[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. They are attracted only to members of the same sex, whereas heterosexual people are sexually attracted to members of the opposite sex and bisexual people are attracted to either.

So how do people develop a homosexual orientation? Most researchers believe that it is caused by a pre-existent genetic makeup which is established in the womb. This may be triggered early in life by an unknown factor in the environment. So it's a combination of nature and nurture; nature provides the switch, nurture either flips it or doesn't.

The evidence for a genetic cause of orientation includes differences in fingertip ridges, finger length, eye blinking inhibition, hearing sensitivity, ear emissions, responses to pheromones, sweat tests, fraternal birth order, studies of identical twins, and brain hemisphere studies.

Generally speaking, when 95% of scientists believe the same theory, it's probably right.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

So how do people develop a homosexual orientation? Most researchers believe that it is caused by a pre-existent genetic makeup which is established in the womb. This may be triggered early in life by an unknown factor in the environment. So it's a combination of nature and nurture; nature provides the switch, nurture either flips it or doesn't.

I wrote a paper on this as a freshman (6 yrs ago, dang yo) and that's pretty much what I discovered.

Sorry that I'm not disagreeing.

[scarlet.starlet]

Originally Posted by slap_j

I wrote a paper on this as a freshman (6 yrs ago, dang yo) and that's pretty much what I discovered.

Sorry that I'm not disagreeing.

LOL you're apologizing for agreeing with me? Don't, I'm really pleased that I got backed up on the first reply.

[slap_j]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

LOL you're apologizing for agreeing with me?

Conflict is more interesting!

[BillSPrestonEsq]

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. They are attracted only to members of the same sex, whereas heterosexual people are sexually attracted to members of the opposite sex and bisexual people are attracted to either.

So how do people develop a homosexual orientation? Most researchers believe that it is caused by a pre-existent genetic makeup which is established in the womb. This may be triggered early in life by an unknown factor in the environment. So it's a combination of nature and nurture; nature provides the switch, nurture either flips it or doesn't.

The evidence for a genetic cause of orientation includes differences in fingertip ridges, finger length, eye blinking inhibition, hearing sensitivity, ear emissions, responses to pheromones, sweat tests, fraternal birth order, studies of identical twins, and brain hemisphere studies.

Generally speaking, when 95% of scientists believe the same theory, it's probably right.

If it does not have it's switch flipped, then how do we know it is nature at all? I am asking this very seriously, because, well it seems as if some people can have the supposed genetic predisposition for it, and be heterosexual, that perhaps the data is not saying what people think it is.

If that possibility exists, then there is a whole can of worms not dealt with.

When 95% of scientists believe the same theory, it probably means it is the current theory of the day, and in a 100 years, we will laugh at that too.

[scarlet.starlet]

It's possible that we might laugh at today's scientific theories, but that's what's good about science. It continually progresses.

Besides, there's a lot of things they've discovered a few centuries ago that are still valid.

[scarlet.starlet]

Originally Posted by Billgamesh

If it does not have it's switch flipped, then how do we know it is nature at all? I am asking this very seriously, because, well it seems as if some people can have the supposed genetic predisposition for it, and be heterosexual, that perhaps the data is not saying what people think it is.

If that possibility exists, then there is a whole can of worms not dealt with.

So what do you think the data suggests?

[roscoestring]

I'm heterolsexual and believe that I was born that way. Wouldn't a homosexual be the same?
I also have a gay uncle (in his 50's now) that claims that he was born homosexual.
I was not pushed in either direction when I was growing up. I chose on my own.

Could the same be said for thieves, or liars, or musicians, artists, obese, silly, lazy, etc.?

[nolidad]

Originally Posted by roscoestring

I'm heterolsexual and believe that I was born that way. Wouldn't a homosexual be the same?
I also have a gay uncle (in his 50's now) that claims that he was born homosexual.
I was not pushed in either direction when I was growing up. I chose on my own.

Could the same be said for thieves, or liars, or musicians, artists, obese, silly, lazy, etc.?

Teh research that was published that first posited that homosexuality is genetic was hopelessly flawed and skewed to get the results they wanted.

Truth of the matter is that homosexuality is caused by societal factors.

In males when puberty hits many many males have homosexual curiosities as hormones are flowing. When pressed many many many more are discovered to have dominant mothers, passive fathers, broken homes with absentee fathers or possessive mothers, taught that homosexuality is normative, emotional disorders, self esteem issues and others.

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

[Rainer.]

^ I'd argue that homosexuality is a condition, while homosexual relations would be the actual sin.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

Teh research that was published that first posited that homosexuality is genetic was hopelessly flawed and skewed to get the results they wanted.

Before I respond: let me point out that nolidad has a well established history of simply inventing facts, typically ones even he doesn't believe, often when they are easily disproven.

Which research was the "first published"? How was it flawed? What resources can you point to to establish this flaw? What about the significant amount of research since?

Truth of the matter is that homosexuality is caused by societal factors.

There would be one of those lies now. Notice the complete lack of actual support.

In males when puberty hits many many males have homosexual curiosities as hormones are flowing. When pressed many many many more are discovered to have dominant mothers, passive fathers, broken homes with absentee fathers or possessive mothers, taught that homosexuality is normative, emotional disorders, self esteem issues and others.

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

This bigoted crap isn't even worth responding to.

BTW: Are you willing to bet your belief in God that human society is the sole cause of homosexuality? I'm willing to swear to believe in God if I cannot prove otherwise (that there must be some cause for [at least some cases of] same-sex attraction other than human society).

You've posted matter-of-fact, and with no indication that you could possibly be wrong. Step up to the plate and swing.

[rock_show_host]

Originally Posted by Rainer.

^ I'd argue that homosexuality is a condition, while homosexual relations would be the actual sin.

This is my position as well.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by Rainer.

^ I'd argue that homosexuality is a condition, while homosexual relations would be the actual sin.

Sounds right. We cannot control what we are: but we can control what we do.

[Thrash]

Where is the scientific evidence to the contrary of what Nolidad has posited? As in the first post? I have no background, but to MY knowledge (which is limited in this factor), there has been no discovery of a "gay"gene.

Whilst I do not have the book, and for some reason have NEVER been ever to find it since I forst read it (wow, this makes me sound like a liar, or like I made it up), I did read a book talking about how there were several skewed researches done in the early days of trying to discover whether or not it is genetic.
One was done in an area where there was a dominant homosexual community, and was done only in that community. It seemed, if i remember correctly, to be attributing too much correlation to a causality that couldn't necassarily be proven,. In other words, it was saying there was a genetic difference in a homosexual brain, but it left no room to say that perhaps the causality wasn't genetic but somehow caused by some other condition, whatever that could be.


As I said before (in other words, since I am the minority on this issue, and in reality have no background or stated belief and binding thoughts upon it) I am not 100% certain on anything I just said.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by scarlet.starlet

Generally speaking, when 95% of scientists believe the same theory, it's probably right.

I'm not going to dispute the genetic basis of homosexual orientation, but I am going to dispute this claim. The sciences, especially biology, have a terrible track record over the past 2500 years, and I find it hard to believe that just because we have Karl Popper's philosophy of science we're somehow that far advanced.

From physics to forensics, we're finding out more and more that our science is flawed.

I'm not trying to be despairing here. If 95% of scientists tell me something is true, I'll assume it's the best working theory. But I won't be shocked when it's overturned.