Damn, the poll has closed - I vote for the third option

 

Their is a problem with being gay and being in a religion. They both are terrorest groups.

 

This is what I posted in comment #51:

Identical twins are genetically identical. Fraternal twins, like related siblings, share 50 percent of their genes. By "genetically unrelated brothers" the article refers to unrelated children raised by the same married couple in which at least one of them is adopted.

In my comment #41 I demonstrated that homosexuals tend to be more intelligent than heterosexuals.

Comment #51 provides impressive evidence that homosexuality is genetic. Comment #41 indicates how it may be perpetuated down through the generations.

I have explained my reasoning before, but I will do it one more time. I think it is likely that homosexuality is caused by genes that are dominant for superior intelligence, but recessive for homosexuality.

Throughout most of human evolution there was powerful selective pressure for superior intelligence. Heterosexual siblings of homosexuals are more likely to have one of the genes for homosexuality than the general population. Therefore, they are likely to be more intelligent.

E.O. Wilson, the author of Sociobiology, the New Synthesis also hypothesized that homosexuals throughout human evolution tended to help their heterosexual siblings raise their children.

I acknowledge that genes for homosexuality, like genes for superior intelligence, and genes for criminal behavior have not been discovered yet. What I have suggested is that homosexuality, superior intelligence, and criminal behavior are found in the general population in ways that indicate genetic causation.

I am confident that the genes will be discovered, and that in the foreseeable future it will be possible to make accurate predictions about a new born infant on the basis of DNA testing of a tissue sample.

 

We are not asking about TWINS, we are asking about studies of brothers and sisters that are NOT TWINS.
When you can post evidence that relates to non TWINS, then your conclusions may sound more believable.
Now get off the TWINS studies as NOT all Gays are TWINS,and not all TWINS are gay, nor are they ALL male.
As we knew 2 brothers, one gay and the other straight this seems to put a big flaw your theories.

 

Fraternal twins and related siblings share 50 percent of genes. I have explained my argument twice. If you will not or cannot understand it, I do not feel the need to explain it a third time.

 

READ YOUR POST AGAIN..

Your words "Identical twins are genetically identical. Fraternal twins, like related siblings, share 50 percent of their genes. By "genetically unrelated brothers" the article refers to unrelated children raised by the same married couple in which at least one of them is adopted."

Now EXPLAIN how this relates to brothers who are born say 3 years apart, the eldest is 100% gay and the other is 100% straight. They are NOT adopted, and have the SAME mother and father..

EXPLAIN why you keep banging on about twins and adopted children, when the question put to you is about NON twins and NON adopted brothers.

The same question could also apply to NON twins and NON adopted sisters.

Also, unless you are totally thick, SIBLINGS are ALWAYS RELATED. It does not matter if they do not share the same mother, or the same father. So long as 1 of the parents is common to both then they will be RELATED.

Drop the twin argument and give the figures you have been asked for, RELATED SIBLINGS but NOT ADOPTED.

 

Identical twins are most likely to share a homosexual orientation, followed by children of the same parents, followed by non related children raised in the same family.

What this indicates is that homosexuality is largely genetic, but that it is influenced by other factors as well.

 

You do understand that if the high-lighted section ever became possible, it would mean child selection by genetics just like the Nazi's did.

Is this really the idea you want for the future, another holocaust based on the perfect child DNA. Where all children that are found to carry either this crime gene, low intelligence gene and/or this homosexuality gene, will be discarded at birth.

 

AT LAST...
A very simple answer to a very simple question..

WHY couldn't you post these words at the very start, instead of that long-winded and pompous fluff that you did.

No-one cares how clever you think you are, all we care about is getting a straight answer to a straight question, and as the question DID NOT relate to twins there was NO NEED for the studies on twins to be brought up.

Do yourself a favour and stop acting big and clever on an anonymous internet forum. Because all it makes you look like is a dumb-ass that can't answer a simple question.

 

It would indicate that if it were a study of identical twins separated at birth and raised in different environments. Are there any modern studies on this with proper control groups?

 

They are more likely to be aborted. Already many pregnant women have their fetuses tested for obvious genetic deficiencies like Down's Syndrome. I think there are also pre natal tests for muscular dystrophy.

Where genetic testing will be useful is in testing for a predisposition to commit crimes. It will influence parole decisions and sentencing. There will be less of an effort at rehabilitation. Prison sentences will become longer and probably harsher in order to deter those on the outside who are tempted to become criminals.

 

If there aren't, I'm sure he will come up with something to bore the good folk to tears :neutral:

 

I don't think it is likely that you would find a crime gene. Crime is a very diverse topic, requiring a range of different skills/emotions or lack thereof to commit them. And there are many different types of crime that would also require different attributes.

There may be genes that lead to a person creating more testosterone or adrenalin, and that person as a result may be more aggressive. But that does not make a person predisposed for a life of crime or violence. People channel their feelings a number of ways, some choose sport, some go to the gym.

