• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Epigenetics and Homosexuality

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
Okay, so. What causes them damn gays to be so gay!? That is the question.

Good question!

The current and most favoured theory under investigation is due to epigenetics.

What is epigenetics?

Good question!

The term epigenetics refers to heritable changes in gene expression that does not involve changes to the underlying DNA sequence; a change in phenotype without a change in genotype. Epigenetic change is a regular and natural occurrence but can also be influenced by several factors including age, the environment/lifestyle, and disease state.

Basically: Epigenetic mechanisms can be seen as an added layer of information that clings to our DNA. Epi-marks regulate the expression of genes according to the strength of external cues. Genes are basically the instruction book, while epi-marks direct how those instructions get carried out. For example, they can determine when, where, and how much of a gene gets expressed.


Okay, so what does that have to do with them damn gays!?

Good question!

Sex-specific epi-marks which, unlike most genetic switches, get passed down from father to daughter or mother to son. Most epi-marks don't normally pass between generations and are essentially "erased." Epi-marks are usually produced from scratch with each generation — but new evidence is showing that they can sometimes carry over from parent to child. It's this phenomenon that gives the impression of having shared genes with relatives.

Normally, sex-specific marks that are triggered during early fetal development work to protect boys and girls in the womb from undergoing too much natural variation in testosterone, which should normally happen later in a pregnancy. Epigenetic processes prevent female fetuses from becoming masculinized when testosterone exposure gets too high, and vice versa for males.

Moreover, epi-marks also protect different sex-specific traits from swinging in the opposite direction; some affect the genitals, and others may affect sexual orientation. These epi-marks can be transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters, or mothers to sons. Essentially there is the presence of "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks — which sometimes carry over to the next generation and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring.


In the basic of basic terms: Sometimes a boy receieves too many female epi-marks, and sometimes a girl can recieve too many male epi-marks. This could also be a critical factor in understanding gender identity crises.


So. Here's the rub: If this is true (and increasingly data suggests that it is), how could any god judge you for something that isn't even your fault?
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
So. Here's the rub: If this is true (and increasingly data suggests that it is), how could any god judge you for something that isn't even your fault?

If it weren't true, how could any god judge us for something that isn't our fault?

Interesting theory, but regardless of its accuracy blame is illogical.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
If it weren't true, how could any god judge us for something that isn't our fault?

Interesting theory, but regardless of its accuracy blame is illogical.

If it weren't true, and homosexuality was purely a choice, then I would still disagree with religious views, but would be a little more tolerant toward them.

You're also coming from the false position that the religious factor logic into their thinking when assigning 'blame'.
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
It certainly would throw the monkey into the wrench for the 'Its not natural!" argument.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
It certainly would throw the monkey into the wrench for the 'Its not natural!" argument.


Well it's natural in that it happens without any artificial interference of external agency acting upon the event. But it is still, essentially a 'malfunction' that should not occur.
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
I don't think malfunction is the right word at all. Function seems better to me. What is it supposed to be doing and why that instead of what it is doing?
 

Gjallarhorn

N'yog-Sothep
If it weren't true, and homosexuality was purely a choice, then I would still disagree with religious views, but would be a little more tolerant toward them.

You're also coming from the false position that the religious factor logic into their thinking when assigning 'blame'.

"Purely a choice" is nonsensical, but yes some religious people wouldn't think it through.
 

ruffen

Active Member
It certainly would throw the monkey into the wrench for the 'Its not natural!" argument.


In light of the fact that we humans are naturally evolved animals and therefore part of nature, just like a rabbit's behaviour is natural, so is all our behaviour. Everything a human does is natural, because we are part of nature.

We do of course have big enough brains to discuss whether something is morally right or wrong or if it hurts other people or animals, and this could be an intelligent discussion if there were victims of homosexual relationships. But the "it's not natural" argument falls flat on its face once one accepts evolution and realizes that we are animals naturally arisen on this planet, and that all our behaviour is therefore, by definition, natural.

:bunny:
 

Sir Doom

Cooler than most of you
In light of the fact that we humans are naturally evolved animals and therefore part of nature, just like a rabbit's behaviour is natural, so is all our behaviour. Everything a human does is natural, because we are part of nature.

We do of course have big enough brains to discuss whether something is morally right or wrong or if it hurts other people or animals, and this could be an intelligent discussion if there were victims of homosexual relationships. But the "it's not natural" argument falls flat on its face once one accepts evolution and realizes that we are animals naturally arisen on this planet, and that all our behaviour is therefore, by definition, natural.

:bunny:

Naturally...
 

s2a

Heretic and part-time (skinny) Santa impersonator
Okay, so. What causes them damn gays to be so gay!? That is the question.

Good question!

The current and most favoured theory under investigation is due to epigenetics.

What is epigenetics?

Good question!

The term epigenetics refers to heritable changes in gene expression that does not involve changes to the underlying DNA sequence; a change in phenotype without a change in genotype. Epigenetic change is a regular and natural occurrence but can also be influenced by several factors including age, the environment/lifestyle, and disease state.

Basically: Epigenetic mechanisms can be seen as an added layer of information that clings to our DNA. Epi-marks regulate the expression of genes according to the strength of external cues. Genes are basically the instruction book, while epi-marks direct how those instructions get carried out. For example, they can determine when, where, and how much of a gene gets expressed.


