Debate Now Prove your case! Is Homosexuality genetic or a choice?

Discussion in 'Debate Now - Structured Discussion Forum' started by TemplarKormac, Mar 6, 2015.

  1. TemplarKormac
    Offline

    TemplarKormac Political Atheist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2013
    Messages:
    40,944
    Thanks Received:
    6,556
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Location:
    The Land of Sanctuary
    Ratings:
    +16,343
    That's it. No fancy thesis, no viewpoint of my own (yet). All that lies here is a challenge to you the reader to prove the origins of homosexuality. Who here can make the more compelling case for their side?

    The rules are as follows:

    1. No ad hominem (personal attacks)
    2. No mention of any political party (Conservative, Liberal, Democrat, Republican, et cetera).
    3. No anti-Gay or anti-Christian commentary.
    4. All arguments must be substantiated by citing credible and scientific sources.
    5. No arguments based on emotional viewpoints.
    6. No discussion regarding religious or non religious views of Homosexuality. Let the science (or your interpretation therein) do the talking.
    7. Attempts to derail this thread will be actively reported to forum staff.
    8. This thread will be governed under "Zone 1" regulations.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  2. Ernie S.
    Offline

    Ernie S. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2010
    Messages:
    34,384
    Thanks Received:
    8,051
    Trophy Points:
    1,340
    Location:
    Sweet Home Alabama
    Ratings:
    +13,844
    Homosexuals don't breed, hence genetic homosexuality is impossible.
     
    • Agree Agree x 5
  3. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    1. Not genetic or not genetic alone, because studies on identical twins
    do not show 100% match where the twins are the same orientation.
    I think the chances are slightly over 50% of being the same orientation,
    something like 53% to 47%. Since this is not random either, but there
    is a slightly greater chance of matching orientations than not matching,
    it could be argued that genetics may predict a "tendency" but that other factors are involved.

    Source: "Homosexuality: Can it be healed" by Francis MacNutt

    2. In some cases homosexuality may be able to change by choice to undergo spiritual therapy. If you look at real cases of people who changed, this can either be interpreted as "changing orientation as a choice,"
    or as "going back to one's original orientation that is natural and not a choice"
    (where the other conditions were not natural but were not chosen either).

    This is based on faith in people's reports and interpretations.

    Regardless if different people look at these changes as natural or unnatural,
    the fact is that there are REPORTS of both people changing and people saying they could not change.

    Examples: People Can Change - An alternative healing response to unwanted homosexual desires.
    De Blasio s wife Chirlane McCray talks about lesbian past - NY Daily News
    How To Defeat Homosexual Activists 101 A Real Education Page 4 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

    3. NOTE: Because this is faith-based, and cannot be proven either way without more scientific research, where I find people can agree to avoid arguing is that these changes or conditions are SPIRITUALLY determined.

    This is also completely faith-based, but at least it covers all the cases and interpretations,
    and allows for explanations either way. People still report either changing or not changing.
    There is no need to argue, if we can agree it is a spiritual process that determines if people change or not.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Derideo_Te
    Offline

    Derideo_Te Je Suis Charlie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Messages:
    20,464
    Thanks Received:
    7,287
    Trophy Points:
    360
    Ratings:
    +12,090
    1. When did the OP choose to be heterosexual?
    2. Can the OP tell us in his own words how he felt attraction to both males and females and made the choice as to which gender he would engage in sexual relations?
    3. What factors influenced the OP's choice?
    4. How old was the OP when he made this choice?
    5. Did the OP seek the advice and counsel of anyone when it came to making his personal choice?

    None of the above is be construed as a "persona attack" on the OP. They are intended as a purely fact finding exercise. To prove that there is no malice intended towards the OP I will provide my own answers to the questions above.

    1. I never made the "choice" to be heterosexual.
    2. I was never attracted to males, only females.
    3. I am not aware of any factors since I never made a choice.
    4. Around puberty.
    5. I asked no one and no one gave me any counsel, I was just naturally attracted to females.

    The OP is demanding that I provide "proof" that I made a "choice" that I never made.

    So isn't the onus on the OP to first provide proof that he made a "choice" first?

    Isn't that the whole basis of the OP that there has to be a "choice" of some kind? So where is the OP's case that homosexuality is a "choice"?

