gene for homosexuality

[eman resu]

not sure if this is posted in the right section, but i guess it ties in with the science vs. religion theme.
i got into a little debate with a friend about whether homosexuality is right or wrong. from a religious stand point i said its not right since god (according to some religions) has clearly stated that it is not right. my friend on the other hand said that some people are born that way with a gene for homosexuality, and thus have no control over it and therefore it is not wrong. but the trouble i have with this is that if god has made homosexuality a sin, he wouldnt have created a gene for it. that wouldnt be fair for people who are born with this gene. im just curious about your thoughts on:

1. is there such a gene and how can its existence/nonexistence be justified from a religious point of view.

when i say "religion" im particularly referring to abrahamic religions and others that are against homosexuality

 

[David M]

not sure if this is posted in the right section, but i guess it ties in with the science vs. religion theme.
i got into a little debate with a friend about whether homosexuality is right or wrong. from a religious stand point i said its not right since god (according to some religions) has clearly stated that it is not right. my friend on the other hand said that some people are born that way with a gene for homosexuality, and thus have no control over it and therefore it is not wrong. but the trouble i have with this is that if god has made homosexuality a sin, he wouldnt have created a gene for it. that wouldnt be fair for people who are born with this gene. im just curious about your thoughts on:

1. is there such a gene and how can its existence/nonexistence be justified from a religious point of view.

when i say "religion" im particularly referring to abrahamic religions and others that are against homosexuality

There is no one single gene for homosexuality, however the evidence is overhwelming that homosexuality has a genetic basis.

The genetic basis is the product of a combination of certain alleles in certain genes, which is why its been so difficult to pin down which genes are involved. It looks pretty probable that some of the genes involved in male homosexuality are linked to increased female fertility.

 

[Alceste]

Many Christian churches are not against homosexuality, FYI. Let's not lump.

Research into possible genetic causes for homosexuality is ongoing, but studying correlation between behavior and genetics is quite difficult. There is another hypothesis that hormonal levels (testosterone in particular) in the womb may impact gender identification and sexual orientation. Again, a promising line of inquiry, but you can imagine the difficulty studying it. Basically, it would require tracing a test subject from conception to puberty and beyond.

However, one thing psychoanalysts and scientists in general are certain about is that homosexuality is not a choice. We do not and can not consciously control who we are or are not attracted to, or who we fall in love with. We may not fully understand the cause yet, but that doesn't prevent us from accepting the mountain of evidence that homosexuality is inherent in some proportion of most mammals, including humans, and that conscious choice and environmental factors like parenting, social acceptance or "recruitment" are not a factor. While scientists are busily figuring out the causes, there is nothing to prevent us accepting the effects and behaving accordingly.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Many Christian churches are not against homosexuality, FYI. Let's not lump.

Yet there are quite a lot that do. If they ever do scientifically prove without a doubt that it is caused by genetics, do you feel these churches will rethink their stance? Personally I don't think they will, but it would be interesting to see nonetheless.

 

[Alceste]

Yet there are quite a lot that do. If they ever do scientifically prove without a doubt that it is caused by genetics, do you feel these churches will rethink their stance? Personally I don't think they will, but it would be interesting to see nonetheless.

Certainly! Look how quickly they've come around on the subject of evolution!

 

[Rainbow Mage]

Homosexuality seems to increase as reproduction of a species increases. This has been observed in lab animal test subjects. The more rats are born in a limited space, the more are born homosexual.

 

[eman resu]

even if homosexuality is not a choice, and whether the gene exists or not, isnt it accurate to say that society and the environment do have an effect on the human body in the long run? for example, i read somewhere that the average testosterone levels in the world decrease by 1% every year. doesnt this plus other similar findings show that human tendencies and behavior do effect the human race overall, maybe not immediately but rather in later generations. just because an individual turns out to be homosexual, and not out of choice, it doesnt mean god created him that way but rather human society over the years/decades made him that way? so in essence, cant one say that the way humans on a large scale decide to shape our society, raise our kids, etc. will have effects on individual human beings in future generations?

 

[Rainbow Mage]

even if homosexuality is not a choice, and whether the gene exists or not, isnt it accurate to say that society and the environment do have an effect on the human body in the long run? for example, i read somewhere that the average testosterone levels in the world decrease by 1% every year. doesnt this plus other similar findings show that human tendencies and behavior do effect the human race overall, maybe not immediately but rather in later generations. just because an individual turns out to be homosexual, and not out of choice, it doesnt mean god created him that way but rather human society over the years/decades made him that way? so in essence, cant one say that the way humans on a large scale decide to shape our society, raise our kids, etc. will have effects on individual human beings in future generations?

Is it so hard to believe that homosexuals are just born that way? Saying that is no more absurd then saying humans are born heterosexual using your argument, yet I bet you have no trouble accepting that.

 

[eman resu]

its not hard to argue that humans are born heterosexual when u look at the male and female anatomy.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

its not hard to argue that humans are born heterosexual when u look at the male and female anatomy.

Well that obviously doesn't prove people are born heterosexual if some people don't have any attraction to the anatomy of the opposite sex. Plus, if you want to use the anatomy argument, did you know guys have something called a prostate that likes to be stimulated? Does that mean males are born homosexual?

 

[eman resu]

i like it when my prostrate is stimulated, but im not attracted to males. so no it doesnt mean males are born homosexual. plus my argument isnt whether people are or arent born homosexual, but rather whether god created homosexuality or if it is an effect of human influenced society/environment.

 

[Rainbow Mage]

i like it when my prostrate is stimulated, but im not attracted to males. so no it doesnt mean males are born homosexual. plus my argument isnt whether people are or arent born homosexual, but rather whether god created homosexuality or if it is an effect of human influenced society/environment.

Correction: It means YOU weren't born homosexual.

Also, did you read my post on page 1 about lab specimens?

 

[Alceste]

its not hard to argue that humans are born heterosexual when u look at the male and female anatomy.

If this reasoning is meant to be logical, it must follow that all you have to do is look at a cucumber to understand it isn't meant to be chopped up for salad.

 

[Frank Merton]

i like it when my prostrate is stimulated, but im not attracted to males. so no it doesnt mean males are born homosexual. plus my argument isnt whether people are or arent born homosexual, but rather whether god created homosexuality or if it is an effect of human influenced society/environment.

There is a more likely explanation for homosexuality (if one is needed) than either of the two you list. This is that there is some unknown selective advantage in homosexuality that offsets the obvious disadvantage of having fewer offspring.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

Certainly! Look how quickly they've come around on the subject of evolution!

Well thats pretty subjective, considering there is still quite a large population of religious folk that straight up deny evolution :areyoucra (which I will never understand). Apparently its tough for the blind followers to open a seeing eye.

I think some individual people may change their outlook, but the chances of the actual church turning a 180 on the subject is unlikely at best.

 

[cmsweet]

to the author of this post - You said homosexuality is not right because "God has clearly stated" that it is not. Do you mean in the bible? Things are not actually as cut and dry as they seem. In the same part of the bible which refers to homosexuality as a sin (Leviticus), it also mentions it is an abomination to eat shellfish, plant two crops in a field, and trim your beard. Why are we always picking and choosing what we want to be a sin? Isn't it all or nothing??

 

[Duck]

Yet there are quite a lot that do. If they ever do scientifically prove without a doubt that it is caused by genetics, do you feel these churches will rethink their stance? Personally I don't think they will, but it would be interesting to see nonetheless.

Personally, I think that those churches will change their stance...on abortion, but only if the indications (genetic, hormonal, precognitive, whatever) indicate the pregnancy would produce an homosexual child. Their stance that homosexuals are 'intrinsically disordered', 'an abomination in the eyes of the Lord', a more serious threat to humanity than environmental destruction, a worse threat to {American} society than terrorism, pedophiles, morally corrupt, a threat to the 'traditional' family, the only group savage enough to form the core of the SS, a threat to military stability, military unit cohesion and the apparent cause of dead beat dads will not change. I would fully expect that the 'pro-life' crowd will relax their anti-abortion stance in cases of rape, incest and homosexuality.

 

[Duck]

to the author of this post - You said homosexuality is not right because "God has clearly stated" that it is not. Do you mean in the bible? Things are not actually as cut and dry as they seem. In the same part of the bible which refers to homosexuality as a sin (Leviticus), it also mentions it is an abomination to eat shellfish, plant two crops in a field, and trim your beard. Why are we always picking and choosing what we want to be a sin? Isn't it all or nothing??

I would stand by for the 'but those are purity laws fulfilled by christ' dodge on this one. Apparently, the OT laws found in Leviticus and Deuteronomy only apply when you quote the ones about killing the ****, but the rest, like executing disobedient teenagers, segregating menstruating women, not touching pig-skins, and the acceptable peoples to purchase slaves (and their price, the treatment of said slaves, and whether or not the master should be considered for criminal proceedings when the slave dies from a beating) are totally those laws that were 'fulfilled' because they are 'purity laws' so christians don't need to worry about those. The gay executing lines--those were 'moral laws' and christ didn't 'fulfill' those, so we still have to follow them.

 

[Frank Merton]

I would fully expect that the 'pro-life' crowd will relax their anti-abortion stance in cases of rape, incest and homosexuality.

No, just in cases of homosexuality. If the pregnancy is because of rape or incest, well, it's still a living being.

I guess it is inevitable that sooner or later the causes of homosexuality will be figured out, and most parents will accordingly take the measures. That will be a pity. The world will lose a lot of talent.

 

[Why not?]

Until there is hard evidence on whether it is genetics that is the cause of homosexuality I will not say that it is. But on the other hand its not possible to prove something does not exist scientifically so I still will never say for sure the other way around. That being said my stance is that it is by choice. I you look back in history homosexual activities were always as a choice of exploration, something they haven't tried before, simply another passion to experience. For example Alexander the great. I am not an expert on the guy but from what I've read and heard by fairly accurate sources he started screwing around with men after he conquered nearly all the known world. In todays world homosexuality is primarily seen from the product of a abusive house, possibly dead mother, or simply want more variety. You might say this is bogus but look around, the straights turn into gays, than into buys than maybe juggle the two around. In the media today its all about 'listen to your hear't and 'do what ever you think is right'. Tell me this, are humans perfect, obviously not, specifically emotions. We get angry when its unreasonable, cry when its not necessary, and argue illogically. So if im to do something out of an illogical emotion like lust is it right. The example of the mice in a enclosed area. Obviously they will be turning to the homosexual desires because there is mainly males in the area and my instincts are telling me to screw something. Just some simple thoughts that I would love for someone to rebuttal. Granted there are probably numerous grammar errors but try to over look that.