Homosexuality: Nature or choice

[achilles12604]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

[muhammad rasullah]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

Homosexuality is not genetic and there is no evidence for it. It is not in anyones nature to be homosexual the person may think so but they're wrong. it is natural for a man and a woman to be together and attracted to each other because they need to reproduce for human life to carry on that is why this is a natural act because it has to occur for life to exist. It is not natural for a man and a man to be attracted to each other nor is it natural for a woman and a woman to be together because the two can not reproduce to carry on the human population therefore for any such thing to occur it would have to be learned.

A person may have thoughts of being attracted to the same sex but it goes against the reproduction process and is therefore not natural. It cant be genetic because that means you would be born with this and you cant be born with a behavior because behavior is learned and aquired thru experiences with others.

[otseng]

We agree that the causes are not the same.

Agreed.

We may not agree on the extent to which some gays 'choose' their orientation. My view is that probably the vast majority do not.

I would agree with this too. And there is a certain percentage that do have a choice.

Althought it is not an exact analogy, I think the societal responses to each of these has been similar in many ways, and pretty much just as unjustified in each case.

There are of course the common element of discrimination towards gays and blacks. But, I think when people compare the two, they are inferring more than just discrimination. There are other groups that are also discriminated against, yet I rarely see comparisions to these other groups.

Further, as Vanguard mentioned, part of the problem is the huge range in the free choice factor of being gay. I would say that it extends the entire range from 0% free will involved to 100% free will involved in being gay.

If all gays had zero choice in the matter and it was set in stone at birth, then there would be more of a valid comparison with blacks (though still not equal), even though the causes would not be both genetic. But having any choice, however little, would definitely set it into a different class.

[Cathar1950]

We agree that the causes are not the same.

Agreed.

We may not agree on the extent to which some gays 'choose' their orientation. My view is that probably the vast majority do not.

I would agree with this too. And there is a certain percentage that do have a choice.

Althought it is not an exact analogy, I think the societal responses to each of these has been similar in many ways, and pretty much just as unjustified in each case.

There are of course the common element of discrimination towards gays and blacks. But, I think when people compare the two, they are inferring more than just discrimination. There are other groups that are also discriminated against, yet I rarely see comparisions to these other groups.

Further, as Vanguard mentioned, part of the problem is the huge range in the free choice factor of being gay. I would say that it extends the entire range from 0% free will involved to 100% free will involved in being gay.

If all gays had zero choice in the matter and it was set in stone at birth, then there would be more of a valid comparison with blacks (though still not equal), even though the causes would not be both genetic. But having any choice, however little, would definitely set it into a different class.

I question that we have real choices. Rather we have influences which include, genetic, biology, experiences and learning often much of it is before we are 5 or 6.
There is an interesting book called "love maps" that explain how our attractions are developed before we are 5 or 6.
Belief is largely involuntary and change or reinforced with experiences which include our cultures. They have found homosexual behaviour in animals.
To claim they have a choice is to deny that they may not. Do we heterosexuals have a choice on what sex we are attracted too? Granted out behavior can be learned and given some influences play anything as many homosexuals attempt to play it straight.

[byofrcs]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

Homosexuality is not genetic and there is no evidence for it. It is not in anyones nature to be homosexual the person may think so but they're wrong. it is natural for a man and a woman to be together and attracted to each other because they need to reproduce for human life to carry on that is why this is a natural act because it has to occur for life to exist. It is not natural for a man and a man to be attracted to each other nor is it natural for a woman and a woman to be together because the two can not reproduce to carry on the human population therefore for any such thing to occur it would have to be learned.

A person may have thoughts of being attracted to the same sex but it goes against the reproduction process and is therefore not natural. It cant be genetic because that means you would be born with this and you cant be born with a behavior because behavior is learned and aquired thru experiences with others.

When a fairly new baby is dropped then its arms fly out. It doesn't need to be dropped much, just a gentle application of low to zero G for a split second.

It's kind of funny to watch this behaviour if you consider the evolved origin of humans and the fact we don't live in trees nor cling to our mother's fur (hairy armpits don't count).

According to your argument, these babies have learnt this from day-time TV or by watching other babies being dropped or supermarket tabloids. You say you are not born with behaviours and so this can't be genetic. I say that claim is questionable.

Where sexuality is involved then genetics is the first place to look. The expression of genes may not be obvious and may be biased by culture, but it's a bit too convenient to simply discard a genetic origin because it's not obvious why.

Given that there are numerous examples of homosexual behaviours across many cultures it would suggest that it is an intrinsic effect and that the culture must adapt to it or suppress it. Islam suppresses homosexuality but other cultures have a coping mechanism.

For example the idea of "Two-Spirit" which is/was prevalent across numerous American Indian tribes, helps cement the society. I'd go as far as to say that all societies have homosexuals.

I would suggest that given such widespread occurrences of homosexual behaviours the effect is intrinsic to the nature of some men and that religions that suppress this are not appropriate for any society unless the religion adapts to suit the nature of man rather than trying to change the unchangeable.

