Is the belief that gay people are born gay substantiated?

Question

is this argument realistic, or is it a way for gay people to compare their "fight for civil liberties" to the civil rights movement by the African American population?

is this argument realistic, or is it a way for gay people to compare themselfs to African Americans in the civil rights movement? please back up you answers with something other than "studies"

Answer 1

No it's not substantiated. I wish their was some long-winded argument, but there's simply NO evidence that points to people being born gay. Simple as that.

Answer 2

Have you ever noticed that very few people seriously ask what causes heterosexuality?

The answer is "OFTEN YES," but we don't know why. Look to a sequence on the Xq28 region of their X chromosome in men for the most known genetic predisposition, when matrilineal ancestry includes homosexuals.

A study by the National Cancer Institute showed that homosexuality runs in families. By itself it doesn't prove anything, there could still be environmental factors. However, further studies concluded that "There were increased rates of gay people among family members genetically related to each other even when raised apart in different households."

This genetic predisposition comes primarily from the matternal side. When gay men's ancestors included homosexuals on the father's side, but not the mother's, the particular marker was not found.

There have been studies that show the brains of some homosexuals are different than heterosexuals -- in both sheep and humans. How do they get that way? Who knows?

A study by psychologist Marc Breedlove in 1999, involving relative finger length had some interesting observations. In their study, gay men and lesbians were found to have shorter index fingers (compared to "ring" fingers) than heterosexuals. This would tend to suggest that there is a pre-determining factor of some kind, most likely genetic. You looked at your fingers, didn't you?

There are identical twins where one is gay the other one isn't; it occurs about 45% of the time, whether or not they are raised in the same family. In fraternal twins, if one twin is gay, the other is gay only 22% of the time. One would expect that both twins would have identical development and similar upbringing, so why the difference? I don't know. Why do they have different fingerprints?

A genetic basis won't stop prejudice of course -- genetics result in gender and race and there is still sexism and racial prejudice.

What remains is that, for whatever reason, most gays and lesbians are born the way we are. It seems more logical than demonic possession to me. Some people (a minority to be sure) do experience change in their orientation, which I believe demonstrates that sexuality is more fluid than most people think. Again, it is something that happens with no known trigger. Perhaps the genetic allele finally penetrated.

And, NO... the comparison is not exactly the same between civil rights movements, but there are similarities.

Answer 3

Is the belief that straight people are born straight substantiated?
Is this argument realistic, or is it a way for straight people to compare their "fight for civil liberties" to the civil rights movement by the African American population?

See how this question feels?
Are you offended? Are you affected in any way by it?
Just curious.

Answer 4

while no one has pinned down the underlying biological mechnism behind sexual orientation a number of studies have shown there does seem to be a biological factor invovled in forming sexual orientation. There are some differences in brain structures between gay ans straight people. Psychology and differences in growing up seem to play a role in sexual orientation as well. Furthermore the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, as well as the American Academy of Pediatrics have all stated that homosexuality is not a disease or disorder and is not changeable and that trying to change someone's sexual orientation may cause a great harm to that individual.

so lets see what we have here. There is scietific evidence to support the notion that sexual orietation is at least partially determined through biology and that early childhood development, neither a factor that a gay person has any control over. Just like African American's have no control over being black. Furthermore every organization or medical and mental health professionals recognize there is no way for a gay person to change their sexual orientation and that even attempting that can do more harm than good. Just as for African American there is no way (barring extreme skin treatments) to change the color of their skin. So we have two goups of people that are both minorities for conditions out of their control, can't change the fact that they are a minority, and have been overtly and covertly oppressed by the majority. So to answer your question it would seem that the comparison between gays' struggle for civil liberties and African Americans own civil rights movement is both realistic and appropriate in that context.

the links below will take you to the full articles on biological causes, psychological causes, and changing sexual orientation.

Answer 5

There is no evidence of a single DNA or genetic cause for homosexuality. However there is no single DNA or genetic cause for race either. There have been plenty of studies showing that there is a biological component to being gay, that gay and straight people are biologically different. In addition, there are hoards of gay people who feel like they have never choosen it and feel like it was inborn.

I think that gay people compare their struggle to the civil rights movement because it is the best comparison, even though it is not a 100% the same. It should be noted that even though black people are definately born black, that doesn't stop racism. Both groups were systemically disadvantaged and discriminated against for something that they have little to no control over.

Personally, I think the question of genetics or not is moot. The real question is if gay and lesbian people are a fully a part of the human condition or a bizarre fetish to be ignored. Do we in a free society accept consentual adult behavior or do we stigmatize it?

I can also tell you that it doesn't matter how people categorize us, or even why we are here - the point is that we're not going anywhere. If you pass amendments against us, we'll just work twice as hard to repeal them. Stigmatizing us or making it 10X as hard for us to care for our families, partners, and children will not make us go away, stop dating each other, or stop raising children, it will just make us better at coping with adversity.

So the issue is less about origins, and what to do with us now that we are here.

Answer 6

It's realistic for me.

When I was growing up, I knew I was gay and I didn't know why. I was terrified of it and I use to cry myself to sleep at night, praying that God would change me by the time I woke up the next day. So, then how would this be a choice? If it was a decision I could make, wouldn't I just choose to be straight. Remember, we are talking about a child/teenager. I didn't want to be gay. Why would I choose to be gay, then cry and pray for God to change it?

That's my argument, and no one can debate it because they are not me and have not experienced the life that I have. That is the problem with straight people going around saying it's a choice. How? How does someone choose something like that unless they are bisexual and have an attraction to both sexes? They must if they think people can just say, "Hey, I think I'm going to be attracted to the same sex. That sounds like a lot more fun!"

Who the hell does that?

Answer 7

Well, obviously gays aren't a different race. There is very strong evidence that it is genetic however. I would particularly point to the Fruit-fly study as proof that its genetic elsewhere -- so why wouldn't it be genetic here. The fact that it is pervasive throughout the animal kingdom as well, indicates that its natural. The local mountain goat didn't wait up and decide "oh, I think I'll be exclusively homosexual." (see Dr. Bruce Bagemihl; Biological Exuberance" from St. Martin's Press) The pheromonal studies are pretty convincing as well -- particularly the one that compared straight male, straight female and gay male pheromones. The gay male pheromones did NOT match the straight male ones, there were actual chemical differences in the pheromones and the scent that gay males give off (I found that particularly interesting because I've never had good "gaydar" but even as a teen I knew if someone was totally straight if they sweat near me -- they just "smelled wrong." I thought I was kind of nuts -- finding out there was a factual basis for it amazed me when it came out recently.

So yes, the argument is very realistic. Researchers at several universities are narrowing the area toward 4 chromosomal bands containing about 25% of all human genes. Homosexuality (we are more complex than Fruit-flies) probably arises for us from a recombinant combination of genes in those bands. Researchers are also looking closely at Xq28 -- but the jury is out on its involvement so far.

As for being similar to the African American struggle. I agree with the Right Reverend John Shelby Spong, bishop of Newark (Episcopal) [retired] who wrote a Catechesis on the comparison of homosexuality with left-handedness together with the Right Reverend Peter Lee, Bishop of the diocese of Christ the King (Episcopal) in South Africa. I've included a link to it as well, you may find it interesting. Gays are not a different race, but they have a genetic difference that leads to prejudice from some people, disguised as religious fervor. The same thing happened to left handed people for centuries.

In the sense that those who suffer undeserved prejudice directed against them, of course, all minorities and under served communities in the United States share in the struggle for equality and justice with all those of the majority who choose to heed the call to decency and honor.

Regards,

Reynolds Jones
Schenectady, NY
http://www.rebuff.org
[e-mail]

Answer 8

You can debate on this subject for ever. There has been scientific proof that you are born gay but that's also not 100% accurate. I personally don't think my sexual preference is by choice. Most people don't chose to be straight or gay. If I had a choice I'd be straight. Why? Because being gay is a very difficult life to live at times. Being accepted by the majority is a secure feeling of normancy. Don;t get me wrong I'm very proud of who I am but people can be very hateful, ignorant and down right cruel. I've always found it amazing that most peopel can sit around and watch the violence they do on TV but the minute you see two guys showing any kind of affection such as hugging, kissing, etc people are freaked out. However, if one guy shoots a bullet through another guys head on TV people are more acceptable to that and stay tuned. Being angry and mad is a sign of fear. People have a tendenacy to get angry and mad over affection, pleasure and love but when it comes to violence they laugh and think it's cool. Anyhow, people are born gay and people become diverse based on their own life experiences.

Answer 9

No matter how many ways the question is asked, the answer is still...

It doesn't matter.

We don't need to compare the gay fight for equality to the civil rights movement for African Americans. Equal rights are equal rights... in America, we are all supposed to be equal.

If you are so dead set against the idea, perhaps you would be happier in a country where equal rights aren't guaranteed.

Answer 10

You are not born gay. Gay is a choice. As for their rights yes they should have their rights.

But as the same civil rights as African American, I think that is wrong. The African Americans has suffer, they didn't have a choice of been a slave. The gays do have a choose.

Answer 11

I don't have the facts to back this up really, but I have read that scientists studied the brains of homosexual people and compared them to heterosexual people and that there were subtle differences in the make-up. (no pun intended). I do believe there are some physical differences, but my personal belief is that they could have had maybe a majority of lives as a female and then wind up a male and not be able to make the switch completely from what their soul was used to to what their body now is. As for the argument part, I believe that if we really want peace in this world, REALLY, we need to stop all the war within ourselves and our own neighborhoods, and be peaceful examples. We want to be a competitive race, and somehow not have war. Can't have it both ways.