Proof that Homosexuality Is Inherited?

[clarise]

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

I must have missed it, along with the incontrovertible truth of Intelligent Design and Global Warming.

Apparently I am a retard.

But I am willing and eager to learn.

Someone show me the chromosome number(s) and codon group(s) that determine homosexuality. I won't hold anyone to homo sapiens. Any mammal will do.

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

[grig314]

Type in "genetic cause of homosexuality" and read the different studies that have come out.

[origen01]

Originally Posted by clarise

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

I must have missed it, along with the incontrovertible truth of Intelligent Design and Global Warming.

Apparently I am a retard.

But I am willing and eager to learn.

Someone show me the chromosome number(s) and codon group(s) that determine homosexuality. I won't hold anyone to homo sapiens. Any mammal will do.

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

Why does it have to be congenital in order for it to be biological? Sexual orientation--even sexual preferences are largely biological...

[ejls]

My aunt had 6 children by the same husband. Three girls and three boys. One was gay. I'm pretty sure that rules out environmental influences and anything to do with chromosomes.

[RandyKnight]

Who know if it is passed down or not...

I have known several guy gays very well and I do think they may have been born that way...

Their thoughts and beliefs are just to great to be learned.

I dont think they have the freedom of choice...

[wantsomefun]

How do gay people have children to pass their homosexual genes to? Yes, I know that many gay people have had relations with the opposite sex, particularly in their youth when they were trying to convince themselves and the world that they were straight. My late ex-brother-in-law was a prime example. He had a girlfriend in high school, even had a pregnancy scare, but by the time he was twenty he was all about rainbows and blowing guys.

Not all heterosexual acts by homosexuals result in conception, so how COULD sexual orientation be genetic?

[JoeDirty]

They once did a study of identical twins.

I can't remember the exact figures but the result was that in ___% (insert figure of more than 50% but less than 100%) of the cases where one of the twins was gay the other one was.

So they said...

"Eureka! Proof that homosexuality is genetic! "

My response to this study was that if homosexuality were genetic then in 100% of the cases where one identical twin was gay the other one would be.

[Distant Lover]

Originally Posted by JoeDirty

They once did a study of identical twins.

I can't remember the exact figures but the result was that in ___% (insert figure of more than 50% but less than 100%) of the cases where one of the twins was gay the other one was.

So they said...

"Eureka! Proof that homosexuality is genetic! "

My response to this study was that if homosexuality were genetic then in 100% of the cases where one identical twin was gay the other one would be.

Identical twins are more likely to share sexual orientation than fraternal twins.

[Baddog_WOOF]

List of mammals displaying homosexual behavior--

• African Buffalo[21]
• African Elephant[22]
• Agile Wallaby[23]
• Amazon River Dolphin(Boto)[19]
• American Bison[21][24]
• Antelope[25]
• Asian Elephant[22]
• Asiatic Lion[26]
• Asiatic Mouflon[27]
• Atlantic Spotted Dolphin[19]
• Australian Sea Lion[28]
• Barasingha[29]
• Barbary Sheep[30]
• Beluga[19]
• Bharal[31]
• Bighorn Sheep[30]
• Black Bear[32]
• Blackbuck[33]
• Black-footed Rock Wallaby[23]
• Black-tailed Deer[29]
• Bonnet Macaque[14]
• Bonobo[34][35][36]
• Bottlenose Dolphin[19][37]
• Bowhead Whale[19]
• Brazilian Guinea Pig[38]
• Bridled Dolphin[19]
• Brown Bear[32]
• Brown Capuchin[39]
• Brown Long-eared Bat[40]
• Brown Rat[41]
• Buffalo[30]
• Caribou[42]
• Cat (domestic)[43]
• Cattle (domestic)[44]
• Cheetah[26]
• Collared Peccary[45]
• Commerson's Dolphin[19]
• Common Brushtail Possum[46]
• Common Chimpanzee[47]
• Common Dolphin[19]
• Common Marmoset[39]
• Common Pipistrelle[48]
• Common Raccoon[49]
• Common Tree Shrew[50]
• Cotton-top Tamarin[51]
• Crab-eating Macaque[14]
• Crested Black Macaque[14]
• Dall's Sheep[30]
• Daubenton's Bat[40]
• Dog (domestic)[52]
• Donkey
• Doria's Tree Kangaroo[23]
• Dugong[53]
• Dwarf Cavy[38]
• Dwarf Mongoose[54]
• Eastern Cottontail Rabbit[41]
• Eastern Grey Kangaroo[23]
• Elk[29]
• Euro (a subspecies of wallaroo)[23]
• European Bison[21]
• Fallow Deer[29]
• False Killer Whale[19]
• Fat-tailed Dunnart[55]
• Fin Whale[19]
• Fox[56]
• Gazelle[25]
• Gelada Baboon[57]
• Giraffe[25][4][58]
• Goat (Domestic)[30]
• Golden Monkey[59]
• Gorilla[60]

