There’s No Gay Gene, Says Scientists

[LisaA]

Sex is not always about sexual desire…it can also be about dominance, power, control, stress relief, a bargaining tool, etc. Sandusky could very well be a heterosexual. There is no umbiased objective way to determine attractions. It could be just as likely that he was attracted to the power and control over the boys who were easy targets and sex was the expression of that power and control.

Really? I don’t think there is any indication that a man who preys ONLY upon young men is actually a heterosexual. The problem in the Church were with respect to homosexual priests preying on young men. They could have just as easily exerted power or control over little girls.

I would bet pretty big money that Sandusky was a closeted homosexual who deliberately set himself up to have opportunities to spend time with boys. He, unlike the priests, was clearly a pedophile as well. The boys were young, not teenagers.

Again that Sandusky or that disgraced governor or several men I know are married does not mean they are heterosexual. They are able to function in a heterosexual relationship but the real attraction and fulfillment is with other males.

At any rate not sure of your point. Maybe I just don’t understand it.
Lisa

 

[Dawnia]

At any rate not sure of your point. Maybe I just don’t understand it.
Lisa

The point was that sex is not always about attraction. And there is not an unbiased objective way to confirm if someone is homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual. Sexual acts alone do not determine orientation.

 

[estesbob]

Really? I don’t think there is any indication that a man who preys ONLY upon young men is actually a heterosexual. The problem in the Church were with respect to homosexual priests preying on young men. They could have just as easily exerted power or control over little girls.

I would bet pretty big money that Sandusky was a closeted homosexual who deliberately set himself up to have opportunities to spend time with boys. He, unlike the priests, was clearly a pedophile as well. The boys were young, not teenagers.

Again that Sandusky or that disgraced governor or several men I know are married does not mean they are heterosexual. They are able to function in a heterosexual relationship but the real attraction and fulfillment is with other males.

At any rate not sure of your point. Maybe I just don’t understand it.
Lisa

Very little of the Sexual abuse by Priests was pedophilia. 88% of the abuse was homosexual rape of post pubescent males.

 

[LisaA]

The point was that sex is not always about attraction. And there is not an unbiased objective way to confirm if someone is homosexual, heterosexual or bisexual. Sexual acts alone do not determine orientation.

Still lost as to your point and how it relates to this thread. Based on your statement NO ONE could be defined as homosexual or heterosexual because even if they haven’t batted for the other team, well it might happen someday.

Quite honestly if a male focuses on other males exclusively or even almost exclusively, I believe he’s a homosexual. As I’ve said, in the horse show world I had a lot of close interaction with homosexuals and a fair number of them had had heterosexual encounters or even relationships but they were clearly homosexual by virtue of their preference for males and lack of interest in females.

Maybe ringil or other professional in the mental health field can provide a definition. But lacking that, I think actions speak louder than words or thoughts in this case.

Lisa

 

[epan]

Very little of the Sexual abuse by Priests was pedophilia. 88% of the abuse was homosexual rape of post pubescent males.

Where did you get this statistic? From what I can find, 73% were under the age of 14. The remainder were under 18.

The largest group of alleged victims (50.9%) was between the ages of 11 and 14, 27.3% were 15-17, 16% were 8-10 and nearly 6% were under age 7. Overall, 81% of victims were male and 19% female. Male victims tended to be older than female victims. Over 40% of all victims were males between the ages of 11 and 14.

Here is a link to a study of the demographics, giving a lot of detail, as far as it could be ascertained at the time of the study:

philvaz.com/apologetics/PriestAbuseScandal.htm

 

[LisaA]

Where did you get this statistic? From what I can find, 73% were under the age of 14. The remainder were under 18.

The largest group of alleged victims (50.9%) was between the ages of 11 and 14, 27.3% were 15-17, 16% were 8-10 and nearly 6% were under age 7. Overall, 81% of victims were male and 19% female. Male victims tended to be older than female victims. Over 40% of all victims were males between the ages of 11 and 14.

Here is a link to a study of the demographics, giving a lot of detail, as far as it could be ascertained at the time of the study:

philvaz.com/apologetics/PriestAbuseScandal.htm

Read the Jay Report. It has statistics dating back to the 1950s
Lisa

 

[Luna_Lovecraft]

Sandusky is CLEARLY a homosexual.

If Sandusky was gay or even bisexual he would have been having down low sex like every other deeply closted gay or bisexual man in America. He worked at a huge university; finding willing adult sex partners would not have all that difficult for him.

No, Sandusky is a CHILD RAPIST. Period. To suggest he is anything but a CHILD RAPISTis offensive and dismissive of his victims, to say nothing of actual gays who do not go around RAPING CHILDREN.

Respectfully, I suggest you do more research, beyond the stuff you did when you converted. I’ll get you started:

homosexuality == child rape

 

[epan]

Read the Jay Report. It has statistics dating back to the 1950s
Lisa

Do you mean the Fay report, commissioned by the Catholic Bishops? That is the link I provided, and the statistics I provided.

 

[LisaA]

If Sandusky was gay or even bisexual he would have been having down low sex like every other deeply closted gay or bisexual man in America. He worked at a huge university; finding willing adult sex partners would not have all that difficult for him.

No, Sandusky is a CHILD RAPIST. Period. To suggest he is anything but a CHILD RAPISTis offensive and dismissive of his victims, to say nothing of actual gays who do not go around RAPING CHILDREN.

Respectfully, I suggest you do more research, beyond the stuff you did when you converted. I’ll get you started:

homosexuality == child rape

Thanks for the clarification. OK you win, he was a homosexual child rapist. Some child rapists focus on the opposite sex. They would be heterosxual child rapists right? Both evil, both should be locked up forever.

Not sure what your point is unless it’s to try to elevate a strawman argument so you can knock it down. No one said homosexuality equals child rapist did they?

Lisa

 

[NeedsMercy]

Again that Sandusky or that disgraced governor or several men I know are married does not mean they are heterosexual.

Jim McGreevey?

 

[ReConverted]

After the fall of man, the scriptures tell us that sin and death entered into the world. We all have our crosses to bear, and they’re not all the same.

The Church affirms that homosexuals do not choose their sexual orientation:

“The Church has stated that homosexual desires or attractions themselves are not sinful. They are said to be “disordered” in the sense that they tempt one to do something that is sinful (i.e., the homosexual act), but temptations beyond one’s control are not considered sinful in and of themselves. For this reason, while the Church does oppose attempts to legitimize same-gender sexual acts, it also urges respect and love for those who do experience same-sex attractions; thus the Catholic Church is also opposed to persecutions and violence against persons with same-sex attractions, and the 1997 edition of the Catechism of the Catholic Church states that:
The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.[7]
The first edition, promulgated by John Paul II in 1992 with the apostolic constitution Fidei Depositum, contained the line “They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial” instead of “This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial”.[8]
The church has also issued a statement that “urges States to do away with criminal penalties against [homosexual persons],”[9] calling it “grave violations of human rights.” It opposes all forms of violence against homosexual people and believes it should be confronted at all levels, but especially at the state level.[10]
For those who do experience same-sex attractions and identify themselves with a homosexual orientation, the Catholic Church offers the following counsel:
Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.[11]”

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Roman_Catholicism
And lest anyone say that this article is not true because it was posted on Wikipedia,
I invite people to read the article and research the extensive footnotes. The information is solid.

 

[VeritasLuxMea]

Homosexual behavior is.

Certainly.

I just wanted to make sure it was clear (because the title had a false implication) that this does not mean that homosexual inclinations aren’t naturally occurring phenomenon.

 

[ReConverted]

No-we are people that adhere to the teachings of the one true church. if one’s propensity to engage in homosexual behavior cannot be changed what are we to make of all the testimonials( many here on CAF) we have seen from people who have put the homosexual lifestyle behind them and are now involved in healthy heterosexual relationships?

Holy Mother Church doesn’t say ANYTHING about “helping” homosexuals change their sexual orientation.

 

[ReConverted]

Research shows that individuals with a fixed sexual orientation do not “change” their orientation.

Efforts to “change” orientation through -pseudo-religious-therapy have been found to be ineffective at best and harmful at worst.

