Is Homosexuality Genetic?

[Benedict108]

Neolithic it wasn’t a charge against you . I hope you didn’t take it that way. It just seems to happen so often on the forums is all.

Pax.

 

[SFTor]

If the material you are using in the Wikipedia article is itself cited, then there’s no problem. However, to save further argument on this issue:

National Geographic: Homosexual Activity Among Animals Stirs Debate

Birds do it, bees do it, even educated fleas do it. So go the lyrics penned by U.S. songwriter Cole Porter.

Porter, who first hit it big in the 1920s, wouldn’t risk parading his homosexuality in public. In his day “the birds and the bees” generally meant only one thing—sex between a male and female.

But, actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.

Roy and Silo, two male chinstrap penguins at New York’s Central Park Zoo have been inseparable for six years now. They display classic pair-bonding behavior—entwining of necks, mutual preening, flipper flapping, and the rest. They also have sex, while ignoring potential female mates.

Wild birds exhibit similar behavior. There are male ostriches that only court their own gender, and pairs of male flamingos that mate, build nests, and even raise foster chicks.

Filmmakers recently went in search of homosexual wild animals as part of a National Geographic Ultimate Explorer documentary about the female’s role in the mating game. (The film, Girl Power, will be screened in the U.S this Saturday at 8 p.m. ET, 5 p.m PT on MSNBC TV.)

The team caught female Japanese macaques engaged in intimate acts which, if observed in humans, would be in the X-rated category.

“The homosexual behavior that goes on is completely baffling and intriguing,” says National Geographic Ultimate Explorer correspondent, Mireya Mayor. “You would have thought females that want to be mated, especially over their fertile period, would be seeking out males.”

Well, perhaps, in a roundabout way, they are seeking males, suggests primatologist Amy Parish.

She argues that female macaques may enhance their social position through homosexual intimacy which in turn influences breeding success. Parish says, “Taking something that’s nonreproductive, like mounting another female—if it leads to control of a resource or acquisition of a resource or a good alliance partner, that could directly impact your reproductive success.”

Well, then. Far juicier than my bloodless wikipedia quote.

 

[SFTor]

Neolithic it wasn’t a charge against you . I hope you didn’t take it that way. It just seems to happen so often on the forums is all.

Pax.

Hmmm. That was quick. Is Neolithic known as a somewhat prickly intellectual opponent?

 

[Neolithic]

Neolithic it wasn’t a charge against you . I hope you didn’t take it that way. It just seems to happen so often on the forums is all.

Pax.

No, I was just pointing out that specific quotes, facts, what have you, taken from a Wikipedia article, so long as they’re cited and you can track the citation down, should be no problem. But I agree - using an entire Wikipedia entry itself to prove a point on. say, the Trial of Socrates, is ridiculous.

Back to the issue at hand, however: Homosexuality is rather common in the wild. So, what does that tell us? Well, it could indicate a few different things: 1). Because homosexuality occurs in the wild, it’s likely to carry over to humans across evolutionary lines; thus, homosexuality may in fact be innate; or 2). Wild animals may engage in homosexual activity for entirely different reasons - such as making the females fecund - and it could have no evolutionary impact whatsoever.

I have my own personal and professional opinion on the matter, but it would take too long to explain.

 

[SFTor]

No, I was just pointing out that specific quotes, facts, what have you, taken from a Wikipedia article, so long as they’re cited and you can track the citation down, should be no problem. But I agree - using an entire Wikipedia entry itself to prove a point on. say, the Trial of Socrates, is ridiculous.

Back to the issue at hand, however: Homosexuality is rather common in the wild. So, what does that tell us? Well, it could indicate a few different things: 1). Because homosexuality occurs in the wild, it’s likely to carry over to humans across evolutionary lines; thus, homosexuality may in fact be innate; or 2). Wild animals may engage in homosexual activity for entirely different reasons - such as making the females fecund - and it could have no evolutionary impact whatsoever.

