To anyone who is anti-homosexual, look at this and what do you think?

Question

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071016/ap_on_sc/gay_genetics;_ylt=AqJM26QmTAUeMRdjH0HqxCfq188F

What do you think of this article, please read all of it. Do you agree with one side, both? Why, and if you are Christian, same questions to you. I'm just merely wondering how people would think if homosexuality could be genetic. Hope to get some good answers!

Answer 1

I am both a psychologist and a man who still experiences same sex attractions, having lived a gay lifestyle at a younger age. I can also say that I felt that I was "born that way", because I remember being "different" than all the other boys, (so I thought). But, scientific research has already made it crystal clear that noone is born gay (Satinover, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth). So, why still the search?

This has been the hope for many pro-gay folks for the last 40 years of scientific research. Newspapers, magazines, and now news websites have even placed articles in their daily with these kinds of titles, such as with the Hamer study in the early 90's, "Gay Gene Found", in all the mass media. But, once it was attempted to be replicated, even Hamer, who is gay, had to admit that environmental factors were predominant. Of course, we didn't read that news flash anywhere, did you? Then there's the Bailey and Pillard identical twin studies in the 90's. Both researchers are also self-avowed gay men, but they also had to come to the conclusion that environmental factors are predominating in their last study, which saw only a 24% concordance rate. The first was 52%, but they were cited for fraudulent reporting by a national research committee, so they did a second one partly in order to avoid losing their professional licenses and reputations.

And, Laumann, in 1994, who was no fundamentalist (actually nominally Jewish) wrote that it was clear that sexual orientation was fluid, not static, and that the trend was toward heterosexuality, as people matured psychosexually, not same sex attractions. This human characteristic and phenomena couldn't be possible if it indeed sexual orientation was genetic. I another mega study, 25% of all boys at age 12 admitted that they believed themselves to be gay, but at 16, it was only 12%, and at 18, 8%, and finally at 25, less than 4%. Then there is the latest studies on whether a change or shift in sexual orientation could be possible via therapy, support groups, and/or ministries. Spitzer, in 1999, who used to be president of the APA at one time, and actually was the head of the Board of Nonmenclature of the APA when it removed homosexuality as a mental disorder in 1973, found that many do in fact experience change, and then Jones and Yarhouse this year (2007) found this to be true as well. None of these things could have been possible if genes were primarily, let alone completely, the cause for sexual orientation.

Answer 2

I am not anti-homosexual but I am a research scientist and am familiar with studies designed to find genes related to particular traits.

I have a big problem with the design of this study.

The key to getting good results in such a study is to have an accurate method of determining whether or not each individual has the trait being studied. This is not the case with homosexuality because our society has such a supressive effect on such orientation. That is, at the particular time of the study, there may be any number of people who say they are not gay at that time, but who may in the future come to the realization that they are.

There are much fewer people who identify themselves as gay at one point in time and then say they are not gay at some later date. So this study will tend to under "diagnose" gay individuals. Such a misdiagnosis can ruin a genetic linkage study such as this.

There have been such studies conducted in the past and they have all failed because of this effect. In fact, I have a friend who's family was in one such study that purported to identify a gene involved in sexual orientation. That finding was later withdrawn.

Beyond the methodology I do think it would be interesting to find the biological basis for sexual orientation. It is such a complex thing that I doubt that it could be driven by one biological factor. The thing I fear is that finding a cause could be interpreted by some as suggesting that there is a "cure" for homosexuality.

I know a lot of people in the GLBTQ community eagerly hope that a biological basis is found to show that they are the way they are by nature and not by choice. But they have to recognize the danger that could come from such a discovery.

Answer 3

Let me be honest:

Even if something has a genetic basis, does not mean it is a good idea to indulge in it. Humans survived in the past by eating everything they could catch or gather, and they passed those survival genes onto their offspring. In today's world, that kind of indulgence leads to obesity. The propensity to rape women might also have genetic roots, for obvious reasons. Nature itself is not the only guide on how to live. One must also use a reasoned morality to judge what is acceptable and what is not good.

But there is no good reason to oppose homosexuality. It is a bond between two consenting adults. There is absolutely nothing wrong with it. I know homosexuals who are caring and loving people. I cannot imagine how an ancient book should be used to define the acceptable limits of love. The world has changed, and so have human societies and customs. It's not about how our genetics influence us, but how we can use genetics and reasoned morality to guide our lives.

