Being gay is in your genes

[livingwordunity]

My wife is a scientist and she conducts studies for a living. You are way off base in thinking there is some kind of “agenda” driving research.

However this forms a basis for your invincible argument, preventing any fuller understanding in reading studies.

So, you will only trust those studies which confirm your preconceived notion.

I’m only suspicious of scientific findings when it comes to highly politicized issues such as this one. For obvious reasons, the “gay” lobby has been driving this search for the so-called “gay gene” from the get-go. And the scientists who are looking for a “gay gene” are looking for it because they are desperate to find one. That alone is how they, whether intentionally or not, can let their bias influence the way they conduct their research and the way they interpret their findings. This is called experimenter bias. Even with peer reviewing, since just about the entire scientific community has been eager to find this “gay gene” they all have the same bias.

 

[John_Savage]

Can psychological factors and/or socially-imposed behaviors influence gene expression (epigenetics)?

 

[Catolico65]

I’m only suspicious of scientific findings when it comes to highly politicized issues such as this one. For obvious reasons, the “gay” lobby has been driving this search for the so-called “gay gene” from the get-go. And the scientists who are looking for a “gay gene” are looking for it because they are desperate to find one. That alone is how they, whether intentionally or not, can let their bias influence the way they conduct their research and the way they interpret their findings. This is called experimenter bias. Even with peer reviewing, since just about the entire scientific community has been eager to find this “gay gene” they all have the same bias.

 

[EIF5A]

I’m only suspicious of scientific findings when it comes to highly politicized issues such as this one. For obvious reasons, the “gay” lobby has been driving this search for the so-called “gay gene” from the get-go. And the scientists who are looking for a “gay gene” are looking for it because they are desperate to find one. That alone is how they, whether intentionally or not, can let their bias influence the way they conduct their research and the way they interpret their findings. This is called experimenter bias. Even with peer reviewing, since just about the entire scientific community has been eager to find this “gay gene” they all have the same bias.

I think it would be good to separate gay activists versus people who study the biological basis of gender, sexuality, etc.

No scientist, afaik, would claim that there’s a single gay gene. The gay lobby takes a tidbit of scientific finding to make their claim that the scientists did not make.

There’s a distinction between identifying allelic variation of a single gene that causes homosexuality versus there being genetic component to homosexuality.

The lack of a “gay gene” does not mean lack of genetic component that contributes to homosexuality.

 

[buffalo]

Genes are the hardware, epigenetics the software.

Therapy Saved My Life

 

[jimmy]

There is a contradiction in the article. On the one hand it says ‘it isn’t a choice to be gay’, on the other hand it says ‘there are other factors beyond genes that affect sexual orientation’. The problem is if you are going to say it isn’t a choice you better know all the other possible causes or mitigating factors that may lead someone to be gay so that you can eliminate choice.

 

[donsnow]

Regardless of whether or not a person is born with attraction to the same sex that does not mean that “gay marriage” should be legalized. People can be born with tendencies towards all sorts of sin but that doesn’t mean that the sin should be endorsed in law.

and, Amen.

 

[EIF5A]

Can psychological factors and/or socially-imposed behaviors influence gene expression (epigenetics)?

All three things, “psychological factors”, “socially-imposed behaviors”, and “gene expression”, are large and nebulous in their own right. So it’s hard to put things into perspective when so many scenarios can be envisioned.

I guess never say never.

If PE class is “socially-imposed behavior” during school, I suppose the physical exercise will result in expression of genes to adapt to energy usage.

 

[EIF5A]

There is a contradiction in the article. On the one hand it says ‘it isn’t a choice to be gay’, on the other hand it says ‘there are other factors beyond genes that affect sexual orientation’. The problem is if you are going to say it isn’t a choice you better know all the other possible causes or mitigating factors that may lead someone to be gay so that you can eliminate choice.

Choice is a willful, deliberate decision-making. Like engaging in same-sexual activity.

Just because the factors are beyond genes (e.g., hormone exposure) doesn’t mean someone made a choice.

It isn’t a choice because it is self-evident that no one chooses (a deliberate, conscious act) to be attracted to the same sex. There doesn’t need to be elimination of every other possible reason.

 

[JamesCaruso]

(sorry for chiming in uninvited)

I don’t think most people who research the cause of homosexuality actually care enough about morality or spiritual matters to even have a desire to make homosexual acts morally justifiable. Things just are, whether the cause is biological, psychological, or both. Morally does not factor in. God is not even on the radar. (Just my opinion of most biological research.)

Many Christians feel the need to prove that homosexuality has no biological basis. Why? It’s not like one day, a biological explanation will do away with Church teachings on morality. Biology does not justify or explain morality.

