I find this video to extremely fascinating and informative. What BrickSquad suggested as environmental factors having large impact on behavior the scientific community calls Epigenetics. Epigenetics is the study of how certain environmental triggers can turn off or on gene. Dr. Dawkins (world renowned evolutionary biologist and author) suggests that certain environmental triggers can cause a certain gene, in this case the gay gene, to manifest itself instead of remaining dormant. It's all a matter of genetics. If you study genetics you'll learn about dominant vs. recessive genes, how people can be carriers but not expressers, and how certain genes can be passed on through generations without ever being expressed then suddenly manifest. It's not a chemical imbalance its the regulation of expressed gene via environmental factors. This is a proven known fact.
http://www.medica...lution.htm
This article presents and interesting theory as to how a gay gene would be passed down not through the male but instead through the females, that it is the females enhances sexual attractiveness due to the gene that encourages the passing of the gene and not the female being more attracted to males.
http://www.news-m...20718.aspx
Homosexuality has been observed in many non-human species on many occasions to believe that it is a solely human behavior is ignorant. I'm sure you've all heard of the homosexual penguins and how they were even given a chick to raise as their very own.
My brother is homosexual. I don't think he is icky, gross or otherwise messed up in the head. He is a normal person. It annoys me to think that people would hate him just because he likes other men instead of women. I think it's ridiculous that homophobes use religion as their justification for their disdain and hatred. Like Hat's poster points out, it's nice that you think homosexuals are "icky" but you should seriously grow up. Not liking something because it's different is an extremely childish way to go about life. We don't live in the Bronze Age anymore where they stoned people for talking back to their parents so why should be basically hate the LGBT community for loving someone that's the same gender, are you jealous that they might steal away a woman or man that you might have gotten to love? Again, grow up. We put a man on the fucking moon 43 years ago for fucks sake, don't you think it's time we advance socially what we have in other areas?
"Hey guys, I just bought this thing called a sight ward...so it's GG." - MasterA in League of Legends
The Hat of Love wrote:
I don't know that but it seems strongly logical, right? What kind of environment turns people gay? And why does that same environment not turn everyone inside it gay? Because that's just the way they were born.
I'm not sure what a 'chemical imbalance' is or if you're sure what one is either but what you're saying, I think, is that if there is an imbalance, that means something is wrong with their head... and I really feel strongly that homosexuality does not mean there is anything wrong with them. Not wrong, simply different.
Such as being raise playing with the opposite toys or doing the opposite sex hobbies. Example, such as women body building. Not saying that if they do that they will become homosexual, just a factor for a lot of lesbian women.
I also made a mistake, it is not a chemical imbalance in the brain, it's the different levels of hormones in the body too that can possibly cause the switch of sexuality. So it is natural, but in the wrong way.
@Raz: True.
@Hat: Also I do not follow that chart. I told you, God told us to love every human, so people that say to kill them are wrong.
@Tim: That video is right in some ways, but they make it a little far from the real truth. Those types of videos I don't like, they make you lean in one direction more, and not just giving the facts straight out.
And don't worry, we all respect each and everybody's opinions, we are just discussing it in a civilized manner. =)
@Carnage: I really haven't research much into the "gay" gene, sounds a little ridiculous? It's like saying there is a "obese" gene too.
And yes that's true that there has been homosexuality between animals, but remember, we humans are the only organisms on this planet that can rationalize, unless you can name me another animal? And if you are, please have resources to back up your opinion.
Remember, I didn't say all of them are messed up in the head, it can be a choice, or the environment around them, just like how I explained to Hat (in yellow words ^ ). I am not ignorant or follow religion strictly. I just believe in God and Jesus Christ, and I try my best to make this world a better place for humanity and for the sake of all the living organisms and this beautiful planet we call Earth.
ZA BrickSquad wrote: I also made a mistake, it is not a chemical imbalance in the brain, it's the different levels of hormones in the body too that can possibly cause the switch of sexuality. So it is natural, but in the wrong way.
@Carnage: I really haven't research much into the "gay" gene, sounds a little ridiculous? It's like saying there is a "obese" gene too.
How can something in nature be wrong? That's an oxymoron. Who are you to decide that something is "wrong" just because you don't like it? Also it is yet unknown if hormones have anything to do with sexuality. Don't make generalizations without backing up your statements with evidence.
You need to take a genetics class. Genes are instrumental in how we behave, look and yes even our sexuality and body shape and size. It really doesn't matter if you think its ridiculous, it is a scientifically proven fact.
Edited by Carnage on 08/10/2012 18:49:51
"Hey guys, I just bought this thing called a sight ward...so it's GG." - MasterA in League of Legends
ZA BrickSquad wrote: I also made a mistake, it is not a chemical imbalance in the brain, it's the different levels of hormones in the body too that can possibly cause the switch of sexuality. So it is natural, but in the wrong way.
@Carnage: I really haven't research much into the "gay" gene, sounds a little ridiculous? It's like saying there is a "obese" gene too.
How can something in nature be wrong? That's an oxymoron. Who are you to decide that something is "wrong" just because you don't like it? Also it is yet unknown if hormones have anything to do with sexuality. Don't make generalizations without backing up your statements with evidence.