• Grant's Gazelle[25]
• Grey-headed Flying Fox[40]
• Grey Seal[28]
• Grey squirrel[61]
• Grey Whale[19][20]
• Grey Wolf[62]
• Grizzly Bear[32]
• Guinea Pig (Domestic)[38]
• Hamadryas Baboon[57]
• Hamster (Domestic)[38]
• Hanuman Langur[63]
• Harbor Porpoise[64]
• Harbor Seal[28]
• Himalayan Tahr[65]
• Hoary Marmot[66]
• Horse (domestic)[67]
• Human (see Human sexual behavior)
• Indian Fruit Bat[40]
• Indian Muntjac[68]
• Indian Rhinoceros[69]
• Japanese Macaque[14]
• Javelina[70]
• Kangaroo Rat[41]
• Killer Whale[19]
• Koala[71]
• Kob[15][72]
• Larga Seal[28]
• Least Chipmunk[61]
• Lechwe[72]
• Lesser Bushbaby[73]
• Lion[26][74][75][76][77][78]
• Lion-tailed Macaque[14]
• Lion Tamarin[39]
• Little Brown Bat[40]
• Livingstone's Fruit Bat[40]
• Long-eared Hedgehog[79]
• Long-footed Tree Shrew[50]
• Macaque[80]
• Markhor[81]
• Marten[49]
• Matschie's Tree Kangaroo[23]
• Moco[82]
• Mohol Galago[73]
• Moor Macaque[14]
• Moose[83]
• Mountain Goat[30]
• Mountain Tree Shrew[50]
• Mountain Zebra[84]
• Mouse (domestic)[85]
• Moustached Tamarin[51]
• Mule Deer[29]
• Musk-ox[86]
• Natterer's Bat[40]
• New Zealand Sea Lion[28]
• Nilgiri Langur[63]
• Noctule[48]
• North American Porcupine[87]
• Northern Elephant Seal[28]
• Northern Fur Seal[28]
• Northern Quoll[55]
• Olympic Marmot[88]
• Orangutan[89]
• Pacific Striped Dolphin[19]
• Patas Monkey[90]
• Pere David's Deer[29]
• Pig (Domestic)[91]
• Pig-tailed Macaque[14]
• Plains Zebra[92]

• Polar Bear[32]
• Pretty-faced Wallaby[23]
• Proboscis Monkey[59]
• Pronghorn[93]
• Przewalski's Horse[84]
• Puku[94]
• Quokka[95]
• Rabbit[96]
• Raccoon Dog[97]
• Red Deer[29]
• Red Fox[98]
• Red Kangaroo[23]
• Red-necked Wallaby[23]
• Red Squirrel[61]
• Reeves's Muntjac[68]
• Reindeer[42]
• Rhesus Macaque[14]
• Right Whale[19]
• Rock Cavy[38]
• Rodrigues Fruit Bat[40]
• Roe Deer[29]
• Rufous Bettong[99]
• Rufous-naped Tamarin[51]
• Rufous Rat Kangaroo[23]
• Saddle-back Tamarin[51]
• Savanna Baboon[57]
• Sea Otter[100]
• Serotine Bat[40]
• Sheep (Domestic)[30][101]
• Siamang[102]
• Sika Deer[29]
• Slender Tree Shrew[50]
• Sooty Mangabey[90]
• Sperm Whale[19]
• Spinifex Hopping Mouse[41]
• Spinner Dolphin[19]
• Spotted Hyena[16][18]
• Spotted Seal[28]
• Squirrel Monkey[103]
• Striped Dolphin[19]
• Stuart's Marsupial Mouse[104]
• Stumptail Macaque[14]
• Swamp Deer[29]
• Swamp Wallaby[23]
• Takhi[84]
• Talapoin[90]
• Tammar Wallaby[23]
• Tasmanian Devil[104]
• Tasmanian Rat Kangaroo[23]
• Thinhorn Sheep[30]
• Thomson's Gazelle[25]
• Tiger[105]
• Tonkean Macaque[14]
• Tucuxi[106]
• Urial[107]
• Vampire Bat[40]
• Verreaux's Sifaka[108]
• Vervet[90]
• Vicuna[109]
• Walrus[110][111]
• Wapiti[112]
• Warthog[113]
• Waterbuck[114]
• Water Buffalo[30]
• Weeper Capuchin[39]
• Western Grey Kangaroo[23]
• West Indian Manatee[115]
• Whiptail Wallaby[23]
• White-faced Capuchin[39]
• White-fronted Capuchin[39]
• White-handed Gibbon[116]
• White-lipped Peccary[117]
• White-tailed Deer[29]
• Wild Cavy[38]
• Wild Goat[30]
• Wisent[21]
• Yellow-footed Rock Wallaby[23]
• Yellow-toothed Cavy[38]

