Born Gay? No Way

This is a sensative topic for many, so I'll preface it with this: I am not sharing my views in an attempt to insult or demean, this is simply how I feel and we are all entitled to our own beliefs.

I just don't believe people are born gay; I don't buy it. This is such a popular argument with the gay community, because if it is true, it means they can't change, therefore allowing gay marriage is the only right thing to do. Bull crap.

I have several firm reasons for my not accepting this argument. First, if people were born gay, then there would be a gene associated with homosexuality. Now since homosexuals and lesbians cannot have children together (For obvious reasons. Please take a look at an electric socket and a power cord if you need further clarification), this would mean that the gene homosexuals and lesbians carry cannot be passed onto offspring, unless they copulate with the opposite gender. Wouldn't this result in lower numbers of future homosexuals and lesbians? Clearly it hasn't, as evidenced by the ever growing size of gay pride parades.

Some proponents of gay rights and born gay theories cite research to support the idea that people are born gay. I say, BS; the innate theory of homosexuality is not founded on any scientific principles. Many scientists that have been cited by gay rights advocates have entirely dismissed the notion that homosexuality is biological, and unchangeable.

"Let's examine the words of just one of those often incorrectly cited as providing evidence for a 'gay gene.' Simon LeVay notes, 'It is important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality was genetic, or find a cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men were born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work.'"

"A new research study by a University of Illinois team, which has screened the entire human genome, reported that there is no one gay gene. Writing in the journal Human Genetics, lead researcher Dr. Brian Mustanski noted that environmental factors were also likely to be involved. "Of the innate-immutable argument, Dr. Richard C. Friedman and Dr. Jennifer Downey, noted, 'At clinical conferences one often hears ... that homosexual orientation is fixed and unmodifiable. Neither assertion is true ... The assertion that homosexuality is genetic is so reductionistic that it must be dismissed out of hand as a general principle of psychology.'"

Additionally, if homosexuality is so ingrained, why are there so many cases of homosexuals leaving past lifestyles behind, and carrying on heterosexual relationships? Dr. Ellen Schecter of the Fielding Institute studied long time, self-identified lesbians, who after age 30 were now in successful relationships with men. How many times have you heard of dyed in the wool homosexuals doing complete 180s? I know I have personally heard dozens of stories.

Well what about the argument that the APA doesn't consider homosexuality to be a psychiatric issue? Well, Robert Spitzer, "the psychiatrist who led the charge to remove homosexuality from the psychiatric manual, studied 200 gay men and lesbian women who had undergone re-orientation therapy concluded: 44 percent of the women and 66 percent of the men had arrived at what he called 'good heterosexual functioning' and 89 percent of the men and 95 percent of the women reported that they were bothered slightly or not at all by unwanted homosexual feelings." Furthermore, the APA and the American Medical Association have long been practiconers of PC in place of science, so I would hardly hold them as the end all standard.

Additionally, if homosexuals and lesbians are only truly attracted to their own sex, why are so many lesbians very masculine, and so many homosexuals so feminine? It is as if they want someone of their own gender, but someone that acts or even looks like the opposite gender.

I firmly believe that the majority of homosexuals and lesbians have very sincere, strong feelings of love and attraction. But that said, I believe homosexuality is unnatural and can therefore in many cases be fixed, and if not entirely eliminated, it can be brought under control and not acted upon.

I believe that many things can cause one to have homosexual desires. It must be stressed that these are simply my opinions, and not based on any particular research or study, but mere observation and logical conclusion. These causes include but are not limited to:

1. Simple perversion. One can simply be a pervert, and be attracted to the "dirty" side of homosexuality.

2. Psychiatric disorder. The attraction can be brought on by uncontrollable mental processes, like chemical imbalances, or under/over grown areas of the brain.

3. The result of abuse. One could be abused as a child, and as a result for an unhealthy attraction or repulsion to a particular gender.

4. Confusion. Often in early development, children and teens experiment. During this time period, they may assume since they have this curiosity, they must be gay. Not the case.

5. Acceptance. A homosexual or lesbian may find that they have nothing in common with the opposite sex, or they are unable to attract the opposite sex, so they turn to their own gender, perhaps unknowingly, confusing the frustration with homosexuality.

6. Fitting in / cool factor. Gay is the new black; kids love to be cool. Enough said.

Genetics:

Science has not yet discovered any genetically dictated behavior in humans. So far, genetically
dictated behaviors of the “one-gene-one-trait” variety have been found only in very simple
organisms. (Ch 1)

From an understanding of gene structure and function
there are no plausible means by which
genes could inescapably force SSA or other behaviors on a person (Ch 1)

No genetically determined human behavior has yet been found. The most closely geneticallyrelated
behavior yet discovered (mono-amine oxidase deficiency leading to aggression) has
shown itself remarkably responsive
to counselling. (Ch 1)

If (exclusive) SSA were genetically inherited, it would have bred itself out of the population in
only several generations, and wouldn’t be around today. (ie. gays with no children would not be
able to reproduce their genes.) (Ch 1)

Generally, geneticists settle for some genetic influence
of rather undefined degree, most
agreeing that many genes (from at least five or six to many hundreds) contribute to any
particular human behavior. (Ch 1) This means:

If SSA were caused by many genes it could not suddenly appear and disappear
in families the way it does. It would stay around for many (eg. at least 30)
generations because it would take that long for that many genes to be bred out.
Therefore SSA cannot be caused by many genes. (Ch 1)

The occurrence of SSA (2.6%) in the population is too frequent to be caused by a chance
mutation in a single gene. Therefore SSA cannot be caused by a single gene. (Ch 1)

Researchers trying to find “homosexual” sequences of genes on the recently mapped
human genome have not found any such sequences although they have found them for
schizophrenia, alcoholism etc. (Ch 9)

The occurrence of SSA is about five time too high to be caused by a faulty (non-genetic)
pre-natal developmental process, so it is not innate in that sense either. (Ch 1)

First same-sex attraction occurs over a very long time span, unlike pre-programmed genetic
events eg puberty, menopause. This argues that first same-sex attraction is not a genetically
programmed event. (Ch 1)

The human race shares most of its genes - something between 99.7 percent and 99.9 percent.
That means all ethnic groups will have most of them. This has the following three implications.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
If homosexuality is genetically dictated, homosexual practices will be identical or
extremely similar in all cultures. But there is an enormous range and diversity of
homosexual practice and customs among different cultures (and within cultures)
(Ch 6)

There would be a similar incidence of homosexuality in all cultures. But
homosexuality has been unknown in some cultures and mandatory in others.
(Ch 6)

Changes in homosexual practice and behavior in different cultures would take
place very slowly, over many centuries. But this is not what history shows. The
decline of whole models of homosexuality (the Greek, over a couple of centuries,
and the Melanesian, within a century); the relatively sudden [in genetic terms]
emergence of the present Western model over a couple of centuries; and abrupt
changes of practice within an ethnic group, even over a single generation, are not
consistent with anything genetic. Even less so the swiftly changing sexual practices
within the current Western model. (Ch 6)

The drop in SSA attraction and practice over the lifespan is too great to attribute to genetic
change – or for that matter, deaths from AIDS. It could indicate some change in sexual
orientation. (Ch 2)

Recent increases in the percentage of those experimenting with same-sex behaviour suggest
social influence rather than genetic change. (Ch 2)

Dean Hamer, one of the strongest advocates of a genetically-based homosexuality, has
remarked that he doesn’t think a gene exists for sexual orientation. (Ch 9)

Twin studies: These very complex comparisons of identical twins and non-identical twins
definitively rule out genetic determinism. If homosexuality were genetic, identical co-twins of
homosexual men and women would also be homosexual 100% of the time, but they aren’t.

The genetic influence is indirect, certainly lower than 30% for men and 50% for women
and may be as low as 10%. This is illustrated further by the fact that identical twins with
identical genes are at most 11 and 14% concordant for SSA (ie. if one twin is SSA the cotwin
will be gay only 11 % of the time (males), 14% (females.) (Other studies have even lower
concordances).

And remember this: everyone has at least a 10% genetic influence in his or
her behaviour - simply because without genes there can be no bodily activity of any kind, or
human behaviour.

http://www.mygenes.co.nz/summary.pdf

http://www.mygenes.co.nz/

I believe that there is no single answer to the question of where homosexuality comes from. Just as with people born with various disorders, I believe it is possible to be “born” “gay” as a result of a genetic defect. I also believe that it is possible for some people to develop a propensity towards being homosexual due to post-utero environmental factors. As in the case of people who develop over the course of time a propensity to desire high octane activities (risk takers), it is possible that some people become homosexual due to the “thrill” of the activity.

Bottom line, regardless of where the development occurs, it is my belief that homosexuality is abberant behavior - it is not a variation of normal human behavior - it is not development of a response set of behaviors that are adaptive - homosexuality does not add to the gene pool as (well stated in your position) two homosexuals cannot share and pass on their genetic material to offspring. Homosexuality is not equivalent to heterosexuality. If this is offensive, tough. Get over it. There are natural differences between men and women too that cannot be legislated out of existence.

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.