Posted on 2/23/2010, 2:15:16 PM by Oldeconomybuyer
There was an elephant in the San Francisco courtroom where lawyers contested the constitutionality of Proposition 8, the California law that prohibits the marriage of same-sex couples. One key issue should influence every aspect of the Perry vs. Schwarzenegger proceedings yet remained unspoken: What makes people gay? Is it a choice or is it innate?
Most geneticists consider sexual orientation a phenotype -- namely, an observable set of properties that varies among individuals. Although physical phenotypes like height and weight are easier to quantify, behavioral phenotypes are intensely studied in animals and humans. Research from many directions leads to a strong conclusion: Human sexual orientation has deep biological roots.
Gay genes appear paradoxical at first blush. From the perspective of natural selection, how could they persist in the population if they lead to fewer offspring?
Science education must help people understand that phenotypic variation, including sexual orientation diversity, is an immutable feature of human biology.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
It’s polyphenols.
More fraud by the Al Gore crowd.
Genetics:
Science has not yet discovered any genetically dictated behavior in humans. So far, genetically dictated behaviors of the “one-gene-one-trait” variety have been found only in very simple organisms. (Ch 1)
From an understanding of gene structure and function there is no plausible means by which genes could inescapably force SSA or other behaviors on a person (Ch 1)
No genetically determined human behavior has yet been found. The most closely genetically-related behavior yet discovered (mono-amine oxidase deficiency leading to aggression) has shown itself remarkably responsive to counselling. (Ch 1)
If (exclusive) SSA were genetically inherited, it would have bred itself out of the population in only several generations, and wouldn’t be around today. ( ie gays with no children would not be able to reproduce their genes.) (Ch 1)
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. (Ch 1)
This means that:
If SSA were caused by many genes it could not suddenly appear and disappear in families the way it does. It would be present in each generation for many (at least 30) generations because it would take that long for that many genes to be bred out. This is not the case, therefore SSA cannot be caused by many genes. (Ch 1)
The occurrence of SSA (2.6%?) in the population is too frequent to be caused by a chance mutation in a single gene. Therefore SSA cannot be caused by a single gene. (Ch 1)
Researchers trying to find “homosexual” sequences of genes on the recently mapped human genome have not found any such sequences although they have found them for schizophrenia, alcoholism etc.
(Ch 9)
The occurrence of SSA is about five time too high to be caused by a faulty (non-genetic) pre-natal developmental process so it is not innate in that sense either. (Ch 1)
First same-sex attraction occurs over a very long time span, unlike pre-programmed genetic events eg puberty, menopause. This argues that first same-sex attraction is not a genetically programmed event. (Ch 1)
The human race shares most of its genes - something between 99.7% and 99.9%. That means all ethnic groups will have most of them. This has the following three implications.
If homosexuality is genetically dictated, homosexual practices will be identical or extremely similar in all cultures. But there is an enormous range and diversity of homosexual practice and customs among different cultures (and within cultures). (Ch 6)
There would be a similar incidence of homosexuality in all cultures. But homosexuality has been unknown in some cultures and mandatory in others. (Ch 6)
Changes in homosexual practice and behavior in different cultures would take place very slowly, over many centuries. But this is not what history shows. (The decline of whole models of homosexuality [the Greek, over a couple of centuries, and the Melanesian, within a century]; the relatively sudden [in genetic terms] emergence of the present Western model over a couple of centuries; and abrupt changes of practice within an ethnic group, even over a single generation, are not consistent with anything genetic. Even less so the swiftly changing sexual practices within the current Western model.) (Ch 6)
The drop in SSA attraction and practice over the lifespan is too great to attribute to genetic change – or for that matter, deaths from AIDS. It could indicate some change in sexual orientation. (Ch 2)
Recent increases in the percentage of those experimenting with same-sex behaviour suggest social influence rather than genetic change.(Ch 2)
Dean Hamer, one of the strongest advocates of a genetically-based homosexuality, has remarked that he doesn’t think a gene exists for sexual orientation. (Ch 9)
Twin studies: These very complex comparisons of identical twins and non-identical twins definitively rule out genetic determinism. If homosexuality were genetic, identical co-twins of homosexual men and women would also be homosexual 100% of the time, but they aren’t. Theoretically the genetic influence may be as high as 30% for men and 50% for women but is probably as low as 10%. It is important to remember that this 10% influence is indirect not direct. That is, everyone has at least a 10% genetic influence in his or her behaviour - simply because without genes there can be no bodily activity of any kind, or human behaviour (Ch 10). Identical twins with identical genes are (at most) 11% and 14% concordant for SSA (ie. if one twin is SSA the co-twin will be gay only 11% of the time (males), 14% (females). (Other studies have even lower concordances).
(more)
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/index.html
“Science education must help people understand that phenotypic variation, including sexual orientation diversity, is an immutable feature of human biology.”
Just like science education MUST help people understand that the government MUST take over all aspects of life which could influence climate change. arrrgggg
Where do bisexuals fit in? Are they genetically predisposed to bisexuality?
No, that is caused by cocaine - with that you will sleep with anything. 8-)
Great comment and succinct documentation! I bookmarked this article for that!
So why is it that the behavioural characteristic of being disgusted by homosexuality is invariably portrayed as something a person has to choose to do, and can just as easily choose not to?
If it’s a genetic trait, will homosexuals become pro-life as prospective parents begin screening their fetuses for the alleged trait?
Dumb question. Is adultery a choice or is it genetic? Obviously, many of us have a genetic, innate, congenital, or other natural urge in the direction of adultery, but some CHOOSE to give in to that urge and some CHOOSE to act based on higher considerations. How is choosing whether to act on an inappropriate attraction to members of the same sex different from choosing whether to act on an inappropriate attraction to the opposite sex?
There was an elephant in the San Francisco courtroom where **(lawyers)** contested the **(constitutionality)** of Proposition 8, the California law that prohibits the marriage of same-sex couples.They must have been trained by Obama.
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.