[Baddog_WOOF]

Originally Posted by clarise

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

Enjoy the list.

[sockaraus]

Originally Posted by Baddog_WOOF

Enjoy the list.

You are such a sad cunt. You google a list? That's your answer?
Being homosexual is genetic. Therefore, I believe, in that sense it's hereditary. What else could it be?

[ladygodiva123]

Well, I don't recall ever choosing to be straight, so I don't find it odd that gays didn't choose their sexual preference. Just about every gay person I've known said that they knew they were "different" quite early, usually before puberty. The one that I knew who became a lesbian later in life had been sexually abused as a child. I think in her case she may have subconsciously been attracted to women because she saw them as more loving than men.

In twin studies, if one identical twin is gay, the chances the other is gay are about 50%. If a fraternal twin is gay, the chances of the other twin being gay are about 20%. If one adopted sibling is gay, the chances that the other is gay are about 10%. Since adopted siblings do not share any genes, this might indicate that environment may play a role as well, because the actual incidence of homosexuality and bisexuality in the general population is less than 5%.

One thing scientists found out recently is that gay brains are more like the brains of straight people of the opposite sex than would be expected. In other words, lesbian brains are more like straight male brains than straight female and gay male brains are more like straight female brains. They don't know if these differences are inherited or caused by exposure to hormones during pregnancy.

[Baddog_WOOF]

Originally Posted by sockaraus

You are such a sad cunt. You google a list? That's your answer?
Being homosexual is genetic. Therefore, I believe, in that sense it's hereditary. What else could it be?

Pretty lame statement, even for a stupid cunt like you.
It isn't my fault that you are too fucking stupid to grasp the simple concept that homosexuality is common in the animal world and is not limited to humans.

[Baddog_WOOF]

Originally Posted by ladygodiva123

Well, I don't recall ever choosing to be straight, so I don't find it odd that gays didn't choose their sexual preference. Just about every gay person I've known said that they knew they were "different" quite early, usually before puberty. The one that I knew who became a lesbian later in life had been sexually abused as a child. I think in her case she may have subconsciously been attracted to women because she saw them as more loving than men.

In twin studies, if one identical twin is gay, the chances the other is gay are about 50%. If a fraternal twin is gay, the chances of the other twin being gay are about 20%. If one adopted sibling is gay, the chances that the other is gay are about 10%. Since adopted siblings do not share any genes, this might indicate that environment may play a role as well, because the actual incidence of homosexuality and bisexuality in the general population is less than 5%.

One thing scientists found out recently is that gay brains are more like the brains of straight people of the opposite sex than would be expected. In other words, lesbian brains are more like straight male brains than straight female and gay male brains are more like straight female brains. They don't know if these differences are inherited or caused by exposure to hormones during pregnancy.

Those who disagree with you will never let the facts get in the way of the "truth".

[deviousdave]

It is likely to be a combination of genetics and environmental causes. As stated identical twins share identical DNA and if it were purely genetic the twins would have the same sexuality in 100% of cases. There is strong correlation that if one twin is gay, then the other twin is more likely to be gay. This could suggest that genetics do play a strong role, but it not the only factor. Are there any studies about Identical twins separated at birth? because identical twins are very likely to have shared a similar environment to grow up in.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by clarise

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

Nobody had claimed that. Chiefly because it isn't true.


Proof that you're a retard? That's easy. You don't even understand your own posts.

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by clarise

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

I must have missed it, along with the incontrovertible truth of Intelligent Design and Global Warming.

Apparently I am a retard.

