and then focus on, only traits that are directly inherited.

Almost every human characteristic is in significant measure heritable. But few human behavioral traits are directly inherited, in the manner of height, for example, or eye color. Inherited means "directly determined by genes," with little or no way of preventing or modifying the trait through a change in the environment.

The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality is a "non-profit, educational orginization dedicated to the research, therapy, and prevention of homosexuality." NARTH is the only orginization that advocates the use of reparative therapy which is condemned by every other mental health professional organization because of evidence that it is both ineffective and dangerous.

Try to find a single reputable scientific or mental health organization on which to base your rebuttals.

reparative therapy....
Any other left-handers on this board ever had "therapy" by having their left hand tied behind their backs?
just curious cause it's the same shit and it does cause BRAIN DAMAGE

Originally posted by Darth Jello
reparative therapy....
Any other left-handers on this board ever had "therapy" by having their left hand tied behind their backs?
just curious cause it's the same shit and it does cause BRAIN DAMAGE

I was changed from left to right hand when I was young. They did that kind of thing in the 60's, and I seem to be ok, 😱 😆 I can't catch a ball, but I can operate my mouse on either side.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
It is not unnatural and it makes sense to me. Around 7% of any population is homosexual, but as a population increases, the % goes up. This is a safety valve that slows the birth rate and helps avoid a population crash. Most species cannot survive population crashes, so those species that had this safety valve were able to survive food shortages caused by over population.

Hmmm....

That's an interesting theory, Shaky.

(and the first real answer to why homosexuality develops in only a few people.)

It is possible that the human race is pro-actively dealing with over-population!!! 😱

I'm not disputing that homosexuality may be doing just that. 😉

It begs the question though, ..."When did the human race start to exhibit this response to over-population?"

Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years, indeed... even during the dark ages, when the life expectancy for most people was 40-55 and we were not anywhere near as populated on earth as we are now.

Also, the human being hasn't had any other major evolutionary changes in the last 7,000 years (physically/functionally, I mean) so it would make me wonder as to where/why the human race would suddenly start to evolve. (i.e. nobody is giving the human race info. that it is an over-populated organism, and should genetically engineer homosexuals.)

It wouldn't be a survival instinct, because many millions, even billions of people are living full, long lives despite over population. (i.e. there is no need in the mass human race for slowing the birth rate.)

Besides, if your between 18-25 like me, (23) a whole 3rd of our generation has already been aborted anyway. 🙁

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Besides, if your between 18-25 like me, (23) a whole 3rd of our generation has already been aborted anyway. 🙁

whoa, i never thought about that .All the people that would be here right now that aren't b/c they were kil...I mean aborted. Another time, another thread.

But yeah, something to ponder about on some free time.

Also, I don't think there's some special reason/plan as to why there are people who like the same sex. It just is. As natural as people who like the opposite sex.

is it comprehensible.....

aren't b/c they were kil...I mean aborted.

If you know that belongs in another thread why post it here?? Seriously it's so f*ckin pathetic when people do that.

Also, I don't think there's some special reason/plan as to why there are people who like the same sex. It just is. As natural as people who like the opposite sex.

But I agree with this.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Simon carnal.

Estas cierto!

Los pinches jotos en el "thread" aqui estas pendejos primeros! 😄

Habla english por favor (sp]..............

Originally posted by debbiejo
Habla english por favor (sp]..............

should be "hablar ingles por favor".

Originally posted by Eis
If you know that belongs in another thread why post it here?? Seriously it's so f*ckin pathetic when people do that.

But I agree with this.


why must you go around and find something wrong with almost everything that I post?

is it comprehensible.....

Originally posted by powerfulone1987
should be "hablar ingles por favor".

.....

Yep, I stand corrected.........though, you know what I meant... 😎

He's a liberal, he can't be very happy with the state of anything right now. 😛

"Piss off a liberal... buy a gun." 😄

should be "hablar ingles por favor".

"Habla ingles por favor." Is just fine.

why must you go around and find something wrong with almost everything that I post?

is it comprehensible.....


Because I post in this thread and when I see something idiotic or stupid, I point it out. But hey I agreed with you on something.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Yep, I stand corrected.........though, you know what I meant... 😎

No!! You were right!! I come from a spanish speaking place, you were correct.

Originally posted by Eis
"Habla ingles por favor." Is just fine.

.

Thought so..............Thanks...............Mi amore!! 😄

Originally posted by sithsaber408
"Piss off a liberal... buy a gun." 😄

That's right!

GO DUB'YA!!!

Originally posted by Eis
No!! You were right!! I come from a spanish speaking place, you were correct.

you are so bent on proving me wrong. Just let it go.

and one single thing you've agreed with me on. 🙄

is it comprehensible.....