[Thrash]

Where is this percentage from, btw?

Is this another one of those unfounded percentages such as Sam Harris' "93% of scientists" are atheistic?

[rock_show_host]

I'll admit that I haven't done extensive research on this, and I don't know too much, but I do know that it seems presumptuous to me for straight people who've never dealt personally with homosexuality to try and speak authoritatively on its origins. That's my $.02.

[slap_j]

From the American Psychological Association:

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; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

The last sentence pretty much sums up what I learned when reading up on the subject. And certainly the latter half of that sentence is true. I've never met anyone who felt like they had any control over their sexual orientation. I sure don't feel as if I do.

[Thrash]

Originally Posted by slap_j

From the American Psychological Association:

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; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.

The last sentence pretty much sums up what I learned when reading up on the subject. And certainly the latter half of that sentence is true. I've never met anyone who felt like they had any control over their sexual orientation. I sure don't feel as if I do.

Seems to me that this is saying no one knows. I don"t see how any one person can conclusively say either way, also seeing as how this is an extremely politically charged subject that can play a factor to.

I don't trust conservatives or liberals in this matter, and it seems like most people are so hung up on one conclusion or the other that they are swayed politically to make a point which concludes what they may believe. Perhaps I am paranoid.
Similar to creationists. Many will interpret the sciences based up on their political perspective. Sometimes we are clouded by our presuppositions.

In my opinion all this topic results in for us laymen is inconclusiveness. Since even the APA states they don't know, I doubt I cna make a qualified guess.

Does anyone have a DMS (DSM? cant remember)IV? Mtlmom does, I know.

[scarlet.starlet]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Homosexuality is a chosen sexual sin just like adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, fornication and premarital sex.

Adultery, pedophilia, bestiality, fornication, and premarital sex are behavior. Homosexuality is a part of one's identity. You can be celibate and still be gay.

[MtlMom]

Taylor, what do you want from the DSM-IV?

[Thrash]

Doesn't it talk of homosexuality? Or was it perhaps one of the earlier editions which catergorized it? Just curious as to what, if anything, it said upon the subject.

Of course, it seems you would have a better opinion upon it than any of us anyway!

[scarlet.starlet]

The DSM IV is the first edition that doesn't say homosexuality is a mental disorder. The first three editions do. I'm pretty certain of that.

[MtlMom]

The very first DSM listed homosexuality as a disorder, but in the 70’s the category was changed to “sexual orientation disturbance”. This was when mental health professionals began recognizing homosexuality as a mental disorder only if it was subjectively disturbing to the individual.

The current DSM-IV does not list homosexuality as a disorder, but does include the diagnosis of "Sexual Disorder Not Otherwise Specified" for someone with persistent and marked distress about sexual orientation.

Basically, it's only a mental illness if it is causing the person distress.

[ICTHUS]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

According to almost all human sexuality researchers, mental health therapists, medical practitioners, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals, homosexuality is one of three sexual orientations.

Really? I thought sexuality was viewed more along the lines of a sort of a spectrum, as in the Kinsey Scale.

[scarlet.starlet]

Originally Posted by ICTHUS

Really? I thought sexuality was viewed more along the lines of a sort of a spectrum, as in the Kinsey Scale.

You're right; the Kinsey Scale is used to measure sexual orientation, but not usually by laypeople. I mean, it's hard enough to quantify how you feel; if the most common system had seven points instead of three, I think it would be pretty confusing. (For example, I would call myself a 1 on the Kinsey Scale, but then I would have to explain it to everyone.)

To make matters more confusing, sexuality's pretty fluid. You might be exclusively attracted to the same sex as a youth, and exclusively attracted to the opposite sex later on in life. People change.

[MtlMom]

I would say that it's rather insulting to the average person to suggest that they can only comprehend three categories of sexual orientation.

[scarlet.starlet]

Originally Posted by MtlMom

I would say that it's rather insulting to the average person to suggest that they can only comprehend three categories of sexual orientation.

Yeah, probably. But bisexuals aren't even fully understood by gay people, much less straight people.

[MtlMom]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

Yeah, probably. But bisexuals aren't even fully understood by gay people, much less straight people.

Why would they be?

[Thrash]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

To make matters more confusing, sexuality's pretty fluid. You might be exclusively attracted to the same sex as a youth, and exclusively attracted to the opposite sex later on in life. People change.

Perhaps I am just being ignorant, but how does the idea of this relevant to the position that it is genetic?
Perhaps it is purely semantic in origin. I suppose when I think of something being genetic I suppose it is set in stone. How can sexuality, if something one is born with, be fluid? Would it not be static?
Perhaps I don't understand the dynamics of your argument or side of this discussion?