But I am willing and eager to learn.

Someone show me the chromosome number(s) and codon group(s) that determine homosexuality. I won't hold anyone to homo sapiens. Any mammal will do.

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

Imagine that,,you and I are both retarded. There is absolutely NO substantial evidence that makes the claim that homosexuality is based on genetic development,,it's all based on theories and inconclusive evidence. No simple, single cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated.

The gay society is wanting to make it possible for the gays to be part of society and enjoy ALL the benefits of society, claiming that it is ALL genetics and that's why they are gay.

I could care less if JoeDirty like to have a dick in his mouth on occasion, but that poor bastard wont convince me that he likes a dick because he possesses a ''GAY GENE''.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

It is likely to be a combination of genetics and environmental causes. As stated identical twins share identical DNA and if it were purely genetic the twins would have the same sexuality in 100% of cases.

Not true; genetic mutations guarantee that identical twins will not have absolutely-100% identical DNA by the time they are born, let alone by the time they reach puberty.

[ace's n 8's]

Originally Posted by Heyesey

Nobody had claimed that. Chiefly because it isn't true.

Correction; the gay society does claim that.

Originally Posted by Heyesey

Proof that you're a retard? That's easy. You don't even understand your own posts.

So unbecoming of you.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by ace's n 8's

Correction; the gay society does claim that.

No they don't. Try showing a little less retardedness by learning the difference between congenital, and inherited.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by Heyesey

No they don't. Try showing a little less retardedness by learning the difference between congenital, and inherited.

I see we are all having fun with this.

H., I responded to your objection on the other thread, but in a moment I will bring it over here.

[clarise]

Here is the post, from yours truly, which started it all off. (Followed by a reasonable objection from Heyesey and my response.)

Originally Posted by clarise

Logic, anyone?

1. Homosexuals supposedly cannot marry.

2. Homosexuals insist that their condition is congenital (i.e., that they are born with it). This has never been proven, but let's assume it to be true.

3. If homosexuality is congenital, it must be passed to them through the DNA of their ancestors.

4. If (2) and (3) are true, then (1) is false. Homosexuals have been marrying for millennia. And let's please not get into a tizzy over what marriage means. I know that the formal institution is a relatively recent development. I mean that homosexuals have been chosing opposite-sex partners, breeding with them, and assisting in the rearing of children since time immemorial. (This the only way the purported "gay gene," whatever it is, can have been passed on.)

5. Either (1) is false, or (2) is false. I doubt there is a single homosexual on this board who is ready to concede that he or she acquired homosexuality through behavioral influences and might be receptive to a "cure," but they cannot have it both ways.

ERGO, homosexuals can marry today, just as they have been able to marry throughout history. No one is stopping them. Anywhere. Lesbians need only find and latch onto fine, strapping young lads, and gay men are free to find a nice girl.

Heysey's Objection:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Heyesey
There is only a transmission medium for things which are transmitted. Congenital does not mean inherited, it means present from birth. Most congenital conditions are NOT transmitted.

Infertility is usually congenital. Are you going to argue that people are only infertile because their parents were also infertile?

And here is my response to his objection.


Ughhhhh.

Now I understand your protest. But that is how I used the word. To repeat #2:

Quote:
2. Homosexuals insist that their condition is congenital (i.e., that they are born with it).

Numbers #1 and #2, in the context of homosexuality still imply that #3 must be true.

Consider the "other" causes of congenital deformity. (Not meant pejoratively. Replace "deformity" with "condition" or "state" if you wish.) Homosexuality is not caused by physical abuse to the woman in utero. It is not caused by alcohol or nicotine in the mother's bloodstream.

Heysey, homosexuality has been passed down for hundreds of thousands of years, if dogma is correct (and homosexuality is somehow inherited). Homosexuality cuts across all regional, racial, ethnic, and economic divides.

We are not talking about mercury in the water, or trace arsenic contamination in foodstock.

If homosexuality is congenital, genetic transmission is the only plausible cause. Gays have been hogging lab time in universities for decades, in search of "proof." They have not found it.

All that aside, you are ignoring the point. I said in my post, assume it to be true. It still does not prevent gays from marrying. Nothing prevents gays from marrying, or ever has prevented them from marrying.

[deviousdave]

Originally Posted by Heyesey

Not true; genetic mutations guarantee that identical twins will not have absolutely-100% identical DNA by the time they are born, let alone by the time they reach puberty.