Yep. Just ask the victims who endured that quackery…

 

[TimeEntrance]

**Honestly, I’m confused how they come to the conclusion this has anything to do with sexual orientation. **

This seems to be all hypothesis, and conjecture. Honestly, this could mean very little. I left Biochemistry after two years of studying because I realized my professors had too much of an agenda then actual science at times.

A hypothesis is a conjecture. And yes, you are correct, this is a hypothesis. It’s also an attempt in what the philosophy of science calls attempting to “rescue and hypothesis” and thereby making it irrefutable. This is a contradiction of the principle of falsifiability.

At any rate this hypothesis in the broader sense of epigenetic causes, in the womb, is nothing new. It’s just a reformulation and rescuing. It was rather obvious for a long time that homosexuality was not genetically heritable. Now, the goal is to prove and make irrefutable - impossible to prove false with ad hoc hypotheses - that homosexuality while not genetically heritable is biologically heritable through epigenetic factors.

Homosexuality being genetically or biologically heritable does not offend me. What offends me is ad hoc hypotheses, rescuing, and non-epistemic values turning “science” into a branch of dogmatic theology. But as scientist and philosopher and historian Thomas Kuhn pointed out: it’s often you find scientists who already knew the results of their tests before they even began their tests.

Research into the explanations of homosexuality is the equivalent of rejecting oxygen as an explanation for a thing burning with fire, the epigentic or genetic hypothesis that is the equivalent of phlogiston theory (that was taken so seriously as the most certain scientific explanation on earth as to why things burn). Admittedly, it offered an explanation, and probably on more solid grounds than genetic and biological heritability of homosexuality does. Even the Ptolemy’s astronomical theory of a stationary earth as the center of the universe offered more predictive power than you can squeeze out of the genetic and biological heritability hypotheses of homosexuality.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlogiston

 

[Aramis]

I found the article on my own and also read the same thing. There is no gay gene just it seems those markers influence your attractions.

The jury’s still out as to what society will think. This will go both ways as it does seem to give validity to the “born that way” argument, but until they can find a way to track someone with these epigenetic markers and can study these people, there won’t be hard evidence one way or the other.

This to me is one of those “stay tuned” studies.

What is even more interesting is that some other studies have shown that epigenome formations are not stable in individuals, even. They can be changed by environmental stresses on the system.

So, while epigenetic markers may trigger homosexuality, it can’t be ruled out that choices can affect the epigenome.

And it may lead to a genuine cure for homosexuality.

 

[LisaA]

Do you mean the Fay report, commissioned by the Catholic Bishops? That is the link I provided, and the statistics I provided.

Yes. The point being that the priest abuse was not pedophilia which is very young children, those who have not started to develop sexually and are under 13. While some were in that range, your own statistics noted a tiny percentage 11 or under. Does this make it any more excusable? No. But the point is that the priests were more likely dealing with SSA as well, not just wanting sexual relations with pre-pubescent children. My understanding is that the behavior is called pedastry. Hair splitting perhaps but the media used the term pedophilia which was even more perjorative. In addition at the time it was thought the priests were “cured” and thus sent back into other parishes which proved to be disasterous.

Lisa

 

[LisaA]

Jim McGreevey?

Yes. From the outside he appeared to be an ordinary married man with a pretty wife. Like some other well known homosexuals…Gene Robinson the Bishop of the Episcopal Church for example, some want to “pass” and for career reasons want to remain closeted. It doesn’t mean they are not homosexual in orientation.
Lisa

 

[livingwordunity]

Holy Mother Church doesn’t say ANYTHING about “helping” homosexuals change their sexual orientation.

Holy Mother Church teaches that although having SSA without acting on it isn’t a sin, it’s still disordered. All sinful inclinations are disordered and happened as a result of the fall of Adam and Eve. But Jesus came to save us from sin, and with God all things are possible. Another important point is that in Heaven everyone is celibate.

 

[JimR-OCDS]

Do you mean the Fay report, commissioned by the Catholic Bishops? That is the link I provided, and the statistics I provided.

Dr Phillip Jenkins did a study a few years back and found that the majority of sexual abuse cases were by homosexual priest with post-pubescent teen age boys.

On recently have psychiatrists have come up with a new term for the behavior by men, and they call it E-pedophilia.

Jim