THE GENETICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY
Web Reports 1997
From Serendip
THE GENETICS OF HOMOSEXUALITY
One of the first successful scientific studies that was done on homosexuality was reported on in 1993. The purpose of this study was to look at families in which there was an abnormally high occurrence of homosexuality. By extensively studying the family histories of these families, researchers hoped to find some clues pointing towards the genetic factors that affect homosexuality. That is exactly what happened. By looking at the family trees of gay males (For some reason, this study only focused on male homosexuality, but made the claim that their findings would be similar to the ones that would be found by looking at female homosexuality. As this paper will discuss later, this assumption that male and female homosexuality can easily be compared may be entirely inaccurate.) it seemed that the majority of homosexual occurrences were on the maternal side of the tree. From this information, researchers concluded that if in fact there was a "homosexual gene", it appeared to be passed down from mother to son. This means that heterosexual females are carriers of this gene, and when it is passed down to a male child, there is a chance that the child will be a homosexual. While this study did not come up with any hard core facts about the genetics of homosexuality, it showed that a connection very well could exist. Since this study did determine that the gene influencing homosexuality was carried by the mother, researchers participating in further studies knew that they could limit their search to the X chromosome, and that is exactly what they did (5).
One of the most influential studies on the genetics of homosexuality was done by Dean Hamer and his co-workers at the National Cancer Institute in Washington DC (1993). Hamer's research involved studying thirty-two pairs of brothers who were either "exclusively or mostly" homosexual. None of the sets of brothers were related. Of the thirty-two pairs, Hamer and his colleagues found that two-thirds of them (twenty-two of the sets of brothers) shared the same type of genetic material. This strongly supports the hypothesis that there is an existing gene that influences homosexuality (4). Hamer then looked closely at the DNA of these gay brothers to try and find the region of the X chromosome (since the earlier research suggested that the gene was passed down maternally) that most of the homosexual brothers shared. He discovered that homosexual brothers have a much higher likelihood of inheriting the same genetic sequence on the region of the X chromosome identified by Xq28, than heterosexual brothers of the same gay men. Keep in mind though, that this is just a region of the X chromosome, not a specific gene. Although researchers are hopeful, a single gene has not yet been identified (7). Hamer's study also acknowledges the fact that while it does suggest that there is a gene that influences homosexuality, it has not yet been determined how greatly the gene influences whether or not a person will be homosexual (4). In addition, Hamer attempted to locate a similar gene in female homosexuals, but was unsuccessful (7). The results that Hamer's study did find though, cannot yet be accepted as absolute truth. Another study took place in 1993 by Macke et al. This study examined the same gene locus as the Hamer study, but found that it had no influence on homosexuality (8). As you can see, the results on this topic are still extremely varied and reasonably new, so it is difficult to come to any lasting conclusion.
Other studies have been conducted that look at twin brothers rather than brothers of different ages. Bailey and Pillard (1991) did a study of twins that determined a Ò52% concordance of homosexuality in monozygotic twins, 22% for dizygotic twins, and 11% for adoptive brothers of homosexual men (8). These results, like Hamer's, provide further support for the claim that homosexuality is genetically linked. Studies very similar to the Bailey and Pillard study have been done both with female homosexual siblings and siblings of both sexes. The results for both of these studies were only off from Bailey and PillardÕs by a few percentage points. Putting all of these results together, it seems like genetics are at least 50% accountable for determining a personÕs sexual orientation (8).
Looking at the results of many of the other studies I have discussed, it seems a little strange to me that the student of homosexual siblings who were both male and female came up with similar result as the studies that looked exclusively at male homosexuality. Hamer's study, along with others, have tried to located a gene that influences female homosexuality, but they have been unsuccessful. More importantly, the region of the X chromosome that very possibly could influence male homosexuality does not influence females in the same way. Female heterosexuals merely pass the gene sequence on to their sons. Knowing this, it seems odd to me that there would be such a high percentage of male and female homosexual siblings. Perhaps this suggests that if genetics are responsible for homosexuality, we have a long way to go before we completely understand the gene loci that determine sexuality.