I thought the DNA was the same but the twins have different phenotypes, meaning that the same DNA is expressed in different ways. Which explains why fingerprints are different etc. I wasn't aware that DNA changes. But I'm not remotely a biologist in any sense of the word, and my knowledge on this kind of stuff is rather ignorant.

[SecretSexyBlogger]

Originally Posted by clarise

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

I must have missed it, along with the incontrovertible truth of Intelligent Design and Global Warming.

Apparently I am a retard.

But I am willing and eager to learn.

Someone show me the chromosome number(s) and codon group(s) that determine homosexuality. I won't hold anyone to homo sapiens. Any mammal will do.

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

I don't even know where to start...

Sexually transmitted? I'm going to assume you meant "genetically inherited". These things definitely DO NOT mean the same thing. There is some evidence that genetics play a role, as explained in various other posts. Sexually transmitted? Ludicrous.

Well, intelligent design is a factless, baseless claim. HOWEVER "global warming" (more accurately described as climate change) has a tonne of proof. You could only have missed the evidence if you were choosing to.

You're surely not ignorant enough (regardless of your incorrect terminology, and obtuse post) to be unaware that mapping the human genome is still underway? That we're still discovering which parts of the genome do what. Don't be an ignorant twit and look at the surrounding evidence, and accept that science is still developing answers in this area.

Simply put though: there are BIOLOGICAL, GENETIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL causes of homosexuality. This is undoubtedly the answer.

Certainly the frequency with which mammalian homosexuality is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic to our genes that causes us to behave this way?

[clarise]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

I thought the DNA was the same but the twins have different phenotypes, meaning that the same DNA is expressed in different ways. Which explains why fingerprints are different etc. I wasn't aware that DNA changes. But I'm not remotely a biologist in any sense of the word, and my knowledge on this kind of stuff is rather ignorant.

I am not a biologist either, Dave. I am a computer scientist, and from that perspective it is possible to conclude intuitively that your statement above has to be essentially correct.

DNA cannot possibly express every detail, such as a specific whorl pattern on a fingertip. It is not big enough. DNA merely controls the formation of proteins that trigger forms of expression (in the case of fingertip patterns, most likely via homeobox sequences and telomeres).

Another example of why this must be true: consider the brain. The postnatal brain has many more connections than an adult brain, due to benign necrosis, so it is difficult to generalize about neural counts and connections, but let's say for argument's sake the adult brain contains around 90 billion neurons (perhaps less). Each neuron contains from 100 to several thousand dendrites, so call it a 1,000, and each dendrite connects to anywhere from one to hundreds of other dendrites and axons. Thus, the connection count, even in an adult brain that has been "dying off" for decades, numbers into the hundreds of trillions.

DNA is not that big. The human genome only codifies a few billion pieces of information.

These observations, by the way, provide the basis for a strong rational argument that homosexual behavior is highly sensitive to emergent behavior and cannot possibly be inherited. But you won't hear that argument being made in the labs of any American (or indeed Western) university. No money in it. Definitely a career ender.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by SecretSexyBlogger

I don't even know where to start...

Sexually transmitted? I'm going to assume you meant "genetically inherited". These things definitely DO NOT mean the same thing. There is some evidence that genetics play a role, as explained in various other posts. Sexually transmitted? Ludicrous.

Well, intelligent design is a factless, baseless claim. HOWEVER "global warming" (more accurately described as climate change) has a tonne of proof. You could only have missed the evidence if you were choosing to.

You're surely not ignorant enough (regardless of your incorrect terminology, and obtuse post) to be unaware that mapping the human genome is still underway? That we're still discovering which parts of the genome do what. Don't be an ignorant twit and look at the surrounding evidence, and accept that science is still developing answers in this area.

Simply put though: there are BIOLOGICAL, GENETIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL causes of homosexuality. This is undoubtedly the answer.

Certainly the frequency with which mammalian homosexuality is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic to our genes that causes us to behave this way?

sexual transmission:

We are not discussing AIDS and STDs.

Pardon me. I shall be precise: meiotic transmission. There. Better?

Spare me your crap about global warming. That is on another thread, about forty miles long, with no proof whatsoever in evidence.

Here I want proof of the meiotic transmission of homosexuality in mammals.

If there are genetic causes, show them.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by SecretSexyBlogger

Certainly the frequency with which mammalian homosexuality is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic to our genes that causes us to behave this way?

