homosexuality and the Bible

How many births do you witness regularly ?

Hum Biol. 1998 Apr;70(2):347-65. Related Articles, LinksHuman sexual orientation has a heritable component.Pillard RC, Bailey JM.Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, MA 02118, USA.We present an overview of behavioral genetics research on homosexual and heterosexual orientation. Family, twin, and adoptee studies indicate that homosexuality and thus heterosexuality run in families. Sibling, twin, and adoptee concordance rates are compatible with the hypothesis that genes account for at least half of the variance in sexual orientation. We note observations of homosexual behavior in animal species, but the analogy to human sexual orientation is unclear. We discuss the reproductive disadvantage of a homosexual orientation and present possible mechanisms that could maintain a balanced polymorphism in human populations.andScience. 1993 Jul 16;261(5119):321-7. Related Articles, LinksComment in:
Science. 1993 Jul 16;261(5119):291-2.
Science. 1993 Sep 3;261(5126):1257; discussion 1259.
Science. 1993 Sep 3;261(5126):1258-9.A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation.Hamer DH, Hu S, Magnuson VL, Hu N, Pattatucci AM.Laboratory of Biochemistry, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.The Science paper fell a bit out of favor as the results could not be reproduced.The genetics of homosexuality will be like all other behavioral traits...quantitative and not dependent on a single gene.

It is hereditary in part i.e. 1/3rd to 1/2 genetic..the rest is environment including the uterine environment and the timing and concentration of hormones you are exposed to...however, there is no one gene that determines homosexuality the same way there is no single gene for other behavioral traits...or physical for that matter, eye color, height are all multifactorial. That is why if you have two gay parents you will not necessarily be gay yourself though your chances are higher because of the genetic component. If it were a single gene you could calculate the trait frequencies with a simple Punnett square.

So you prefer your groundless and false assertions to the reality of the genetic and behavioral studies that have actually been performed that show you are wrong?What a great way to live...it removes research, evidence, substantiation, and contemplation from ones life and replaces it with uninformed opinion...I finally see what the appeal of being a creationist is....being lazy.

Better than feeding a teen a lie that there is no heritable component to a behavioral trait...just because you do not have a clue about genetics does not mean everyone is equally so clueless...and just because the facts of biology are distasteful to you does not mean they should be supressed...but then you are clearly not interested in the truth.I find it fascinating that the fact that a behavior such as homosexuality has a partial genetic basis causes you immediately assume that telling someone this simple biological reality might make them gay i.e. your puerile rant against me in your post and your implication that I am gay and wish to somehow "convert" messenj...and where in my post did I tell this young lad you seem to have a strange and sudden fondness for to fornicate?It certainly shows you need a couple of classes in genetics for one thing (not to mention logic) since you obviously do not understand even the basic principles of heredity much less more complicated topics such as evolution.

There are gay Christians for one thing.
And regardless of what the bible says about the consequences of homosexuality the fact is it has a heritable component...simple as that...funny..I was not even debating the morality of homosexuality but trying to correct Crashfrogs statement about a gay gene...and as a result I get a creationist outing party as to their lack of knowledge about genetics...given the complete illogic of A Christians last rant maybe I should post a soup recipe and see what other subject he/she has not clue about.

quote:

---

Sir, I believe that a murderer can be a Christian or can become
a Christian. That doesn't mean that a murder wasn't committed
or that it suddenly became OK.

​

The very same is true for a homosexual. The act doesn't take on
righteousness because the person is or becomes a Christian. However,
the indivdual recognizes that he is living in error and is trying to
change with GOD's help. The act isn't OK and lives still can
be ruined by sin.

---

I really could not care less what your personal mythology states regarding homosexuality...I know the old christian cop out of raping, murdering and pillaging and then saying "oh I was bad but found god so everything is ok and I get to go to heaven and do it all again woo hoo" Fortunately the majority of the christians I know are absolutely nothing like you..they are actually intelligent and kind.I still notice you have absolutely avoided the biological fact that a significant component of homosexual behavior is genetic i.e. hereditary in origin...but as others have pointed out, you are very poor at supporting your assertions or directly addressing the issues under discussion.

Did the bible instruct you not to read posts?Posted yet again...Hum Biol. 1998 Apr;70(2):347-65. Related Articles, Links
Human sexual orientation has a heritable component.Pillard RC, Bailey JM.Department of Psychiatry, Boston University School of Medicine, MA 02118, USA.We present an overview of behavioral genetics research on homosexual and heterosexual orientation. Family, twin, and adoptee studies indicate that homosexuality and thus heterosexuality run in families. Sibling, twin, and adoptee concordance rates are compatible with the hypothesis that genes account for at least half of the variance in sexual orientation. We note observations of homosexual behavior in animal species, but the analogy to human sexual orientation is unclear. We discuss the reproductive disadvantage of a homosexual orientation and present possible mechanisms that could maintain a balanced polymorphism in human populations.andScience. 1993 Jul 16;261(5119):321-7. Related Articles, LinksComment in:
Science. 1993 Jul 16;261(5119):291-2.
Science. 1993 Sep 3;261(5126):1257; discussion 1259.
Science. 1993 Sep 3;261(5126):1258-9.A linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation.Hamer DH, Hu S, Magnuson VL, Hu N, Pattatucci AM.Laboratory of Biochemistry, National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892.The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.The Science paper fell a bit out of favor as the results could not be reproduced.The genetics of homosexuality will be like all other behavioral traits...quantitative and not dependent on a single gene.Now its your turn to show me the scientific documented "facts" that refute the content of the first article...note that the first is a review of multiple studies performed by people who don't close their eyes to the world around them as you have so you have to demonstrate how they did not actually record the observations they made and that all homosexuals are so because of a specific choice they made as you have asserted.

