Posted on 02/03/2010 5:29:33 PM PST by RGirard
There is a lot of controversy right now over homosexuals in the military, gay marriage, teaching children in school ... At the root of this issue is the question of whether or not it is a choice, or if a person can be born gay/homosexual.
In the book "If You Read Just One Book This Year ... " the author, who goes by the pen-name "An American Man," addresses this issue ... The author starts out with a humorous approach ... by comparing homosexuals to vegetables ...
He proceeds to address hate crimes and how television media plays a role.
"Many people in the media seem to forget that intelligent consumers want to understand both sides ... I want to know and understand WHY people are gay ... Even if you don't like or didn't expect the answers you receive, shouldn't the TRUTH actually BE important?"
American Man then discusses how we are "losing out because of manipulative, selfish agendas ... because there is "no genetic proof that anyone is born gay. However, does that mean that people are NOT born gay? No. .... just like stem cell research, and evolution, and the education system ... ...
The author points out that "Many people have come in and out of the lifestyle...
So if it's not a genetic thing, then what is it?
"Part of it is cultural sexual lust ... it is like a fad or a virus. Some people are more susceptible than others. And once infected ..."
What other reason(s) could there be? ... [ see article ]
(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...
People are certainly wired differently and yes a lot is imprinted either pre-birth or not long after. However the way neural pathways work is - those we feed with imput continue to feed or provide input or apply belief to keep growing and intertwining with other parts of the brain so it is quite possible if a person allows their brain to believe that they are gay and then continue to entertain thoughts or involve themselves in that lifestyle then the brain will allow that attraction and it will seem to be part of “who they are”!
Cheers
Mel
I think the “born that way or not” argument is a red herring. Let us assume for the moment that there is a genetic component to it. There are genetic components to many things which are not laudable, such as alcoholism, mental illness, psychopathy, etc.
The question should not be whether there is a genetic connection. The question should be does this lead to a healthy, wholesome, lifestyle that builds society, or does it lead to family breakdown, promiscuity, pedophilia, and other antisocial behaviors?
As an American, I laud tolerance. But tolerance is not the same as value-neutrality or even advocacy. The military certainly should not become a social experiment.
Yes, I also believe they are born gay. It is a birth defect in the brain.
Most normal people don't understand a mental illness. Or personality disorder. Or gender confusion. Whatever it's called it's still an illness.
If you insisted you were really Napoleon Bonaparte, and you believed it, would that make you correct?
So Michael Glatze, a gay rights leader and editor of Young Gay American was just experimenting when he was gay.
And Charlene Cothran who founded and ran Venus Magazine was also just experimenting when she was gay. She now uses her magazine to reach out to gays.
Even the APA doesn't have a problem with treatment of unwanted homosexual attraction.
How Might Homosexualitiy Develop? Putting the Pieces Together
For those actually interested, People Can Change.
More information here: Root Causes, Homosexual Consequences.
I like it.
So, you are ready to prove the nonexistence of a gene?
I do believe it is something that can be changed, with good mental health care, or they can be encouraged not to engage in that activity, because it's not good for their physical or mental health.
I object to engaging the lobby on behalf of homoeroticism on these terms.
I think a reasonable case can be made that all of us are born with tendencies that predispose us toward certain temptations and with them certain sins.
The problem with allowing the debate to be frame in terms of “is it inborn?” is that it is debating the wrong issue. The question is whether yielding to this disposition results in good or evil behavior.
If I were born with a predisposition to anger, that fact would not make it either moral or morally neutral for me to yield to that predisposition and commit murder nor even perpetually rail against my neighbors and acquaintances.
If I were born with a predisposition to acquisitiveness, that fact would not make it moral or morally neutral for me to pilfer from my employer or turn to brigandry.
No more, were I born with a predisposition toward buggering other men would that make buggery either moral or morally neutral.
OK I’m not trying to ruffle anyone’s feathers here. I’m using introspection more than I should, I guess.
I can name ten thousand things about females that make me happy to be alive (and a few that make me wish I was dead sometimes), but, sex with men, well, the idea just never occurred to me.
Given that, it seems to me that one would have to have some genetic predisposition to partake in such a bizarre act.
For me, it’s on par with having “sex” with animals. It ain’t happenin’.
