Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Gay' gene claim suddenly vanishes American Psychological revises statement on homosexuality
WND ^ | May 14th, 2009

Posted on 05/14/2009 12:59:02 PM PDT by TaraP

A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue on the website of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality.

A. Dean Byrd, the past president of NARTH, confirmed that the statement from the American Psychological Association came in a brochure that updates what the APA has advocated for years.

Specifically, in a brochure that first came out about 1998, the APA stated: "There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality."

However, in the update: a brochure now called, "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," the APA's position changed.

The new statement says:

"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles. ..."

(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...


TOPICS: Government; News/Current Events; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: apa; gaygene; genetics; homosexualagenda; homosexuallinks; narth

1 posted on 05/14/2009 12:59:02 PM PDT by TaraP
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Oh yes there is a “gay” gene! ...

... And it looks fabulous!


2 posted on 05/14/2009 1:00:33 PM PDT by Mr. Jazzy (No greater friend, no worse enemy -The United States Marine Corps.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a soon to be banished as a homophobe doctor who has written about the issue on the about to be put out of business for disagreeing with the gay lobby website of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality.

Edited for accuracy. /sarc

3 posted on 05/14/2009 1:02:38 PM PDT by Personal Responsibility (Control the teleprompter, control the agenda!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

While this is a good start I should point out that psychologists have as much credibility in genetic studies as plumbers have in heart surgery.


4 posted on 05/14/2009 1:05:51 PM PDT by Hacklehead (Liberalism is the art of taking what works, breaking it, and then blaming conservatives.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
How much money was wasted on finding out that "gay" is a choice?

I wonder if God gets sick of being right all the time....

5 posted on 05/14/2009 1:05:57 PM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

Psychiatry is simply a way of trying to examine what is wrong with humans without addressing the effects of sin and disobeying God’s laws.


6 posted on 05/14/2009 1:08:49 PM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, Bowman later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
Photobucket
7 posted on 05/14/2009 1:09:12 PM PDT by dragonblustar ("... and if you disagree with me, then you sir, are worse than Hitler!" - Greg Gutfeld)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Sure they don’t mean “jeans”?


8 posted on 05/14/2009 1:09:57 PM PDT by chemicalman (Obama the "fly-by" terrorist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar

That looks like Senator Franken!


9 posted on 05/14/2009 1:10:28 PM PDT by liege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar
Related are they??
10 posted on 05/14/2009 1:11:10 PM PDT by TaraP (The RAPTURE: Separation of Church and State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
I remember, during the time when a "gay gene" was originally proposed, that there was a debate which arose from it: It was something like... Assuming it was true, and assuming DNA could be tested for it, would you as a prospective parent abort your baby because it may be gay?

Pro-Lifers remained true to their beliefs and still wouldn't abort (good for you!). But there was quite a fight in liberal camps about it.... I'll look to see if I can find the data on it.

11 posted on 05/14/2009 1:13:10 PM PDT by theDentist (qwerty ergo typo : i type, therefore i misspell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

I caught this last night. Here is a post on the gay and lesbian response:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2250568/posts


12 posted on 05/14/2009 1:13:47 PM PDT by sageb1 (This is the Final Crusade, There are only two sides. Pick one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta
I wonder if God gets sick of being right all the time....

No, but we do. :)

Good post.

13 posted on 05/14/2009 1:23:06 PM PDT by Bosco (Remember how you felt on September 11?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

There’s an article over at the Oprah website (my wife had seen a show on something that I was trying to check on so that’s why I visited) about women who, when they break up with their husbands, are increasingly choosing female partners. When I read it the one thing that stands out is that the article seems to state pretty clearly that these women are choosing a female rather than a male — even though they never,previously, had thought about same-sex alternatives.


14 posted on 05/14/2009 1:23:47 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

There’s an article over at the Oprah website (my wife had seen a show on something that I was trying to check on so that’s why I visited) about women who, when they break up with their husbands, are increasingly choosing female partners. When I read it the one thing that stands out is that the article seems to state pretty clearly that these women are choosing a female rather than a male — even though they never,previously, had thought about same-sex alternatives.


15 posted on 05/14/2009 1:23:58 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

There’s an article over at the Oprah website (my wife had seen a show on something that I was trying to check on so that’s why I visited) about women who, when they break up with their husbands, are increasingly choosing female partners. When I read it the one thing that stands out is that the article seems to state pretty clearly that these women are choosing a female rather than a male — even though they never,previously, had thought about same-sex alternatives.


