Homosexuality is a choice

Bishadi said:
i dont do weird science!
Click to expand...

I was thinking of this remark and realized that Bishadi's "evidence" may have come from his own personal experience and perhaps experiments with himself. It was quite a non-sequitur considering my statement that provoked it. I wasn't asking him to perform an experiment. I was asking him to think about the homosexual's typical discovery revelations.

So it seems Bishadi doesn't do much reading, studying, examining evidence -- even anecdotal. His "evidence" I suspect comes from study of his navel. You can also see this pattern in his discussion of quantum physics.

He's mentioned he wrote about the biology of the brain when he was 16 years old. I can remember thinking the same way when I was 16 years old -- just making stuff up that made sense to my 16 year old mind.

Since he is so rigidly closed-minded there isn't much hope of him learning anything here. He's only here to exhibit his unique personal wisdom.
 
Last edited:
Emet said:
I used to watch Ellen, and The Puppy Episode (2 parter) was hilarious. Here's the ending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xKfEdjlRxSk&feature=related
Click to expand...

Sheesh! When I decided that I'm heterosexual I had to give a sample of blood, have the papers notarized and pay a $100 fee!!!

And the woman who signed me up only got a $10 gift certificate to Bed, Bath and Beyond......

...makes me wonder for the people who decide to be bi, what do they get for signing people up...?

:D

(That episode was hilarious, though. Thanks.) :)
 
Marcus said:
They're just so busy recruiting, don't you know. If we dare let one become a scoutmaster, in no time we'd have merit badges for kissing boys.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

They have merit badges for everything except premature ejaculation, and I hear that's coming soon.

:duck:
 
Why homosexuality, even if genetically predisposed, is natural and advantageous

Important new evidence on a plausible mechanism for the evolution of "gay genes" has emerged from the work of Camperio-Ciani.[23] They found in two large, independent studies that the female relatives of homosexual men tended to have significantly more offspring than those of the heterosexual men. Female relatives of the homosexual men on their mother's side tended to have more offspring than those on the father's side. This indicates that females carrying a putative "gay genes" complex are more fecund than women lacking this complex of genes, and thereby can compensate for any decreased fertility of the males carrying the genes. This is a well known phenomenon in evolution known as "sexual antagonism", and has been widely documented for many traits that are advantageous in one sex but not in the other. This provides solid experimental evidence of how "gay genes" could not only survive but thrive over the course of evolution
Click to expand...

Evidence for maternally inherited factors favouring male homosexuality and promoting female fecundity

The above quote is from wiki "Biology and sexual orientation"
 
Last edited:
HansMustermann said:
Brain dimorphism and asymmetry (one factor mentioned in the gay vs hetero study) being already present at birth (although, interestingly enough, the asymmetry in males was actually the opposite at birth than what it will grow into):

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2886661/
Click to expand...

Would you care to explain where in the study about Sexual Dimorphism and brain asymmetry (e.g. physiology) is any evidence of cause and effect of homosexual behaviour (e.g. psychology) in human beings?

Sexual dimorphism is the existence of physical differences between the sexes, other than differences in the sex organs. Darwin contended that sexual dimorphism evolved by means of sexual selection.

http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/ridley/a-z/Sexual_dimorphism.asp
Click to expand...

sexual dimorphism, the differences in appearance between males and females of the same species, as in colour, shape, size, and structure, that are caused by the inheritance of one or the other sexual pattern in the genetic material. These differences may be extreme, as in the adaptations for sexual selection seen in the exotic plumes and colours of the male birds-of-paradise, or for protection, exemplified by the great size and huge canine teeth of the male baboon.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/537133/sexual-dimorphism
Click to expand...
 
Mr. Scott said:
There's an awesome hypothesis for the cause of homosexualty called "sexually antagonistic selection" which I recommend to anyone interested in the subject. It explains how homosexuality can have a genetic basis and remain stable in a gene pool even if homosexuals never reproduce.
Click to expand...

No, do not explain how homosexuality (psychological behaviour) can have a genetic basis (biological behaviour), because is no such thing as "homosexual gene".

To prove any cause and effect of genetic nature, is necessary conclusive evidence, not a misguided study using hypothetical data:

A number of genetic or familial studies have even attempted the identification of the loci related to the trait, with not yet conclusive results [1], [4], [5], [9], [14], [15]. While clarifying various aspects of the phenomenon, the evidence-based assumption of a genetic loading for homosexuality in males also generates a number of questions.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2427196/
Click to expand...

I am surprised how a study can be made on "assumptions" and "not conclusive results".
 
