<p>
</p>
<p>.......AND?</p>
<p>I really think that homosexuality must be nature as opposed to nurture, because only a crazy masochist would choose to be perpetually victimized by right-wing zealots because of his or her sexual orientation.</p>
<p>lets see...my grandfather fathered one conservative, one moderate and one gay child...kind of weird huh?</p>
<p>I believe that homosexuality is a psychosexual phase that all young children go through but that most grow out of.</p>
<p>It's really funny that this thread was created around the time that I'm being bombarded with such questions in real life. My story (about how I outed myself through a gay-rights project that got national recognition) made the front page on the two major newspapers in my area and was also included in one of the two major newspapers in Chicago. I intended to slowly come out through a project, but now, the entire city knows.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Marriage was meant to be between a man and a woman.
[/quote]
Supporting evidence? Didn't think so. As far as I care, marriage can be between a goat and a lizard.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I really think that homosexuality must be nature as opposed to nurture, because only a crazy masochist would choose to be perpetually victimized by right-wing zealots because of his or her sexual orientation.
[/quote]
Fallacy. Early Christians chose to be victimized rather than submit to pagans. Oh, "his or her" ..haha..very PC</p>
<p>I googled gay twin studies a while ago, and the concurrance between identical twins was pretty high, supporting genetics theories.</p>
<p>^^Fallacy. Early Christians chose to be victimized rather than submit to pagans so that they could be martyrs and feel like God loved them more since they constantly suffered selflessly for Him.</p>
<p>And I'm always PC ;)</p>
<p>I think the majority of "gays" are just attention-seekers although there are a few true genetic homosexuals.</p>
<p>HAHHAHHAAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA sai thats gotta be a joke.</p>
<p>I dont think you would change your sexual orientation just for attention and to be ridiculed.</p>
<p>To answer the question...no. I truly believe, and have heard of cases of, people changing their orientation.</p>
<p>Well, no. The studies are far from conclusive. Here I quote a Boston Globe article on the study you are referring to</p>
<p>
[quote]
Bailey's 1991 twin study is still cited by other researchers as one of the pillars in the genetic argument for homosexuality. But his follow-up study using a comprehensive registry of twins in Australia found a much lower rate of similarity in sexual orientation between identical twins, about 20 percent, down from 50 percent. Bailey still believes that genes make important contributions to sexual orientation. But, he says, "that's not where I'd bet the real breakthroughs will come.
[/quote]
See, if it was genetical, then why not both gays? Identical genes=identical sexual preference, right?</p>
<p>There is no definitive answer yet, so I am going to play this by the ear. Anyway, I don't really care either way. Men can choose to like partners of whatever sex they want...doesn't matter to me if its voluntary or not.</p>
<p>Yea, I am gonna go out of my way to be as non PC as possible from now.</p>
<p>
[quote]
To answer the question...no. I truly believe, and have heard of cases of, people changing their orientation.
[/quote]
You're right about that. There are cats who counsel gays and turn them straight.</p>
<p>yea, many of which "found God" and just attempt to suppress their sexual desires.</p>
<p>I <3 Homos!</p>
<p>"To answer the question...no. I truly believe, and have heard of cases of, people changing their orientation."</p>
<p>sure, you can "change" who you sleep with... you can be heterosexual and participate in homosexual acts but that doesn't mean you "turned" homosexual. and you can be homosexual and participate in heterosexual acts but it doesn't mean you've changed your orientation.</p>
<p>being homosexual is innate. you realize that you are, you don't decide it. i agree with bob, you can just suppress your sexual desires. but doing so means just living a lie.</p>
<p>anyways, i think we have bigger concerns out there than whether homosexuality is wrong or not. some will think it is bad, some won't. the fact is, it exists. and as a society, we're going to have to accept that and give equality to all and move on to more pressing issues such has global warming, dependency on oil, things of that nature that really impact the future.</p>
<p>It's interesting that when some gays say it's entirely genetic then they're right on, but when some gays say it's not genetic then they must not be real gays or they are just trying to "repress" it. </p>
<p>The two most popular experiments/findings that "showed" homosexuality was genetic were the supposed "X gene" one published in TIME (strangely, even after it was proven incorrect) and a study of brains by a man named LeVay (who initiated the frenzy in the early nineties by manipulating the research pool; a fact clearly understood among those who have researched his "experiments.") </p>
<p>I did this research like a year and a half ago when I grew interested in people's "claims," which I heard during debates.</p>
<p>This website is very objective. It presented the facts and follow-up findings as delicately as possible; perhaps TOO delicately. The reality of the situation is that every single shred of scientific evidence to date favoring genetic foundations of homosexuality has been proven, without a doubt, wrong. Going all the way back to Kinsey, we can find data manipulation. An assistant directly involved with his studies in the realm of homosexuality recounted that Kinsey specifically told his surveyors to seek out prisons and other areas where cases of homosexuality would be rampant in order to generate a biased sampling of the population. The Kinsey study is the one from which the 10% figure comes and no credible organization still accepts that number as remotely true. You will only ever hear that number from A)misinformed fools on a bandwagon or B)informed gay rights groups with an agenda.</p>
<p>As many people have said, biomedical studies on the "gay gene" theory have been inconclusive. No one knows. No one is claiming that they know. What's factual is that homosexuality is not a choice.</p>
<p>"As many people have said, biomedical studies on the "gay gene" theory have been inconclusive. No one knows. No one is claiming that they know. What's factual is that homosexuality is not a choice."</p>
<p>No one is claiming that they know? Nobody knows, but it's a fact?</p>
<p>...These questions and possibly more after gianscolere1's next post!</p>
<p>O_O</p>
<p>Let me repeat what I said:
As many people have said, biomedical studies on the "gay gene" theory have been inconclusive. No one knows. No one is claiming that they know. What's factual is that homosexuality is not a choice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You misunderstood the post. No one is claiming to know, for certain, that homosexuality is genetic. But regardless of whether it's genetic or not, we now know that homosexuality is NOT a choice.</p>
<p>If it's nurture and not nature then yes it is within choosing. It might not have been a straightforward choice such as right or left, nor consciously chosen to begin with, but those affected can still choose to change (assuming it's nurture) because it was a "choice," however unconscious, to begin with.</p>