Aside from the scientists who are researching the topic of homosexuality and genetics, there are many other people who have concerns and vested interests in the topic. The information that is being discovered has been used by people in both positive and negative ways. On the one hand, there are members of the gay community who are very excited to find that the life-style they live is not entirely a choice that they made, as homophobic people often like to believe. Some homosexuals feel that if the world realizes that homosexuality is something people are born with, just like the color of your skin or your eyes, then people will begin to be more accepting of the homosexual life-style (5). However, on the other hand, there is also a group a people who believe that if homosexuality is in fact genetically linked, then there should be a way to genetically alter homosexuals in order to make them "normal" (3).
Before I started researching this topic on the world-wide-web, I did not realize what a new and controversial issue the genetics of homosexuality was. From tid-bits of news that I had picked up along the way, I thought that scientists had located, without a doubt, a gene that plays a role in influencing sexual orientation. From the research that I have discussed above, that is obviously not the case. I am eager to follow this subject more in the future and see what biology will discover next.
References
1) Genetics and Homosexuality, from the Gene Letter
2) Homosexuality: Genetics and the Bible, by Tom Terry, Cutting Edge Magazine
3) Statement on NIH Genetic Study on Homosexuality, from the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force
4) New study says genetics influences homosexuality, from St. Louis Post-Dispatch, 1995
5) Homosexuality and Genetics, one person's views
6) A commentary on "Research on Sex Orientation Doesn't Fit the Mold"
7) Genetics Press Cuttings, from The Knitting Circle, South Bank University, London
8) The Hypothetical Genetics of Sexual Orientation, by Keith Bell, a Boston University undergraduate
9) Is there a genetic basis for sexual orientation?, from Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
10) Lesbianism/homosexuality - a human surival trait, a commentary on the Queer Resources Directory
11) Homosexuality: Its in Your Genes, an article posted on QRD
12) Genetics and sexuality, a news report
Comments made prior to 2007
I am iranian gay in a gay family, my dad was gay and my brothers and the sons of my brothers all are gay, o know something about the homosexuality factors that is can be proven, i have some ideas so i ll be glade if i receive a comment from a scientist working in this area, by the was i am also aducated person and can help more in this matter ... Kamyar, 28 December 2007
Comments
Ask Any Homosexual
A great experiment would be to ask any amount of homosexuals if they feel as if they chose their orientation or if they feel as if a genetic predisposition played a role in their sexuality.
I'd bet dollars to donuts that 100% of participants say that homosexuality is not something that can be chosen.
I am a young (25), successful and attractive woman and I haven't had/wanted/or even thought about for that matter, any sort of sexual contact with a man in eight years. Being gay is not an easy lifestyle and no one would choose this. Reading posts about the bible and God's will are actually entertaining to me at this point. Hopefully, someday everyone will get it.
Fraternal Birth Order and the Genetics of Homosexuality
I wrote a blog post "Fraternal Birth Order Threatens Research into the Genetics of Homosexuality": http://blog.tanyakhovanova.com/?p=40. Here I present one paragraph from this post:
Let us create a theoretical model where homosexuals would be born randomly with a fixed probability if they are the first sons of a woman, and increasing probability for subsequent sons. In this model there would be two interesting consequences:
* Mothers of homosexual men would be more fertile on average than mothers of men in general. Remember, this random consequence can be misinterpreted as a genetic correlation between homosexuality and fertility.
* If a homosexual person has a brother, then the probability that this brother is homosexual might be very different from the probability that a random person is homosexual. Again, this might create the suggestion that there is a genetic component, when it is not there.
If homosexuality is normal
If homosexuality is normal then why are homosexual men and women unable to have children on their own?
Why is the anotomy of the homosexual men the same as a straight man.
If something is normal then everything else is normal.
Why is it that in africa and Asia homosexuality is not common as it is here.
If homosexuality is normal: answer
{"If homosexuality is normal then why are homosexual men and women unable to have children on their own"?}
Your question assumes that sexuality and romantic attractions are for the sole purpose of reproduction. Not so. Homosexuality and bisexuality run rampant throughout the entire Animal Kingdom. It is normal for a certain percentage of people to be gay. Just as it is normal for a certain percentage of the population to be left handed.