I have my own personal and professional opinion on the matter, but it would take too long to explain.

I have a simple point of view: I have several homosexual friends, and they have had an extremely hard time coming to terms with it and admitting it, even long after everyone around them knew.

It proves nothing, I know, but seeing their difficulties with admitting to being homosexual made it appear to me that this was nature forcing itself upon them, no matter how socially unpleasant.

 

[Benedict108]

No, I was just pointing out that specific quotes, facts, what have you, taken from a Wikipedia article, so long as they’re cited and you can track the citation down, should be no problem. But I agree - using an entire Wikipedia entry itself to prove a point on. say, the Trial of Socrates, is ridiculous.

Back to the issue at hand, however: Homosexuality is rather common in the wild. So, what does that tell us? Well, it could indicate a few different things: 1). Because homosexuality occurs in the wild, it’s likely to carry over to humans across evolutionary lines; thus, homosexuality may in fact be innate; or 2). Wild animals may engage in homosexual activity for entirely different reasons - such as making the females fecund - and it could have no evolutionary impact whatsoever.

I have my own personal and professional opinion on the matter, but it would take too long to explain.

Like you I have my opinions, but I see this thread overall going nowhere…LOL! We are now on page 18 and no one is about to change opinions on anything. I have been reading it on occassion. Both you and Arandur seemed to have had a very long conversation and if you both didn’t cover all the points, I don’t know what is left .

Pax tecum.

 

[Neolithic]

Like you I have my opinions, but I see this thread overall going nowhere…LOL! We are now on page 18 and no one is about to change opinions on anything. I have been reading it on occassion. Both you and Arandur seemed to have had a very long conversation and if you both didn’t cover all the points, I don’t know what is left .

Pax tecum.

I think you’re probably right. This is an issue much like abortion; people will argue and argue, debate and debate, but when it’s all said and done, people walk away with the same opinions they had when it started.

 

[Neolithic]

I have a simple point of view: I have several homosexual friends, and they have had an extremely hard time coming to terms with it and admitting it, even long after everyone around them knew.

It proves nothing, I know, but seeing their difficulties with admitting to being homosexual made it appear to me that this was nature forcing itself upon them, no matter how socially unpleasant.

I agree it’s forced upon them; no doubt. I simply do not believe sexual orientation is a choice; I’m skeptical about whether or not genetics plays a large role, but that’s to be expected of a psychologist (lol). I think there are both biological and environmental factors at work.

Sigmund Freud, for example, believed that everyone was born a bisexual and either became gay or straight based on their early childhood experiences. This may seem absurd, given the small number of homosexuals in the United States, but keep in mind that in some cultures, homosexuality is extremely common. If you read the discussion between me and Ar, you’ll know that it was terribly common in Ancient Greece.

Regardless of the cause, I don’t believe homosexuals should be encouraged to change if they don’t want to (mostly because I don’t think conversion therapy is conducive) and I don’t believe homosexuality is harmful to society.

My motto is simple: If it’s not hurting anyone, then let it be.

 

[injo]

Dear Frinds,

reading your discussions or opinions on this topic makes me thing about the presence of Homosexual in the Church - as priests. some one asked me two months ago, what do you think of a homosexual become a priest? I was tried my best to asnwer this way, for me, there would be no problem as long as he does know himslef and to do his best to evorcome his limitation or weakness. I do not know if my answer was right or no. so, It is good also to hear from all of you regarding this matter. Tahnks!

injo

 

[jean8]

?Why do people always quote wikipedia? I understand it is accessible, but it is not a peer reviewed source or journal type source and is subject to error and has been challenged in the past. I wouldn’t call wikipedia authoritative, as is the case with any wiki. Wikis sometimes post opinion as fact.

isedj.org/isecon/2007/3123/ISECON.2007.Willison.txt

Bene,
On the subject of homosexuality, is it a sin? The Bible says ,‘yes.’ See Rom.1:22-32 God hates this lifestyle.
All christian churches teach this.

God bless,
jean8

 

[Neolithic]

Bene,
On the subject of homosexuality, is it a sin? The Bible says ,‘yes.’ See Rom.1:22-32 God hates this lifestyle.
All christian churches teach this.

God bless,
jean8

“God hates” is pretty strong.

 

[Benedict108]

Bene,
On the subject of homosexuality, is it a sin? The Bible says ,‘yes.’ See Rom.1:22-32 God hates this lifestyle.
All christian churches teach this.

God bless,
jean8

Did I ever say it wasn’t? My reference in that post was talking about wikipedia not being a valid source for authoritative information and my later posts merely stated that I had my own opinion which I didn’t not care to discuss further, as all points had been covered on the board; however, if you wish to know my thoughts on the subject you can reference the earlier pages of this thread and see a conversation I had. Post #150, 160 and 165.

Pax tecum.

 

[Benedict108]

Bene,
On the subject of homosexuality, is it a sin? The Bible says ,‘yes.’ See Rom.1:22-32 God hates this lifestyle.
All christian churches teach this.

God bless,
jean8

I was just doing a bit of thinking…if you want to boster your point why stop at Romans?

1 Corinthians 6:9 -10
an nescitis quia iniqui regnum Dei non possidebunt nolite errare neque fornicarii neque idolis servientes neque adulteri

neque molles neque masculorum concubitores neque fures neque avari neque ebriosi neque maledici neque rapaces regnum Dei possidebunt

Translation:
Know you not that the unjust shall not possess the kingdom of God? Do not err: Neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers:

Nor the effeminate nor liers with mankind nor thieves nor covetous nor drunkards nor railers nor extortioners shall possess the kingdom of God.

But like I said earlier, I stated a position earlier in the thread. I didn’t use biblical verses, but a prayer as representation of the Church’s position. I am well aware of the sinfulness of the action and I do not contest it. As far as the genetic argument, I think all angles have been covered and no one is going to budge. I am not one to beat my head incessantly against the wall when people do not want to listen. Free will is a powerful thing. People can choose to accept or reject God, His teachings, or His Church. That is what most makes us like Him and not like animals. He has given us a soul and with that a gift to choose Him or reject Him. At this point, I have resigned myself to prayer. I trust in Him more than my own abilities; hence I leave it to Him now.

Pax tecum.

 

[goofyjim]

Bene,
On the subject of homosexuality, is it a sin? The Bible says ,‘yes.’ See Rom.1:22-32 God hates this lifestyle.
All christian churches teach this.

God bless,
jean8

Only the action is a sin. There is no sin in what is known today as the homosexual orientation. So the condition of homosexuality is harmless.

 

[Neolithic]

Hmmm. That was quick. Is Neolithic known as a somewhat prickly intellectual opponent?

HA! It was forever ago, but I just came across this.

The answer is this: No. I am not a prickly intellectual opponent.I don’t think I’m an idiot, but I do have some humility. I know what I know, and I know psychology. I’m a psychologist, so what do you expect?

I know mental illnesses. I’ve studied them and their characteristics and I know that homosexuality is NOT a mental illness. I don’t give a damn what people on this forum say, either. I have studies upon studies (I provided some of them earlier) which prove my conclusion. If that’s not good enough, too bad. That’s the science and that’s the fact of the matter. Either deal with it or remain ignorant. I frankly don’t care. And that’s my point.

And no, I’m not a homosexual. I’m a married man with five children.

Homosexual persons deal with so much junk from society, and it’s time it stops. They can’t help who they are - period. And simply quoting a few Biblical statements you **can’t **put into context won’t help your inerrant foolishness.

I love Jesus Christ and His mother Mary as much as anyone, and I try to follow His teachings. But I don’t go around spreading pure hate. We humans have minds and abilities because God gave them to us, yet, when confronted with science that proves homosexuality is NOT an illness and cannot be helped and is completely normal, it’s written off as liberalism run amok, notwithstanding the PROOF that God gave us the ability to FIND.

It’s asinine and it’s why so many people shy away from religion. Many Christians will wallow in their ignorance and go on being who they are, but someday they’'ll have to answer for it. And they can quote scripture after scripture that they don’t understand as justification, but the winds of justice will find them one day. That is a fact.

 

[buffalo]

HA! It was forever ago, but I just came across this.

The answer is this: No. I am not a prickly intellectual opponent.I don’t think I’m an idiot, but I do have some humility. I know what I know, and I know psychology. I’m a psychologist, so what do you expect?

I know mental illnesses. I’ve studied them and their characteristics and I know that homosexuality is NOT a mental illness. I don’t give a damn what people on this forum say, either. I have studies upon studies (I provided some of them earlier) which prove my conclusion. If that’s not good enough, too bad. That’s the science and that’s the fact of the matter. Either deal with it or remain ignorant. I frankly don’t care. And that’s my point.

And no, I’m not a homosexual. I’m a married man with five children.

Homosexual persons deal with so much junk from society, and it’s time it stops. They can’t help who they are - period. And simply quoting a few Biblical statements you **can’t **put into context won’t help your inerrant foolishness.

I love Jesus Christ and His mother Mary as much as anyone, and I try to follow His teachings. But I don’t go around spreading pure hate. We humans have minds and abilities because God gave them to us, yet, when confronted with science that proves homosexuality is NOT an illness and cannot be helped and is completely normal, it’s written off as liberalism run amok, notwithstanding the PROOF that God gave us the ability to FIND.

It’s asinine and it’s why so many people shy away from religion. Many Christians will wallow in their ignorance and go on being who they are, but someday they’'ll have to answer for it. And they can quote scripture after scripture that they don’t understand as justification, but the winds of justice will find them one day. That is a fact.

Do you live your life in a static sense. Do you want to do better? Do you want to please the Lord?

 

[fix]

I love Jesus Christ and His mother Mary as much as anyone, and I try to follow His teachings. But I don’t go around spreading pure hate. We humans have minds and abilities because God gave them to us, yet, when confronted with science that proves homosexuality is NOT an illness and cannot be helped and is completely normal, it’s written off as liberalism run amok, notwithstanding the PROOF that God gave us the ability to FIND.

It’s asinine and it’s why so many people shy away from religion. Many Christians will wallow in their ignorance and go on being who they are, but someday they’'ll have to answer for it. And they can quote scripture after scripture that they don’t understand as justification, but the winds of justice will find them one day. That is a fact.

Science cannot determine morality.

As for health and disease that to can have political influence. Please note how direct abortion is termed “therapeutic”.

 

[pathia]

Do you live your life in a static sense. Do you want to do better? Do you want to please the Lord?

No matter what we do, someone always wants more from us. It’s never enough, ever. Nothing we ever do is acceptable, it’s not enough, we have to try harder, we have to fix ourselves, we have to cure ourselves, we have to get married, we have to have kids. Have to have to have to have to.

I’m simply sick of it.

 

[buffalo]

No matter what we do, someone always wants more from us. It’s never enough, ever. Nothing we ever do is acceptable, it’s not enough, we have to try harder, we have to fix ourselves, we have to cure ourselves, we have to get married, we have to have kids. Have to have to have to have to.

I’m simply sick of it.

That is what God asks from **all **of us. Our journey to the cross is a difficult one indeed.

 

[pathia]

That is what God asks from **all **of us. Our journey to the cross is a difficult one indeed.

No, he does not. He asks me to be chaste, yet people ask for more than that, nothing is ever enough. They never leave me alone. I’m terrified to go to Church anymore, because as soon as they find out I’m chaste, they’re like ‘Well now you can go to X therapist and get cured and get married!’

How about, no?