Study: Sexuality hard-wired by Genetics

[monkspider]

Lesbians are so 90's. Gay guys are all the rage these days.

[lord of the mark]

they show a genetic difference between males, and females, and a difference between male and female brain structures. Everything relating this to gender differnces in thought and behavior is pure speculation.

What exactly are the differences between male and female thought and behavior that this explains? those found in western countries? Those found in muslim countries? Those found in Polynesia? Universal differences? Are there any? Did anyone drawing conclusions from this study examine the existence of such univerals.

Im NOT saying that there are no genetic differences between males and females in terms of thought and behavior. Just that you cant get that from this study.

And plenty of people who believe in evolution are skeptial of the attribution of SPECIFIC behaviors to genes.

The classic way to look at the role of genes in determining traits is through studies of identical twins (obviously doesnt work for gender differences) IIUC, even those that have been touted as showing genetic basis for IQ, mental illness, etc still show PLENTY of variance AMONG the identical twins. As far as I know there IS NO human behavior (well other than obvious ones, like eating, sleeping) that is 100% determined by genes, and I very much doubt that Sexuality is either. Doesnt mean SOME genetic influence, or even CONSIDERABLE influence, but likely to be at least some environmental/cultural influence.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Starchild



I want to shout at the top of my voice that genes don't create behaviours, desires, or personalities. Genes create proteins. Yet most people would require a college level education in biology to understand what subtle and powerful meanings that sentence has.

what i meant to say.


And, BTW, wasnt that in one of the SMAC technology quotes - by Zakharov, ISTR? See if people only played games more we wouldnt have so much foolishness.

[Datajack Franit]

I cannot believe I agree to something posted by Fez

[Spiffor]

Fez is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack !

[Ben Kenobi]

makes women who carry it better mothers.

Interesting hypothesis, but then we come back the fact that genes do not completely control behavior. Funny that the same eugenicists, ought to be so enamoured by gay people when they say that there is a gene for homosexuality.

But we are not there yet, we are just dealing with the hypothetical.

The real question is, why should you strive to overcome behavior that you are hard-wired for? We would all agree now, I think, that forcing a left-handed child to cultivate right-handedness is misguided, if not cruel; to do so because we perceive left-handedness as evil (as some ancient societies did) is, at best, loopy.

Le main sinistre, en francais.

1.

There are two explanations for why, one requires Christianity, one does not.

The first is that Jesus is very clear about what works best for people, that to be either married to a member of the opposite sex or abstinence are the only proper expressions of sexuality.

2.

It's like alcoholism, an alcoholic damages his body, as does a homosexual. Whether one uses the right or left hand does not hurt a person, whereas alcholism most certainly does. This is why we encourage people who have a predisposition to drink to overcome their predisposition because they will be better for it in the long run.

Finally, why would a merciful God give people these predispositions?

Why does God give us the afflictions of the flesh, disability, etc. I ought to confess here that I am not far from being totally deaf, that I am profoundly hearing impaired, something that God has not seen fit to heal.

Why would he do this? To punish me for some sin? No. He makes use of everyone regardless of their talents, in that those with similar burdens may encourage each other. Do we not cry when we hear someone profoundly afflicted, yet they believe and trust in Christ, and wait for the better times of the resurrection?

Let us help our brothers who suffer, show them the better path.

[Evil Knevil]

Ah hah! But being a Homosexual is evidently not harmful, unlike being an Alcoholic.

ps, I like you, you're much better The Diplomat. Apologies if I've insulted you in the past.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


Why would he do this? To punish me for some sin? No. He makes use of everyone regardless of their talents, in that those with similar burdens may encourage each other. Do we not cry when we hear someone profoundly afflicted, yet they believe and trust in Christ, and wait for the better times of the resurrection?

They suffer yet THEY believe, and so it is POSSIBLE for us to believe.

Youve GOT to read "To Mend the World" - I really think youd find a lot you like in it.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
It's like alcoholism, an alcoholic damages his body, as does a homosexual.

As an alcoholic I take exception to this. I'm doing far more damage to my body by drinking than would ever occur if I slept with a man (well.... unless there was some rough stuff ). So without resorting to religious nonsense, can you explain exactly what "damage" is occurring to homosexuals due to their behavior?

[The Andy-Man]

if homosexuality is geetic, then explain the greeks.


its stupid, of course human behaviour is to an extent pre determined, but i don't think it veries much between people, for example, if the gene valkue is 100, then nearly everyone will fall into the 98-102 range - ie, unnoticable.


if genes did everything, then i can go a kill someone and say i had no choice cos 'my brain is a load of chemical reactions'

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Datajack Franit
I cannot believe I agree to something posted by Fez

I'll be in Italy in December....

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi




How is this so different from soup?

Wittlich, I will reply when I get home.

the "soup", as you call it, was water with a huge concentration of biologically important compounds and chemicals

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
There are two explanations for why, one requires Christianity, one does not.

The first is that Jesus is very clear about what works best for people, that to be either married to a member of the opposite sex or abstinence are the only proper expressions of sexuality.

But we're back to this: what "works best for people" is not homosexuality, but God has hard-wired same-sex desire into a certain a percentage of His creations? That doesn't sound like Jesus; Loki, maybe, but not Jesus.

Leaving aside two plausible explanations -- that there is no God, or that God is a sadistic monster -- one might still come to the conclusion that the nomadic scribblers who put teh Bible together either got it wrong or just plain made stuff up. That makes way more sense than a God who is Love taunting his children so.

It's like alcoholism, an alcoholic damages his body, as does a homosexual. Whether one uses the right or left hand does not hurt a person, whereas alcholism most certainly does. This is why we encourage people who have a predisposition to drink to overcome their predisposition because they will be better for it in the long run.

Bodily harm? What the heck are you talking about? And don't say AIDS, because the demographic group that has suffered least from AIDS is lesbians. This just makes no sense.

Finally, why would a merciful God give people these predispositions?

Why does God give us the afflictions of the flesh, disability, etc. I ought to confess here that I am not far from being totally deaf, that I am profoundly hearing impaired, something that God has not seen fit to heal.

Why would he do this? To punish me for some sin? No. He makes use of everyone regardless of their talents, in that those with similar burdens may encourage each other. Do we not cry when we hear someone profoundly afflicted, yet they believe and trust in Christ, and wait for the better times of the resurrection?

There it is folks: homosexuality as birth defect. I called that one on page 2.

You know why that analogy doesn't work? Because nobody looks at the deaf, or blind, or lame, and cries out "SINNER!" Indeed, no one expects a blind person to try to see, or a lame person to try to walk -- let alone tells them that if they don't try, they're going to burn in the everlasting fires of hell. You either have to abandon this analogy, or follow it to its logical conclusion.

Let us help our brothers who suffer, show them the better path.

Would that be the path of repression, shame, and despair? I can't tell you how many gay friends I have who used to be believing Christians, including fundamentalists. To a person, they all tell the story of praying fervently to be made "normal," to stop their desire for others of their sex. They believed in a way I could never believe, prayed in a way that I could never pray. God didn't listen. God didn't give them strength. And so they abandoned that God -- and instead became kind, healthy, well-adjusted people who truly love with all their hearts, and whose lives enrich all who know them. Did God really not want that? What a Jerk.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Even if it could be shown that there were a gene for homosexuality, it does not mean that all who inherit the gene will act as homosexuals. In fact, it is a requirement that the gene does not predetermine behavior in order for the gene to propagate.

Suppose the gene made 100% of all who had the gene exclusively homosexual? The gene would simply die out and fail to propagate. Therefore, there must need to be some wiggle room, either not everyone with the gene was homosexual, in the case of a recessive gene, or the gene merely influences behavior, and the urges can be controlled.

Therefore, even if the gene exists, it must also allow for people to control their behavior.

Did you win, Rufus?

Wrong.

Rather, this trait could be recessive. Only having two copies of the "homosexual" gene would cause homosexuality. Thus, the behavior is completely "involuntary", and it could still survive, just like recessive genetic disorders that are always fatal before reproductive age.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Fez


**** I come back here and find myself in agreement with Odin.

The Diplomat: Prove it. For once in your life, prove it. Prove that homosexuality is immoral behavior. And I don't want to hear stinking bible quotes. I think I got enough of that when I watched that **** Pat Robertson was saying on the TV. What an idiot. Pro gay agenda? Since when did we have an agenda? We just want equal recognization.

Fez and Odin

*realizes that he just praised both Fez AND Odin, for the SAME opinion, at once, and faints*