Subscribing as well.

Along the DOF lines, a question I pose to people who ask when i chose to be gay: ‘When did you choose to be straight?’ Of course it’s slightly flawed, but gets my point across. 

My 2 cents:
If I had a choice, I would not choose to be persecuted and denyed human rights (and in some countries exicuted by law). 

Anywho, I’m intersted in following this and hearing what people think.

Oh I can tell this is going to be a real intelligent thread. I already disagree with your statistical information regarding homosexual percentages in the population. 

The evidence in ascertaining the calculation is clearly flawed. In my case the evidence makes it’s way to my hand in the shower, and “What I was Thinking” just before it becomes the evidence. This has so little to do with Science. It’s a matter of people who try to harness others, and not allow them to openly choose love.

Repression, Denial, Indifference, Fupidity, That’s what this is really about.

Actually we’ve had a lot of threads that address the civil-rights aspect, and philosophical aspects of homosexuality.  It probably won’t kill us to focus on the narrow question of genetic basis for homosexuality for one whole thread. 

Personally I have less interest in the methodology of the studies (since it is difficult to get straight answers - pardon the expression - out of people on their gender preference) than I am in knowing why, if heterosexuality is genetic, homosexuality would not be genetic.  But methodology is important and worth discussing anyway.

As a lay person on this subject, (since I am hetrosexual there is definitely no pun intended) it never occured to me, nor do I think that homosexuality is genetic.
I have always been of the opinion that it is strictly biological.
As for the 10% rule I always knew it was around 2-3% and thought that the 10% bit was propagated by the gay community to make themselves seems more mainstream than they really were.
I have quite a few gays friends and get along with them quite well but do wish that they had stayed in the closet instead of flaunting their sexuality with todays “in your face” attitude.

moses: I have quite a few gays friends and get along with them quite well but do wish that they had stayed in the closet instead of flaunting their sexuality with todays “in your face” attitude.

I’m pretty sure you know, but for the record, there are a wide variety of personalities that go with being gay.  I, for one, do not lisp, love to fix cars, BBQ quite often, love watching hockey, go camping, hike, rollerblade, and can spend hours in Home Depot. 

I’m curious as to what the percentages constitute.  Is that a percentage of the population who considers themselves 100% homosexual?  (Kinsey 6) Or does it include any and all of the flavors inbetween?  Bisexual?  Transgender?  etc.  We’re the studies to come up with this number anonymous?  Did it take into account how some people won’t talk about their sexuality openly?  As in, if an Evangelical Christian preacher took the study, and he has had sex with other men, do you think he would really answer honestly?

I’m pretty sure you know, but for the record, there are a wide variety of personalities that go with being gay.  I, for one, do not lisp, love to fix cars, BBQ quite often, love watching hockey, go camping, hike, rollerblade, and can spend hours in Home Depot. 

Yes - Yes - I know, and that’s not what I’m talking about.

The media, because it is so populated by gays, is constantly flaunting homosexuality out of all proportion to the percentage of the population that is gay. This was done right down to the point where fashion models were required to adapt an androgenous look to promote a certain stereotype.

And by the way Jeffercine, why are you calling into question the studies on the percentage of gays?

And by the way Jeffercine, why are you calling into question the studies on the percentage of gays?

There’s such a broad range of people’s sexualities, I just want to know exactly what those numbers represent.  I don’t see a problem with wanting to know if the percentages include various ranges of bisexual men and women as well.  Or if it’s strictly 100% homosexual men and/or women.

I have a suspicion that if you included bi-sexual people that number could start to approach the 10% mark.
By the way I don’t know if “bi” is biological or the son of a bitches are just constantly horny

If you took straight guys and included the ones that get horny enough to fuck a chicken then we have hit the 10% mark. 

By the way I don’t know if “bi” is biological or the son of a bitches are just constantly horny

Actually, it’s just the ultimate example of not descriminating based on gender.

Actually I think I went off on a different thread and took us away from the genetic thing, sorry.

I must be missing something…

Why does it matter what ‘causes’ homosexuality?  Whether it is proven to be purely hereditary or not shouldn’t have any bearing of the rights of gay people.

Aren’t we over-analyzing things here?

KKop: Why does it matter what ‘causes’ homosexuality?  Whether it is proven to be purely hereditary or not shouldn’t have any bearing of the rights of gay people.

I agree completely.

The only way that ‘how a person becomes gay’ has any merit is in religious debate.
If its hereditary, then ‘why did God do that?’ can be applied.
If not, then it can be considered a choice and therefore a sin.

Well, I suppose it could be a factor if you really and truly wanted to change your sexuality. If there were a genetic marker then you could conceivably take a pill and find other things to do with the guys over the weekend besides watch football, then take another pill and be heterosexual enough to get a rise from your girlfriend. Or something like that.