But sexuality is anything but a gay/straight issue. People are naturally gay and naturally straight. But far more often, we naturally fall somewhere in between. Welcome to the natural world.
Your statement contradicts
Your statement contradicts itself. I am A zoologist (a person who studies animals) and it is scientificly proven that the only animals who have sex for pleassure are dolphins no other animal in the animal kingdom has pleassure on the mind when they think sex it's for reproduction when they see a hole they think reproduction the animals u see that apear to be "gay" acctualy don't have a stong enough mind to tell the difference between male and female if you can name three smart species that are gay I will tell my co workers if not this disproved your statement
sex for pleasure?
You mean to tell me that humans don't have sex for pleasure?
Of course humans have sex for
Of course humans have sex for pleassure but to relate homosexuality being natural to the animal kingdom is idiodic. Tell me David what relegion do you belive in.
Whether Homosexuality Is Natural
It doesn't matter what religion I believe in...We were talking about whether animals have sex for pleasure. Human heterosexuals have sex for pleasure (we know this anecdotally), and human homosexuals have sex for pleasure (we also know this anecdotally). Animals also have sex for pleasure. We know this because homosexuality occurs in the animal kingdom, so why else would they have sex if they're not reproducing? I believe most people would say sex is supposed to be pleasurable.
To judge whether something is natural or not, we have to define nature. Is natural anything that occurs or was created outside of the human world? By this definition, human homosexuality would still be natural because homosexuality occurs in the animal kingdom.
By the same definition, human heterosexuals would still do a lot of things that are unnatural and probably don't think twice about it. Television doesn't occur outside of the human world but almost everyone watches it. That is something that most people do for pleasure. You probably do many things for pleasure and don't think twice about it. Who says that pleasure is bad or unnatural? If used correctly, it can actually be used to reinforce positive behavior.
Nobody here would believe
Nobody here would believe that comment came from a professional of any kind, let alone someone over the age of 19.
Non human apes use sex for both pleasure and as a way of maintaining relationships and hierarchal structures.
Then do some research and
Then do some research and then comment back.
It is very commen in Africa
It is very commen in Africa and Asia.. you need to do your research. It was very commen in Africa for young men to have homosexual partners before they married. It was Christians that brought fear to Africa. Before Christians Africa was more accepting of Homosexuality.
What research have you Been
What research have you Been doing to tell you this nonsense Africans did not have homosexual partners it wasn't untill American tourists influence that it became more common and christians have been going to Africa longer than documented so now your just making stuff up trying to blame christians that's not cool plus in Africa we have our own religions all denouncing homosexuality
RE: If homosexuality is normal
Your measure of whether homosexuality is "normal" is pinned partly on the observation that homosexual men and women are unable to have children (through homosexual intercourse). Of course, all of the sexual acts that homosexuals engage in are also engaged in by a majority of heterosexuals. Since these acts do not result in pregnancy, by your definition they are not "normal." Presumably then, you would agree that all non-procreative sexual acts are not "normal" -- regardless of the gender of those involved, right? If procreation is the standard for what is normal, then all sexual acts between persons incapable of reproduction for any reason are abnormal. If you believe otherwise, then you are applying a double-standard purely based on the gender-orientation of the individuals involved.
You also assert that homosexuality is not as common in Africa and Asia as it is "here." (Where is "here" incidentally?) Could you please cite studies regarding the frequency of homosexuality in Africa or Asia and offer similar studies establishing its frequency in your own country? Oh, and regarding homosexuality in Asia, please be sure to include analysis of how the brutal repression of homosexuality in China and most Muslim societies in Asia might tend to skew the results of research on frequency. (Asking a man who is subject to beheading for being gay if he is in fact gay might elicit a less than truthful response, you see.)
Re: Gene of homosexuality passed from mother to Child
I would like to have concrete evidence that actually does prove that the mother actually does pass down the "gay gene". I may have had several cousins that are gay, but that is neither here nor there, I would just like the facts,one more thing I think that most people that are gay really did not choose to be gay, and alot of different religions they would be an outcast.
