Does the gay gene exist?

[Labrocca]

This topic is an offshoot of another debate. I think it's one worth getting into. Seems the "gay" debates get a lot of discussion here and I believe the "gay gene" is really the heart of the matter.

http://www.leaderu.com/jhs/satinover.html

That's a great read. Tell me what you think of it. Feel free to quote parts of it but please don't quote it entirely.

[Buck Laser]

I don't have time to follow the link you cited in your post today, but I'll try to get into. It seems to me that there is increasing evidence that homosexual behavior is VERY widespread in the animal kingdom. On the face of it, I find it hard to dismiss the myriad of examples of creatures all along the scale of life who seem to practice homosexual sex without benefit of clergy. There is clealy a greater amount of deviant sexual behavior among the more creative elemnts of the society than among the "routine" people. One might even not that people of hight politival accomplishment frequently display sexual behaviors that would be untolerated by lesser men--Clinton and his intern, VP Rockefeller and his um...temporary dalliance, Roosevelt and his dalliances have always been tolerated.

This is why the spookiness of Cheese Whiz and others worrys me so.

[AlonzoMourning23]

There are very few things that are decided by one gene. It's a common misconception that biological things can be reduced to that. Most traits, characteristics etc. are polygenetic, if they're genetic. A certain combination has to be in place for that to result.

Second, the issue of whether it's genetic has shaky support, the issue of whether its biological has strong support. Birth order is correlated with homosexuality in men. Some brains homosexual men share structural similarities with female, and female homosexual brains often respond to certain hormones, such as pheromones, more in line with male heterosexuals than female heterosexuals.

But one significant source of research against obvious (in the sense of things that common sense would indicate can lead to homosexuality) connections with homosexuality, and the idea that there is some basic choice, even if unconscious, lies in the results of homosexual parenting. Their children (either biological or adopted at birth) are no more likely to be homosexual, or suffer any psychological or social issues, than the children of heterosexuals.

Another significant argument against choice is the total failure of behavioral or cognitive therapy in treating homosexuality. It doesn't work. Yes, there are a minority of people who can act heterosexual, and behave heterosexually, but Haggard is a perfect example of what often happens in such cases. Few men wanted to be homosexual less than he did. And people with such attitudes occasionally can be superficially cured, but all those does is change behavior. There's a monumental divide between changing behavior and changing the underlying causes of that behavior.

"Curing" homosexuality is an ineffective therapy, and any psychologist offering it is acting irresponsibly (according to the American Psychological Association), since the risk of harm is much greater than achieving the goal of such therapies. It's largely the domain of quacks who place moral beliefs above the science of psychology and the well being of clients.

Also, the term environment needs to be understood in a scientific context. Scientifically, environment can mean pretty much any non genetic influence. Womb conditions are a major source of environmental differences in humans, and those difference are biological.

Some direct responses to this:

(b) the research agenda is being distorted by the political requirement that no such associated traits be discovered and that homosexuality be falsely presented as directly inherited.

That's not the state of modern research in this area. He's grasping onto the argument advanced in the media, something which he earlier correctly stated distorts the issue, and is now trying to turn that criticism on the scientific community. I've read multiple psychology books, and attended conferences on psychology, they're not arguing that its directly inherited.

As one prominent gay activist researcher implied, all genetic things being equal, it is a whole lot easier to become "gay" in New York than in Utah.

That's a horrible argument. For one, it takes confessed sexuality at face value. He naively (or wishfully) seems to suggest that asking a heterosexual if he is indeed heterosexual is equal to carrying out a study on his sexual attraction based on bodily responses. The other issue is movement. Massachusetts has a higher percentage (not significantly higher, but higher) of homosexuals now than it did in 2002. That's because it's a more desirable place for homosexuals. Provincetown, MA has a significantly higher percentage of homosexuals than Andover, MA. The reason for that is one is a more desirable place for homosexuals to relocate to.

Taken as a whole, this is a convoluted mix of science and misconceptions about science. He jumps from scientific opinions to the press' and the publics understanding of science repeatedly. And he responds to scientific arguments, and misconceptions about such arguments seemingly as if they are scientific equals, even though, in most cases, he earlier points out those misconceptions. And, by the end, I'm left wondering whether he's responding to scientific arguments or popular misconceptions held by the public. Considering his target audience here and the opening to the speech, I get the feeling that the goal is to convince the layperson of a point more than to convince his peers, and to argue against certain policies. To that end, it's a wonderful argument.