Last edited:
SnakeTongue said:
No, do not explain how homosexuality (psychological behaviour) can have a genetic basis (biological behaviour), because is no such thing as "homosexual gene".
Click to expand...

How do you know that? Do you know every gene in the human genome? If not, how can you be sure not one of them is the homosexual gene?

To prove any cause and effect of genetic nature, is necessary conclusive evidence, not a misguided study using hypothetical data:
Click to expand...

But just because something hasn't been proven doesn't automatically mean that the reverse is true.

I am surprised how a study can be made on "assumptions" and "not conclusive results".
Click to expand...

Then you know very little about how scientific study works.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I've always found interesting that experiment someone did with rats once, where they created a confined environment and let them breed as much as they wanted, and observed the behavior. The more rats that occupied the space, the more same-sex relations that were observed. It was suggested that perhaps homosexuality shows up when the population reaches a certain density, as a sort of growth-control method. The more gays, the smaller the next generation, the less shared the resources will have to be.
Click to expand...

Could you provide a link for such study or explain the methodology used to observe "same-sex relations"?
 
commandlinegamer said:
...that homosexuality is widespread amongst the animal kingdom (i.e. humans and other fauna).

Here's just one newspaper report on a study of 1,000 species:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...spread-in-animals-according-to-new-study.html

See what I did there: I cited a source. That's what helps to reinforce an argument.
Click to expand...

Would you explain why a misguided and biased article in the news is comparing "two pair of females" to the term "lesbians"?

Would you explain where is any evidence that prove that two females raising a child consist in "lesbianism"?

I would also ask you to put the definition of "lesbian" in scientific terms, so we can objectively find conclusions.

They found that on the Hawaiian island of Oahu, almost a third of the Laysan albatross population is raised by pairs of two females because of the shortage of males. Through these 'lesbian' unions, Laysan albatross are flourishing. Their existence had been dwindling before the adaptation was noticed.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/...spread-in-animals-according-to-new-study.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Mirrorglass said:
How do you know that? Do you know every gene in the human genome? If not, how can you be sure not one of them is the homosexual gene?
Click to expand...

I took the "genome" word from you answer and put in the DuckDuckGo web search box. I clicked over the "lupe" icon. I clicked over the link to the National Human Genome Institute (NHGI). In the NHGI web page I typed the word "homosexuality" in the search box. I clicked over the next link:

http://www.genome.gov/DNADay/q.cfm?aid=436&year=2009

Q: Geoffrey Toyes and Jefry Cohen in NJ (Higher Education grade other): Hi, My friend and I are gay. With all the current controversy about homosexuality, has there been any research linking sexual orientation to genes?

A: Barry H. Thompson, M.D., M.S.:
In a very general sense, some studies indicate that there may be a considerable genetic component to sexual orientation. However, there is no known gene for "homosexuality." Sexual orientation, no matter the genetic make-up of an individual, likely is a very complex matter.
Click to expand...

Mirrorglass said:
But just because something hasn't been proven doesn't automatically mean that the reverse is true.
Click to expand...

What is the reverse of something that was not been proven true?
 
Last edited:
bikerdruid said:
evasion duly noted.
smaketongue:rolleyes:...... indeed.
Click to expand...

I am not trying to evade. I am trying to be objective. I still cannot understand what exactly you mean with "straight", since this word bear many meanings.

If you can provide me a definition to me understand what you mean, I will be glad to give you an accurate and objective answer.
 
SnakeTongue said:
I took the "genome" word from you answer and put in the DuckDuckGo web search box. I clicked over the "lupe" icon. I clicked over the link to the National Human Genome Institute (NHGI). In the NHGI web page I typed the word "homosexuality" in the search box. I clicked over the next link:
Click to expand...

Yes, that's right. We do not know whether there is a gene for homosexuality. That means there may be, or there may not be. It isn't difficult.




What is the reverse of something that was not been proven true?
Click to expand...

That would depend on the something, wouldn't it?
 
SnakeTongue said:
Define "be straight".
Click to expand...

SnakeTongue said:
I am not trying to evade. I am trying to be objective. I still cannot understand what exactly you mean with "straight", since this word bear many meanings.

If you can provide me a definition to me understand what you mean, I will be glad to give you an accurate and objective answer.
Click to expand...

Are you heterosexual? When did you choose to be so, if that is the case?
 
Mirrorglass said:
Yes, that's right. We do not know whether there is a gene for homosexuality. That means there may be, or there may not be. It isn't difficult.
Click to expand...
Why is so difficult to be? The sexual genes are just to letters:

X and Y.

Maybe is not to be...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom