Skip to comments.How Gay Uncles Pass Down Genes
Posted on 02/11/2010 12:53:22 PM PST by Cementjungle
click here to read article
You must have missed this in my first post to you....
-Generally, geneticists settle for some genetic influence
of rather undefined degree, most
agreeing that many genes (from at least five or six to many hundreds) contribute to any
particular human behavior.-
The point they’re trying to make,it seems,is genetic influence is not genetic determination.
This is the mating strategy of the male wild turkeys. Some will help attract females to their brothers.
I think the article is BS with regard to humans. I believe it isn’t a gay gene but a certain environment in the mothers uterus at the time of sexual development in the babys brain.
4. Most homosexuals (incl lesbians) say they were molested as children.
I guess that rules out the "Fabulessness" gene as well.
How does a baby know how to breath, swallow, or beat a heart?
Of course, and it’s always complex. I don’t believe homosexuality is genetic (altho things that allow someone to lean that way may well be). However, many behaviors likely ARE genetic, and that was the only point I was making.
Programmed. Genetically. How else do you think this all happens? Magic?
Not a predisposition to the Beatles over the Rolling Stones or an ability to win at chess.
Answer is a baby doesn’t know, it is the function of the muscles working together. It happens on a level we are not conscious to.
Your breathing apartus links ear, nose, and throat passages. I push on your chest, air flows. It isn’t “genetic”. It’s the design. Same as if I step on a paper bag with air in it.
Without the BRAIN driving the system, people need to be put on artificial assistance to keep the organs functioning.
APA reversed their position in 2009 from their 1998 position implying genetic or physical causes for homosexuality. The more recent position after a decade of research dedicated to interpret all data as supportive of genetic causes of homosexuality, has forced a reversal which meekly reports there is no consensus other than nature and nurture as cause of homosexuality.
i.e. there is no gay gene, but since the issue has so much political clout, nobody wants to come out so forcefully to state it, but instead encourage and acknowledge each person may choose their own destiny. Besides, any other path which declared no gay gene, would also imply no medical funding in Obamacare for any gay related illness, especially HIV.
If you can’t explain to me how instinctive (meaning unlearned) behaviors are happening, then we can go no further with this conversation. You appear to think it’s some sort of magic.
It’s not genetic.
Isolate the DNA aspect of this and show me the evidence. Show me how the “genes” magically tell a child how to (or not to) suckle. It is in the base operation of the brain.
It is not possible to have a discussion about genetics with someone who doesn’t understand basic biology. Believe as you will.
The “genetic component” of homosexuality is just a soft sell. “They were born that way”.
The sex positive agenda has made it perfectly clear that they seek an END to all moral judgements over ALL sexual pairings regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s).
It is about incrementally narrowing dissent. In the end, they think that morality means nothing when it comes to sex. Everyone should be sexually active at every age and tasting the pornicopia of sexual pairings. Choice or genetics don’t really matter, desire is there and should be enjoyed. That’s the ultimate argument of Reich and Kinsey.
And what of all of the homosexuals who say that their first partner was an older male/female who brought them into the lifestyle?
Does Pre-natal Hormonal Exposure
Make You Homosexual?
Although there are some pre-natal hormonal effects having a major effect on sexual behavior for lower
animals, there is no convincing
evidence for such an effect on sexual orientation in humans.
examining the effects of high doses of female hormones to pregnant women are particularly
because these are very high doses and any hormonal effects on sexual orientation should show up clearly.
But the result is a dubious effect on women and no effects on men. Any effects on sexual orientation appear
to be better explained in terms of gender non-conformity arguably a psychological construct. Sex drugs do
increase or lower sex drive, but that appears to be about all.
The maternal immune hypothesis is very speculative, and needs much more evidence before it can be
We leave the last word to several researchers in the field.
In summary, the evidence from prenatal endocrine
disorders and from the offspring of hormone-treated
pregnancies suggests that hormones may contribute
to, but do not actually determine, the course of sexual
orientation in individuals with an abnormal sex
steroid history during prenatal life.3
At this time, the literature does not support a causal link between hormones
In clinical practice numerous patients are encountered with gross abnormalities of their hormonal
profiles. As a rule this does not impact on their gender identity or sexual orientation.35
So, not only your genes didnt make you do it, it seems your hormones didnt either. In sexual orientation,
the strongest stimulation appears to come from the mind and the environment.
Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.
Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.
I thought it was satire and then I realized it wasn't. Children are influenced by relatives and family friends. Watch your children and make sure they don't spend much time - especially time alone - with family members or friends who are homosexuals. And it's not because of genes.
The problems with the hormonal “theory”, is that it leaves no baseline for measurement, and,like the authors’ conclusions, is, for all intents and purpose, an untestable path to pathology. Adding the fact that, any human testing of this theory would result in a massive ethical suit brought against those performing the research. Without any controlling factors, the only thing left for a qualitative approach would be that of identifying, and defining “gayness” from those just born, and the various stages of their maturation into adulthood.
I see no viable way to make such a study produce convincing results?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.