Can Science Ever Prove One Way Or Another Whether Or Not People Are Born Gay?

[Foxfyre]

I'm asking this question because atheists on here repeatedly use the excuse that since they don't believe in the Bible that they just jump to the conclusion that people are either born gay or straight especially since being gay has its hardships.



So far, I don't see any arguments in the world of science proving this one way or the other. Am I missing something? Btw, this isn't meant to be a gay bashing thread, so please don't make it one. Just looking for answers here to this ages old debate about a possible gay gene.

Does it matter?

So far science has not identified a gene for sexual orientation and maybe never will, but I accept that some in my family (well one anyway), friends, associates, acquaintances are gay and most likely have always been gay. I certainly haven't discussed it with every one, but those who have talked with me about it assured me they did not choose to be gay or want to be gay. Some tried very hard not to be gay. But they just are and of those who have discussed it with me, they tell me they have been far happier since they just accepted it.

And most of these are salt of the Earth, honorable, hard working, responsible citizens and none of them are in my (or anybody else's face) about it. Many are devout Christians. They accept what they are and everybody else does too. They draw attention to it no more than heterosexual people draw attention to their sexual orientation. In short they are just normal people. Most gay people are not the in-your-face activists that offend and turn so many people off.

Certainly the people of the Bible did not understand it and assumed at least some actions to be sin. Controversy on interpretation on whether it was just being gay or whether it was unacceptable lewd or immoral gay behavior they objected to will probably never be resolved.

I think we Christians seriously err when we pluck that one 'sin' out of a listing of sins and make it more important than the other sins. I allow Christians to believe what they believe about anything, including homosexuality, so long as they don't force unreasonable requests or demands on others. And I allow gay people to be who and what they are so long as they don't force unreasonable requests or demands on others. I think that is how we obey the admonition for us to judge not lest we be judged. I think Jesus meant that we should not assume authority to judge another's relationship or standing with God.

Again science has not identified a specific gene for homosexuality or many other human conditions that are deviations from 'normal' and science has not identified a specific gene for why they occur. Science does believe there is likely a genetic component perhaps coupled with environmental, social, etc. factors but they honestly don't know why some have such conditions when others do not. But in my opinion there is no sin in being born with or developing a condition over which you had no choice. Any sin for every single one of us, gay, straight or whatever, will always be in the choices we make.

 

[Road Runner]

Foxfyre Yes it does matter because it's a sin against God, but no it doesn't matter more than any other sin as a sin is still a sin in the eyes of the Lord.

 

[Orangecat]

I'm asking this question because atheists on here repeatedly use the excuse that since they don't believe in the Bible that they just jump to the conclusion that people are either born gay or straight especially since being gay has its hardships.



So far, I don't see any arguments in the world of science proving this one way or the other. Am I missing something? Btw, this isn't meant to be a gay bashing thread, so please don't make it one. Just looking for answers here to this ages old debate about a possible gay gene.

No one is born gay.
No one is born heterosexual.
When humans mature, they develop the urge to reproduce. That's nature.
If they develop an urge to take it up the butt, that's liberalism.

 

[Foxfyre]

Foxfyre Yes it does matter because it's a sin against God, but no it doesn't matter more than any other sin as a sin is still a sin in the eyes of the Lord.

If it is sin is is the sin of their 'fathers.' It is no sin to be born a diabetic or autistic or any other condition outside of the general norms that nobody would intentionally choose for himself or herself. How can it possibly be sin to be born gay when the person had no choice in the matter?

Again I allow you to believe homosexuality just by its existence is a sin. But you must in turn allow me my belief that your belief is wrong.

 

[Road Runner]

If it is sin is is the sin of their 'fathers.' It is no sin to be born a diabetic or autistic or any other condition outside of the general norms that nobody would intentionally choose for himself or herself. How can it possibly be sin to be born gay when the person had no choice in the matter?

Again I allow you to believe homosexuality just by its existence is a sin. But you must in turn allow me my belief that your belief is wrong.

A disease and a sin aren't one in the same but you do you. I'm just speaking the truth.

 

[Foxfyre]

A disease and a sin aren't one in the same but you do you. I'm just speaking the truth.

Autism is not a disease. It is a condition nobody would choose for themselves.
Homosexuality is not a disease. It is a condition nobody would choose for themselves.

I'm sorry but I think we Christians err seriously when we insist that one sin be condemned in the Bible but other laws/sins can be ignored or tolerated. That some laws are to be obeyed but other laws can be ignored.

I think we err seriously when we insist that we decide what the interpretation of any passage of the Bible is and no other interpretations can be considered for translations of manuscripts written thousands of years ago. I believe the Holy Spirit put on my heart not to judge those who have no control over their condition or situation, and to love God--meaning He gets to be the boss-- and one another--meaning all have sinned and fallen short but we are to do good and care about others whenever we can--fulfills all the Law as Jesus said.

 

[Road Runner]

Autism is not a disease. It is a condition nobody would choose for themselves.
Homosexuality is not a disease. It is a condition nobody would choose for themselves.

Still not the same thing and I'm not really sure how you think it is.

 

[Foxfyre]

Still not the same thing and I'm not really sure how you think it is.

My belief is based on logic and reason and I believe confirmed by the Holy Spirit at least so far. I believe the Apostle Paul raised as an orthodox and Pharisaic Jew probably, in his time and culture, did see homosexuality as a sin, but even in his letters we cannot determine for certain if he was speaking of homosexuality in general or whether it was crude, lewd, immoral acts he objected to. I leave such things for God to sort out.

Both the Apostle Paul and Jesus of Nazareth were very big on common sense. Jesus rejected legalism. Paul struggled with it but sided with Jesus most of the time.

 

[sealybobo]

You think gay people cutoff their body parts? You have proof? A link? I think you are making up stuff to sound really ignorant.

You're another one who knows what I mean. Half jokingly, what I am saying is that eunicing a dude might be a punishment Republicans might suggest to a gay man who's thinking about putting it up another man's ass. They suggest celebicy. Well what if the urge is bad? I bet they would suggest cutting it off before using it in such a sinful way.

What I'm saying is they can't suggest cutting their dicks off because they already have a big problem with trannies doing that. At least if they have to pay for it. That was like the first thing Trump did when he got into office. Said trannies in the military will no longer have health coverage costs covered if you are a man becoming a woman. The military won't pay for the drugs or surgery.

Anyways, it was meant to be a joke. Since trannies are cutting off their own dicks and tucking them in so they resemble a pussy, Republicans can't suggest gays cut their dicks off.

Forget it! It's not funny anymore.

 

[Papageorgio]

You're another one who knows what I mean. Half jokingly, what I am saying is that eunicing a dude might be a punishment Republicans might suggest to a gay man who's thinking about putting it up another man's ass. They suggest celebicy. Well what if the urge is bad? I bet they would suggest cutting it off before using it in such a sinful way.

What I'm saying is they can't suggest cutting their dicks off because they already have a big problem with trannies doing that. At least if they have to pay for it. That was like the first thing Trump did when he got into office. Said trannies in the military will no longer have health coverage costs covered if you are a man becoming a woman. The military won't pay for the drugs or surgery.

Anyways, it was meant to be a joke. Since trannies are cutting off their own dicks and tucking them in so they resemble a pussy, Republicans can't suggest gays cut their dicks off.

Forget it! It's not funny anymore.

Trannies are not necessarily gay.

 

[Road Runner]

Trannies are not necessarily gay.

No, but they are mentally disturbed individuals.

 

[sealybobo]

Trannies are not necessarily gay.

OMG now suddenly you know the nuances of gay? You know the subtle differences between the L's and G's and B's And T's and Q's? Goofayou.

 

[Papageorgio]

OMG now suddenly you know the nuances of gay? You know the subtle differences between the L's and G's and B's And T's and Q's? Goofayou.

You are claiming there is no difference between gay, and transgender?

