Homosexuals - Born or Turn

[bodecea]

Even if it IS a choice, i have a hard time believing it's their fault. There has to be some psychological problem there. If it's NOT a choice and the elusive "gay gene" is identified then perhaps they could be screened for it. Then parents would have a choice as to whether or not to continue the pregnancy.

Problem?

Not for me!

Good to hear that.

 

[bodecea]

Please don't blame someone having so little self-value that they feel the need to kill themself on others. It's a weak argument and most people don't buy it. If you kill yourself you have mental problems. Plain and simple.

And as a Christian I do care about anyone who is struggling, including these people. But they need to want to be helped.

This is not a situation where all things are equal. This is a situation where a minority group is constantly being bullied and kicked around by bigots like you. Are you not aware that bullying in school children causes increased depression? Or are you silly enough to believe that it's somehow their own fault despite the large external pressure? This is basic psychology. Tell a kid they suck, and they will manifest psychiatric problems compared to the kids you say are good, regardless of the actual issue being addressed or performance. This is proven in numerous studies.

So yes, bigots like you propagating hatred and ignorance DO promote this. The best help homosexuals can get is if you shut your mouth. This too is proven through scientific study. So the question is: do you really want to help? Or do you want to continue pushing your bigotry at the detriment of others?

First, if I had an inkling that my child might have homosexual tendencies or was being coerced into believing it was an acceptable lifestyle choice, I would either seek psychological help for them or remove them from the destructive situation. That a parent allows a child to believe they're homosexual or allows it to go unchecked medically is simply bad parenting.

Now, be clear what you're REALLY after. Not legal equality (which i support). You want acceptance that the lifestyle is moral, normal, and acceptable. How's this, I'll stop speaking about the topic when your side stops seeking what I just spoke of. Deal?

*ETA....are you also the kind of guy who supports giving out 10th place ribbons or not keeping score to avoid hurt feelings too?

Would you have your child locked up? I knew a few that that happened to in the 70s and 80s. Their parents had them committed temporarily when minors.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

First, if I had an inkling that my child might have homosexual tendencies or was being coerced into believing it was an acceptable lifestyle choice, I would either seek psychological help for them or remove them from the destructive situation. That a parent allows a child to believe they're homosexual or allows it to go unchecked medically is simply bad parenting.

Luckily for the civilized modern world, homosexuality is not a medical or psychiatric problem. There is literally a handbook that all psychiatrists use to diagnose all psychiatric diseases, and homosexuality is specifically not placed in it because it is not a disease. I'm sure you can find one radical religious zealot who got an MD decades ago with a questionable medical license who subscribes to your idiocy, but you would be hard pressed to even find that in this country.

Now, be clear what you're REALLY after. Not legal equality (which i support). You want acceptance that the lifestyle is moral, normal, and acceptable. How's this, I'll stop speaking about the topic when your side stops seeking what I just spoke of. Deal?

What I want is for uneducated bigots like you to leave other people alone. You are causing psychologic problems while claiming you are trying to "help," as shown by every study on the topic. I don't give a crap what you do or don't believe is moral. No one cares about why you're a dumb bigot. Therefore, my goal is not to have you accept things as moral or normal or acceptable or an abomination or unholy. No one cares. I just want you to shut the hell up and keep it to yourself. Go back to whatever undereducated bible thumping podunk swamp you crawled out of and leave everyone else in the world to their own devices. If other bigots followed the same advice, homosexuals would have dramatically lower psychiatric risks.

So again I ask: do you want to HELP this group by removing the cause of their bullying, or do you want to further your bigotry?

 

[TheLonelySquire]

First, if I had an inkling that my child might have homosexual tendencies or was being coerced into believing it was an acceptable lifestyle choice, I would either seek psychological help for them or remove them from the destructive situation. That a parent allows a child to believe they're homosexual or allows it to go unchecked medically is simply bad parenting.

