Gene Tierney
Don't know about the lesbian genes but she was gorgeous enough probably to convert a few.
Posted on 09/07/2014 7:07:57 PM PDT by WXRGina
Of course, it helps that media, public school administrators, universities, the legal profession, etc ... are all heavily promoting the “gay lifestyle,” and exposing children to it a ever decreasing ages levels, so to indoctrinate and trap them into the behavior. Sort of along this line: “How do you know your not gay ... There was a time in world history when those individuals who corrupted the youth of a culture were immediately put to death. Hint.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermaphrodite
I have known several who were born with both male and female sex organs. This is how I see homosexuality, as a birth defect.
The tenth value was generated by a very poor study in a very long time ago by a man named Kinsey (1948) More recent studies generally place the upper boundary at 4 and the more likely boundary at 2 to 3 percent
You said it best. We all have desires and urges that we must suppress. That is TRUE! But if someone is truly happy living with same sex partner and not trying to bother anyone else, I would leave them alone!
There is no "blame the mother" involved. What were once commonly called "birth defects" - physical, mental and behavioral - have been around forever, and we still don't know the cause of all of them.
Some might recall that the old March of Dimes annual fundraisers at first were to fight polio. After polio vaccines practially eliminated that in the developed world, the March of Dimes continued raising money, but to fight birth defects once polio was under control.
Whether some common birth defects, or other problems are genetic, or developmental is still not known.
There is no such predisposition that necessitates a conscious mind to make such a decision. A defective genome that predisposes an individual to behave in such a manner that would make the propagation of it’s genetic line is a possibility, but not one that must be dictated by an intelligent guiding hand.
In the end, such a hypothesis (mine) is idle speculation, and really has nothing to back it up.
What is “claimed” and what is “actual” are two different things.
I still prefer they keep it all hidden. We have enough sexual sin without their very visible presence in public bringing up the whole subject to children, who frankly should not even countenance any of it until maybe 10. No real desire until 13.
Even worse if they are allowed to raise children. Bad for those children, yes, but blatantly brings up the sex subject to other children when it needn’t be there.
How is then that, in every instance of research done to date, the correlation of same-sex attraction among identical twins never exceeds 11 percent?
If homosexuality were a genetic trait, then both individuals in a set of identical twins would possess the inclination to the same degree and without exception - since they share the same DNA. Yet that is hardly the case, even in the most biased research.
It is not directed at you, just the last post mentioning gestational disturbances i.e., something the mother did. It may not be intentional but the number of posts mentioning that without any mention of the many other causes of defects implies, mother (woman) did something bad. Yes, I am a bit sensitive after many years on FR. Just trying to ensure other causes get mention.
Then how is it that such attraction is not 100 percent identifiable in identical twins? They both share the same DNA, the same womb, the same placenta, the same maternal blood and protein exposure ... and yet the correlation of homosexual attraction among identical twins has never - in any research thus far - exceeded 11 percent ... and even that degree of correlation is at the margins and not typical.
Gene Tierney
Don't know about the lesbian genes but she was gorgeous enough probably to convert a few.
Interesting that you would select thalidomide as an example. Most of the afflicted were born in Japan after WW2 and the atomic bombs were used as the primary “excuse” in those cases, or at least that is what I have learned, and that information may be in error I will admit. In any case, such a correlation was determined very quickly and the man made compound was taken out of use for pregnant women.
While there is also a distinct possibility that, chemically and a result of man made compounds, such a cause has not been located to date, and homosexuality has been with humanity from the beginning it seems. That reality makes me believe that perhaps it is simply a learned behavior that is easily acquired or perhaps a common defect of the most complex organ known to man (our brain(.
Interesting speculations, and I still reserve the right to ask any homosexual advocate that if there is a genetic defect or chemical reason for homosexual behavior that could be cured by medicinal therapy or genetic therapy, would they be an advocate for such a “cure”?
The article is not necessarily flawed science. It is more a statement that despite speculation, no gene associated with homosexuality has ever been found. A scientific proof would require that the gene be produced(you can not prove a negative hypothesis of existence.) Could the action of several genes or gene defects produce homosexual behavior? Perhaps, but that is speculation, and runs afoul of the general evolutionary principle that in the long run genetic outcomes that reduce successful reproduction are eventually removed from the pool. The argument that a homosexual gene combination might exits to ‘solve’ some other existential problem is literally a solution in search of a problem; possible I suppose, but not a very strong argument. In my opinion, homosexuality is much more likely a function of the wide innate range of human emotional response, or is derived from conditioning.
The point is not all born problems are “genetic”, as ininherited traits. Many are accidental mutations, or defective gametes themselves.
My post was not intended as support for the existence of a homosexual gene. I do not know if one exists or not. My post was intended to point out the flaw in the reasoning committed by the author. That line of reasoning would apply to other genetic defects that inhibited reproduction. Since other such genetic defects are well documented, and less controversial, it is clear that the premise of the article is false.
Again, the low correlation of homosexual attraction among identical twins does not support your argument. It has yet to exceed 11 percent, which makes it statistically insignificant.
if what you argue were true, then in every set of identical twins, where one twin expresses same sex attraction, then the other must also express the same attraction to the same degree. Since this is not the case, then your argument cannot be valid.
Explain identical twins.
You did not read the article in its entirety, did you? The author discusses this point.
Dennis Prager
http://www.orthodoxytoday.org/articles2/PragerHomosexuality.php
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.