What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:31 am

rabble wrote:Yeah. Right. Better for a kid to grow up in a series of foster homes surrounded by overworked social workers, eh?


Bulshit, Rabble. Honesty is not your strong point, is it? Right after the part you quoted from me I said:

As for whether they are better off in a 2 gay parent (or either sex) household than a single parent or foster care, that would depend on the gay parents, the single parents and the foster care, wouldn't it? Not all foster care is horrible, not all gay couples are great parents.

And, add the straight couple into that mix. There will be situations where the kid is better with 2 gay parents than 2 straight ones. Depends on the parents involved.


John Henry

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7869
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby rabble » Tue Jun 04, 2013 8:48 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:
rabble wrote:Yeah. Right. Better for a kid to grow up in a series of foster homes surrounded by overworked social workers, eh?


Bulshit, Rabble. Honesty is not your strong point, is it? Right after the part you quoted from me I said:

As for whether they are better off in a 2 gay parent (or either sex) household than a single parent or foster care, that would depend on the gay parents, the single parents and the foster care, wouldn't it? Not all foster care is horrible, not all gay couples are great parents.

And, add the straight couple into that mix. There will be situations where the kid is better with 2 gay parents than 2 straight ones. Depends on the parents involved.

John Henry

And not all same sex couples are going to turn out gay kids.

And neither you nor bludgeon have answered the question of why in hell that is even something to worry about. You seem to imply that it's bad but never come right out and say it.

So I'll simplify my question and make it two parts:
1. Is homosexuality a bad thing?

2. If so, Why?

We have to get these foundation premises laid down or all we're doing is dancing around the real subject.

jman111
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3614
Joined: Wed Aug 12, 2009 12:43 pm
Location: Dane County
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby jman111 » Tue Jun 04, 2013 9:16 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:My problem with same sex households is that I think kids should have a dad and a mom. I think kids need both male and female influence and they do not get that in a same sex household.
johnfajardohenry wrote:As for whether they are better off in a 2 gay parent (or either sex) household than a single parent or foster care, that would depend on the gay parents, the single parents and the foster care, wouldn't it? Not all foster care is horrible, not all gay couples are great parents.
johnfajardohenry wrote:And, add the straight couple into that mix. There will be situations where the kid is better with 2 gay parents than 2 straight ones. Depends on the parents involved.

So, JH thinks that kids need straight parents...except sometimes they're better off with other arrangements. They need two parents, except sometimes having only one is better. Kids should be with their parents, unless foster care is better.

But, mostly, same sex couples shouldn't have kids.

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:26 am

78 posts so far and nobody has answered Bludgeon's question. Lots of snarking at him for asking it but nobody seems to know the answer.

Have any of you here ever seen any actual studies that homosexuality is not choice but genetic?

And if so, if you can, do you have any links?

No doubt there are such studies as there are studies showing that it is choice and/or some combination of genetics and choice (or nurture etc)

But so far everyone just seems to be taking it on faith. And a fairly rabid faith at that.

Don't they teach critical thinking up there in Wisconsin?

John Henry

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7869
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby rabble » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:35 am

Nobody's answered mine either.

Is homosexuality bad?

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:55 am

rabble wrote:Nobody's answered mine either.

Is homosexuality bad?


What do you mean by "bad"?

Do you mean morally wrong?

I've been pretty clear about my views on that. That is a decision up to the two parties involved.

Is it bad healthwise? Seems to be.

John Henry

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Thu Jun 06, 2013 9:57 am

rabble wrote:Nobody's answered mine either.

Is homosexuality bad?


I take it this is a no?

That you have never seen studies and are taking the homosexuality is genetic argument simply on faith.

Right?

John Henry

Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:03 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:Is it bad healthwise? Seems to be.


Please elaborate.

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby wack wack » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:05 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:That you have never seen studies and are taking the homosexuality is genetic argument simply on faith.

Right?

John Henry


I have not seen any studies, but I have a lifetime of experience, observation and anecdotal evidence which tells me nature over nurture, no question.

Now, what do you have? I showed you mine, now let's see yours. Do you have evidence of studies demonstrating that homosexuality is a learned behavior? Do you have lots of experience around homosexuals? Do you have a lifetime of observation and anecdotal evidence?

Or do you just have more BS from that big fat head of opinion?

Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:06 am

wack wack wrote: Do you have lots of experience around homosexuals?


He's fixed homosexual refrigerators and taught teh gayz in college classes.

johnfajardohenry
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1778
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2012 12:22 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby johnfajardohenry » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:15 am

Stebben84 wrote:
johnfajardohenry wrote:Is it bad healthwise? Seems to be.


Please elaborate.