    Unless the OP can provide scientific substantiation that he made a "choice" there is nothing to discuss here.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  5. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    You may have a point:
    If you look at how Chirlane McCray talks about finding love
    it is more about ACCEPTANCE:

    De Blasio s wife Chirlane McCray talks about lesbian past - NY Daily News
     
  6. Derideo_Te
    Offline

    Derideo_Te Je Suis Charlie

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2013
    Messages:
    20,464
    Thanks Received:
    7,287
    Trophy Points:
    360
    Ratings:
    +12,090
    Sexual attraction is a spectrum in my opinion. The two ends are heavily weighted but there is room for in the middle for a variety of alternatives.

    Perhaps the most telling evidence of all comes from nature itself. Do animals "choose" same sex mates or does the attraction occur naturally?

    BBC - Earth - Are there any homosexual animals

    There is plenty of evidence of homosexual behavior in the wild so it isn't merely something found exclusively amongst humans. If it is as common as the scientific data collected to date suggests then there is probably some evolutionary benefit to be gained. Obviously we still need a great deal more before any definitive conclusions can be reached.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,427
    Thanks Received:
    6,360
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,669
    My case is that there is no scientific reason why homosexuality need be either genetic or a choice

    Among the potential options:
    • Genetic
    • Epigenetic
    • Environmental(pre-natal)
    • Environmental(post-natal)
    • Conditioned(such as family environment or perhaps abuse)
    • 'Choice'- this option I put down as a wobbler- since homosexuality is by definition 'sexual attraction to a person of the same gender- I am doubtful anyone actually ever chooses who they are attracted to- but I do believe that people have made conscious choices to live their lives as heterosexuals or homosexuals
    In addition- I also believe that humans do not necessarily fall easily in A or B- is the boy who fools around with his 14 year old best male friend once, but figures out he prefers girl a homosexual or a heterosexual?

    And finally- I don't think the reason why is as important as treating people fairly. Anymore than I need to know why someone is a Christian or why someone is Jew.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. Syriusly
    Offline

    Syriusly Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Messages:
    50,427
    Thanks Received:
    6,360
    Trophy Points:
    1,840
    Ratings:
    +19,669
    This is actually a very good point- I have seen people from both sides of the situation point to twin studies- IF it was purely genetic- then the match should be closer to 100%- IF there was no genetic component, then the match should be exactly the same as non related parties- but instead twin studies show something in the middle.

    Epigenetics could possible account for that- or possibly a genetic component that is only activated by a distinct environmental or social exposure.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. emilynghiem
    Offline

    emilynghiem Constitutionalist / Universalist Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2010
    Messages:
    19,832
    Thanks Received:
    2,754
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    National Freedmen's Town District
    Ratings:
    +7,224
    Not sure you can compare animals to humans,
    as the key issues people are trying to address are inherently the human factors.

    Humans can carry psychological and/or "spiritual" patterns from past generations
    that may or may not be the same as how animals function.

    I don't know how far science can measure or quantify these factors,
    so until then, this area remains "faith-based"
    * there are people who believe humans and animals operate the same and are only separated by intelligence
    that evolves and can change later on
    * there are people who believe humans and animals operate differently and cannot be compared in this case

    all faith based,
    so to be purely objective and neutral means not to assume one way over the other.
    but to act unconditionally, regardless which way it may be.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. C_Clayton_Jones
    Offline

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    48,098
    Thanks Received:
    10,251
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +31,940
    "Prove your case! Is Homosexuality genetic or a choice?"

    Neither.

    It's irrelevant.

    As a fact of Constitutional law it makes no difference whether homosexuality manifest as a consequence of choice or birth, the condition of being gay is entitled to Constitutional protections, to the right of due process, and the right of equal protection of the law.

    Proof:

    “It suffices for us to acknowledge that adults may choose to enter upon this relationship in the confines of their homes and their own private lives and still retain their dignity as free persons. When sexuality finds overt expression in intimate conduct with another person, the conduct can be but one element in a personal bond that is more enduring. The liberty protected by the Constitution allows homosexual persons the right to make this choice.”

    LAWRENCE V. TEXAS

    Consequently, the 'argument' that gay Americans are not entitled to Constitutional protections fails, as does the notion that to be gay is a mere 'lifestyle preference,' and that if gay Americans don't want to be subject to discrimination they need only 'stop being gay.'

    While science might someday be able to prove or disprove that homosexuality is a result of biology and birth, it will forever be immaterial, having no bearing whatsoever on the protected liberty afforded gay Americans.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

proving sexual orientation