You need to take a genetics class. Genes are instrumental in how we behave, look and yes even our sexuality and body shape and size. It really doesn't matter if you think its ridiculous, it is a scientifically proven fact.
It's not an oxymoron, sorry for the lack of details. I meant to say as it naturally occurs due to the different reasons I explained before. If there is a "gay" gene, well it must be one of those bad genes, such as genetic disorders. Or like the "fraternal birth order and male sexual orientation" which states: "The more older brothers a man has, the greater the probability is that he will have a homosexual orientation."
I got a big blue star for posting. i must be special
Posts: 1723 Joined: 16.11.10
I can kind of understand what brick means. In nature, the whole point of attraction and sex is to have offspring and pass on genes. If two members of the same gender feel attracted to each other, their genes are not passed on, so technically something would be 'wrong' with them.
Of course the human race has progressed far past 'survival of the fittest' and psychologically love has become something more than just the need to mate. Carnage's 'gay gene' is far more likely to show up now than, for example, when we were cavemen. Homosexuality can also be a choice, so the reasoning behind it is not limited to genetics.
I'm straight, Christian, and I don't give a shit what you are. We're all human beings, and we all need to be treated as such.
I have a friend that is homosexual and one day I asked him ”Do you think people are born gay or turned gay?” He told me they are turned gay later in life. Also, I respect gay people and I believe that God just wants you to live your life.
It depends, there is tons of variables that have to be taken into account like they're personalities, location, the child, the schools etc. In some cases it will make no difference but in others there will could be problems. Personally, a mother and a father is a necessity in a childs life but if they can still provide the same nurture, care and beliefs I would see no problem.
Well, many children are raised without a parent or without either parent for whatever reason so I don't see what's so wrong/different with gay couples having children.
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
Should homosexual couples be allowed to raise children? For men, this would mean adoption. For women, they could also use IVF with a sperm donor.
Who are we (other humans) gonna to tell them if they can raise children or not? That is not a question. Imagine if any other group of humans tell YOU, you can't raise kids just because of their reasons.
Let them be, as long as they can give the children what they need for a bright future.
ZA BrickSquad wrote: How do you know if they were born like that? And not the environmental factors around them?
If they are born like that, there must be a chemical imbalance in the brain?
Sounds like nature vs. nurture debate to me.
@Topic:
What are your thoughts on Homosexuality?
I am not entirely certain myself, I'll try to find out in this post. I'm going to take a critical scientific approach to homosexuality.
Do you think Homosexuality is bad, or incorrect?
This is a difficult question. The fact of the matter is, what is "bad" or "incorrect" is defined by society's interpretation of the facts when considering certain base values.
I do not think homosexuals should be treated differently then others due to hate. I do not support discrimination due to sexual orientation. I think any form of discrimination due to a person's physical makeup is wrong. (Sexism, ageism, heightism, racism, etc.) It has yet to be seen whether homosexuality is part of a person's physical makeup (something they can't change, something that's entirely natural). However, regardless of whether or not homosexuality is a choice due to "nurture" or a genetic fact due to "nature", I do not think any sort of discrimination based on it is right.
This does however bring up some questions. First off, we distinguish "restrooms" in almost all parts of the world by gender. The reason for this is not sexism, but rather to restrict unwanted sexual interactions when one goes to relieve themselves. However, if we consider homosexuals we find that such separation is only partially effective. Thus (if we are to maintain this logic) we either have to institute entirely private restrooms or remove the gender separation entirely, neither of which is practical. There are numerous other questions as well. There are also psychological issues that might be associated with homosexuality. E.g., an inability to interact with the opposite sex on any deep level because they are different. Homosexuality itself could (hypothetically, in certain situations) be due to deep seated psychological barriers that are themselves constructs of hate/fear/discrimination against the opposite sex. I have no evidence to support this, however.
Now I will look to the functions of animals in regards to homosexuality. Take apes for instance. Apes are only a short way down the evolutionary tree from humans. Apes do indeed exhibit homosexual behavior, usually as a means to assert dominance within the group. It can be noted, however, that a predisposition to only engage in homosexual behavior when heterosexual behavior is possible is a rarity:
"Although homosexual behavior is very common in the animal world, it seems to be very uncommon that individual animals have a long-lasting predisposition to engage in such behavior to the exclusion of heterosexual activities. Thus, a homosexual orientation, if one can speak of such thing in animals, seems to be a rarity. One species in which exclusive homosexual orientation occurs, however, is that of domesticated sheep (Ovis aries). About 10% of rams (males) refuse to mate with ewes (females) but do readily mate with other rams."
This has been used as both an argument for/against society's acceptance of homosexuality.
Beyond this I will assert that natural selection would select against "homosexual orientation", for if such a behavior is indeed genetic it would not lead to production of offspring and thus would not be passed down through any direct means. Thus one can say that it goes against natural selection (which can be considered "nature") to have a "homosexual orientation". However, since humanity has achieved self-awareness, intelligence, communication, and technology it seems that whether or not something goes against natural selection is of less consequence in our day-to-day lives.
The only thing I can say is that it would be wrong and bad for a large percentage of the human population to have a homosexual orientation (because it would significant decrease our population growth, which could be bad...). This could, on the other hand, be a good thing because the number of humans on Earth is WAY more than we can currently support with the economy and has led some very terrible occurrences worldwide. Hence, it might not be a bad idea to decrease our population growth, or even see some population reduction.
What is your opinion on discriminating people who are Homosexual?
Discrimination is defined as:
1. The unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, esp. on the grounds of race, age, or sex.
2. Recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another.
I am 100% against the first of these, prejudicial treatment of people or things is wrong in every situation that I have ever come in contact with.
I am not against the second, however. There are differences between things that have to be recognized at times. E.g., is it wrong to recognize that the female body/psyche is slightly different from a man's? No. Is it wrong to separate restrooms into "men" and "women"? No. Is it wrong to disrespect or doubt the capacity of a person because they are a woman rather than a man? YES.
This is a fine line.
Do you think Homosexuality should be considered an insult? As in, calling someone "gay" or anything related, for any reason, just to insult them?
No. That is socially immature.
Final notes:
I have a slight personal bias against homosexuality. However, since I see no substantial logical/scientific reason why homosexuality should not be allowed in society I feel that it should be accepted and respected. I feel that everyone should do their best to accept people regardless of their sexual orientation as I do.
Edited by Mator on 08/11/2012 12:44:56
Wow respect mator, you always put effort into thoroughly analyzing the points behind the debate and always give detailed entries based on facts and your own opinions.
Mator wrote:
This could, on the other hand, be a good thing because the number of humans on Earth is WAY more than we can currently support with the economy and has led some very terrible occurrences worldwide. Hence, it might not be a bad idea to decrease our population growth, or even see some population reduction.
So basically, homosexuals will solve world hunger.
Mator wrote:
This could, on the other hand, be a good thing because the number of humans on Earth is WAY more than we can currently support with the economy and has led some very terrible occurrences worldwide. Hence, it might not be a bad idea to decrease our population growth, or even see some population reduction.
So basically, homosexuals will solve world hunger.
So they deserve our respect!
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
well our lord has spoken and said that he loves all of his children, both believers and non believers. Elsewise he would not make then as he did. So therefor there is purpose. a reason for existence and need.
i mean after all, we need good Male interior decorators and fashion designers, and someone had to fill that role for humanity.
FC_SlimJim wrote:
well our lord has spoken and said that he loves all of his children, both believers and non believers. Elsewise he would not make then as he did. So therefor there is purpose. a reason for existence and need.
i mean after all, we need good Male interior decorators and fashion designers, and someone had to fill that role for humanity.
FC_SlimJim wrote:
well our lord has spoken and said that he loves all of his children, both believers and non believers. Elsewise he would not make then as he did. So therefor there is purpose. a reason for existence and need.
i mean after all, we need good Male interior decorators and fashion designers, and someone had to fill that role for humanity.
That's why women exist...LOL
In my experience, women don't make very good male interior designers.
my signature broke, here is a fox snek:
Let's just love every living organism in the world, like that, we can all live in peace and make life beautiful. homosexuals are human being, that's all you have to look at. The rest of the living organisms are for the use of us, plants, animals, and whatever I left out lol.
You know what I believe? I believe there is enough resources for everybody to live happily, but the systems such as capitalism makes everything unbalanced for each human life. That's what I said previously before, not in this thread, that God gives us the test of life, so he looks at what we can do for the ones in need. That's why there are people are suffering in different countries in Africa and many parts around the world, to see what would other humans do to help them. That's just my opinion, you don't have to believe me.
FC_SlimJim wrote:
well our lord has spoken and said that he loves all of his children, both believers and non believers. Elsewise he would not make then as he did. So therefor there is purpose. a reason for existence and need.
Still can't quite believe this, but each to their own.
ZA BrickSquad wrote: Let's just love every living organism in the world, like that, we can all live in peace and make life beautiful. homosexuals are human being, that's all you have to look at.
Yes!
ZA BrickSquad wrote: The rest of the living organisms are for the use of us, plants, animals, and whatever I left out lol.
No! That's selfish and naive. We're sharing this planet with them.
ZA BrickSquad wrote: You know what I believe? I believe there is enough resources for everybody to live happily, but the systems such as capitalism makes everything unbalanced for each human life. That's what I said previously before, not in this thread, that God gives us the test of life, so he looks at what we can do for the ones in need. That's why there are people are suffering in different countries in Africa and many parts around the world, to see what would other humans do to help them. That's just my opinion, you don't have to believe me.
At the moment, yes there are enough resources, but there might not be in the foreseeable future, if the population continues to grow.
God's testing you by making other people suffer. Lovely. There have been people suffering all over the world for years - I guess everyone's failed the test. See you in Hell!
Don't want to post a long response. I'm just going to say I completely agree with BrickSquad's views on this topic. Also, I believe it is unnatural because when I think evolutionary wise, wouldn't the human being want to procreate and continue the species? Two males or two females cannot do this. The human body is created to extend the life of the species, just like any other animal. No species wants to lead itself to destruction.