But I remember when the arguments first started coming out on the part of gay activists many decades ago. It seemed then that much research was done with the sole purpose in mind of justifying homosexuality as normal behavior. In those days, homosexual behavior was a crime on the books of many jurisdictions, and almost universally condemned in our country. Now we have a much different social atmosphere, one that is more than accepting of it, but in many cases promoting it.

 

[frobert]

Genes are the hardware, epigenetics the software.

Therapy Saved My Life

Please be aware that NARTH has been discredited across the board. They lost their state recognition for failure to pay their dues for several years. They lost their non-for-profit federal status.

Questions to ask NARTH: Why haven’t you paid your dues? Why did you loose you non-for-profit status. Why do no most if not all main stream mental health associations consider your form of therapy unethical? Where does your credibility and legitimacy come from? Do you have any certifications besides your own for conversion therapy? Who certifies the therapists you recommend? How long is their training program for psychotherapy?

 

[Catolico65]

I think it would be good to separate gay activists versus people who study the biological basis of gender, sexuality, etc.

No scientist, afaik, would claim that there’s a single gay gene. The gay lobby takes a tidbit of scientific finding to make their claim that the scientists did not make.

There’s a distinction between identifying allelic variation of a single gene that causes homosexuality versus there being genetic component to homosexuality.

The lack of a “gay gene” does not mean lack of genetic component that contributes to homosexuality.

With all due respect you have a very naive understanding of research. I did research in a masters program in college and bias certainly does get involved in research, whether you accept it or not.

BTW, the way you throw around biological terms it would appear you are a research geneticist. Is that the case?

 

[buffalo]

Former APA President Condemns APA for Barring Research

 

[Catolico65]

Please be aware that NARTH has been discredited across the board. They lost their state recognition for failure to pay their dues for several years. They lost their non-for-profit federal status.

Questions for NARTH: where does your credibility and legitimacy come from? Do you have any certifications besides your own for conversion therapy? Who certifies the therapists you recommend? How long is your training program for therapists?

That has nothing to do with credibility my friend.

Furthermore, we know the gay lobby hates NARTH so we know they must be good.

 

[buffalo]

With all due respect you have a very naive understanding of research. I did research in a masters program in college and bias certainly does get involved in research, whether you accept it or not.

BTW, the way you throw around biological terms it would appear you are a research geneticist. Is that the case?

If they ever find it genetic it would be a defective mutation.

 

[Catolico65]

It isn’t a choice because it is self-evident that no one chooses (a deliberate, conscious act) to be attracted to the same sex.

While this may be true this does not mean by inference that homosexuality is biological as that would be false logic.

 

[Catolico65]

If they ever find it genetic it would be a defective mutation.

Real science has taught us it cannot be genetic. Furthermore, there isn’t one definitive gene that can cause a person to sin. Lay people in the sciences with an agenda take suggestive and preliminary studies and promote them as fact.

 

[EIF5A]

With all due respect you have a very naive understanding of research. I did research in a masters program in college and bias certainly does get involved in research, whether you accept it or not.

BTW, the way you throw around biological terms it would appear you are a research geneticist. Is that the case?

(To avoid pride, I will not disclose my educational qualifications.)

Here’s the thing about your interaction with me (and a few other people). We’re talking past each other. No one is saying bias does not exist. I even concede that the gay lobby takes one thing and makes it seem like another. Bias wasn’t even the main point of my last response.

But I digress.

I don’t study human genetics. But being around molecular biology, I do have to come across it.

 

[frobert]

That has nothing to do with credibility my friend.

Furthermore, we know the gay lobby hates NARTH so we know they must be good.

It has nothing to do with any gay lobby? I do not belong to any gay lobby even though I am empathic to them as I am to all groups fighting for what they perceive are their civil rights. Even though there is little that we agree on I have continuously attempted to be both empathic and support of you, I even recommended a book that supports your core beliefs but not necessarily mine.

This paragraph is not for you, it is for people considering therapy. Anyone undertaking therapy should know about their therapist’s training, education, supervision, and professional affiliations. Therapy can be dangerous when conducted by people who have a 3 month certificate on the wall and do not know what they are doing? I have treated therapy causalities. Trying to establish trust with someone who has been so wounded in therapy is the most difficult task that I have undertaken. You owe it to yourself to ask the right questions.

 

[estesbob]

The lie of pretending to not be attracted/tempted to the same sex. A non-heterosexual husband may not cherish/love the wife as much as a heterosexual husband would. It would be best to be honest upfront, instead of hiding and falling to temptation and causing emotional pain for the wife when she finds out her husband had same-sex extramarital incidences.

In a perfect world, no one would sin. But there’s that pesky temptation and weakness of human nature that is a reality.

So not publicly proclaiming all my sinful desires is living a lie???