possible discovery of a Gay gene?

Scientists may be on the verge of discovering a physical basis for homosexuality, that can be passed down from generation to generation. This discovery would be a major breakthrough for the civil rights of gay people, since they could no longer be denied equal treatment under the law in the U.S.

www.unknowncountry.com...

I wonder.......!

[edit on 15/10/2004 by rai76]

[edit on 15/10/2004 by rai76]

Hmmm interesting, however there is something that troubles me if they are to find this gene ? How could it explain people who are of a camp nature, and sound it as well. you cant have a half a gene unless these gene's were to somehow be able to counteract the effects of the other, to an extent.....HMMMM,..................

Im not sure if anyone can back me up on this but I heard that they did a study on bulls and cattle. And they kep them in seclusion with a group of bulls and kept them until homosexual tendencies began to develop. And they had the bulls mate with a cow and their male bulls ended up having homosexual tendencies as well. So I think thats very interesting. But hey as long as they have no intention with getting it on with me (homosexuals) Let it be!

As another person on this site suggested, the increase in homosexuality / asexuality might be natures way of reducing or levelling out the human population. A guy can't exactly get another guy pregnant now can he? Or at least not yet :S

Well, here's something you never hear anyone talk about. If homosexuality is a physical trait, that physical trait could be corrected, perhaps through gene therapy.

That leads to some interesting things. "It can be fixed. I can be normal. You can be normal."

Good point Taibunsuu, and that brings up a whole seperate issue. What defines normal what what is in need of 'correction.' In another thread based on two women who wanted to conceive a baby that was deaf, the idea of government involvement in reproduction was posed. Should there be a constant physical trait that was able to be corrected, we would have to accept with certainty that homosexuality is abnormal and in need of correction. Once this was in place, would parents be ridiculed for not allowing their child to be corrected, and would homosexual adults opt for the proceedure to correct their tendencies? Would it then make homosexuals more shunned and disliked?

If this was a genetic fix and not a surgical one, what else would the 'fix' effect, and how much other damage would one accept to not have a gay child? Tinkering with genetics and DNA is so new that while we think we know what we're doing, we could be setting a trigger for a new genetic disease or trait, or creating a child that cannot see green or some other weird result.

Does homosexuality need to be corrected, and should it be? For those who say "it's not god's will for homosexuals to exist!" then why are they here? If it's not "god's will" to pick blonde and green eyed babies, then its not "god's will" to decide the gender or orientation of your child either. Take god out of it, and still the question remains if its morally right to even go in and surgically "fix" a child who has no say in the matter and might be perfectly happy and contented being homosexual.

If homosexuality is to be considered a defect or disorder after this physical difference is found, that might not be a good thing for civil rights of homosexuals. It's possible it might offer more legal protection against discrimination, but it opens the door for more subtle discrimination and pressure to be "fixed."

This is definitely something to keep an eye on...

Originally posted by LordGoofus
As another person on this site suggested, the increase in homosexuality / asexuality might be natures way of reducing or levelling out the human population. A guy can't exactly get another guy pregnant now can he?

Or at least not yet :S

I do believe this, that dosen't make it right. I wish I could prove it.

APproach this or any study like that with extreme caution guys. These scientist have agendas to promote! To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda. If they can prove that homosexuality is natural, even if they just claim it on fuzzy evidence they can use that to attack the church. I know many members here on ats are not religious but even if your not dont jsut jump to accept these facts.

Mabe they can find the peodofile gene too. Seems to be a high ratio of peodofiles from anglo saxon type bloodline. If someone had a gay gene, it's very unlikely it would be passed on. Since the anus can't bear children

[edit on 17-10-2004 by Thinker]

Seems to be a high ratio of peodofiles from anglo saxon type bloodline

It's probably no higher than any other race. Peadophiles are probably attracted to young children due to the whole "wanting what you can't have" and the attraction of innocence. I don't think it's a genetic defect. For example from memory I think it is in South Africa where men rape babies almost fresh from the womb for various reasons. I think if South Africa's case it's because they believe sex with the youngest virgin they can find will cure them of AIDS. There are a few other tribes / races which see sex with the youngest child you can find as desirable but I can't tell you off the top of my head who they are.

Originally posted by Thinker
Mabe they can find the peodofile gene too. Seems to be a high ratio of peodofiles from anglo saxon type bloodline. If someone had a gay gene, it's very unlikely it would be passed on. Since the anus can't bear children

First, just to make sure it's pointed out, pedophelia has NOTHING to do with homosexuality. Pedophiles can be anyone, and they can pray on anyone. I would feel more comfortable leaving my child with a gay neighbor than the single hetero 45 yr old man neighbor with a passion for christian rock or my own grandfather. The myth than homosexuals are pedophiles is another way for people to excuse their homophobia. Are you worried about pedophiles? Look to your own family where a majority of sexual abuses happen.

Yes, there are a high number of pedophiles reported from the "anglo bloodline" in the US because the "anglo bloodline" types are in a majority here. Perhaps close knit minority groups in the US are unlikely to report abuses due to language issues, fear of law enforcement, or being shunned by their own family for bringing shame by reporting. There is pedophilia everywhere and it's done for reasons from everything from lust, to fear, to custom, to common acceptance. What we define as repulsive and illegal here is not necessarily the same elsewhere. The South African baby-raping thread is one example, young child brides, fear of reporting, and on and on.

Finally to the gay gene, if it exists, being passed or not... homosexual people DO sleep with heterosexual people. They also desire families and children just like heterosexual people do. Men who are afraid or ashamed of their homosexuality often marry and hide their feelings for years, as Taibunsuu mentioned above. They often have children and lead a "normal" life. Many homosexual couples - both men and women - desire children and arrange for surrogates, or artificial insemination to bear their children that carry the genetic material of at least one of the homosexual parents.

It has nothing to do with as$holes (self-censor goes here, but it would have been a great pun ) and their ability to bear children.

Originally posted by Quicksilver
APproach this or any study like that with extreme caution guys. These scientist have agendas to promote! To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda. If they can prove that homosexuality is natural, even if they just claim it on fuzzy evidence they can use that to attack the church. I know many members here on ats are not religious but even if your not dont jsut jump to accept these facts.

Excellent point about scientists having agendas, but....

Not all scientists are anti-religion, and they aren't all working towards the same agenda. They could be paid by a political group, or by the opposing side. They could be financed by drug companies eager to introduce a new drug that "cures" a condition that has been "proven" by those scientists to have a physical and therefore curable basis. They might have personal beliefs that they are trying to prove and present the results of their studies in a way that emphasizes their viewpoints. Everybody has an agenda - it's just not always obvious what it is.

It's not always religion itself that people disagree with, it's often the way its presented and forced on others. Perhaps it's that those against religion are the very ones that have been attacked by it.

While you suggest that everyone not be quick to accept facts based on wanting to attack the church, I invite you to also not be so quick to dismiss facts or research or an idea based on what it *might* mean to "the church." When I read the above article, my toughts went towards social reactions to this piece based on homophobia and social acceptance and not about any possible threat to "the church." My acceptance of the facts in any article comes from my understanding, or lack of, of what is being done, my tendency to question the source and possible problems with the study, and my own beliefs on how people come about. Wanting to blindly protect "the church" and unwillingness to challenge it's ideals smacks of the middle ages and denial that the earth was round and the earth revolves around the sun. Astronomy has come a long way, and "the church" has survived all these years. I don't think science with all of its proofs and certainties will effect those who believe in "the church" and rattle their faith to the point of abandonment. "The church" should embrace science as working to understand the workings of "god" and to make sure they are always in the debate and at the cutting edge of discovery and the current paradigm. Being involved is a great way to stick around, and to gain the respect of people who aren't a member of "the church."

To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda

And why destroying the belief of God is a bad thing? Religions is the source of problems on this Earth.


[edit on 17-10-2004 by masterp]

Originally posted by masterp

To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda

And why destroying the belief of God is a bad thing? Religions is the source of problems on this Earth.


[edit on 17-10-2004 by masterp]

Let me just put it this way: What do you think society would be like with out morals? People would just patrol the streets with Uzi's shooting each other without somebody telling them murder is a bad thing, not just against the law. I agree Quicksilver we should definatly view this info with catioun. Like somebody said it's unusual that homosexuality hasn't died out.

Quicksilver,
And Your agenda is to promote God and ofuscate all FACTS to the contrary.

If you don't like the results of current science get your arse in a lab and do the grind work it takes to gather and analyze data.

Science is based on facts and truth and it will outlive and surpass your puny religious beliefs.

cyberdude78, your assuption that everyone will use intimidation of guns and violence without God is cynical and very possibly illogical. Guns come from technology and science as does most advanced weaponry. I think people are beginning to realize that for intellectual supremacy it takes optimized open dialogue and experimentation. The best civilian living and best military preparedness and useage is base on creativity, intelligent actions and strategies.

Gentle and thoughtful people can possess and use guns too.
.

When I mentioned guns it was an example. The concept is that if a person knows they can break a law with out being caught then whats holding them back. Even if God really doesn't exist it's still nice having a nice set of morals to hold people back. When people start getting selfish that's when society begins to crumble. Anyhow its not like it matters what you believe in. I just find it comforting that theirs more than just state and federal laws preventing people from commiting unethical acts. In the mean time Quicksilver has a good point and I think it should be respected, not attacked.

If this study proves what it's trying to prove then this truly will be a leap forward for homosexuals. But still even if this proves false homosexuals shouldn't be steroetyped.

Originally posted by slank
Quicksilver,
And Your agenda is to promote God and ofuscate all FACTS to the contrary.

If you don't like the results of current science get your arse in a lab and do the grind work it takes to gather and analyze data.

Science is based on facts and truth and it will outlive and surpass your puny religious beliefs.

Well first off im not a scientist ill be the first to admit that Gods given me different talents. Yep maybe my agenda is to promote God im not ashamed of that but im not goin to shove it down your throat or ignore facts.

YOu statement tho is really funny. Science is based on facts. Yep soem of it is but most of it is based on asumptions and hypothesis. I do agree that alot of science is fact but much of the stuff that is big issues is in shady territory. Also one closing thing. Science will outilve and surpass my religious beliefs fine then believe that. Many scientific discoveries have been stated by my religion and then discovered by the scientist. Also science also proves my religion in many aspects. Have fun. You will find out in the end who is right.

Originally posted by Quicksilver
APproach this or any study like that with extreme caution guys. These scientist have agendas to promote! To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda. If they can prove that homosexuality is natural, even if they just claim it on fuzzy evidence they can use that to attack the church. I know many members here on ats are not religious but even if your not dont jsut jump to accept these facts.

This I'm curious about. I'd like to hear more about the agenda. Why would science or the financial contributors of science want to destroy the belief in God? I think defining the motive would add more strength to the argument.

I agree otherwise. I thought it was already proven in an earlier news article I read just to find out further on it said - Some scientists believe they may have a chance at possibly validating the theory that...blah blah blah...
Either way, it would not change my connection with God.

i noticed that there were no references to published papers or anything like that. The strongest evidence was a correlation between being gay and being a younger boy with many siblings and a number of older brothers. Seems like a good start, but not much else.

quicksilver
To destroy the belief of GOd is thier agenda.

What in the world makes you think the people doing this research aren't pius christians or any other religion?

And what about this study disproves god?

Yep maybe my agenda is to promote God im not ashamed of that but im not goin to shove it down your throat or ignore facts.

UIf you have an agenda to promote, then by definition you are going to ignore facts. And thats what you are doing. You are saying, without justification, to discount these results (not even noticing apparently that nothing particularly 'powerful' has come out of any of these studies).

Many scientific discoveries have been stated by my religion and then discovered by the scientist

Name some. What religion is that?

Also science also proves my religion in many aspects

Science has not proven any single religious beleif, ever. Indeed, how could it. It would have to be able to disprove them at least potentially. What beleifs are you talking about?

Yep soem of it is but most of it is based on asumptions and hypothesis

Yeah, thats the point. Observations of nature and the evidence are made and then people posit hypotheses and test them. As long as they aren't refuted, then they stand as science.

saint4god
Either way, it would not change my connection with God.

Indeed, why would it? How could any experiment or natural fact in any way validate or invalidate a matter of faith? If it could, it wouldn't be faith.

cyberdude78
What do you think society would be like with out morals?

Why would god be necessary for people to act moral?

without somebody telling them murder is a bad thing

Why wouldn't anyone tell them murder is bad?

The concept is that if a person knows they can break a law with out being caught then whats holding them back

What does god have to do with that? Law enforcement will provide that effect.

If this study proves what it's trying to prove then this truly will be a leap forward for homosexuals.

Its just looking at the inheritance of a particular trait that is in part determined genetically. It would 'validate' the idea that homosexuals are 'born gay', but not do much else.

[edit on 20-10-2004 by Nygdan]

If this is true then it PROVES that GOD has a hand in creating homosexuals.

I suppose we don't know God's plan as well as some of us think, do we?