 

[sealybobo]

You are claiming there is no difference between gay, and transgender?

I thought the science said they were both boys. So you know the difference between a tranny and boy? You know to call the tranny she? Good for you Papa

 

[Papageorgio]

I thought the science said they were both boys. So you know the difference between a tranny and boy? You know to call the tranny she? Good for you Papa

it Isn’t that difficult, sorry it is so tough on you

 

[Captain Caveman]

I'm asking this question because atheists on here repeatedly use the excuse that since they don't believe in the Bible that they just jump to the conclusion that people are either born gay or straight especially since being gay has its hardships.



So far, I don't see any arguments in the world of science proving this one way or the other. Am I missing something? Btw, this isn't meant to be a gay bashing thread, so please don't make it one. Just looking for answers here to this ages old debate about a possible gay gene.

Scientists claim/proved there's no gay gene.

 

[sealybobo]

Scientists claim/proved there's no gay gene.

That's right

There is no ‘gay gene.’ There is no ‘straight gene.’ Sexuality is just complex, study confirms​

And homophobes aren't 100% straight. There's a spectrum and they are on it. If you "hate" gays, you're probably gayer than I am. A guy who's so firmly straight that gays don't bother me.

They must be mad at the way gays make their dicks hard.

 

[Captain Caveman]

That's right

There is no ‘gay gene.’ There is no ‘straight gene.’ Sexuality is just complex, study confirms​

And homophobes aren't 100% straight. There's a spectrum and they are on it. If you "hate" gays, you're probably gayer than I am. A guy who's so firmly straight that gays don't bother me.

They must be mad at the way gays make their dicks hard.

Well, I'm for one don't hate gays, I just think they have mental challenges that they need to address and overcome. Maybe one day a cure in the form of tablets can be developed for them.

 

[sealybobo]

Well, I'm for one don't hate gays, I just think they have mental challenges that they need to address and overcome. Maybe one day a cure in the form of tablets can be developed for them.

That's silly. Today I was listening to guys who like to get shit on. Or they like to shit on other people. I suspect this pill would work on them too? Like viagra works on gay and straight dicks. Would this tablet stop you from having a foot fetish?

Would it stop you from fucking your spouse with a condom on? That's a sin too. There's only one reason to stick your dick in a woman and that's to knock her up. So this pill of yours. Would it be forced on gays or just gays who want to take it? And would it make them hot for girls or just turned on to men? They already have testoterone lowering drugs.

You don't "hate" gays but you'd hate for your son to be gay right? So you hate gays.

I too agree they are clearly different than hetero breeders. I too am different than them. I have no desire to have a wife and kids. Would they have a pill to make me normal too?

How about tablet that would stop you from cuming until your wife reaches an orgasm? That's the pill you need.

Maybe one day there will be a tablet where you mind your own business when it comes to abortion and gays.

 

[Captain Caveman]

That's silly. Today I was listening to guys who like to get shit on. Or they like to shit on other people. I suspect this pill would work on them too? Like viagra works on gay and straight dicks. Would this tablet stop you from having a foot fetish?

Would it stop you from fucking your spouse with a condom on? That's a sin too. There's only one reason to stick your dick in a woman and that's to knock her up. So this pill of yours. Would it be forced on gays or just gays who want to take it? And would it make them hot for girls or just turned on to men? They already have testoterone lowering drugs.

You don't "hate" gays but you'd hate for your son to be gay right? So you hate gays.

I too agree they are clearly different than hetero breeders. I too am different than them. I have no desire to have a wife and kids. Would they have a pill to make me normal too?

How about tablet that would stop you from cuming until your wife reaches an orgasm? That's the pill you need.

Maybe one day there will be a tablet where you mind your own business when it comes to abortion and gays.

I do construction work for gays, I know quite a few single gays and gay couples. But if there was a vote on gay marriage etc, I would vote no.

People like you seem to struggle with that. I think your problem is is that you think people must love or hate gays, so until you can sort yourself out on that, you're just gonna be an annoying ****.