Mixed evidence on genetics and homosexuality
There is a mixed record on whether or not homosexuality is genetic or not. The consensus seems to be that genetics does play a role in influencing homosexuality, but it seems that genes might pre-CONDITION people to homosexuality, but not pre-DETERMINE homosexuality, and that homosexuality is no more determined by genes, than is interest in playing guitar or interest in reading.
-Ted
iam depressed
everyone there listen:
i am a homosexual who is living in an islamic country.i didnot chose to be gay,
if you just think for one second you will realize how redicolous it is to chose to be gay in an islamic country,because the punishment of homosexuality in islam is just DEATH.
from the very first day of my puberty i realized that i have homosexual desires
i was truly terrified,because i didnot want to be like this.
year after year i understood that its something inside me and i dont have any control over it.you know can imagine how hard it is that you are a gay and you cant change it.
now iam 25 years old man,who is a medical student and have many achievements in my life(imnot saying it as a compliment),but has a very sad aspect of life,which is iam still a virgin ,because iam gay.and if i find a partner ,and i be arrested ,i will be killed.
i have no desire for sex with women.and let me tell you another fact:
my twin brother is homosexual too.and we were both afraid to tell this truth to each other.
you cruel people who think that homosexuality is a choice,is better to go and discuss with gay people.you will find out that we all were born that way.
again its soooooooooooooooooo rediculous to think that i chose to be gay in an islamic country
bollocks
this story seems fabricated. purely to slander muslims. out of curiosity, which islamic country would this be?
also, your twin brother is gay yet you cant find the courage to tell each other you are both gay....which strikes the question, how did you know he is gay?
also, puberty doesn't hit you overnight, its a slow process and if you claim that it is not a choice, why did you not know you were gay earlier?
ive always known im straight. if you claim this is genetic then shouldn't you have always known you were gay?
the death sentence has been abolished regarding homosexuality in islamic countries with the exception of one or two small countries. all you would face is either a fine or a prison sentence. i hope you find a job as a doctor out of the fictitious country you speak of to escape prosecution.
I think you guys are all
I think you guys are all foolish for even believing or thinking about believing that there is a gene that causes homosexuality, it is a choice and lifestyle that people choose the bible says that God has not made man bent toward the unatural relationship but towards the natural and homosexuality is not natural.
Re: I think you guys are all
{"I think you guys are all foolish for even believing or thinking about believing that there is a gene that causes homosexuality, it is a choice and lifestyle that people choose the bible says that God has not made man bent toward the unatural relationship but towards the natural and homosexuality is not natural".}
Oh yeah? And I bet you believe that the Earth and the entire Universe are only 6,000 years old.
Ok. I used to be really
Ok. I used to be really religious. I remained that way for awhile and I fought my gay feelings thinking I could trick my mind into liking girls. I still am not fully out cause I'm completely uncomfortable with it, but I can't change it. I've tried. Thank you for your ignorance. I am no longer religious partly because the bible persecutes gays and I didn't choice this and the other part is because the story's in the bible were so juvenile. You have to realize everyone has a different perspective. See from another persons for once. It will teach you more than to like gay people
There are many reasons why
There are many reasons why homosexuality could be seen as a positive. A couple hypothesis are that homosexuals in a species help more with rearing the offspring than the heterosexual males, this is seen with a lot of primates and heard animals (as stated in the above articles). Another hypothesis is that in heard animals homosexuality helps with a peaceful means of population control. Just because someone is a carrier of a gene that has a potential of building a person this way or that way doesn't make it 100% so. In science nothing is 100% true, any study that will show you otherwise is not scientific. There is always a potential of fallibility.
Oh boy...
Oh boy... here is why good moderate Republicans like me are given a bad rap. Why oh why did McCain choose Palin??????? :)
Swish! He shoots! He scores! Score one for science there big guy. Drop your personal interpretations of the bible at the door and at the very least go give the Methodists a ring. At least they allow gays AND gay clergy. Wait a minute, are not Methodists Christians? Does not that make you a hypocrite?
Spoken like a know it all
Spoken like a know it all straight guy. How can anyone who isn't gay really truely understand?
