Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Reaching the obvious conclusions concerning gays
Re: mordent - there is no definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic
Twin studies have provided evidence that their is a genetic component to gender preference, but also that it is clearly not a one-gene trait. Human sexuality is controlled by multiple genes, like other complex behaviors and systems, and many genes create not an exact trait, but a pre-disposition, and are activated only by stimuli from the environment. So not all identical twins both smoke, or refrain from smoking, and even among those that do, not all die simultaneously.
Environmental stresses (which by a biological definition includes everything on is exposed to) affect which genes are expressed. But patterns of sameness and difference with respect to gender orientation among identical twins supports a strong biological and genetic component.
posted by
mousehop
on November 20, 2008 at 7:25 AM
| link to this | reply
mordent - there is no definitive proof that homosexuality is genetic
All studies that have attempted to identify the so called "gay gene" have so far been inconclusive, this is true. What is also true, and something that very few Christians will offer as they attempt to defend the gay is a choice position, is that environmental causes are as equally inconclusive. When the fact that there are cases of identical twins having different sexual orientation is used as an attempt to defeat the gay is a choice argument, the reality must be acknowledged that in most cases it defeats both arguments (nature versus nurture). This assumes that both twins grew up in the same environment.
The argument suggesting that both twins would have to be gay for the cause of homosexuality to be genetic is therefore on faulty ground, rendered further so by the fact that there are many cases of one identical twin developing any number of medical conditions that is not suffered by the other twin.
Those of us with no stake in this argument (heterosexuals without gay family members) can only use common sense to sort this out from two highly agendized and distorted positions. I base my opinion that it must be genetic on the few gays I have actually asked about this and the reality of what they contend with in a society that ostracizes them to the extent that we still do in North America. I cannot conceive of another reason, including making a choice, why someone would suffer becoming an outcast from their communities or immediate families. No sane person would make this type of choice, there has to be something further compelling their orientation.
Where no one can say conclusively what that is, using terms such as "pre-wired" or "born that way" seem the most accurate when reconciled with real life observation.
posted by
gomedome
on November 18, 2008 at 1:11 PM
| link to this | reply
I think homosexuality is genetic also for all the reasons you stated. At least in most cases that is.
However in talking to some Christians they've told me there is no proof that it is genetic and that they've seen twins, one of which turned out gay and claiming both would've had to be gay for it to be genetic.
What's your response to that?
posted by
mordent
on November 17, 2008 at 10:32 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: Defense of Marriage
mousehop - Universal acceptance of same sex marriage is inevitable. As time goes by, the countries that do allow it will prove as models to completely dispel most of the baseless arguments being used against its acceptance today. In short; it has virtually no effect on a society that allows it.
Of the two things you mention I can agree that the insistence that homosexuality is a choice is a contention used by fundamentalists. They have even developed a bogus therapy to cure gays from being gay. Comically, they are the ones who have developed the concept that this bogus therapy is premised upon and even more hysterically, provide all of the data that proves in their minds that it actually works. Not so surprisingly their therapy and their bogus results have been discredited by mainstream medical science far and wide.
The issues of roles and dominence I have not heard of before.
posted by
gomedome
on November 17, 2008 at 2:02 PM
| link to this | reply
Defense of Marriage
From analyses I've read, it seems that two factors predominate in opposition to gay marriage. One is a belief that being gay is a choice as opposed to being a biological condition. Most who believe it is biological support gay marriage. The other relates to the inherent sexist nature of marriage. That is, there are identified roles for men and women in marriage, traditionally, and an equal marriage threatens those roles. That is a valid argument, as far as it goes; men and women can no longer make assumptions about the expectations in a marriage automatically if the equation is changed, and actually made equal. But that is happening in marriages, regardless of expansion of the definition. Public discussion of this concept will increase acceptance of marriages of equal partnership, and acceptanct of gay marriage will follow. But it will take persistence.
posted by
mousehop
on November 17, 2008 at 10:53 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: You have expressed very well in a nutshell what we all have been trying to
Xeno-x - that sad truth is that a good many people will never see or fully comprehend. If they are capable of convincing themselves that people from the ancient middle east were somehow privy to the words of God and that these words have been translated accurately through several languages to Edwardian era English and that no editorial or cultural bias has infiltrated those words . . . then they are probably too far gone. They are beyond redemption. It is the future generations that will change things.
posted by
gomedome
on November 16, 2008 at 6:57 PM
| link to this | reply
Troosha - I wonder if in the long run, same sex marriages will be any more
stable than heterosexual marriages?
As it stands now; of the few jurisdictions in the world that allow same sex marriage, it has not been in practice long enough to glean useful statistics. The best number in terms of how many same sex marriages have ended in divorce worldwide (as of 2007) is about 20% but there are some obvious problems with this number. The most obvious is the difference in comparative heterosexual divorce rates from country to country making the comparison of 20% to 55% unfair. In other words; not all of the countries that allow same sex marriage have divorce rates as high as 55% with Sweden being the one exception.
We can also assume that there is a novelty or honeymoon period amongst same sex partnerships newly granted the right to marry. It may take as long as 10 years before we have any statistics that are useful. By that time we will see if partnerships that generally do not have the welfare of children holding them together will endure to the same extent as heterosexual marriages. It is probably a good thing that divorce rates are not relevant to the right to marry.
posted by
gomedome
on November 16, 2008 at 6:51 PM
| link to this | reply
You have expressed very well in a nutshell what we all have been trying to
say all along.
A very good summation.
Now, if only more people would see.
posted by
Xeno-x
on November 16, 2008 at 3:58 PM
| link to this | reply
gomedome
Fundamentalists may be able to site chapter and verse as to where the Bible states same sex relationships are a sin (I would not be one such person) but you can read just about anything into the bible to affirm or align with your prejudices. I think in some instance the use of the word “marriage” when it comes to same sex relationships is what makes people skittish or causes them run for their bibles to justify their discomfort with a subject they know nothing about. Perhaps if it was referred to as a union -perhaps if they just quit the hyperventilating and tried to open their minds to the notion that two people regardless of gender or colour can, and do, share and experience thriving and nurturing relationships. Heterosexuals have certainly screwed up the so called sanctity of marriage as evidenced with a divorce rate in excess of 55%+ - why not let the homosexuals put us to shame?
posted by
Troosha
on November 16, 2008 at 3:21 PM
| link to this | reply