Startling Study Says People May Be Born Gay

HealthDayNews ^ | October 6, 2003 | Amanda Gardner

[MEGoody]

"Most do leave you alone."

Yes, and most Muslims 'leave us alone too'. . .but they (and 'most homos') fail to speak out against the ones that don't, thus giving tacit approval to their behavior.

[cookcounty]

"The only credible research I have ever seen on the subject said that in twin studies there is a 50% likelihood of having a gay sibling--therefore it is most likely that being gay is 50% hereditary and 50% environmental."

some of the "science" in all of this seems hyped.

As in any study seeking distinctions between nature / nurture:

1.you can only use identical twins that were separated at birth--but are still both locatable---a very tiny pool to begin with.

2.Then you need to find twins that were male. (cut the small pool in half)

3. Then find twins that are self-described as gay (take out another 96%!)

4. Then, in a field so emotionally charged, you have to make sure that the twins have remained isolated from each other to knock out any "sympathy for my twin" attitudes.

I would guess an honest pool in the US would probably be small enough to fit in a phone booth ---if that.

[Maelstrom]

It was hip to be gay in my wife's high school.

A decade later they found out why: A teacher who was considered "cool" was molesting students by the score.

The school administration wasn't able to draw the connection between the dramatic drop in the proportion of homosexual students when he left for another school, nor were they keen to the reason for the dramatic rise in the proportion of homosexual students a year after he arrived.

[cookcounty]

"I am firmly convinced that genetics is a major factor in sexual determination. One of my friends who is a lesbian has bodily features that are so obviously male that she alone constitutes a very strong proof of genetic disposition. Anyone she meets knows immediately that she is a lesbian and that she didn't have any choice, she's built like a Mack Truck.

But you haven't allowed for the fact that Ms. Mack Truck, from an early age was looked at differently than Ken's Barbie. It is unimaginable that these kinds of experience (especially in our era of extremely high value on perfectionist sexual images) did not have a profound effect on her attitudes toward boys, men, and women. Most Lesbians (maybe all) are "lesbians by default," ---They desperately want someone to hug them and hold them close, but they perceive the chances of that happening with a male human as essentially zero, so they get affection where they can find it--a dog, a cat, or a female human.

[Shethink13]

And what conclusive scientific evidence do you propose to show this?

It's called immutable FACT. No scientific evidence necessary because it is not arguable.

[Osage Orange]

You wrote:

"Have any of the people who think that it's not biological in many, if not most, cases ever stopped to ask why a man would prefer a man instead of a woman? "

[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[

Have any of the people who think that it is biological in many, if not most, cases ever stopped to ask why a man or a woman would stick a needle in their arm to get high?

Love and sex...are pretty powerful emotions and feelings. And yes...one can become, like the heroin addict is addicted to heroin, addicted to same gender love and sex.

Fwiw-

[cookcounty]

"One has to view studies of homosexuality based on genetics with skepticism. If human evolution is true, the researchers need to explain how a genetic trait which results in a behavior which does not produce progeny is carried forward in the genetic pool of a population?

Well, the cool thing about evolution is that it is a concept so pliable and plastic, that it can be formed to almost any set of facts. So I'm sure there are folks out there who say that homosexuality in a population results in better haircuts so that the heterosexuals, having been preened by the homos, are really extra hot to get it on and attract partners from other clans.

There are any number of such schemes you could invent, and if you have a grant, get it published, and you would have people on this site reverently call it "Science".

[Osage Orange]

You wrote:

"Christians sure can be neanderthals sometimes. "

111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

Yes....just as all humans can.

[scripter]

You cannot deny the similarities that tie homosexuals together. The first is they share a sexual dysfunction. This dysfunction implies a number of things which I've discussed. Moreover, this dysfunction also entails the cessation of the activity because homosexuals cannot have children amongst themselves, they absolutely MUST take children from others. "Most" might not do this, however, those that do supply human toys for the rest and as they age, they propogate the dysfunction.

Worth repeating.