Luckily for the civilized modern world, homosexuality is not a medical or psychiatric problem. There is literally a handbook that all psychiatrists use to diagnose all psychiatric diseases, and homosexuality is specifically not placed in it because it is not a disease. I'm sure you can find one radical religious zealot who got an MD decades ago with a questionable medical license who subscribes to your idiocy, but you would be hard pressed to even find that in this country.

Now, be clear what you're REALLY after. Not legal equality (which i support). You want acceptance that the lifestyle is moral, normal, and acceptable. How's this, I'll stop speaking about the topic when your side stops seeking what I just spoke of. Deal?

What I want is for uneducated bigots like you to leave other people alone. You are causing psychologic problems while claiming you are trying to "help," as shown by every study on the topic. I don't give a crap what you do or don't believe is moral. No one cares about why you're a dumb bigot. Therefore, my goal is not to have you accept things as moral or normal or acceptable or an abomination or unholy. No one cares. I just want you to shut the hell up and keep it to yourself. Go back to whatever undereducated bible thumping podunk swamp you crawled out of and leave everyone else in the world to their own devices. If other bigots followed the same advice, homosexuals would have dramatically lower psychiatric risks.

So again I ask: do you want to HELP this group by removing the cause of their bullying, or do you want to further your bigotry?

Sure it's not a mental disorder. And global warming is real too.

You have a lot of venom. Fortunately I live in a free country where ALL parties have the right to voice their opinion. Where do you live? So it's not very likely I'm shutting up on this topic anytime soon. Now stop making excuses for people and blaming others for bad choices of the individual.

And when you can properly frame your question I'll answer it.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Sure it's not a mental disorder. And global warming is real too.

There isn't a single psychiatrist in the nation who can point to a single modern source of information that suggests homosexuality is a mental disorder. In fact, doctors can be sued for directly contradicting the handbook I described in my prior post. Contrasted to global warming, which is surrounded by controversy, the medical field as a whole is unified and settled on the matter of homosexuality. The only actual controversy is when uneducated people who know nothing about psychiatry or medicine such as yourself believe that their incorrect opinions have value. So perhaps the question you should be asking yourself is: do you or do not agree with the entire US medical field on this topic, or do you think you are in a better position to decide this issue?

Fortunately I live in a free country where ALL parties have the right to voice their opinion. Where do you live? So it's not very likely I'm shutting up on this topic anytime soon. Now stop making excuses for people and blaming others for bad choices of the individual.

Bad choices are publicly promoting hatred and bigotry as you are doing, while claiming you are a "good Christian" trying to help. Do you or do you not agree that bullying causes psychological problems to others? This is a simple issue. Are you aware that religious zealotry attempting to "cure" homosexuality has resulted in increased psychological damage and more harm without any actual help? Do you disregard all evidence on this topic or do you admit you are not educated on the topic and defer to people who are clearly smarter than you? Let's see how ignorant you are.

You see I live in a free country too, where all parties have the right to say whatever they want, but idiots are generally ignored. Keep this in mind while the entirety of the medical field shows you to be incorrect.

 

[sangha]

First, if I had an inkling that my child might have homosexual tendencies or was being coerced into believing it was an acceptable lifestyle choice, I would either seek psychological help for them or remove them from the destructive situation. That a parent allows a child to believe they're homosexual or allows it to go unchecked medically is simply bad parenting.

Luckily for the civilized modern world, homosexuality is not a medical or psychiatric problem. There is literally a handbook that all psychiatrists use to diagnose all psychiatric diseases, and homosexuality is specifically not placed in it because it is not a disease. I'm sure you can find one radical religious zealot who got an MD decades ago with a questionable medical license who subscribes to your idiocy, but you would be hard pressed to even find that in this country.

Now, be clear what you're REALLY after. Not legal equality (which i support). You want acceptance that the lifestyle is moral, normal, and acceptable. How's this, I'll stop speaking about the topic when your side stops seeking what I just spoke of. Deal?