And what about the human rights element?
Homosexuality is not natural?
Dear Anonymous, I am currently writing a paper on homosexuality and it's significance in anthropology, sociology and psychology. I am curious to understand where you come to the conclusion that homosexuality is not natural? Is this something that you were taught or something that you blindly assume? I know that sounds harsh but it is not intended to be, obviously you are reading this with some sort of open mindedness or curiosity. Homosexuality is prevalent throughout nature. Petter Boeckman had an exhibit in Norway displaying homosexuality in the animal kingdom. If you need examples of this there are many articles I am uncovering that might help your understanding that homosexuality is definitively NOT against nature:
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=20718
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_animals_displaying_homosexual_behavior
You can check those out. I have been reading a lot of the comments here and it seems that some people are missing a basic understanding of genetics and the roles of genotypes and phenotypes. I don't claim to be an expert but I do understand enough to say that 58% is a pretty good indicator that homosexuality is affected by genetics. In nature many of the animals that practice homosexuality still produce offspring. There are many reasons why homosexuality could be seen as a positive. A couple hypothesis are that homosexuals in a species help more with rearing the offspring than the heterosexual males, this is seen with a lot of primates and heard animals (as stated in the above articles). Another hypothesis is that in heard animals homosexuality helps with a peaceful means of population control. Just because someone is a carrier of a gene that has a potential of building a person this way or that way doesn't make it 100% so. In science nothing is 100% true, any study that will show you otherwise is not scientific. There is always a potential of fallibility.
The big question raised in my mind is that if more people were educated to know that homosexuality is not against nature and is about as natural as breathing, what would the next argument be? I would think that if the people that are saying this are implying that God created nature and God's will is infallible then it would be a contradiction to say that god is against homosexuality at all.
nature and homosexuality
I think you need to read Romans 1:26-27 you need to notice how many times natural is used.
verse 26 exchange the natural use for that which is against nature
It is sad to hear people lower themselves to the standard and level of animals to justify their behaviour.
Just because a monkey does an act you think that a good reason to do the same?
hey
hey Travis
I read your article, have you finished your paper. I would be interested to see it as i feel you have very relevant views and would be deeply interested to read it. Many Thanks Harry
Homosexual gene and evolution?
The idea of a "homosexual gene" is difficult to reconcile with the theory of evolution. Two points: 1 Carriers of such a gene would be much less likely to seek heterosexual partners and procreate, causing such a gene to be eliminated from the pool; 2 What possible evolutionary advantage would such a gene bring to the carrier?
In fact, a "homosexual gene" is in flat condradiction with the basic idea of genes battling incessantly to perpetuate themselves; it would be self-sabotaging.
Strangely, both scientific
Strangely, both scientific dogmas, homosexual behavior and theory evolution, we not supposed to criticize. To call evolution an unconfirmed hypothesis, or to hint about finding a cure for homosexual behavior would both invite the intellectuals' displeasure.
Apparently you haven't done
Apparently you haven't done your research. THERE ARE DOZENS OF ANIMAL SPECIES that show/practice homosexuality.
Would you choose to be gay?
I sincerely agree with the research. People who are truely homosexual (not just bi or curious or whatnot), but are truely and innately gay DO NOT have a choice. They are born to be gay, just like someone who is heterosexual is born to be that way. Now, if we DO propose that it is due to environmental factors, then why are some brothers or sisters who live in the same household, and grow up with the same influences, opposite in their sexual orientation? As far as the twins argument goes, genes do not play the entire roll when it comes do determining who we are. The human design is so complex that any change in its design can result in dramatic changes. To say that being homosexual is wrong would be like saying someone born with down syndrome is wrong. If you are going to say that homosexuality is a choice, than you must say that heterosexuality is a choice as well, and that we are all born neutral, and deside "I want to be gay or I want to be straight," which is ridiculus. Imagine if someone ridiculed you for being straight, you would think to yourself, "I can't help it," so why should it be any different for someone who is gay?
homosexuality
Hi there
The bible says in Romans that the act is against nature in other wods you cannot populate the world naturally by homosexual behaviour.
The other thing that interest me is that in the 70's the homosexuals would always proclaim how different they were and didn't want to be like the rest of society.
Now they want to have children and get married and have tax breaks etc... what is even more amusing is I have a lesbian at work who calls her partner her wife
A great example of what the bible calls confusion in a text speaking about these types of relationship.
This is absolutely true for me
I completely agree. Being truly homosexual is not a choice. I believe genetics play the largest part by far in determining an individual's sexuality. I know this as i have always been attracted to boys and men all the way through my life growing up (i am now 23). When i was very young, even though i couldn't interpret my feelings at the time, i recall having sexual desires for boys my age as early as when i was 4 years old.
To me this is all the evidence i need to believe the environment i grew up in was irrelevant in determining my sexuality considering i started having these feelings so early. The only choice to make is whether or not to embrace or suppress your inherant sexual desires
hi friend
thanx for your comment
iam gay and i didnot chose to be gay ,it is not a choice
iam living in an islamic country and the punishment of homosexuality is DEATH,so am i a fool to chose to be gay????
thanx
Tell him!!
Tell him how stupid he sounds... people who live in America, how does a penalty of DEATH for homosexuality sound???? Not so 'fun anymore' shut your mouths and think
A genetic component of homosexuality
Scientists have identified genetics as a cause of homosexuality. This has been accomplished through a type of study on people who identify as homosexual (and non-homosexual as a control group) and a region of the genome to identify whether there is a genetic component to homosexuality. Another type of study, "twin studies," uses pairs of non-twin siblings, dizygotic twins, and monozygotic twins, who share between half and all of their genetic information (non-twin siblings-50%, dizygotic twins-50%, monozygotic-100%). One sibling (or twin) is compared to the other one of the pair in terms of their sexuality, and the co-occurrence is measured across the three types of pairs. A higher co-occurrence of homosexuality among monozygotic twins, who share the same genetic information (compared to dizygotic twins and non-twin siblings who share only half), provides evidence of a genetic link to homosexuality.
Both of these types of studies, as well as others, have shown with statistical significance that there is evidence of a genetic component to homosexuality. I have provided links to webpages that reference studies on the topic of a genetic link to homosexuality. Here are a few that seem to support the idea of a genetic influence on homosexuality:
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1925
http://www.dailyprincetonian.com/archives/2006/10/12/news/16168.shtml
http://www.webmd.com/sex-relationships/news/20050128/is-there-gay-gene
Evidence or Proof
Would you please clarify; are you saying genetics is a cause of homosexuality or that there is evidence to suggest genetic is a cause of homosexuality?
Thank you!
Straight-ness
How can homosexuality be genetic, when almost everyone is born to straight parents??? This entire argument is pointless.
Uh
Are you saying it's impossible for a homosexual person to be born to straight parents? How come? Are you EXACTLY like your parents? Do you carry ALL their traits?
Because recent studies talk
Because recent studies talk about a maternal gene for male homosexual. So OBVIOUSLY the mother is heterosexual or at least she had heterosexual behaviours.
Female homosexuality has, probably, different causes and IS different.
gays and genetics
That would have to be the most ridiculous statement I have seen in a long time. I am left handed, both my parents are right handed- so saying that gays are born to straight parents is a pointless argument is utterly absurd. Are you under the ridiculous assumption that every gene is passed and expressed? Then we would expect our fathers to have breasts, and our mothers to have beards
Just because your parents carry genes does not mean you get and express them. Both parents can have blue eyes, but the children have green. Why? Because the parents possess the green gene, and therefore have the POTENTIAL to have it expressed in their off-spring. Besides, they have already said very clearly that genes can play a part but not the entire role. Your stupidity astounds me, you should really stick to commenting about things you understand and not waste space reserved for those that have at least a sensible comment.
Off topic info
Ok so nice argument but just to throw it out there. You being left handed and your parents being right handed has nothing to do with genes. It all depends on what hand you choose to use or in my case your parents choose for you to use. Ita kinda funny because when I lived with my mother she wanted me to use my right hand so that's what I practiced with. My father on the other hand (no pun intended) whanted me and my brother to use the left so we can have an atvantage in sports. That went back and forth my entire childhood and I am gladly able to use both hands equaly.
Sexuality and Handedness
Just because your parents taught you separately to use each of your hands doesn't mean you weren't genetically predisposed to be able ambidextrous. With traits that manifest as behaviors, such as handedness and sexuality (as opposed to something non-behavioral like eye color), there are both genetic components and environmental components.
People have genetic material that predisposes them toward heterosexuality, homosexuality, or bisexuality. However, if the environment is strongly anti-gay, it may keep a person in the closet, and their homosexual genes may not manifest as such. They may therefore behave as heterosexual even though they are truly homosexual.
It's the same with handedness. You may be genetically influenced to be either right-handed, left-handed, or ambidextrous. According to you, however, your environment influenced you to become effectively ambidextrous. But genetically, one of your hands may be wired to work better than the other.
The environment's tendency to influence genetic factors is of course very common. But it doesn't change the fact that the genetic factors are there. An heterosexist or anti-gay society may create the allusion that people "choose" their sexuality. But deep down, sexuality is still influenced by genetic factors. Just like your handedness.
Genetics of Homosexuality
When you say almost everyone is born to straight parents, what percentage of the population is that? The argument is pointless if you have nothing of value, or factual to add to it. I am assuming you are straight, and if so, no one made you feel the way you feel about the opposite sex. You just know that you are attracted, and not conflicted by your feelings. Why would anyone chose to be conflicted? If it is true for most gay people who admit to having an attraction for the same sex since they were small children, then it would only make sense that genetics may play a role in this. Perhaps you should take a course in Biology if you haven't already, and it may at least make more sense from a scientific perspective, and then you can tell the world what percentage of children are born to straight parents. This information will not be totally accurate because there will still be parents who pretend to be straight, and have children just to appease everyone around them.
No one is saying it's
No one is saying it's HEREDITARY, as in, passed on between generations, necessarily. We are simply arguing that it is BIOLOGICAL, as in genetically inherent.
The idea that homosexuality
The idea that homosexuality is purely genetic is not without its flaws. Although there is very compelling evidence to show that homosexuality is indeed genetic, there are other factors such as, prenatal hormonal environment, which will also have an influence on sexual preference.
Make an attempt to understand the subject matter before you dismiss it as pointless.
questions
In fact, I'll keep it non-threatening by asking questions to make my point.
Point 1.
Do left-handed parents only and always have left-handed kids?
Point 2.
If I play the role of Brutus in a high school play which leads to drama courses in college, playing Brutus which then leads to a local theater production where I play Brutus again. Does that mean that I am indeed Brutus? Am I murderer?
Are you stoned???
What exactly is your point? None of this makes sense? Jake Gyllanhaal played in Brokeback Mountain, but he's not gay- again what is your point????
Homosexuality was the "norm" in the past
I think for me, the question is not whether there is a specific homosexual gene (though i would like to know if there was one) but the fact that in the past, specifically during the times of the greeks, homosexuality was the norm. It wasn't seen the way it was today. In fact sexual orientation was not even a concern for men at that time. In fact, sex with boys was even seen as the purest form of love. That said, my main concern with homosexuality today is how did it evolve from something that was so tangibly prevalent to something so deviant and taboo?
Homosexual gene
" my main concern with homosexuality today is how did it evolve from something that was so tangibly prevalent to something so deviant and taboo?"
In short, today's Bible is responsible for homosexuality being considered deviant behavior.
The Bible's history is availabe at http://www.allaboutthejourney.org/history-of-the-bible.htm where it says ..."In 397 AD, in an effort to protect the scriptures from various heresies and offshoot religious movements, the current 27 books of the New Testament were formally and finally confirmed and "canonized" in the Synod of Carthage."
the bible
I'm afraid you are wrong when it comes to homosexuality and the bible because it was spoken of in the old testament in Genesis and Leviticus and Deuteronomy.
And I laugh when I hear of Homosexuals talking about christians coming against them with scriptures,but if you look at the verses used it includes people who are liars and thiefs and drunkards etc...
It is in the old and well as the new testament.
Post new comment