[AntiGuv]

Geez, JR. You're a regular Renaissance Man.

LOL! I think it's more a jack-of-all-trades, master-of-none kind of thing.. Yesterday, I actually finally wrote most of the answer to Torie's question of over a year ago now regarding what my research entailed and how/why it's influenced my political belief system. I'll probably be posting that elsewhere later tonight when I give it the final once-over.

[aruanan]

The guy also seems to assume that because there may be "hardwiring" for sexual orientation that it means that one is just as hard-wired to be homosexual as to be heterosexual. It may very well be that one's degree of sexual orientation may be along a scale of less to more determined with heterosexuals (given their predominance and the necessity for continuation of the species) at the top of being most genetically determined. If this is the case, though, it would make the "we just can't help it" ploy unsustainable exactly to the degree that one is less hardwired to be heterosexual than more hardwired to be homosexual.

[mel]

Absolutely with the entertainment industry leading the way trying to promote homosexuality. Here's a scary thought, someone recently told me that bisexuality is more common in dating in young adults now.

[LPM1888]

But you haven't allowed for the fact that Ms. Mack Truck, from an early age was looked at differently than Ken's Barbie. It is unimaginable that these kinds of experience (especially in our era of extremely high value on perfectionist sexual images) did not have a profound effect on her attitudes toward boys, men, and women. Most Lesbians (maybe all) are "lesbians by default," ---They desperately want someone to hug them and hold them close, but they perceive the chances of that happening with a male human as essentially zero, so they get affection where they can find it--a dog, a cat, or a female human.

That's a valid observation but in this case she certainly had opportunities for sexual relations with the opposite sex including me. She is delightful to be around, intelligent and the first to help someone in need. You may be correct in her case but I doubt it.

I do know of a very attractive woman who became a lesbian because of environmental considerations but she also exhibited other signs of the stresses that she had experienced. The woman in the first case seems to have none of those symptoms.

[Jorge]

I would imagine you've seen the following links on the subject, but for those who haven't:

I had some of them but not all.
There's some great material on those sites. Thanks!

[Jorge]

Could you explain just what God's intention was (is?), since you seem to know? And do you see this intention as superior to the "natural biological design" you mention? Or are you just confused?

No, actually you are confused.
They are one and the same.

The natural biological design reflects God's created intent for human sexuality, because this design IS God's creation.

And this design/intent couldn't be much more evident. It's male-female.

[LPM1888]

The problem, also, is that it can be both nature and nurture. Abused children (emotionally or physically) can become gay, but it's also possible to find non-abused-as-children homosexuals, I'd think.

That has been exactly my experience.

[LPM1888]

Homosexuals are recruited.

Not always, I know for a certainty that my cousin wasn't recruited and it wasn't environmental.

[LPM1888]

She is a lezbian only by choice, I don't care how bad the one-eyed trouser trout scares her!

Your bias is showing.

[Jorge]

"First of all there are animals which kill and eat their young. Would you just dismiss this a "natural" child rearing behavior?"

For that species, yes. You have a very flimsy stance on nature. On one hand you say that God made nature the way it is and on the other hand you decide that you, Jorge, are the one fit to judge what is naturally occuring outside of the parameters of objective observation. If a species eats its young, then based on a theological argument, is that not how God made that species? You believe that God made every facet of nature, well did God stop at defining how each species interacts with its young?

You obviously missed the distinction I made between nature as God created it, and nature in it's fallen corrupted state.

It's still easy to see God's created intent in spite of the corruption of nature, which is what I have been trying to explain to you.

You only seem to comprehend select parts of my responses, and are losing track of which statement of yours I was responding to.

For example; You implied that because homosexuality can be observed among some animals, it was natural behavior and could therefore be call natural for some humans.

My response above is that some animals eat their young, and by your definitions this is "natural". Therefore would you also say that if some humans eat their children we MUST call this "natural" child rearing behavior?

By insisting on leaving God out of the picture, your arguments are leading to some grotesque conclusions.

If you can't see this, the isn't much point in my trying to convince you of anything.