Okay, so what does that have to do with them damn gays!?

Good question!

Sex-specific epi-marks which, unlike most genetic switches, get passed down from father to daughter or mother to son. Most epi-marks don't normally pass between generations and are essentially "erased." Epi-marks are usually produced from scratch with each generation — but new evidence is showing that they can sometimes carry over from parent to child. It's this phenomenon that gives the impression of having shared genes with relatives.

Normally, sex-specific marks that are triggered during early fetal development work to protect boys and girls in the womb from undergoing too much natural variation in testosterone, which should normally happen later in a pregnancy. Epigenetic processes prevent female fetuses from becoming masculinized when testosterone exposure gets too high, and vice versa for males.

Moreover, epi-marks also protect different sex-specific traits from swinging in the opposite direction; some affect the genitals, and others may affect sexual orientation. These epi-marks can be transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters, or mothers to sons. Essentially there is the presence of "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks — which sometimes carry over to the next generation and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring.


In the basic of basic terms: Sometimes a boy receieves too many female epi-marks, and sometimes a girl can recieve too many male epi-marks. This could also be a critical factor in understanding gender identity crises.


So. Here's the rub: If this is true (and increasingly data suggests that it is), how could any god judge you for something that isn't even your fault?

Regardless of genetic progeny/phylogeny, I am pretty self-assured that I did not choose to be straight. Women, yum. Men, not so much.

I remain confident after 50 years or so of sexual surety that I will not (can not) choose to be "gay" in some new found "lifestyle choice". Yelling and shaking fists at passing clouds is tiring enough...

..oh, and get off my lawn!

Besides, I have no interest in whatever "god" you determine as your moral compass.

In the United States, we are a people dedicated to the proposition of equal treatment under law for all. ALL. Not any particularly selective persecution that declares homosexuality as "icky" (even if I agree).

Just so I understand..."epi-marks" are kinda "cooties", right?

If only I were 9 years old again, and knew fer sure whom deserved my hate for the "right" reasons.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
Just so I understand..."epi-marks" are kinda "cooties", right?

I have no idea what cootie is. It sounds like one of those words dreamt up by a 6 year old for inclusion into the American English Dictionary.
 

Estro Felino

Believer in free will
Premium Member
Congratulations. Bravo
You have just explained the biological causes of homosexuality.
My biology teacher in high school used to say these things too.
 

McNap

Member
So. Here's the rub: If this is true (and increasingly data suggests that it is), how could any god judge you for something that isn't even your fault?

The answer to that must be he couldn't.
God will judge us through our own conscience.
Remind 1 John 3:21 - Beloved, if our hearts don’t condemn us, we have boldness toward God

Same is for faith in Jesus... some people can't have faith in Jesus, because evangelists failed to explain the gospel correctly, so the blame is not always yours when you don't have faith in Jesus. God sure wouldn't blame you if that's the case.
 

Mycroft

Ministry of Serendipity
The answer to that must be he couldn't.
God will judge us through our own conscience.
Remind 1 John 3:21 - Beloved, if our hearts don’t condemn us, we have boldness toward God

Same is for faith in Jesus... some people can't have faith in Jesus, because evangelists failed to explain the gospel correctly, so the blame is not always yours when you don't have faith in Jesus. God sure wouldn't blame you if that's the case.

So the existence of epigenetic homosexuality makes the Levitican Laws void, right?
 

McNap

Member
So the existence of epigenetic homosexuality makes the Levitican Laws void, right?

The Levitican law is against people who CHOOSE to do homosexuality.
In that time they must have known about homosexuality between homosexuals for whom it was not a choice to do so.
Therefore I don't see the levitican laws as void. Today they are misinterpreted by the unjust.

Leviticus says: You should not sleep with another man in the way you slept with a woman.

And I think God is trying to tell that sexuality determines that we are married.

Today we are inclined to see sexuality as something we try with different people one after the other as if it doesn't determine marriage.
I used to do so myself. And it hurt, so I stopped having seks with girls I don't love.

I recommend to have seks with someone you love.
In most cases we want to know about seks, so we want to try it out as soon as possible which is logical since most people brag about it and even bully virgins with their virginity. It was from shame I started to have seks with prostitutes. It's also logical to love seks, even with no love for the one you do it with. It's easy to love flesh. But if I just love the flesh of a girl then it would make no difference to marry the first, single one I meet outside.
 

McNap

Member
So the existence of epigenetic homosexuality makes the Levitican Laws void, right?

In fact I could answer this question with YES saying you can limit yourself to the 10 commandments. And if you keep the 10 commandments you automatically keep the levitican laws.
And even 9 of the 10 commandments become void when they are simplified to the one main commandment that says: MAKE LOVE.

Everyone knows it's not love if we steal, or kill, or lie, etc.
 

ScuzManiac

Active Member
In fact I could answer this question with YES saying you can limit yourself to the 10 commandments. And if you keep the 10 commandments you automatically keep the levitican laws.
And even 9 of the 10 commandments become void when they are simplified to the one main commandment that says: MAKE LOVE.

Everyone knows it's not love if we steal, or kill, or lie, etc.

Can we not lie out of love though?

After all, the truth hurts...
 
Top