[dgridley]

Great thread and some great replies so far.. I'm all for a genetic predidposition to being "gay".. environmental factors may play a factor in bringing it out, but if the predisposition isn't there, it ain't gonna happen IMO.

[Labrocca]

If a gay gene exists does that mean a pedophile gene exists as well?Â*Â*Also will there one day be a cure for the gene issue in the future.Â*Â*And will parents test before birth to see if their child is gay and then want to abort how will the gay community react?

I would like to see more sites with solid research into the gay gene theory.

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

Every link I have found so far only has 1 research paper that touted the "gay gene" and it's spotty at best.Â*Â*How many times was this studied?Â*Â*I surely hope more than just once for the gay gene theorists to hold onto.

Here is another extensive analysis of the research for the gay gene.
http://www.newdirection.ca/a_biol.htm

[BoogyMan]

Expanding on Labrocca's commentary, if homosexuality were genetic, one could also conclude that just about any impusle driven behavior could be explained away with an "it's genetic" line of argumentation.Â*Â*Is there a kleptomaniacal gene or a nymphmaniacal gene?

[AlonzoMourning23]

I don't get it, why do people keep thinking researchers in this field believe there's a gay gene? And why do people believe that a single gene is necessary for something to be present at birth?

[MAP2010.wireless]

No, there is no Gay Gene.
We all know do what we want, If there is a Gay Gene then is there a Gene for people who date outside of their race?

There are People who only with to date outside of their race, are they born that way? Is this a new Breed of Human, Will we see a Gay Man and another Gay Man have a child on their own?

[underdawg]

First of all, if there was such a thing as a gay gene, and that homosexuality were not a choice, then wouldn't that put a bit of a hole in Christians theory that people choose to be gay? Wouldn't it make your God seem a bit cruel and somewhat evil for condemning someone for something that he was born with? It would be like blaming a child for being left handed.

If Christian women want to get an abortion for whatever reason, I see nothing wrong with it. It is their bodies, and I don't think the government should have any say in the matter. This hatred of gays must be so bad in this country that Christians would consider having abortions rather than have a gay child seems a bit hypocritical to me. You would be willing to make laws to prevent other women from having abortions, but would consider doing it yourself if the child was known to be gay.

What is really wrong with being gay? I don't see it as an illness.It is different yes, but what harm do does it actually cause? So we don't produce children. Lots of people don't or can't have children. Children do not owe their parents grandchildren. That is just being selfish. Then some will argue that two men or two women having sex or kissing is revolting. Well heterosexuals can do some pretty nasty things as well. And gays are not the only ones getting sodomized. Women take it up the butt by their husbands also. You will also say that God doesn't approve, well God doesn't seem to approve of a lot of things, but that doesn't stop most people as well as Christians from doing them anyway.

I think the reason people hate gays has more to do with ego than it is considered a sin by God. Lots of people do things quite sinfull, but homosexuality is seen as an embarrassment. The male ego is such a fragile thing. Gay is seen as being weak and feminine. Guys who are not secure with their own masculinity will try to distance themselves from and try to not be associated with gays for fear that they think that others will think they might be weak or gay themselves. If there is any "sin" to be found in homosexuality, I think the sin that would be most damning would be the sin of pride.

[lily]

Well said underdawg.......especially the fear. I don't know if it's because they are afraid they are going to get "hit" on or as you say fear that someone will think they are gay........and this I think goes back to childhood and name calling.

Then some will argue that two men or two women having sex or kissing is revolting.

Going to disagree with you on this one sentence though and go off topic......I don't know any man that has a problem with seeing two women making love or kissing.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Well I remember a man protesting same sex marriage and he pretty much summed up the average guys opinion: "Homosexual sex is disgusting, unless it's two women and they're hot"

Without the "and hot", it reverts to disgusting.

[underdawg]

I don't think men have a problem with seeing two hot babes kissing, but if it were two butch dykes, perhaps so.

[MAP2010.wireless]

First of all, if there was such a thing as a gay gene, and that homosexuality were not a choice, then wouldn't that put a bit of a hole in Christians theory that people choose to be gay? Wouldn't it make your God seem a bit cruel and somewhat evil for condemning someone for something that he was born with? It would be like blaming a child for being left handed.