By the way, this last paragraph is classic. One could advance this argument for any behavior if one wished.

Certainly the frequency with which belief in God is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic in our genes that causes us to behave this way?

How does that sound? Reasonable?

[deviousdave]

Originally Posted by clarise

[I]Certainly the frequency with which belief in God is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic in our genes that causes us to behave this way?

How does that sound? Reasonable?

Ah well, now that you mention it, I was thinking about this very thing just the other day. The first beliefs in deities, gods etc may be down to our first attempts to make sense of the world. Our brain's ability for pattern recognition, and for solving problems could inevitably have led to belief in god. Bigger brains that enable problem solving skills is an obvious advantageous trait that led to offspring to be more successful.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

Ah well, now that you mention it, I was thinking about this very thing just the other day. The first beliefs in deities, gods etc may be down to our first attempts to make sense of the world. Our brain's ability for pattern recognition, and for solving problems could inevitably have led to belief in god. Bigger brains that enable problem solving skills is an obvious advantageous trait that led to offspring to be more successful.

Could be. I have considered the possibility that our bigger brain allows us to dread death, and hence our musings on "another place" in which someone must necessarily be "in charge," because due to genetically expressed behaviors we are hierarchical pack animals. Like dogs.

But if we allow an argument of this sort, in the absence of empirical proof of causation, we necessarily admit any such argument, and we require ourselves to give each form of expression legitimacy, merely because all such forms are intrinsic. To wit:

A man's genetically expressed dopaminergic thalamo-cerubellar afferents induce him to be sexually attracted to young girls. This expression is intrinsic, and he cannot help it. Although we are only beginning to codify the genome and cannot yet provide empirical proof of genetic causation, it is reasonable to presume that such causation exists, due to the historical prevalance of male attraction to adolescent and pre-menarche females. Therefore it is normal, and we must accept and tolerate it.

Clearly such an argument calling for social acceptance of pedophilia would be condemned, and rightfully so.

Yet in the case of homosexuality, we are obligated to accept essentially the same logic. Not only that, but we are moving toward sanctifying the behavior via marriage.

Personally I ascribe to Robert Heinlein's thesis in his book, Starship Troopers, in which he says (paraphrased), "We are not interested in the causation for a murderer's behavior. Regardless of the cause, it behooves society to forcibly remove him."

So. Enough red herrings, people. Back to topic. Proof. Let's see it.

[deviousdave]

Well there is a big difference between homosexuals and paedophiles. Their sexual behaviours may have the same cause (including heterosexual behaviour). But there is no victim between consenting gay adults, where as obviously there is when it comes to paedophilia

[clarise]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

Well there is a big difference between homosexuals and paedophiles. Their sexual behaviours may have the same cause (including heterosexual behaviour). But there is no victim between consenting gay adults, where as obviously there is when it comes to paedophilia

Of course!

I do not condemn homosexuality. Indifferent to it, to be honest. To each his/her own.

I do object to gay marriage, on the grounds that it is a waste of money.

[deviousdave]

I object to marriage in general.

Doug sums up my thoughts

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by clarise

Numbers #1 and #2, in the context of homosexuality still imply that #3 must be true.

No they don't. Most congenital conditions are not transmitted.

Until you grow enough of a brain to understand that sentence, this is all a waste of time.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by clarise

By the way, this last paragraph is classic. One could advance this argument for any behavior if one wished.

Certainly the frequency with which belief in God is seen should tell you that there is something intrinsic in our genes that causes us to behave this way?

How does that sound? Reasonable?

How many species out of the umpty-umpt million on this planet have ever displayed a belief in God? I've aware of exactly one.

So actually, the fantastically low frequency with which it's seen would tell us that there isn't.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

I thought the DNA was the same but the twins have different phenotypes, meaning that the same DNA is expressed in different ways. Which explains why fingerprints are different etc. I wasn't aware that DNA changes. But I'm not remotely a biologist in any sense of the word, and my knowledge on this kind of stuff is rather ignorant.

There are approximately 200 random changes in the DNA in your body, each and every second. Most of them are irrelevant, or harmless, or just destroy the DNA molecule they are in and leave everything else intact.

The ones that are not, can be responsible for absolutely anything.

[Kimiko]

Originally Posted by clarise

Several people on the Chic-Fil-A thread claim that there exists incontrovertible proof that homosexuality is sexually transmitted.

I must have missed it, along with the incontrovertible truth of Intelligent Design and Global Warming.