What I want is for uneducated bigots like you to leave other people alone. You are causing psychologic problems while claiming you are trying to "help," as shown by every study on the topic. I don't give a crap what you do or don't believe is moral. No one cares about why you're a dumb bigot. Therefore, my goal is not to have you accept things as moral or normal or acceptable or an abomination or unholy. No one cares. I just want you to shut the hell up and keep it to yourself. Go back to whatever undereducated bible thumping podunk swamp you crawled out of and leave everyone else in the world to their own devices. If other bigots followed the same advice, homosexuals would have dramatically lower psychiatric risks.

So again I ask: do you want to HELP this group by removing the cause of their bullying, or do you want to further your bigotry?

Sure it's not a mental disorder. And global warming is real too.

You have a lot of venom. Fortunately I live in a free country where ALL parties have the right to voice their opinion. Where do you live? So it's not very likely I'm shutting up on this topic anytime soon. Now stop making excuses for people and blaming others for bad choices of the individual.

And when you can properly frame your question I'll answer it.

translation: a truthful answer will never come from this xtian

 

[kharnak]

I found this partial answer online. i thought everyone might be interested to hear from some people who are more qualified to anwer this question:


Re: Is being gay genetic?
Area: Genetics
Posted By: Rolf Marteijn, Grad Student, dept of Foodscience -> Bioprocesengineering and dept. of Virology, Wageningen Agricultural University
Date: Mon May 5 21:34:32 1997
Area of science: Genetics
ID: 860962700.Ge
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Message:
Hi Greg,

I answered this question before, but on a higher level. It is a very tough question to answer.

Research towards your question is hard. First of all, is it a disease? Most people won't think so (except the maybe sick-making 'Ellen-coming-out' event). However, there is some research which points to some genes which may be involved. It can also have something to do with the environment in which people are raised. Many people may be gay but don't wish to express it, which will give bad results in large scale tests.

In the articles I've read, I think the relationships between being-gay and certain genes are not very strong. When being-gay is genetic, many genes will probably be involved (as is often the case).

Personally, I don't see homosexuality as a disease, so I wouldn't call the differences in genes defects.

In summary, the answer is " I DON'T KNOW, YET". Being homosexual may be genetic, it may have something to do with the environment in which someone is raised, but most likely a combination of many genes and environment.
It will take many many more years before a definite answer can be given.

Regards,

Rolf

Additional commentary by Mad Scientist Network volunteer Louise Freeman:
Dear Greg,

Some time ago, I was sent your question to answer, and unfortunately, it was a while before I could get to it. In the meantime, I saw that someone else has answered your question on the site. I had a few things to add to Rolf's answer.

You ask a question that is a very hot topic among scientists right now. The short answer to your question is "Probably yes, at least partially." There are several studies that provide evidence that homosexuality has a partial genetic basis.

The first type of study involves pedigree analysis, or examining the families of gay men to see if they have close relatives who are also gay. On the surface, this might not seem to prove anything... even if you could show that being gay "runs in the family" it might be due to environment rather than genes. To draw an analogy, if three brothers all suffered from heart disease, it could be that they all inherited a gene that predisposed them to this condition, or it could be something in the family environment... maybe they were raised with a high-cholesterol diet, for instance, and continued to eat that way for most of their lives, which resulted in all of them having heart attacks! But researchers doing pedigree analysis found that gay men tended to have other gay men for uncles, but usually on their mother's rather than their father's side. This lend researchers to believe that a gene on the X-chromosome might be linked to homosexuality.... more on this later!

The second piece of evidence comes from twin studies. Identical twins, as you probably know, share all of their genes. Non-identical, or fraternal twins share half their genes... the same rate as other brothers and sisters. Finally, adopted kids share no genetic material, but are raised in the same environment from an early age. A common way of looking for genetic link for any trait is to compare the concordance rate in such pairs of siblings. Concordance rate is the chance that the siblings share a trait. If you and your brother both have brown eyes, you are concordant for that trait. If you have brown eyes and he has blue, you are discordant for eye color. The concordance rate for hair color (assuming neither twin dyes it) in identical twins is near 100%... identical twins have the same hair color because hair color is determined by your genes. Non-identical twins are less likely to have the same color hair... so they have a lower concordance rate. Adopted siblings' concordance rate for hair color is even lower. This is not to say that non-identical, or adopted siblings never have the same hair color... of course, some do, but the _percentage_ of those that are concordant for that trait is much less than 100%.