In 1993, Columbia University psychiatry professors Drs. William Byne and Bruce Parsons examined the most prominent "gay gene" studies on brain structure and on identical twins, and published the results in the Archives of General Psychiatry.
There is no evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory. … [T]he appeal of current biologic explanations for sexual orientation may derive more from dissatisfaction with the present status of psychosocial explanations than from a substantiating body of experimental data
In May 2000, the American Psychiatric Association issued a Fact Sheet, "Gay, Lesbian and Bisexual Issues," which includes this statement:
"Currently, there is a renewed interest in searching for biological etiologies for homosexuality. However, to date there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for homosexuality."
All I have to go by is a lifetime of observations of the various gay people I’ve met over the years. I see “gay” as just another fetish. Are people *born* to be into bondage or leather or have a particular attraction to feet? It’s a personality trait, not a condition, IMHO.
People are born with a brain that’s wired up different from every other brain. Everyone is different, across a wide spectrum of personality ranges. Then all manner of complex interactions with life proceed to build and reinforce personality as brains develop.
I wouldn’t say that people “choose” to have a bondage fetish. It certainly does nothing for me. That just happens to be what works for them at that time in their lives. But I don’t think they were necessarily “born” with that either. We are born with a starter-kit personality I suppose... but then we spend our whole lives developing it, in ways that are too subtle and complex to ever map out.
People don’t need to “choose” to be gay either to end up that way, and I don’t think it has much to do with their starter-kit. The whole concept of a “gay gene” seems to me to be an oxymoron. How would such a gene last in the gene pool after millions of years of evolution? It’s a gene that tends *away* from selection rather than toward it. Doesn’t make sense.
But it doesn’t need to be a “choice” at a discreet moment in time either. It’s a personality trait— a fetish— just like any other attraction or enthusiasm in life. Some people live to golf, and some live to hunt or fish. Some people like sailboats and some people like motorboats. Did they “choose” to have those enthusiasms? Not exactly. But were they born that way? Probably not.
I’m tiny ... but fortunately no one ever went around saying I looked gay. Sounds like your husband and the other family members may have planted doubt and confusion in his mind. What a shame.
I'm not saying it's a disorder, but if same-sex attraction were a disorder, would it seem so bizarre?
There may be some genetic predispositions but what does that really mean? Would we consider acting effeminate qualifies as a genetic predisposition? Why? There are more effeminate heterosexual men that homosexual men. We need to be careful how and why we label behavior.
I don't want to sound like Al Gore pushing global warming, but... it's complicated. Actually, I've been saying "it's complicated" in regards to the science on homosexuality longer than Al Gore has in reference to global warming. Still, it's complicated.
ping
It doesn’t matter if you or I care. The fact is, if it’s genetic then it really is the same as race or anything else. If it’s an illness (or deviation caused by environmental factors) then it should be treated (early) and not codified into law.
All I have to go by is a lifetime of observations of the various gay people I’ve met over the years. I see “gay” as just another fetish. Are people *born* to be into bondage or leather or have a particular attraction to feet? It’s a personality trait, not a condition, IMHO.
People are born with a brain that’s wired up different from every other brain. Everyone is different, across a wide spectrum of personality ranges. Then all manner of complex interactions with life proceed to build and reinforce personality as brains develop.
I wouldn’t say that people “choose” to have a bondage fetish. It certainly does nothing for me. That just happens to be what works for them at that time in their lives. But I don’t think they were necessarily “born” with that either. We are born with a starter-kit personality I suppose... but then we spend our whole lives developing it, in ways that are too subtle and complex to ever map out.
People don’t need to “choose” to be gay either to end up that way, and I don’t think it has much to do with their starter-kit. The whole concept of a “gay gene” seems to me to be an oxymoron. How would such a gene last in the gene pool after millions of years of evolution? It’s a gene that tends *away* from selection rather than toward it. Doesn’t make sense.
But it doesn’t need to be a “choice” at a discreet moment in time either. It’s a personality trait— a fetish— just like any other attraction or enthusiasm in life. Some people live to golf, and some live to hunt or fish. Some people like sailboats and some people like motorboats. Did they “choose” to have those enthusiasms? Not exactly. But were they born that way? Probably not.
BINGO. One can chose to be celibate, but one can’t chose their orientation. That’s just nonsense. One could just as easily change their eye color.
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.