All,
I have generally beleived that Homosexuality has had to do more with genes than anything else. That is not to say that I was fixated on that belief though, it was just something I tended to believe more than anything. The concept that being gay was a choice seemed more foreign to me for some reason, and plus I had seen more research indicating the "Nature" explanation than anything else. I was having a discussion about this with someone I know who explained that he had listened to someone giving a speech who admitted that he was once Gay. Basically through a combination of factors such as abuse, and other things, he had made the choice to be gay at some point. Then at another point, he had discovered his problem, and changed, and is now straight. Any thoughts on the matter? Have you been convinced one way or another by something you have read or heard?

-P

Personally, I believe being gay is not a choice, but how one is born (genes). From a religious standpoint, I think the sin factor kicks in at whether or not you choose to commit the act of intimacy, whatever that may be.

As a Christian, I think its fascinating that Jesus never mentioned it. He was far more preoccupied with the travesties of hypocrisy.

Hmmm, genes? I do not happen to believe that persons are born gay. I lean more toward some sort of social/family type thing. I certainly won't claim to have the answer but to imply that to be gay is a science would seem to imply that there is not a choice in the matter. I think people choose to be gay for reasons probably only known to them.

I think people are born gay.....when I say born gay I mean like it's
a chemical thing ya thing know? Thier mind responds to the same sex the same way that straight people minds respond to the opposite sex.

I also think that people can "become" gay over time. I think both.

Not all gays chose to be gay....it's just the way they are. And some gays chose it over a period of time.....a gradual acceptance.

However I have noticed that with females, especially the ones in HS and college......being gay is kind of like a social trend for some of them. Or being Bi or whatever. Not all females....just a good number of them...enough to notice the trend going on...that's all

Saying people are "born gay" is like saying then that some are born rich, some poor, some snobby, some just plain silly (of course, that one may be true). I won't get too religious in this thread but I doubt when God created man that he added a "gay gene" that could turn on at any moment without free will. I don't buy it and will admit that my mind is not real open on this subject. But hey, at least I was born adorable!!!

PS: As for your women are gay trend comments........That would be a result of social influence thus I would probably tend to agree more with that one.

In my humble opinion, it doesn't matter one way or the other. Life, Liberty and the persuit of happiness is a constitutional guarantee in my country and if someone wants to be gay, it's no one else darn business.

They should be treated no differantly then anyone else. If they are cruising the parks for sex, arrest them. You'd arrest a hooker for the same darn thing. If they are breaking no laws then how they live their lives is no ones business but their own.

I'm more concerned about the perverts who go around snooping into other peoples private sex lives and condemning the things they don't like. Now THATS some seriously sick behaviour.

Ofcourse, this is mho.

Wupy

That would be a result of social influence thus I would probably tend to agree more with that one.

Yup...it is. I think both are the case...born and enviormental.

I used to think only enviormental...but after reading some stuff and talking to my hot neighbor (ohhh if only she were straight) I think both now.

Im a chrisitan too. And sometimes it's like well....people are "animals" (let's not go there) and animals are not born gay.....so what makes humans different??? why are they "born" gay? if that is the case.

And my mother who used to teach said some of these 6 and 7 yr old boys are super fruity....I meant feminine. And thier households are liek redneck as ever....see my point?

I beg to differ, there are many documented case of animals that are gay. Now whether they are born that way or have simply made a lifestyle choice is something I don't know, but gay animals do exist.

Yup, that clears up the animal thing...thanks

I am Christian but I really never thought of humans as animals in that context. I understand the girly issue in guys is sometimes odd in some familys or social settings but I still don't think they are born that way. If I were to start believe in the born gay theory then I would have to think that men are born to like sports and thus born gay as they do seem awfully friendly to each other when playing sports.........

I am not too concerned what people do in the privacy of their own home and as consenting adults but gay or not, I did not go to the park for a porn show and parents should not have to worry about their kids be molested by nuts and yes, even priests.

I love when this topic comes up. The pro-gay people want you believe that being gay is natural. But they tend not to have the same view that humans are part of nature. If humans make a few species of animals go extinct, wouldn't that be natural too? Humans have to natural ability of invention, if one of them inventions destroy the planet (impossible, but what if?) wouldn't that be natural also?

Originally posted by Kidfinger
When it comes to the process of our likes and dislikes, even our sexual orientation, we must take into account both nature and nurture. It is really simple mathematics. 1+1=2. Nature + Nurture = personality.

Kidfinger, this was HIGHLY informative. Thank you very much for your contribution to this thread. You have given me much to study, and think about.

-P

The pheremone link is pretty persuasive. I think there is a perfectly logical reason to adapt to be attracted to the same sex. In populations where there are many men, or many women, or a social construction that limits your access to members of the opposite sex, homosexuality can lead to tangible benefits in safety, gifts, and acceptance.

Humans are animals, complicated animals certainly, but animals none the less.

Homosexuals, historically, do have children some of the time. Bisexuality likely came first and is overexpressed in some individuals. Bisexuality is a very good adaptation for a male if you need to survive in a competetive environment with a lot of other males. If you adapted an anger response to male pheremones, you would not last very long, unless you were Hercules.

Long term, the system worked itself out and we developed a setting for that behavior, because it was occasionally advantageous historically.

So in the end, I think Nature initially, but certainly not in every modern case. There are cases where psychological trauma or personal decision, or any number of other factors contribute to a desire to seek the company of members of the same sex.

I don't see any reason why society should object to it. How does it effect us, what others do in the privacy of their homes? I think the civilized thing to do is say "to each his own" and leave it at that.

Originally posted by postings


Kidfinger, this was HIGHLY informative. Thank you very much for your contribution to this thread. You have given me much to study, and think about.

-P

You are quite welcome. This is actually an abridged version of a thesis I wrote about a month ago for a Comp class. I thought it would be relavant so I reworked it to shorten the length. It was originally 14 pages

I am glad that I could stimulate your mind

Originally posted by postings
Hey Byrd, those links were enormously informative, thank you. I keep coming back to a particular sentiment, tha since there is no way for me to know what it is like to truly be gay (since I am not) there is no way for me to walk in the other's shoes. Therefore, I find it increasingly difficult to decide one way or another, since there is really no way to test it. To make matters worse, I see points on both sides of the matter. I am really interested in people's insights though . . .

Well, you could, actually.

If sexuality is nurture (and not nature) than you and I and everyone else could change who they were attracted to simply by "reprogramming."

In other words, you and I could be (through whatever process) made to become gay.

If sexuality is nature, then no amount of programming could turn us into people interested in the same sex.

I'm all for the "nature" explaination, personally. I can't imagine any amount of training that would get another woman to smell pleasant/attractive to me (I am on the VERY Far end of the Kensey sexuality scale... so far there, that I simply can't tell if a woman is attractive or not. Now, guys... Ohyeah! But women... I have as little interest in them as I do a fishing lure.)

I do believe there's an overlap (just like there's a range of heights), but that unless the person is completely bisexual, no amount of motivation can get them to change their sexuality. I have known bisexuals who went into longterm heterosexual relationships and I've known them to be in longterm homosexual relationships.

But for someone with a non-bisexual orientation (homosexual or heterosexual) I don't think they can be completely and permanently converted.