On the other hand, if the concordance rate for a trait is the same in genetic and adopted pairs of siblings, it is likely that genes play little or no role, but that the trait is caused by something in the environment that the siblings share, such as family upbringing. For instance, children growing up in the same home almost always learn the same launguage. The concordance rate for the language they speak as adults is therefore also near 100%, no matter if they are identical twins, nonidentical twins, or adopted siblings (assuming they were adopted as babies, before they learned to talk!). Genes, as you might guess, do not influence what language you speak; that is entirely up to what language you learn as a baby! Most behavioral traits, however, are not due to just genes or just environment, but to a combination of both.

Researchers found that the concordance rate for homosexuality is highest among identical twins, lower among fraternal and lowest in adopted siblings. Such a pattern is evidence for a genetic basis to homosexuality... the closer you are genetically to your sibling, the more likely you both are to be gay. If you are not genetically related, you are less likley to both be gay, even though you grew up in the same home. However, it should also be stressed that the researchers found aconcordance rate of around 50% for both gay and lesbian pairs of identical twins... *not* 100%. In other words, half of those with an identical twin who is gay are also gay, half are not. This probably means that, although genes play a role in sexual orientation, they are likely *not* to be the only factor, as they are for traits like eye and hair color.

The final piece of evidence comes from studies on gene linkage. Remember the pedigree analysis that suggested a gene for male homosexuality on the X-chromosome. To review some basic genetics, girls inherit 2 X-chromosomes, one from each parent. Boys get an X-chromosome from their mother, and a Y-chromosome from their father. The fact that gay men tended to have more gay relatives on the mother's side than on the father's suggested that, if homosexuality was inherited, the gene would be on the X-chromosome.

In 1993, a scientist named Hamer studies 40 pairs of homosexual brothers who were not twins. He found the same set of chromosomal markers on one part of the X chromosomes of 33 pairs of the gay brothers... a much higher rate than could be explained by mere coincidence. It is therefore possible that this region of the X chromosome contains a gene that predisposes a male to be gay. However, as in the twin study, it is unlikely that the gene could explain all aspects of homosexuality. Seven of the pairs of brothers did not share these markers, meaning that something else, genetic or environmental, must cause their homosexuality. Also, we do not know how many heterosexual brothers of these men also carried the same genetic markers. (Hamer only looked at the chromosomes of brothers who identified themselves as gay. As Rolf pointed out, some men with homosexual tendencies repress or lie about them because of societal pressures. Hamer assumed the men who said they were gay were not likely to be misrepresenting their sexual orientation.) So, while there is some evidence that homosexuality has a partial genetic basis, it is far from conclusive, and environmental factors almost certainly play a role, as well. Furthermore, no one knows how a "gay gene", assuming it exists, works to make a man be sexually attracted to other men.

As far as I know, although the twin studies suggest a genetic basis for homosexuality in women, linkage studies have not yet been done in lesbian sisters.

More studies on the link between genetics and sexual orientation are underway, and the issue will likely be debated for years to come. Even if a genetic link to homosexuality is conclusively proven, it is unlikely to settle the debate over homosexual rights in our society. Homosexuality could be seen as a natural and harmless variation, such as being born left-handed, or it could be viewed as a genetic disease that should be "cured." Scientists can seek to understand the causes of homosexuality, whether they be genetic or environmental, but it is up to society to decide how that information will be interpreted and used.

Further information on the search for a genetic link to homosexuality, and the debate that search has caused among scientists and nonscientists can be found at members.aol.com/gaygene/index.htm.

The American Psychological Association also has information on homosexuality. Go to Psychcrawler and type "homosexuality" as a search term. Thank you for your question, and I'm sorry it took me so long to reply.

Louise M. Freeman, PhD.
University of Virginia Biology Department

 

[SmarterThanHick]

While the first response seems reasonable, you may want to find a better resource besides a grad student in "foodscience" research.