You obviously did not read the paper and obviously do not understand genetics if you 1) offhand dismiss solid data from MULTIPLE different studies 2) claim that your offhand comments are more valid than studies that EXCLUDED environmental contribution to see if the null hyphothesis (that homosexuality has no genetic component) was rejected or not....the rejection of the null hypothesis by the multiple data sets is the evidence of a genetic contribution..this is how genes are mapped and have been successfully....oh yeah, I forgot, you prefer unsupported assertions like a pink unicorn wrote the bible than actual work i.e. hypothesis testing and evidence gathering..must be nice..

quote:

---

I would submit that you don't KNOW me at all. You don't KNOW my
tastes or friends. You don't KNOW about my youth or my family.
You don't even see my facial expressions. You would judge me
by debate?

---

In a debate on the genetics of homosexual behavior I don't care about you as a person..only the evidence that you can bring to the table in support of your assertions and thus I do judge your ARGUMENTS based on the merits of the support of your assertions.

quote:

---

I would also submit to you that through the middle of the 20th
century, most criminals were considered to have genetic disorders
and that their behavior was hereditary. This supports the Bible's
stand that sin is passed down from father to son to the third and
fourth generation among those that HATE GOD.

---

And for a long time the French thought that tying a string around your left testicle while having sex would increase your chances of having male children....and that was wrong to....criminal behavior studies only rarely support a strong genetic component to such behavior in SOME families with specific alleles of the monaminoxidase gene which also affects mice in a similar fashion. However criminality is not a mendelian trait but quantitative and thus there is no direct transmission of the behavior from father to son so thus you are incorrect....transmission of behavioral traits is like transmission of height from one generation to the next..it has an environmental component and a genetic component and thus tall people can produce short children but have a higher tendency to produce taller children i.e. the genetic component in action....but nothing supports you assertion of a direct transmission of a behavioral trait among whatver you mean by people who hate god...

You seem to have it backwards...if atheists don't have as high a divorce rate as those of faith it would appear the atheists take the "institution of marriage" more seriously...or at least the tax break one gets

quote:

---

Firstly, I assume that anyone who says they are "Christian" were
considered to be Christian".

---

I assume so as well since there is no other way to tell.

quote:

---

Secondly, I might assume that the numbers of Atheists and Agnostics
who just choose to live together and then split without the need of
"divorce" is much higher.

---

You may be right as I have no data..however, my experiences in Germany and in the US was that lots of people lived together for extended periods unmarried whether christians or not i.e. it did not seem to have much of an influence on their decisions on whether or not to get married...in any case, in many places there is a tax break for married couples and thus, often people who plan on staying together anyway, marry to get the tax break i.e. huge numbers of civil weddings...but I don't know what the actual religious/lack of religion breakdown in numbers is for people who co-habitate and do not marry.

quote:

---

If those numbers were then added to
the mix and we define "Christian" as those who regularly attended
evangelical Bible churches, you might see a shift

---

Why cut out the rest of the Christians? By that criteria why not skew the data by only including christians that once owned chihuaha's and like Jerry Lewis movies?

quote:

---

In any case
GOD hates divorce and fornication is a sin no less grievous.

---

Since I don't believe in god this is irrelvant for me...I stay with and married my wife because I enjoy her company more than anyone elses and my life would be much less fun and rich without her...and I got a tax break to boot ...not because I am afraid of some mythical cosmic vigilante who will come and kill me because of a written definition of male-female association prescribed by somebody elses religion.You can ascribe likes and dislikes all you want to your mythical being..I could also say that a giant four assed galactic monkey hates people who write sentences with vowels in the words and one should fear it... but claiming to know the preferences of mythical beings is pretty silly

quote:

---

Not silly, if one reads the Bible and believes it to be the inspired
written word of GOD.

---

But pretty silly if one reads the bible thinks it is a nice myth (though pretty boring compared to some others) and does not believe in god(s).

quote:

---

It would be silly if you suggested that
atheists and agnostics count only if they never attend church.

---

I don't think I suggested this was a requirement of atheists and agnostics..if I did, it was a goof.

quote:

---

I am glad you and your wife are presently happy

---

Thanks

quote:

---

it will be of small counsolation when bad times come (and they always do) and
the end draws near (and it will).

---

Why small consolation? We have been through bad times and it makes it much easier to get through together than alone...and in the end, even if it were today, I could look back on having had a great time with a woman I care for more than anyone and respect...don't see the problem with that....I am not so weak that I can only get through the day making some mythical being more important than the people around me in my life or by saying this world sucks..can't wait for the afterlife...that to me is a waste of time.

quote:

---

I'll still have joy because I have hope, I have something to
look forward to----even at deaths door...

---

Hmmm strange..I have joy and hope but I am an atheist and I have a lot I am looking forward to...even death is not particularly scary...I will just get recycled into the earth..so I will be hanging around one way or another Your life must really suck if you spend so much time dreaming about the afterlife...[This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 08-26-2003]

Hi truthlover,
I was sort of baiting him as I know why he wants to cut out other Christians from his definition. Over the last year I have run into a number of people like AC who claim they are true Christians and all others are not. The usual justification for this beleif is they know they are right...I get the impression if these sects were the only people left in the world they would still end up in an earth threatening conflict because they just don't seem to be capable of getting along peacefully with anyone else.Thanks for the link...it seems that fundamentalism is not a sure way of producing long lasting marriage cheers,
M