[Jura]

a homosexual persons olnly possible choices are to chose not to have intercourse with the prefered sex, or to simply be celibate
wich would be sad and stupid

sexuality is an aspect of the human mind we have wery little understanding of and practically no control ower
humans can control their actions, yes, and to an extent discipline thoughts, but if a person is atracted to women he or she will forever be atracted to women, if to men men, if both then both
it is not fisically posible to chose ones sexual preferance

bysexual people might be able to chose, in most situations, as they have an option
heterosexual people, unless forced, can chose to indulge in homosexual behaviour or not to
homosexuals can, for whatever reason chose to have "straight" sex

but none of this will change their sexual orientation or give them anny choices about it
sexuall orientation is something humans are born with, not something that can be chosen
homosexual behaviour in general is diferent, people of all sexuall orientations can, if they so wish or have no alternative, have homosexual sex, or alternatively chose not to

so there is a big diference betveen having choice of action and being able to chose ones own sexual orientation

[Jura]

Leaving aside the free will argument for the moment, I would like to investigate the evidence for homosexuality being a result of genetics or biochemistry, or personal choice.

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is controlled by his genetics or biochemistry and must therefore be homosexual?

What evidence is there that the homosexual individual is such simply by choice outside of other driving factors?

Please feel free to add to the criteria of the OP if you feel there are other options I missed.

Homosexuality is not genetic and there is no evidence for it. It is not in anyones nature to be homosexual the person may think so but they're wrong. it is natural for a man and a woman to be together and attracted to each other because they need to reproduce for human life to carry on that is why this is a natural act because it has to occur for life to exist. It is not natural for a man and a man to be attracted to each other nor is it natural for a woman and a woman to be together because the two can not reproduce to carry on the human population therefore for any such thing to occur it would have to be learned.

A person may have thoughts of being attracted to the same sex but it goes against the reproduction process and is therefore not natural. It cant be genetic because that means you would be born with this and you cant be born with a behavior because behavior is learned and aquired thru experiences with others.

there is much evidence on homosexuality being congenital
the argument that it should then be hereditary is not valid, there are numerous examples of congenital anomalies, wich are not hereditary
for something to be congenital a whole number of things can go wrong, there is no need for it to be hereditary or even involve genes

as a congenital anomality homosexuality is not anyones choice
a homosexual persons olnly possible choices are to chose not to have intercourse with the prefered sex, or to simply be celibate
wich would be sad and stupid

to say homosexuality is not natural is simple denial
all human tendencies are natural, or develop from natural needs, even the most bizare ones, amongst wich heterosexual tendencies are far more numerous and often far more deviant
homosexuality is one of the most natural human tendencies, in fact homosexual behaviour is natural even amongst heterosexual humans, especially in situations where there is no alternative, or where the bias against it is not present
also it is questionable what percentage of anny given population is in fact bysexual

to say it is against nature becouse it goes against reproduction is apsurd
theres simply no logic in it
no homosexual can stop heterosexual humans from having sex
as much sex as they want
theres truly nothing a homosexual can do about it even if for some strange reason he or she would want to, exept maybe join them
the percentage of exclusively homosexual humans of both sexes is too small to actually count, and even if 90% of the population was all of the sudden gay, most of these people are in all fisical and mental aspects healthy individuals, fully capable of sucesfull reproduction

sexuality is an aspect of the human mind we have wery little understanding of and practically no control ower
it is known homosexual behaviour is fairly comon and not practiced olnly by the homosexual population, but that almoust equal pecentage of bysexuals and/or heterosexuals have homosexual experiences
humans can control their actions, yes, and to an extent discipline thoughts, but if a person is atracted to women he or she will forever be atracted to women, if to men men, if both then both
it is not posible to chose ones sexual preferance, olnly force oneself to deny it

homosexuals can chose to make themselves or be forced to have "straight" sex, in the same way heterosexuals can and do chose or are forced to have homosexual sex
or they can all chose to abstain from sex, if possible

but none of this will change their sexual orientation or give them anny personal choices about it
sexuall orientation is something humans are born with, not something that can be chosen


so there is a big diference betveen having choice of action and being able to chose ones own sexual orientation
the olnly question is why would anyone chose not to have intercourse with the prefered sex?

[athiest_420]

some people are straight, some are gay, some are bi curiouse and the rest just aint sure.

let them be, does what they do behind closed doors bother you? if it does you have no right to look down on them.

i believe very few ppl are fully 100% straight, even myself id say im just in the high 90's % of being straight, tho my only sexual expericances have always been with a female (yes im male).

i do have gay/bi firends of both sexes tho, their that way because thats how they want to be, its how the feel comfortable, no 1 is born gay or straight, its how you brought up, and billions of other factors, but al it comes down to is some people are, some are not, and thats fine.


gay marrige:
hmm tricky one, the problem with marrige is that its religion and goverment benefits in 1....

i think there should be a gay equivelent to marrige, one that makes you a married couple in the eyes of the law, but is not linked to religion, im sure some religiouse sods would still not want them to be happily together, but to be frank, if anyone feels that way, they can go fuck themselfs >.> its not your place to say how thers live their lives if their happy and not harming anyone in doing so.