16 posted on 05/14/2009 1:24:02 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bushwacker777

Exactly!

Take the Stigma away, and people will be inclined to say
*I will try that*


17 posted on 05/14/2009 1:31:27 PM PDT by TaraP (The RAPTURE: Separation of Church and State)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

How could there be? Wouldn’t it be selected out of existence, even if there was only a 0.1% chance that someone who has it as the dominant gene (i.e. someone gay) would not reproduce, and thereby pass the gene on?

Clearly, the answer is that such a gene would, over a sufficient number of generations (and there have been a couple thousand generations of humans since the appearance of Cro-Magnon Man), be selected out of existence. Which necessarily requires that the behavior in question is as a result of some outside, non-genetic influence. Even if it took some outside influence to activate or express the gene, a mere 0.1% failure-to-reproduce rate would phase such a gene out of existence (though more slowly than one that didn’t require an outside influence to activate it).

IOW, the whole concept of a “gay gene” is a bunch of horse poop.


18 posted on 05/14/2009 1:35:14 PM PDT by Ancesthntr (Tyrant: "Spartans, lay down your weapons." Free man: "Persian, come and get them!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

And that is what the article said as well. I guess one coudl go there and search “lesbian” to read it.

The thing is...in the 1980s you couldn’t even feature two women kissing on a regular TV program. People considered any woman wo went for another woman to be neurotic or that she had flaws so she couldn’t get a man.

In the 1990s is surfaced (maybe due to the mainstreaming of porn) as kinda trendy. Of course, only certain social circles had much experimentation going on. It was still fringe behavior.

Now, in the 21st. Century, lesbianism is quite fashionable — at least bisexuality. So it’s no wonder more women are trying it out — and one wonders if males are mre likely to experiment when they see the culture going gaga over female-female sexuality.


19 posted on 05/14/2009 1:37:09 PM PDT by Bushwacker777
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

There never was a gay gene... its a mental disorder folks, not a biological one. Does that mean there are not folks born with certain urges? Nope, not at all. However we are human beings, not animals, we all have urges, and sane rational adults know healthy ones from unhealthy ones and generally avoid unhealthy ones. They don’t engage repeatedly in unhealthy ones and ask the world to accept that they can’t help it.


20 posted on 05/14/2009 1:40:07 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

Queers can no longer hide behind a medical reason for being queer. That’ll burst their bubble. They’ll have to finally understand what’s already been known, i.e., that participating in a queer lifestyle is a choice. This means that Congress can stop leaning towards making “a choice” a legitimate reason for making queers a protected group, and thereby stop supporting the godawful “hate crimes” legislation.


21 posted on 05/14/2009 1:41:40 PM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bushwacker777

Don’t kid yourself, experimentation in lesbianism has been part of the college years for a lot longer than the 80s and 90s... It just wasn’t as flagrantly open.

I have a friend in her 50s who can tell you all about how most of her friends were “ardent lesbians” at one point in college, and now are all married (in the traditional sense, not in the dumbed downed redefined sense) grandmothers. Like it or not, female “experimentation” has always been around and generally more tolerated... The flagrant openess of it is all that has changed.


22 posted on 05/14/2009 1:42:59 PM PDT by HamiltonJay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

It is a birth defect. I am convinced of this. Something happens in the womb that changes people. It is only normal because it happens to a small percentage normally. Other than that, it is not normal behavior and anyone who tries to say yes it is, is dead wrong.


23 posted on 05/14/2009 1:46:09 PM PDT by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked. Prov. 25:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

LUG’s. Lesbian Until Graduation.


24 posted on 05/14/2009 1:46:43 PM PDT by Travis T. OJustice (I can spell just fine, thanks, it's my typing that sucks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: TaraP
Golly gee, then homosexuals should be candidates for therapy to "straighten" them out.
25 posted on 05/14/2009 1:47:10 PM PDT by NewHampshireDuo (Earth - Taking care of itself since 4.6 billion BC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar

Oh, jeez that’s frightening! A pair of married Her-ims, or are they He-Shes.


26 posted on 05/14/2009 3:10:38 PM PDT by SuziQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: TaraP

The perverted homosexuals will just start calling this person a homophobe.


27 posted on 05/14/2009 7:27:47 PM PDT by DMG2FUN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson