Posted on 11/13/2004 7:47:12 PM PST by Former Military Chick
Religious belief is determined by a person's genetic make-up according to a study by a leading scientist.
After comparing more than 2,000 DNA samples, an American molecular geneticist has concluded that a person's capacity to believe in God is linked to brain chemicals.
His findings were criticised last night by leading clerics, who challenge the existence of a "god gene" and say that the research undermines a fundamental tenet of faith - that spiritual enlightenment is achieved through divine transformation rather than the brain's electrical impulses.
Dr Dean Hamer, the director of the Gene Structure and Regulation Unit at the National Cancer Institute in America, asked volunteers 226 questions in order to determine how spiritually connected they felt to the universe. The higher their score, the greater a person's ability to believe in a greater spiritual force and, Dr Hamer found, the more likely they were to share the gene, VMAT2.
Studies on twins showed that those with this gene, a vesicular monoamine transporter that regulates the flow of mood-altering chemicals in the brain, were more likely to develop a spiritual belief.
Growing up in a religious environment was said to have little effect on belief. Dr Hamer, who in 1993 claimed to have identified a DNA sequence linked to male homosexuality, said the existence of the "god gene" explained why some people had more aptitude for spirituality than others.
"Buddha, Mohammed and Jesus all shared a series of mystical experiences or alterations in consciousness and thus probably carried the gene," he said. "This means that the tendency to be spiritual is part of genetic make-up. This is not a thing that is strictly handed down from parents to children. It could skip a generation - it's like intelligence."
His findings, published in a book, The God Gene: How Faith Is Hard-Wired Into Our Genes, were greeted sceptically by many in the religious establishment.
The Rev Dr John Polkinghorne, a fellow of the Royal Society and a Canon Theologian at Liverpool Cathedral, said: "The idea of a god gene goes against all my personal theological convictions. You can't cut faith down to the lowest common denominator of genetic survival. It shows the poverty of reductionist thinking."
The Rev Dr Walter Houston, the chaplain of Mansfield College, Oxford, and a fellow in theology, said: "Religious belief is not just related to a person's constitution; it's related to society, tradition, character - everything's involved. Having a gene that could do all that seems pretty unlikely to me."
Dr Hamer insisted, however, that his research was not antithetical to a belief in God. He pointed out: "Religious believers can point to the existence of god genes as one more sign of the creator's ingenuity - a clever way to help humans acknowledge and embrace a divine presence."
13 October 2004: Homosexual link to fertility genes
I was speaking of peer reviewed technical or scientific articles. Yeah, more than 500 people read the article posted here, but I'd bet that was a highly watered down version.
I got it.
If he really wants to do the world a favor he needs to find and eliminate the gene pool that makes people believe that crap he's shoveling.
If there wasn't a "viable" alternative, what need would there be for faith?
Not if they get caught.
Then they will be put in a place where they will get introduced to the gay gene.
Thud-bump. BTTT.
"If one is a Calvinist, one might say that God gives the "brain chemicals" necessary for belief to his elect. And many classical Christians, who are not Calivinists, view belief to be an act of God on man (regeneration) rather than a voluntary act of man, himself."
As a 'Calvinist', I would not say that. I may say that God, from all eternity foreknew the 'brain chemicals' I would have at any point during my life. And, that I would not have the "God Gene" when I was (physically) born; and He would, as an act of mercy and grace alter my brain chemical make-up so that I would believe and accept his offer of salvation. That point of changing my brain chemical make-up could be called "regeneration".
For the record, let me make it clear that I believe that the "God Gene" construct is total nonsense.
Religion and science have been clashing for centuries and both have somehow managed to thrive.
Yes, the guy gave us the "gay gene". A discovery that, other more objective scientists ,are UNABLE to duplicate.
I would take this guys " discoveries" with a LOT of skepticism.
"I refuse to accept that religious belief, like love, is a condition of the organs."
No, but there is evidence of the opposite being true: faith having an effect on our organs, most notably the brain. Since the advent of PET scans and functional MRIs, they can actually see certain areas of the brain light up when one prays or meditates. And repetitive prayer, like the saying of the rosary or buddhist chanting actually raises levels of serotonin and other chemicals that promote a sense of peace and well-being.
"No, but I have gay friends who have confided in me that it isn't a choice. And that all things being equal, they would rather not be gay."
I can't imagine anyone choosing to be gay either, but I think the science isn't definitive yet. There was one small study, though, that found marked differences in a certain part of the hypothalmus btwn. straight men and gay men. I think it was smaller in gay men, but I don't know that they were able to conclude that it was a congenital finding vs. a developmental issue. And I can't recall whether the study included women.
Yes, but homosexuals in a lifelong monogomous relationship are doomed to become members of the "Darwin Society".
If there is a 'Gay Gene' it is either an abnormal mutation of a normal gene, or they choose to 'create one in their own mind' to justify abnormal behavior. I suppose you could postulate that some individuals with a gay gene are "unfaithful" and have relations with a heterosexual, thus keeping the gay gene in the gene pool.
And, if two (hetero's) with dominant God Genes came together, their offspring would all have God Genes - which I have seen not to hold true in a number of instances. Reducto Absurdum.
There are neither God Genes, nor Gay Genes. I'm beginning to think that the whole article is a trolling exercise.
Homosexual Agenda + Moral Absolutes Ping.
I just have to ping you all to this one. Wasn't going to, but something got the better of me.
It's just too rich that the faux scientist who "discovered" the gay gene that wasn't, now wants to find a chemical reason for belief in God.
Couldn't accept the fact that God actually exists, and some people want to know Him, and some people don't. Nope, everything's chemicals. That way there is absolutely no personal responsibility for anything whatsoever at any time.
The next step is for some idiot nihilist to "prove" that Actually None of Us Really Exist! (Actually there is a school of thought, if you want to call it that, that the sense of "self" is just a phantasm. But then, who is seeing and believing the phantasm?)
My DNA made me do it.
So what about Satan worshippers - do they have the God worshipping gene, but it was installed backwards?
Let me and Scripter know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
(As an ex-atheist, am I fighting my genes now, or before?)
"If you were really straight as a board you would not disseminate this homo trash or make inappropriate use of the word "gay."
You have given yourself away by your own words."
Wow. You've got one heck of a debating position staked out there: everyone who disagrees with you on the issue must be gay.
Check up Scripter's links. The study was non-replicatable, made up of a small number of cadavers, and IIRC they didn't know who was "gay" and who wasn't, and some may have had AIDS but they didn't know which ones. They entire thing was 100% bogus. Total junk.
This "scientist" may be the author, can't remember.
But it hardly matters, since there are thousands of ex-"gays".
People often mistake license to do whatever their minds suggest to them for freedom.
Real freedom means being able to tell your mind "No, I think not." And then having it shut up.
:-)
That was Simon LeVay's study - debunked and discredited, by LeVay himself. We have some info on the subject if you're interested.
Science tells us the major factor behind homosexuality is environment, and the tens of thousands of former homosexuals testify and support what science tells us.
My money is on mutation or some kind of recessive gene. Who knows? Maybe mutation that combines with some form of conditioning/environment to set up neural pathways. Human behavior is complex stuff.
Thanks for the ping. This is a good thread to debunk the bad science.
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.