If Christian women want to get an abortion for whatever reason, I see nothing wrong with it. It is their bodies, and I don't think the government should have any say in the matter. This hatred of gays must be so bad in this country that Christians would consider having abortions rather than have a gay child seems a bit hypocritical to me. You would be willing to make laws to prevent other womenÂ*Â*from having abortions, but would consider doing it yourself if the child was known to be gay.

What is really wrong with being gay? I don't see it as an illness.It is different yes, but what harm do does it actually cause? So we don't produce children. Lots of people don't or can't have children. Children do not owe their parents grandchildren. That is just being selfish. Then some will argue that two men or two women having sex or kissing is revolting. Well heterosexuals can do some pretty nasty things as well. And gays are not the only ones getting sodomized. Women take it up the butt by their husbands also. You will also say that God doesn't approve, well God doesn't seem to approve of a lot of things, but that doesn't stop most people as well as Christians from doing them anyway.

I think the reason people hate gays has more to do with ego than it is considered a sin by God. Lots of people do things quite sinfull, but homosexuality is seen as an embarrassment. The male ego is such a fragile thing. Gay is seen as being weak and feminine. Guys who are not secure with their own masculinity will try to distance themselves from and try to not be associated with gays for fear that they think that others will think they might be weak or gay themselves.Â*Â*If there is any "sin" to be found in homosexuality, I think the sin that would be most damning would be the sin of pride.


I have stated clear that being gay is not from birth, they wish to be gay and thats it.

People who wish to have kids with other people outside of their race are they born that way?

You have some crazy ideas, a person who is left handed is nothing like a guy who has sex with other men.

[underdawg]

So Map, are you speaking from some sort of experience that you know that being gay is a choice? I am gay, and I know I never made such a choice.

[Labrocca]

Another significant argument against choice is the total failure of behavioral or cognitive therapy in treating homosexuality.

The same is said about sexual predators.

Birth order is correlated with homosexuality in men.

This doesn't prove anything about biology. This could still be environment.

Their children (either biological or adopted at birth) are no more likely to be homosexual, or suffer any psychological or social issues, than the children of heterosexuals.

I would think this needs to be researched somehow. Gays are still in general good people. Let's for a moment say that gay is an environmental problem and something went "wrong" in the upbringing. Now let's say a gay parent is unconsciously aware of this. They may truly want to raise a normal child without the same problems they had. If anything normal kids brought up by gays prove that kids are normal unless something goes wrong. More research into this would need to be done...like possibly attempting to make a child gay through environment. Obviously just being around gays doesn't make others gay (mostly).

[Labrocca]

So Map, are you speaking from some sort of experience that you know that being gay is a choice? I am gay, and I know I never made such a choice.


I am not trying to offend you or get too personal but since you are a self-proclaimed gay man can I ask a couple simple questions? Feel free to say no if you are uncomfortable.

1. Did anything in your childhood happen that was sexually innappropriate?
2. At what age do you first remember thinking about other boys in a sexual manner?
3. What siblings do you have? Older sisters perhaps?
4. Have you ever sought therapy or considered it to "treat" your sexual identity?

Just curious and I won't personally attack you for any replies.

[MAP2010.wireless]

So Map, are you speaking from some sort of experience that you know that being gay is a choice? I am gay, and I know I never made such a choice.


What I will say is this, you had a choice you made your choice.
Do I hate you NO, but it is a choice. You have that right to make that choice, I wish you a long life and that you are happy. But because its a choice, we should not just ask is it your right. But what about the Kids right, that child needs to know that a Man and a Women makes a baby. Life is based on this, and no I don't think all gays are bad. But Gays should respect the kids rights as well. I don't know you, but if you would be upfront and think about it. you would understand.

If you feel you are like a female or a Male who like Men who act like a female. This is a type of Role Play, It happens all the time where men or women will role play. Why do people role play, because its something at they know they are not. You are role playing and its a choice just like some women like to act as if they are being raped. And you are fully right to make your choice in whatever way you want. But its a childs right to know what life is about.

So that child can make his or her choice.

[underdawg]

It could be environment, or perhaps something hormonal that happens at a very very young age. I just don't think it is something that you can catch from someone else by being around them. And I certainly don't think that children see it as being "cool" and want to be like that. When I was growing up it certainly wasn't something that I would actually choose to do. The last thing in the world that I would choose to do, would be to choose something that would make me be an outcast and to be shunned by society. Only a stupid person or a masochist would choose that.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Another significant argument against choice is the total failure of behavioral or cognitive therapy in treating homosexuality.

The same is said about sexual predators.

But there are typically other psychological issues going on, such as antisocial personality disorder. And they're typically not sexual predators to the exclusion of non violent sex.

Birth order is correlated with homosexuality in men.

This doesn't prove anything about biology.Â*Â*This could still be environment.

Biology is heavily influenced by environment. Womb conditions are one of the most significant environmental influences.


I would think this needs to be researched somehow.Â*Â*Gays are still in general good people.Â*Â*Let's for a moment say that gay is an environmental problem and something went "wrong" in the upbringing.Â*Â*Now let's say a gay parent is unconsciously aware of this.Â*Â*They may truly want to raise a normal child without the same problems they had.Â*Â*If anything normal kids brought up by gays prove that kids are normal unless something goes wrong.Â*Â*More research into this would need to be done...like possibly attempting to make a child gay through environment.Â*Â*Obviously just being around gays doesn't make others gay (mostly).


Well research has been done in this area and I have shown you some studies and the analysis of the available research by the leading organizations for pediatrics, psychology and psychiatry.

There's no evidence for a social environmental playing a role in making people gay. There is evidence for environmental influences, but they're physical, chemical etc. They're not based in social interaction or upbringing.

Most areas can always use more research, but there are children who need good homes, and children who are already in same sex families. The available evidence has found nothing problematic about these situations.

If there is any negative effects, which I doubt, they're likely to be minor, and less damaging than the alternative, denying children these homes and denying the childrens parents full parenting rights. And, in many cases (and this was particularly true of Catholic Charities in Boston) homosexuals often ended up with the most difficult to place children. But that's speculation since I'm simply guessing what the results of an unknown issue would be.

As far as I'm concerned there is enough research to state that there are no significant negative effects of such relationships. I see no reason to think that there may be some relatively minor effects, but it's always hard to catch minor things.

[MAP2010.wireless]

It could be environment, or perhaps something hormonal that happens at a very very young age. I just don't think it is something that you can catch from someone else by being around them. And I certainly don't think that children see it as being "cool" and want to be like that. When I was growing up it certainly wasn't something that I would actually choose to do. The last thing in the world that I would choose to do, would be to choose something that would make me be an outcast and to be shunned by society. Only a stupid person or a masochist would choose that.


So do you think people who dated out side of their race was born that way?

[underdawg]

Map, I knew as a teenager that I was gay. I do not know what choice you are speaking of. What specifically do you think I chose? Before you ever had sex, did you know that you were attracted to girls, or did you find yourself being attracted to both sexes? I was a virgin until I reached my thirties and during that whole period I knew I was gay. There was no choice to be made. I just found myself natually attracted to men. The only choice I made was when I reached my 30's and acted upon that desire. Therfore, I was already Gay before I ever made a choice.

[AlonzoMourning23]

I have stated clear that being gay is not from birth, they wish to be gay and thats it.


http://img299.imageshack.us/img299/2639/buchenwaldwebaa8.jpg

Someone probably should have told them they had a choice.

[firefox]

I think "gay by default" is genetic. How could it not be? On the other hand, social pressures can influence people to "stay in the closet" or "act metro" as well. The bottom line? Who cares? If you don't like gay people, don't hang out with them.

[MAP2010.wireless]

Map, I knew as a teenager that I was gay. I do not know what choice you are speaking of. What specifically do you think I chose? Before you ever had sex, did you know that you were attracted to girls, or did you find yourself being attracted to both sexes? I was a virgin until I reached my thirties and during that whole period I knew I was gay. There was no choice to be made. I just found myself natually attracted to men. The only choice I made was when I reached my 30's and acted upon that desire. Therfore, I was already Gay before I ever made a choice.


You say that only people would be Gay because they are born that way because if not why would they want to to hate them right.

People who date out side of their Race are dealing with the same thing.

Do you think they are born that way?

[MAP2010.wireless]

I think "gay by default" is genetic. How could it not be? On the other hand, social pressures can influence people to "stay in the closet" or "act metro" as well. The bottom line? Who cares? If you don't like gay people, don't hang out with them.


I have posted my view, but I do not hate Gays.

We learn at a young age, we know what is what very young.
We have a choice and its based on that choice what we will do what we will think and how we will act.