Likewise, psychopaths by definition do not feel emotions, at least not in the same way normal people do. This does not mean that they are predisposed to commit crime, and become killers. Often they are thrillseekers that push limits that benefit humanity.

You propose, or at the very least "predict" inadequate broad solutions to complex problems that you don't fully understand. A person should not, and will not be subjected to different measures of law based upon their genetics, they should not be punished more severely for their crimes than anyone else. I will fight with every last breath in my body in protest to any such change in law to make sure that does not happen. The current penal system is already flawed enough as it is with unfair, unequal sentences for equal crimes. There are already different sentences dished out for race, sex and age. And differences within the same demographics where people are made examples of. This is inherently wrong.

 

I am confident that you will be outvoted. In the United States the criminal justice system has become progressive harsher since 1980. As a result the crime rate has declined. The findings of genetics research give a scientific rationale for directions most Americans want to move in anyway.

 

The Declaration of Independence proclaims, as a self-evident truth, that, “all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness—That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men.”

Thus, all people are equal by virtue of their humanity and are in possession of certain rights (such as rights to liberty) that it is the responsibility of government to protect. Obviously there was some inconsistencies, it took a few Amendments to put this right. The 13th Amendment for example by banning slavery. Again the 15th Amendment further enforces equality of the voting booth.

Clearly though, Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

Essentially the equal protection clause within the 14th Amendment ensures everyone's rights are equal. (even though it took some while longer for segregation to be dealt with)

 

But your quote said "NEW BORN" so how can they be aborted?

 

As I did not get this right and in time to be edited, here is the conversation..

D.L.
PLEASE READ the high-lighted section of your post, that you have wrote in your own words. Then answer the question that was put to you, BASED on YOUR WORDS, NOT what you thought that you wrote..

 

The most recent study I know of is the Minnesota Twin Study (not of the baseball team), but that was conducted over 20 years ago. The occurrence of identical twins raised in different environments is fairly rare. There wasn't really strict control because of the randomness of adoption. Although, it would be inhumane and against the rules set for current psychological study to allow proper controls to be arranged.

Using an equation of 2(monozygotic rate - dizygotic rate), heritability rate of certain temperaments can be found. I assume this equation was used for the study as well. But these were the results (regardless):
Sense of well being: 49%
Social potency: 57%
Achievement orientation: 38%
Social closeness: 15%
Neuroticism: 70%
Sense of alienation: 59%
Aggression: 67%
Inhibited control: 56%
Low risk taking: 45%
Intelligence: 70%
Average twin correlation: 0.54 (54%)

It should be noted that these were the findings at the time (which I believe was back in the 90's). The Minnesota Twin study is ongoing. While there aren't any more specific numbers (that I found), here is a link to the website: https://mctfr.psych.umn.edu/research/research home.html
I don't know how homosexuality would fit into it (because there are cases of identical twins having different sexual preferences), but having the same genes has shown some correlation for it. There are a ridiculous number of factors (both genetic and environmental) that would go into something like that.

I don't know about genetic determination for crime in general (since it's too broad of a topic to file genetic screening into), but there has been a link to low MAOA to psychopathic behavior. If I remember correctly, it's an enzyme that prevents re-uptake of serotonin (mainly), which is linked to a hyper responsive amygdala, diminished regulatory function of the prefrontal region, and thus an increased risk of violent behavior. When combined with childhood physical abuse, the rate of antisocial behavior skyrockets from a fairly low percentage. There is also an increase when MAOA production is high (from a low percentage to a high one), but to a lesser degree than with low expression of the enzyme.

Here's a good video for psychopathic tendencies: [YOUTUBE]u2V0vOFexY4[/YOUTUBE]

You're basically talking about genetic profiling, as well as preemptive crime and other such topics discussed/displayed in Minority Report.

 

This is the text of the Thirteenth Amendment:

Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Notice that it specifically exempts incarceration as punishment for a crime.

When judges give sentences, and when parole boards decide who to release from prison they usually are and certainly should be governed by a rational evaluation of whether or not the criminal will be a repeat offender. The discovery of genes for crime will help in this evaluation.

In the fairly near future those who desire humane treatment of criminals will have nothing to base their advocacy on but sentiments that have been passing out of fashion since the late 1960s. Those of us who desire more cruelty will have scientific studies that demonstrate that a harsh criminal justice system is effective in reducing the crime rate.

 

Here again you are being picayune. I predict that as a result of genetics research it will be possible to make accurate predictions about the intelligence and criminal inclinations of new born infants, and it will also be possible to make accurate predictions about fetuses. I doubt this will lead to an increase in infanticide, but it may. I do believe it will lead to an increase in abortion.

With the growing acceptance of homosexuality I doubt many likely homosexual fetuses will be aborted, but some certainly will be.