Posted on 02/11/2010 12:53:22 PM PST by Cementjungle
A new study found that homosexual men may be predisposed to nurture their nieces and nephews as a way of helping to ensure their own genes get passed down to the next generation.
Vasey said he suspects that the conditions just aren't right in modern Western societies for this genetic predisposition to express itself.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I wonder if God approves of this..
Ha!
So now “genes” can be passed along through social interaction, not just biology.
“As Barack Obama Jr. learned, you can even get them from a “family friend”.”
Not ALL you can get...
Molestation is probably the mechanism for the “gene transfer”.
Wonder who paid for this study? I do not find it “special” or “genetic” that an uncle would be more predisposed to care for a niece or nephew than for a stranger’s children. I tend to favor my own nieces and nephews over children with whom I have no relationship, and I have no need to perpetuate my genes like that.
There is another objection to the notion of a genetically
induced homosexuality. An unreproductive behavior
cannot be “genetic” and also continue to exist in the population. According to mainstream genetics,
genetically enforced homosexuality (exclusively same-sex
sex) would die out of the population in several generations.
Here’s how. A gene is retained in the gene pool when an average of at least one child is born to every
adult having that gene (one child per person). As unlikely
as it sounds, surveys show that of persons classifying
themselves as exclusively homosexual, one in five has a child. At that rate, a homosexual gene, or
genes, could not be replaced.
But most homosexuals may be married (see Chapter Two). Wouldn’t this preserve any homosexual
gene or genes? Not necessarily. A married homosexual is (usually) bisexual. According to surveys, bisexuals
have an average
of 1.25 children each. On its own, that’s enough to replace the adult gene or genes, but the
average total number of children produced by bisexuals and exclusive homosexuals still comes to less than
one child per person
- 0.9. At that rate, any homosexual gene or genes would still slowly but inevitably breed
out of the population.
Sociobiologists, almost the only group of academics who argue seriously that all human behavior is
preordained
by genes, have great difficulty accounting for the persistence of SSA in the population. They
try to argue that genes causing male SSA would also exist in the sisters of gays, and that the homosexual
male would help ensure those genes were passed on by helping his sister and her family - for example, babysitting,
and later helping with money and resources. But these arguments are unusually weak. Those with
SSA have much weaker ties with their biological families than average.
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Ch1.pdf
First time that has occurred on this planet since the beginning of life.
Well, the article does exist... the conclusions are a bit twisted I would say.
They keep trying. They failed to prove that there is a “gay gene,” so now they’re trying something new. Just proves that the leftist “mind” is a terrible waste of brain cells.
Homosexuality is not genetic.
HF
New study: “Gay brothers nature’s baby sitter”
Some don't reveal their gaiety until after offspring come along. Such things lead to really sad tales.
HF
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.