Its your choice.

[underdawg]

I really don't know why people develope attractions to other people. Some guys will only date fat women. While other guys might like a woman outside of his race. And yet other guys will feel the urge to only want to date men. I don't really think people choose those sort of things. Sex in whatever form it takes is a very powerful biological urge. It is not something you chose but rather something that you feel deep down inside, just like hunger, thirst, or the urge to go to the bathroom. You don't choose those things. For whatever reason some people are just wired differently.

[dgridley]

Actually, I do.. I feel they were born with the capacity to see beyond the skin, empathize and love the inner person, and born with the courage to follow their heart, instead of society at large.




So do you think people who dated out side of their race was born that way?

[MAP2010.wireless]

I really don't know why people develope attractions to other people. Some guys will only date fat women. While other guys might like a woman outside of his race. And yet other guys will feel the urge to only want to date men. I don't really think people choose those sort of things. Sex in whatever form it takes is a very powerful biological urge. It is not something you chose but rather something that you feel deep down inside, just like hunger, thirst, or the urge to go to the bathroom. You don't choose those things. For whatever reason some people are just wired differently.


Ok, Now lets go with want you just said.

"just like hunger, thirst, or the urge to go to the bathroom. You don't choose those things. For whatever reason some people are just wired differently."

I know its hard for you, but it is.
We are have a mind set and it rules everthing that you do.
All that you put is all the same, you may not see it but it is.
Its how the mind works. its a choose.

I hope you see my point, I do on the other hand have respect for you in the fact you where able to talk about it very repectfully.


I hope you see what I'm talking about, Once you see you will understand. Your mind set is the key.

Mark

[MAP2010.wireless]

Actually, I do.. I feel they were born with the capacity to see beyond the skin, empathize and love the inner person, and born with the courage to follow their heart, instead of society at large.




So do you think people who dated out side of their race was born that way?



Ok my first Girlfriend was a black girl, most of all my girlfriend have been black. I'm from "Texas" I was told something all the time, now I do not date black women as much. I was not born that way, I just like all women. It just so happens that black women wanted to date me.

So that why I say its a choose, and only you can make that choose.

[Labrocca]

The last thing in the world that I would choose to do, would be to choose something that would make me be an outcast and to be shunned by society. Only a stupid person or a masochist would choose that.

Yet some do choose to be masochists or shunned in society (criminals of all sorts).

As for myself...I don't like white chicks in general due to my upbringing...specifically my step-mother. To this day anyone that even remotely looks like her brings up hatred. I couldn't see myself with a white woman because of that and I became attracted to latino and black woman. I don't care too much for asians (a different childhood environmental episode).

So from my personal experience I know that a persons upbringing CAN effect their sexual desires. Some may be aware of it...others may not.

Alonzo.. You seem to seperate genes with biology. Maybe I am just ignorant but I thought they were the same. Can you explain how they are different?

http://www.answers.com/topic/biological

[underdawg]

I really do not see where the choice part comes to play. I do not choose to feel hunger, yet I choose to eat to relieve the pain. I do not choose to feel the need to urinate or deficate, yet I choose not to do it in my pants. I do not choose to feel thirst, yet I choose to drink to relieve the pain of thirst. I did not choose to feel an attraction to men, yet 30 years later I did choose to act upon that urge. Being a homosexual is not an action. It is a state of being. Choice implies concious decision making.

[MAP2010.wireless]

I really do not see where the choice part comes to play. I do not choose to feel hunger, yet I choose to eat to relieve the pain. I do not choose to feel the need to urinate or deficate, yet I choose not to do it in my pants. I do not choose to feel thirst, yet I choose to drink to relieve the pain of thirst. I did not choose to feel an attraction to men, yet 30 years later I did choose to act upon that urge. Being a homosexual is not an action. It is a state of being. Choice implies concious decision making.


When you were a child your mom showed you how to eat and your mom told you not to urinate or deficate in my pants, its because your mom and dad. but you could do so if you wanted to, just like you felt you were gay. You can change anything you want, you and only you have that power. And it is power to change and learn.

Mark

[Labrocca]

I do not choose to feel hunger, yet I choose to eat to relieve the pain.

I get the urge for cheesecake...if I never had cheesecake before I would never have the urge.Â*Â*I choose to eat cheesecake when I get this overwhelming desire.Â*Â*I could of course show restraint but since cheesecake is so widely accepted in society I just go get me some.

Sex is a natural urge...no one disputes that.Â*Â*Having sex with the same sex is what we are debating.

I do not choose to feel the need to urinate or deficate, yet I choose not to do it in my pants.

Exactly...you don't choose to feel the need for sex...yet you choose to do it with men.Â*Â*See our point. Maybe an 'urge' to have sex with men is more appropriate. The real question is where did that urge come from?Â*Â*Environment or Biology?

btw..I have urges to have sex with woman other than my wife. I CHOOSE not to.

[underdawg]

You can not choose to not feel hunger, but you can choose to starve. You can not choose to not feel the need to deficate or urinate, the only choice you have is where you choose to let it happen. You can not choose to not feel homosexual desire, but you can choose not to have sex, or you can choose to have sex with women contrary to your desire for men. Closeted men do that all the time. Even with the best intentions, closeted men are living a lie. Eventually that ever present desire will come back. He can choose to fight it, but eventually it will wear away his soul. Just ask Ted Haggard.

[Elrathin]

if I never had cheesecake before I would never have the urge.


Ah but some people have had homosexual feelings without EVER being in a homosexual relationship. Not the same thing as a cheesecake analogy and actual adds to the fact it may be gene related.

My brother for instance is gay. When he was growing up, he dated but never felt right around women. Then he met a man and the world seemed to click for him.

Explain how someone can feel abnormal while dating the opposite sex, but feel normal about having feelings for a man without ever being in a homosexual relationship. Because I'll tell, I can't. For me, I am happily married and the thought of some guy's hairy ass or cock is about even to make me vomit. However, to some gay people that is perfectly normal for them.

I have a hard time believing in a "gay gene", but to be honest it is appearing more and more that the case may be true in at least a little part.

[underdawg]

My feelings exactly Elrathin. I dated girls when I was younger, but wouldn't dream of having sex with them. Instead I just naturally found it much easier to be friends with them. Girls used to tell me that I was so different in that I made such a good friend to them when normal guys could never be a friend. I suppose it was because my brain was wired similar. It is hard to be friends with someone when there is sexual tension between two people. What you as a heterosexual sees as repulsive I see as desirable. I would assume that some of the things a heterosexual girl sees as desireable is pretty similar to what I would experience.

[MAP2010.wireless]

My feelings exactly Elrathin. I dated girls when I was younger, but wouldn't dream of having sex with them. Instead I just naturally found it much easier to be friends with them. Girls used to tell me that I was so different in that I made such a good friend to them when normal guys could never be a friend. I suppose it was because my brain was wired similar. It is hard to be friends with someone whenÂ*Â*there is sexual tension between two people. What you as a heterosexual sees as repulsive I see as desirable. I would assume that some of the things a heterosexual girl sees as desireable is pretty similar to what I would experience.


you should really look deep, and see was i'm saying.

[askates]

[/quote]
I am not trying to offend you or get too personal but since you are a self-proclaimed gay man can I ask a couple simple questions? Feel free to say no if you are uncomfortable.

1. Did anything in your childhood happen that was sexually inappropriate?
2. At what age do you first remember thinking about other boys in a sexual manner?
3. What siblings do you have? Older sisters perhaps?
4. Have you ever sought therapy or considered it to "treat" your sexual identity?

Just curious and I won't personally attack you for any replies.
[/quote]

I'll answer this....:-)
1. I found my dad's porn collection.
2. At age 5 i had my first crush on an actor on a t.v. show.
3. I am an only child.
4. Only when i was so thoroughly embarrassed, and assaulted daily because of it.

[askates]

[/quote]

you should really look deep, and see was i'm saying.
[/quote]

We can't, you refuse to speak in decipherable english.

[MAP2010.wireless]

you should really look deep, and see was i'm saying.
[/quote]

We can't, you refuse to speak in decipherable english.
[/quote]

Weak...

[Elrathin]

you should really look deep, and see was i'm saying.



You really should look deep into what others are saying first.

[Labrocca]

Hmm...well it's an interesting debate at the very least and so far has remained civil. I still think there is much to discuss and of course we need more research. I am not AGAINST a gay gene...I just don't think it's real. It would be an easy answer though if it was.