In 2008, men who have sex with men (MSM) accounted for 63% of primary and secondary syphilis cases in the United States. MSM often are diagnosed with other bacterial STDs, including chlamydia and gonorrhea infections.

Gay and bisexual men can be infected with HPV (Human Papillomavirus), the most common STD in the United States. Some types of HPV cause genital and anal warts and some can lead to the development of anal and oral cancer. Men who have sex with men are 17 times more likely to develop anal cancer than heterosexual men. Men who are HIV-positive are even more likely than those who are uninfected to develop anal cancer.


http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/STD.htm

Men who have sex with men are at even greater risk for suicide attempts, especially before the age of 25.


http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/suicide-vi ... ention.htm

Studies have shown that, when compared with the general population, gay and bisexual men, lesbian, and transgender individuals are more likely to:

Use alcohol and drugs
Have higher rates of substance abuse
Are less likely to abstain from alcohol and drug use
Are more likely to continue heavy drinking into later life[1]


http://www.cdc.gov/msmhealth/substance-abuse.htm

CDC=Centers for Disease Control.

Much more at the links and at the CDC site. Basically gay men, or "men who have sex with men (MSM)" as they call it have higher risks for many kids of disease and risky behavior.

So back to you. Anything you can point to to refute this?

Perhaps some life experience and anecdotal data? That seems to pass muster here provided that it is supporting the right point of view.

John Henry

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby wack wack » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:35 am

wack wack wrote:
johnfajardohenry wrote:That you have never seen studies and are taking the homosexuality is genetic argument simply on faith.

Right?

John Henry


I have not seen any studies, but I have a lifetime of experience, observation and anecdotal evidence which tells me nature over nurture, no question.

Now, what do you have? I showed you mine, now let's see yours. Do you have evidence of studies demonstrating that homosexuality is a learned behavior? Do you have lots of experience around homosexuals? Do you have a lifetime of observation and anecdotal evidence?

Or do you just have more BS from that big fat head of opinion?


John Henry, I answered your question directly and clearly. Please return the favor.

Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6073
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm
Contact:

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby Stebben84 » Thu Jun 06, 2013 10:48 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:So back to you. Anything you can point to to refute this?


What this study shows is that promiscuous homosexual sex is more likely to cause STDs. It does not show that "being homosexual is more unhealthy that being heterosexual."

Show me in the study where homosexuals in a monogamous relationship are more unhealthy that heterosexuals in one.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7869
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby rabble » Thu Jun 06, 2013 11:19 am

johnfajardohenry wrote:What do you mean by "bad"?

Do you mean morally wrong?

I've been pretty clear about my views on that. That is a decision up to the two parties involved.

John Henry


I mean, as in not a good thing for any reason.

We're getting there. Apparently, it's only bad if it involves someone under 18, then?

Why are we worried if a kid catches gayness from the home she's in?

Detritus
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2664
Joined: Wed May 13, 2009 9:42 pm

Re: What is the case for the 'genetic sexuality' argument?

Postby Detritus » Thu Jun 06, 2013 1:16 pm

I hesitate to step in here, but I find the naivete of the question breathtaking. As some of the other posters have suggested, things are a lot more complicated than the headline "Sexuality: Nature or Nurture?" acknowledges.

For one thing, there are at least three aspects of human sexuality that are in complex relation with each other: biological gender, psycho-social gender identification, and affective orientation. Biological gender, although it seems simple enough (male or female), is a mix of genetics (X/Y) and fetal development processes, which can result in one gender according to genetics and another according to gonads, or a mix of the two genders. Psycho-social gender identification is the question of whether an individual considers themselves male, female, or a combination of the two. The relationship of biological gender to psycho-social gender identification is not at all clear; we see examples of a contradiction between the two in transexual individuals and some (but not all) transvestite individuals, some of whom declare that they always knew they were the wrong gender, suggesting some kind of biological basis. Some of the famous experiments on "feminizing" male rats with heavy hormone treatments may provide a clue to this contradiction--except that transexual/transvestite individuals don't typically show such hormonal crossing. On the contrary, pre-op and post-op transexuals have to maintain a steady diet of hormone supplements to maintain their chosen gender identity.

Affective orientation is the most complicated. In spite of the rhetoric of LGB, and the insistence by many people that they always liked girls, or they always liked boys, it's clear that, for many people, affection (up to and including sexual attraction) is much fuzzier in its targeting than that. Some people feel strongly one way at one point in their lives, and then swing in another direction later; other people are more settled in one orientation but feel attractions in another direction that are never strong enough to be acted upon, but are there nevertheless. Lay affective orientation on top of biological gender and psycho-social gender identification, and you get human sexuality in all its variety.

Biologically we as a species may not be as flexible as clownfish, but mentally and emotionally we put them to shame.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests