Replies

My guess would be, since science hasn't been able to point to one gene as the "gay gene," that one of three things happens (1) there is more than one abnormal gene need to cause gayness, and these genes all exist in a frequency dictated by the equalibrium, but only manifest in gayness themselves when together as a group - so the genes normally get passed on - or (2) there may be many normal people with a the recessive genes, ff for instance, and that enviromental factors, anything from chemicals in the enviroment to how the person was treated growing up, actually influence the expression of these genes or (3) a combination of both before points. All of these would allow gene frequencies to remain relatively the same, even if the homosexual him/herself never reproduces.

In the end though, people still have a choice in the matter of how they are going to live their lives. One of my friends that I mentioned earlier was raised by two loving Christian parents, and was not molested as a child (I asked). After a period of rebellion and being angry for the way he was, he reaccpeted Christ, and remains celebate. He says the attraction is still there, but he doesn't act on it. He sees himself like any person born with a problem an doesn't rail against it or against God, but rather understands that things get messed up in a fallen world, and deals with things as appropriate. He's one of the rare ones that understands you don't get a "pass" just because you are naturally one way or the other. It's not fair, but whoever said the world was.

I'm not meaning to drag this on forever, but I am finding your link fascinating. Here is another excerpt:

An important way of discovering why real populations change with time is to construct a model of a population that does not change. This is just what Hardy and Weinberg did. Their principle describes a hypothetical situation in which there is no change in the gene pool (frequencies of alleles), hence no evolution.

Consider a population whose gene pool contains the alleles A and a. Hardy and Weinberg assigned the letter p to the frequency of the dominant allele A and the letter q to the frequency of the recessive allele a. Since the sum of all the alleles must equal 100%, then p + q = 1. They then reasoned that all the random possible combinations of the members of a population would equal (p+q)2 or p2+ 2pq + q2. The frequencies of A and a will remain unchanged generation after generation if the following conditions are met:

1. Large population. The population must be large to minimize random sampling errors.

2. Random mating. There is no mating preference. For example an AA male does not prefer an aa female.

3. No mutation. The alleles must not change.

4. No migration. Exchange of genes between the population and another population must not occur.

5. No natural selection. Natural selection must not favor any particular individual.

First, this theory appears to be a control theory. They are not saying that this is the way it IS. They are saying that this is the way it WOULD BE if we had no mutation, migration, natural selection; and always had large populations and random mating.

There are two problems with the concept of the "gay gene" no matter how you combine its cause. Being gay eliminates random mating. Gays only mate with gays and they do not reproduce (in theory they shouldn't -- the fact that they sometimes DO just puts another hole in the argment and it certainly wouldn't bring the frequencies up to a random level).

Also, being gay becomes victim to natural selection. Nature favors non-gays over gays in that one can reproduce and the other cannot.

I do not see how the equation will EVER work, regardless of the gene combination. Perhaps the complexity of it can REDUCE the decline rate, but it couldn't eliminate it if its cause is genetic and if you believe in all of the above scientific theories.