I think I want some cheesecake now.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Exactly...you don't choose to feel the need for sex...yet you choose to do it with men.Â*Â*See our point. Maybe an 'urge' to have sex with men is more appropriate. The real question is where did that urge come from?Â*Â*Environment or Biology?

btw..I have urges to have sex with woman other than my wife. I CHOOSE not to.

But if you had absolutely no urge to have sex with your wife, and you never had such urges, and you felt no deep attraction with your wife, what would you do?

Alonzo.. You seem to seperate genes with biology.Â*Â*Maybe I am just ignorant but I thought they were the same. Can you explain how they are different?

A gene is simply a section of DNA that contains information. To say something is genetic means that it is in the persons DNA, part of their blueprint.

To say something is biological means that there is an actual physical, chemical etc. difference in the individual.

To say something is environmental means sources from outside the individual are affecting the organism. For example, cigarette smoke is an example of something that is environmental and can result in biological problems (cancer).

Humans are genetically male or female, but its the release of hormones by the mothers body that determines how a human will appear physically. For people where the correct hormones were not released in the correct amount, they appear a different gender than their genetic indicate, and that's due to the environmental influences of the mothers hormones.

Social interaction and touching is an example of environmental influences that have both social and biological implications. A baby who recieves little or no physical contact or social interaction is at risk of significiant struggles in day to social interaction as they grow older, particulary if such things are absent for a long period of time. At the same time, physical contact and stimulation, interaction etc. are essential for the growth of brain cells. Simply put, their brain would not have the same intellectual capability.

Diet and womb conditions are the two most essential environmental influences on an unborn child, they greatly influence the biology of the individual. But they do nothing to the genetic structure of that individual. They may influence what genes are displayed, but that's it.

But, also, most traits are not the result of one gene. Very few things fall into that category. And sexual orientation is not one of those things.

With relative certainty it can be said that there are biological reasons for homosexuality, the evidence is much weaker on whether there are genetic reasons (i.e. something encoded in the DNA). But there is no evidence of a single gene controlling sexuality.

[Labrocca]

You also seem to interchange biological with environmental.

Diet and womb conditions are the two most essential environmental influences on an unborn child, they greatly influence the biology of the individual.


and

For people where the correct hormones were not released in the correct amount, they appear a different gender than their genetic indicate, and that's due to the environmental influences of the mothers hormones.

In essence you are saying biological problems are environmental. I use genetic the same as you describe but I also consider environment to be anything external that influences the child. It can be of course biological in the sense you described but in essence...it's still environment.

But if you had absolutely no urge to have sex with your wife, and you never had such urges, and you felt no deep attraction with your wife, what would you do? Find someone else to marry.

[AlonzoMourning23]

Find someone else to marry.

Now expand that to all women.

You also seem to interchange biological with environmental

Environment is not genetic, but environment does affect biology. They are not mutually exclusive, and in fact biology is heavily dependent on environment. Environment can effect anything but the DNA (genes) itself.

Being genetic means there is a biological reason, but being biological does not mean genetic. It's like how all Catholics (genes) are Christian (biology) but not all christians are catholic.

[Labrocca]

Find someone else to marry.

Now expand that to all women.



So if I am not attracted to women, or men but only say...children...does that make it ok? gobble gobble you really don't have to answer that.

Having an urge to do something doesn't make it right. And just because this urge is environmental, biological, or even genetic...still doesn't make it right. Plain and simple.

[AlonzoMourning23]

So if I am not attracted to women, or men but only say...children...does that make it ok?Â*Â*gobble gobble you really don't have to answer that.

I've answered it many times. The attraction to children is wrong to act on because it involves those who are not capable of consenting or fully understanding the ramifications of such acts. There are mountains of evidence showing pedophilia to be harmful to the children involved.

Keeping people celibate is not healthy, humans are not made for that. Two consenting, psychologically healthy adults are not harmed by engaging in a mutual activity that satisfies both.

Having an urge to do something doesn't make it right.Â*Â*And just because this urge is environmental, biological, or even genetic...still doesn't make it right.Â*Â*Plain and simple.


What makes it wrong?

[MAP2010.wireless]

Hi,

I can't read every post, but I will try.

But Thanks for posting what your point of view.

Thank you.

Mark

[Labrocca]

What makes it wrong?


touche!


You guys make it tough to win a debate.

[MAP2010.wireless]

What makes it wrong?


touche!


You guys make it tough to win a debate.


But its nice that we can come here and state our point and show repect even if we not feel the same.

Mark