Apparently I am a retard.

But I am willing and eager to learn.

Someone show me the chromosome number(s) and codon group(s) that determine homosexuality. I won't hold anyone to homo sapiens. Any mammal will do.

Show this retard incontrovertible proof of congenital homosexuality in a white lab mouse or a ferret, and I will post a public apology.

Until then, SIT DOWN AND EAT A CHICKEN SANDWICH.

You realize, I hope, that this post makes no sense whatsoever....

"Sexually transmitted"? I think you meant "genetically determined".

[Kimiko]

Originally Posted by ejls

My aunt had 6 children by the same husband. Three girls and three boys. One was gay. I'm pretty sure that rules out environmental influences and anything to do with chromosomes.

It doesn't rule out either one, actually. No two children born separately of the same parents are genetically identical, nor are they subject to the same post-natal influences.

[Kimiko]

Originally Posted by clarise

Of course!

I do not condemn homosexuality. Indifferent to it, to be honest. To each his/her own.

I do object to gay marriage, on the grounds that it is a waste of money.

That may be the most idiotic reason for opposing gay marriage I've ever encountered. Congratulations.

[Kimiko]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

Ah well, now that you mention it, I was thinking about this very thing just the other day. The first beliefs in deities, gods etc may be down to our first attempts to make sense of the world. Our brain's ability for pattern recognition, and for solving problems could inevitably have led to belief in god. Bigger brains that enable problem solving skills is an obvious advantageous trait that led to offspring to be more successful.

Religion was born of fear, not reason. It's man's primitive attempt to explain what he didn't understand, by invoking a magical superpower.

[Rixer]

My view is that it doesn't matter one way or the other how a person became gay. That's the lifestyle they choose to live and they are harming nobody. Just who are we to tell two people who love each other they can not marry?

Live and let live.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by Kimiko

That may be the most idiotic reason for opposing gay marriage I've ever encountered. Congratulations.

Of course, since a marriage costs exactly the same regardless of which two individuals are involved, she must also be against straight marriage, no?

[deviousdave]

Originally Posted by Kimiko

Religion was born of fear, not reason. It's man's primitive attempt to explain what he didn't understand, by invoking a magical superpower.

There is no proof either way. You are just making an assertion. I was expressing a possibility. There is no evidence that religion was born out of fear any more than a desire to understand the world around them. That is not to say there was no fear, not knowing the cause of volcanoes, earthquakes, eclipses, disease, extreme weather would provide an extra level of fear for anyone.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by Kimiko

You realize, I hope, that this post makes no sense whatsoever....

"Sexually transmitted"? I think you meant "genetically determined".

I made it more precise for someone else who has clap on the brain: meiotically transmitted. There. Better?

Now stop diverting with your pithy bullshit and either put up or shut up.

I've also caught your remark that my cause for opposing gay marriage is idiotic. I can't help myself; I am honestly curious... arghhh, I'm going to ask it.... sheesh.... HOW SO, Miss K?

[clarise]

Originally Posted by Heyesey

Of course, since a marriage costs exactly the same regardless of which two individuals are involved, she must also be against straight marriage, no?

Yes. I am, in principle.

I oppose marriages of convenience.

[Heyesey]

Originally Posted by clarise

I made it more precise for someone else who has clap on the brain: meiotically transmitted. There. Better?

Not really, no. You're still trying to argue against a claim that nobody has ever made in all of history. You still don't understand the difference between congenital and inherited.


In short, you're making yourself look even stupider every time you post.

[Empress Lainie]

Jun 17, 2008 ... Research shows that gay men's brains resemble those of straight women.
http://www.time.com/time/health/arti...815538,00.html


Gay Brain Science: Homosexuality a Birth Defect?
Jun 19, 2008 ... Some people are right-brained. Others are left-brained. Apparently, some are gay -brained. What makes people gay? Biologists may never get ...
http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/gay...-birth-defect/


Gay Brains Are Wired Differently Say Scientists
Jun 17, 2008 ... Using scanning technology, researchers in Sweden found that the brains of gay men and women were wired differently to the brains of ...
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/111663.php


Gay brains structured like those of the opposite sex - life - 16 June ...
Jun 16, 2008 ... Brain scans have provided the most compelling evidence yet that being gay or straight is a biologically fixed trait.
http://www.newscientist.com/article/...osite-sex.html


BBC NEWS | Health | Scans see 'gay brain differences'
Jun 16, 2008 ... The brains of gay people look like those found in heterosexual people of the opposite sex, research suggests.
www.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7456588.stm


The 'Gay Brain' Explained - Louann Brizendine - YouTube

Apr 23, 2010 ... Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2010/03/31/ Dr_Louann_Brizendine_The_Male_Brain Dr. Louann Brizendine, author of The Male Brain, ...

[clarise]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

There is no proof either way. You are just making an assertion. I was expressing a possibility. There is no evidence that religion was born out of fear any more than a desire to understand the world around them. That is not to say there was no fear, not knowing the cause of volcanoes, earthquakes, eclipses, disease, extreme weather would provide an extra level of fear for anyone.

As I have already explained, I am ashamed to say it, but I side with Kimiko on the fear/dread theory (viz., dread of death). But you and I are citing theories as to motivation. If I read Kimiko's posts correctly, she is attempting to ascertain a cause, which is fundamentally different.

This gets right to the heart of the blinders that people have, in the debate about the causative effects of homosexuality.

On the Chick Fil-A thread, people are going to all kinds of absurd stretches to justify the vitriol against David Cathy and the company's authors. The claim is even being made that they give money to organizations that support murder in Africa. This is utter rubbish.

Chick Fil-A does, however, financially support research into the causes of homosexuality and possible cures, and this is anathema in most university settings and the LGBT community generally, to even speculate that homosexuality might be "curable."

Yet, all forms of sexual expression utilize the brain's dopaminergic reward systems-- the same neurological systems that are subverted by most forms of chemical addiction.

One is condemned as a prejudiced crank and even a criminal hater for speculating on the curability of homosexuality, yet most of us would welcome a cure for chemical addictions and many forms of sexual deviance, particularly the violent ones.

At any rate, curability is also speculation. But I believe the true motivation for all the bitterness to Chick Fil-A might be their willingness to fund research initiatives that accept as a premise the notion that homosexuality could be a treatable syndrome.

[clarise]

Originally Posted by Heyesey

Not really, no. You're still trying to argue against a claim that nobody has ever made in all of history. You still don't understand the difference between congenital and inherited.


In short, you're making yourself look even stupider every time you post.

Sheesh.

People can't reason around here. Much either to yell retard! idiot! stupid!

I do understand the difference, and have understood it all along. You have blinders on.

Congenital disorders have causes.

Genetic transmission is one of them.

You are denying that cause as a possibility. Fine, if you want to do that. Not that it affects my thesis one way or another (that gays men are free to find a nice girl, marry them, and make babies).

I am a retard, okay? Explain it to me simply. Make the retard understand: if DNA is not the cause, then what?

Lead paint in the water pipes?
Arsenic in the grain?
Mercury in tuna fish?
Cosmic rays?

What common thread has caused the congenital deformity (okay, trait if you prefer) across all regions, races and cultures for tens of thousands of years?

Go ahead. Explain it to the retard.

[tim929]

Originally Posted by deviousdave

I object to marriage in general.

Doug sums up my thoughts

I had to quote this one simply because it is an amazingly insightful oppinion presented by an inarticulate drunk. If an inarticulate drunk can show this level of insight I am forced to ask...what the fuck is wrong with the rest of the world?

As for homosexuality, I have no idea if it is genetic or environmental or both. Does it realy matter? Whos business is it what goes on between two consenting adults? If you want to ask the question "did nature intend this?" then you also have to ask if nature intended things like vibrators, dildos, nipple clamps, ball gags, KY jelly, breast implants, etc. We also have to ask about a million other things like diet soda, potato chips, monosodium glutamate, toasters, french manicures, dental braces, reality television, the color burnt orange, rocking chairs, Alvin and the Chipmunks, mullets, chocolate bars, thermonuclear weapons, food coloring, Kim Kardashian (or any other Kardashian for that matter.) The list is almost endless.

Homosexuals have the desires they have, and as long as they arent forcing it on anyone else I frankly dont give two hoots or a damn what they do. As for the religios implications, like everything else in peoples lives their actions are between them and God. Its not my job, or anyone elses job to condemn them just because we might think that what they are doing is wrong, as long as they arent doing it to anyone who isnt willing to participate. Frankly, the only reason people are so spun up about homosexualtiy is that they have nothing else to do, they need a reason to be pissed off at someone and they are afraid it might be contagious.

[Intern]

The original thread title would be a good question for Anderson Cooper or Don Lemon.

They are both gay.