Religions just ask us to condemn based on ancient prejudice, instead of asking questions or changing the status quo. I'm not anti-homosexual, and I can't imagine a good reason why anyone should be. Those who argue that homosexuality harms the family ignore the 1 million gay parents in this country, who seem to be doing fine. Those who argue that gays affect the morals of heterosexuals forget that this is a secular government founded on civil liberties -- for everyone.

Answer 4

If we found that there was a genetic predisposition to pedophilia, would you be okay if your 3 y/o daughter was molested by a pedophile who was simply doing what his DNA told him to do?

Sin is sin. Homosexuality is sin. Heterosexual sin outside the bonds of marriage is sin. The issue isn't whether homosexuality is somehow a "genetically" definable attribute: it is that to practice homosexuality defies God's commandments, just the same as heterosexual fornication or adultery.

What is most often hoped for in this sort of study is the same old story: "I seek to justify my sinful behavior, because I just can't help myself... I was BORN this way, so you must accept my inability to control this behavior." Again, pray hard for your own children on the day they find the genetic predisposition for pedophilia, because whatever argument they use to allow homosexuality to become a "socially acceptable lifestyle," MUST be used to allow a pedophile to indulge their evil sin as a "socially acceptable lifestyle."

And if you argue that the difference between a pedophile and a homosexual is one of "consenting adults" versus "victimized child," then let's talk about abortion. Who speaks for the child there? And in either case, how can we justly punish the pedophile? As Richard Dawkins (author of "The God Delusion") states "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference. As that unhappy poet A.E. Housman put it: `For Nature, heartless, witless Nature Will neither care nor know.' DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music." (Dawkins, R., "River out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life," Phoenix: London, 1996, pp.154-155.)

That's why this whole exercise is viewed by Christians for the slippery slope that it is. To abolish absolute moral standards of right and wrong that are based on the word of God is to open the door to a world of moral relativism and evil beyond comprehension. God help us!

Answer 5

You have to consider the sources of information. In 1890 the surgeon general declaired that smoking caused cancer. The OFFICIAL read political view is that there may be a link. Intelligence dictates that there is, but big money controls the political view. About 30 years ago they discovered a genetic link to homosexuality, but the religious right decided that they didn't want that and legislated against the possibility of a genetic link. It exists, but you have to fight the party line.

Answer 6

For those who dont believe in God, At an aethist perspective, evolution claims that they are two goals, survival and reproduction, right? You cant reproduce if your wish is to be with someone of the same sex. Yea u can do all those sperm and egg stuff but the main point is that u wont reproduce. being an aethist and a homosexual is therefore logically impossible, because it refutes itself but yea

Now as a Christian, that I am, we as humans are made to be with the opposite sex. Adam was created first, and Eve was created to help Adam. Men and women are meant to be with each other. It is possible that this "gay gene" is in some humans because of the sins of their fathers and mothers, and the society we live in supports this homosexuality therefore making it morally ok. Scripture teaches that it is not ok to have two males and two females in a relationship concluding that marriage between the two is a blasphemy to God. It is an abomination to Him. But i can also say that because the Lord gave us free will to sin, and free will to not beleive in Him, some of us do those things. I still love those people and want to share the gospel with them as much as anyone else, i simply dont beleive in the practice

Answer 7

A genetic basis for homosexuality is a two-edged sword.

No reasonable person thinks that gay people should be picked on, or harmed in any way. If the genetic basis is proven, gay-bashing will no longer be any more acceptable than harrassment of people with any genetic disorder.

There will, however, be a problem with pre-natal screening, and abortions to get rid of a gay fetus.

I wonder what the pro-life and anti-gay folks (and there are a lot of them) will do with that one? It ought to be no more acceptable to abort a gay fetus than to abort one with any kind of genetic anomyly.

Answer 8

This homosexual thing will go on forever because these people will literally use what ever they can to convince society that it is morally OK, the catholic church will never condone such moral decay, religion and their beliefs can only be on their terms no one Else's, if one believes the words of the bible, then their argument simply speaks for it's self.

Answer 9

The bible is sexist... and it looks that god can lactate ... that realistic.. Gofd is a latent gay factor... I imply if it existed ... I utterly accept as true with you... Plus I dont provide any rattling what the bible says... it's written through guys... I am lustful through nature... and I will move after something it lusts for... That realistic... god believers are pathetic losers... they're there to be herded through folks such as you and me... Lets lust for his or her females ...

Answer 10

the sooner you stop trying to justify homosexuality the sooner you can start your growth towards the ultimate love,that is a man and a woman having a child believing in the same GOD....How many lives will you live before you grow.?your choice.