Both are true.
2007-03-17 17:57:47
·
answer #1
·
answered by JR 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
genetic explanations for homosexuality are WEAK.
homosexuality has been existing throughout all time and history in various cultures and creatures on earth. trying to find a homo-gene would be ridiculous.
homosexuality does not get passed on genetically to offspring with things like "brown hair, blue eyes," etc., like all other genetics do.
Homosexuality does not have a SOURCE (for example, dark skinned people live closer to the equator) like all genetics do.
Homosexuality is both a behavioral choice and an instinctual state of mind.
Until the day genetics can show me whether or not an unborn child will like Doritos when he grows up is the day I will believe that genetics can show me whether or not an unborn child will like men when he grows up.
Just because people don't choose what they like (or what is pleasing to them) does not give "genetics" the right to explain it. Be it homosexuality (as an orientation, not a behavior) is NOT a choice, it is not necessarily genetic.
with that said and to answer the question: it is easier to prove that homosexuality is genetic simply because the bible has been proven not true on at least one occasion.
The Bible says that the Earth is flat. It is not. Therefore, the Bible is less than 100% true.
2007-03-18 01:12:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Homosexuality being genetic. Researchers have found that most animals express bisexual behaviors and some exclusively homosexual behaviors (And even transsexual animals). Which makes it natural. Besides, they found many important differences between straight and gay people's brains (Which is the "Brain Pattern" decided in the mother's womb). It's on its way to be 100% proved. But the bible? How can anyone really find for sure if anything the bible said ever happened? Archeology is not supporting biblical stories much. And even proved wrong on many ocassions.
2007-03-18 08:37:25
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There will never be a way to prove the Bible being 100% true, because the whole basis of faith is that it cannot be proven, but must be taken in, well, faith.
Homosexuality being genetic, however, can be proven or disproven with science.
2007-03-18 01:09:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
It would be easier to show that genetics and homosexuality either are or are not related than it would be to show that the Bible is 100% correct.
LOL... Showing that the Bible has any connection to reality at all is nearly impossible. The Bible lacks even the most crude rudiments of a factual foundation - it's very likely that it's a work of fiction from cover to cover.
[][][] r u randy? [][][]
.
2007-03-18 01:00:58
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
You can't prove anything true, that's unscientific. It is only possible to prove things wrong and there for support theories. Any theory that withstands the test of time, is considered a truth. It is impossible to test the validity of the Bible and therefore cannot be proven wrong, and hence can't be supported as a truth either (scientifically). Homosexuality's relationship with genetics is testible.
2007-03-18 00:59:25
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
Studies have already linked homosexuality with genetic traits.
You'd never be able to prove the accuracy of the bible, and evolution has already disproved genesis.
2007-03-18 00:51:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by Dalarus 7
·
4⤊
0⤋
Homosexuality being a birth defect ( genetic ) is pretty
much an accepted scientific conclusion now...
2007-03-18 01:23:12
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Homosexuality being genetic, we can learn that in simple studies, the question is, is it worth our time and resources?
2007-03-18 00:50:25
·
answer #9
·
answered by Kirstin 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
obviously homosexuality being genetic, since that has been proven unequivocally, and there has yet to be a shred of evidence for the bible...
2007-03-18 00:50:59
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
definitely homosexuality. the only thing the bible is 100% of is ****.
2007-03-18 00:49:57
·
answer #11
·
answered by fat 1
·
4⤊
0⤋