While it doesn’t appeal to me now, I can see how doubling my gender preferences for having sex could make for more dates.

Les:

Homosexuality has been the topic of much discussion here at SEB.  I’ve tried to avoid the discussion on whether homosexuality is a result of genetics or a lifestyle choice, and have focused primarily on providing my positions as to:

1) Why the legal strategy for the promotion of same-sex marriage was flawed; and

2) A legitimate refutation of Les’s challenge that opposition to same-sex marriage is always grounded in religion.  Those discussions always get intentionally sidetracked.  So, I have engaged on the subject.  That is the purpose of this thread.  Shelley has been kind enough to serve as my counterpart in this discussion.

Don:

To answer # 1:

As I told you, but you Les and others, do not listen.

Marriage is a civil contract and by State statute, if not by civil litigation, there IS NO Discrimination by gender. So your argument is flawed, Les, right out of the gate.

Number two of your assertions Les:

There is religious grounding of gay marriage as let’s go back to the sources of such assertions of gay marriage as being valid by antiquity i.e: The bible, Koran, Zeus, to say the least, if not the Spartans and their historic acts lived by to this day, OF WHAT the US Marines lived by! “Never leave one behind.” are there any ladies on front line combat? My point made.

You want to open that door Les, fine then, you will lose, at the bottom of the heap on up to the top, I can show without fault, one sex caring for the same sex, in all of human life and substance, and this is good? Yeah-Damn right.  So, Fuck YOU.

Marriage is a civil contract, by State statutes and civil enforcement, jender mentioned is abomination.

You Les, never read the bible. Oh, you looked at it but you never studied it. You have a working knowledge from propaganda, but you cannot quote first hand.

I would like to nail your ass down Les, and find out who are, for as fact, you make claims you can not support.

Don

And now Don proves that his reading comprehension is as flawed as his writing ability.

First, dipshit, you’ll notice, if you bother to read, that this post is by Consigliere, not Les. So taking Les to task for someone else’s opinions is a bit stupid, don’t you think?

Second, as the post in question made clear, this thread is NOT about gay marriage, it’s about the origins of homosexuality, be they genetic or enviromental.

As to whether there is any value in determining this (brought up in more sensible posts than Don’s) I can only comment that all knowledge has its value. If someone could tell me why I like ham much more than beef, I’d like to know. It wouldn’t change anything, I’d still like ham, but I’d like to know.

I feel pretty much the same about this. All knowledge is good.

Lastly, thank you, Consig, for the amount of time and energy you’re bringing to this discussion. I look forward to following this thread very closely.

My sides are splitting from this latest invective from our friend Don. Thanks for the laugh!

I have a curiosity in knowing what causes a person to be gay, although I seriously doubt that a discussion such as this will bear any fruit.  I personally know that being gay not a choice, I also do not believe that it is caused by ‘nurture’. 

I have been doing some Googling for studies that are looking into the causes of homosexuality. 

Nobody currently knows whether being gay is genetic or not.  The published twin studies are disputed by various people for various reasons.  Many of the studies that purport to be investigating the cause of homosexuality appear to be biased toward either trying to show that homosexuality is a choice or is caused by something that can be cured.

Doctor M. : If its hereditary, then ‘why did God do that?’ can be applied.
If not, then it can be considered a choice and therefore a sin.

And if it’s a choice, it can be unlearned or even physically wiped out. We’re doing amazing things with soldiers these days. You don’t have to clean it up everywhere, just your neighborhood, ...or your state. We’re also doing amazing things with the Constitution these days.

Like Spock said to Dr. McCoy: “Remember”

Let me get something straight here just so I know exactly what we are talking about.
First of all gay is not a matter of preference, that we all agree on.
Now when you ask the question is it genetic I assume you mean is it inherited because it is not.
When I say it is biological I mean that it has been proven to be chemical and maybe other factors such as wiring in the brain that came about during the developmental process. (I don’t remember whether it was in the womb or shortly after.)
If this is all the debate is about there is your answer.
Allan

As I said above, and now repeat here, there’s plenty of other threads to discuss other aspects of homosexuality.  Let’s stand back and let Consi and Shelly discuss the twin studies.  It will be at least interesting to some of us, and possibly useful as well.

I was wondering about that “biological” business, Moses.

But how do you know it isn’t inherited? Maybe just a little bit?

But I still have issues with:

I… do wish that they had stayed in the closet instead of flaunting their sexuality with todays “in your face” attitude.

If we try to keep today’s attitudes out of our faces, will you cooperate?

Sorry, DOF. I didn’t think this was really a private thread.

Certainly. It is now 11:30 and I must retire but just before I go - Don.........fuck off!