Why do people take scientific studies on homosexuality out of context to further their political agenda?

Question

For most traits, especially complex behavioral traits like schizophrenia, genes are not a fixed linear blueprint as for hair or skin color but the traits are influenced by interactions with other genes and the environment. A person might be predisposed to be a certain height or lifespan, but things like diet and excercise do have an effect, otherwise we wouldn't bother taking care of our health. Also, you can use animal models to find a genetic or biological influence for pretty much any behavior, not just homosexuality. Certain breeds of dogs, for instance, are bred for agression and you could argue that agressive behavior in certain individuals is caused by too much testosterone or a deficiency in gray matter in the brain. Studies with identical twins also show that they are more likely to share behavioral traits than nonidentical twins. The problem with these studies is correlative studies don't prove that a gene causes a trait, otherwise all twins would behave the same.

Answer 1

Great question. Of course it applies to *ANY* politically charged discussion (global warming, evolution, abortion, stem-cells, the death penalty, euthanasia, obesity, cigarettes, nuclear power, ... or even whether there are WMD's in Iraq).

There are two main reasons:

1. Science as a method has had an *amazing* track record ... and is thus very persuasive. The irony, however, is that the less one knows about science, the more scientists look like some mysterious 'priesthood' to be either trusted without question, or attacked without reason.

2. Science also *as a method* has built-in checks and balances for rooting out bias. (Peer review.) Thus it has a well-deserved reputation as being impartial. But when people take isolated tidbits out-of-context, they are drawing conclusions that have *not* been peer-reviewed.

That said, let's examine your example:

>"For most traits, especially complex behavioral traits like schizophrenia, genes are not a fixed linear blueprint as for hair or skin color but the traits are influenced by interactions with other genes and the environment."

Absolutely correct. But then you have to ask whether advocates of homosexual rights are *claiming* that genes are "a fixed blueprint" ... or are they merely claiming that genes can provide a *predisposition* to a certain sexual orientation. Everything I've read seems to indicate the latter.

Secondly, the advocates for homosexual rights are not just relying on genetic data, but on other data that indicates that, regardless of cause, sexual orientation for many people is *strongly* established by early childhood ... certainly by adolescence.

The point of all of this is to point out to those of us who are heterosexual that sexual orientation is not a matter of "choice" ... that forcing a homosexual person to simply "choose" a different sexual orientation, is as unrealistic and unfair as asking us heterosexuals to simply "choose" to be gay. I couldn't do it. Could you? If not, why would anyone demand the same of homosexual persons? Because it offends *your* religious beliefs? Sorry ... in this country you need a better reason than that.

Answer 2

You are correct. However, we live in this politically correct culture, which means you can be wrong and still be right. Other thing, people see and hear things in the media, on TV and in the movies, bad science mostly, and assume it is correct. Why they don't check correctness is beyond me. Why they wanna remain ignorant is beyond me. Why people assume they know all there is to know about homosexuality and human behavior is beyond me.

What is really annoying is when you tell them things, which you wrote so well by the way, tell them that science has the proof, they are still uncertain and skeptical. Something wrong with that huh. Americans believe a whole lot more than they know. Americans also assume they are intelligent. Anyone spending much time in Yahoo Answers knows better than to make such a gross simplified conclusion.

Answer 3

Because they want to control society and shape it to their views.

I am a scientist and through extensive research I have concluded that homosexuality is in fact genetic. I have seen families that have homosexuals in their genetic line going back 100 years, and I have seen families that have zero homosexuals throughout their genetic history. My own family is one that has zero homosexuals in our genetic history.

I am sure there will be many who will dispute this and dismiss my research as garbage, but I am not trying to push an agenda on anyone and I do not care if people believe me or not.
I know what I have seen and documented, and I believe in my results, that is all that matters to me. Although I have not yet been able to isolate the exact genetic marker that predisposes someone to be homosexual, one day either I or someone else will and that will not sit well with a lot of people.
Those who continue to insist that homosexuality is a life choice and not genetic, will have their brains implode.

Answer 4

Because most people do not understand many basic scientific concept, let alone the really complex ones like the human genome. So they try to present some concept vaguely in a foolish attempt to appear more intelligent than they are.

That's why if you watch old science fiction movies you can find lots of really BAD science. It's just because people don't really understand the concept but want to pretend they do.

Answer 5

Why do people use evolution to further their political agenda? Why do people use religion to further their political agenda? For some people having power is so important that nothing else matters. The best way to control people and extract money from them is to demonize something or imply that you are like them and you and them need to organize to "protect" the group from those who are not like you. Science has long been misused to justify these sorts of ends. Look at the Nazis.

Answer 6

Simply because using information out of context is an essential part of any successful political career.

Way too few of us actually challenge politicians to back any of their claims,

Answer 7

everything is taken out of context,,,,why should homosexuality be different?
a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOng question.