1. Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Possible explanations for homosexuality explained.

Discussion in 'General Religious Debates' started by madhatter85, Nov 2, 2009.

  1. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    It makes the most sense to me that having homosexual urges is not something someone chooses. So far there are 3 most likely possibilities (well 4, if you count ambiguous genitalia and a mistake made as to what gender the child REALLY is on a biological level)

    1) That homosexuality is a choice.
    This I believe to be the most unlikely to the core group that identify as homosexuals. However, I don't believe it is entirely without merit. There are some people who follow fads or trends of the minorities because they feel it is fashionable. I believe there certainly are a few people who do chose to be attracted to the same sex.

    2) That it is genetic.
    This i believe to be the most likely cause of homosexual urges/behavior in animals and humans. However, the argument is made that it's evolution. This cannot be the case. Evolution is caused by external stimuli over multiple generations of a species. Also, evolution will never cause behavior or changes at a genetic level that would be a hinder to it's own propagation. Unless, the species has become subject to natural selection and is slated, by nature, to become extinct. This cannot be the case as more than 3% of the species would be affected. Also the trend of an increasing population has occurred over the known history of homosexual behavior. This leaves one conclusion, genetic defect or flaw just like genetic predisposition towards autism, cancer, heart disease,

    3) That they are a product of their environment.
    This is possible, however it is not plausible. Due to the nature of our sensory perceptions and how it affects the brain It is NOT what the brain receives as sensory information that defines who we are. Rather, it is what our brain does with that information that defines us.
    Beau Lotto: Optical illusions show how we see | Video on TED.com
    This means that if it is external stimuli that causes homosexual behavior, it requires either A) a genetic predisposition to interpret the stimui in a way that would cause homosexuality. (see argument #2) or B) The person consciously interpreted the data that resulted in homosexual behavior (see argument #1). The most likely of the two would be A. example:
    Two people experience the same traumatic event, they are of the exact same demographic, same geological area, everything in their life in nearly identical. Subject A blocks out the memories and experienced trauma but represents itself through nightmares, paranoia, and other adverse psychological behavior. Patient B remembers the entire event but remains unaffected by it psychologically and has "come to terms with it" without any adverse effects. The proposed reason behind this is genetic, biological, or physiological predispositions to how the brain interprets data. Which then refers us back to Argument #2
     
  2. Autodidact

    Autodidact Intentionally Blank

    Messages:
    23,259
    #2 is interesting, but the analysis is oversimplistic. First, you need to separate male and female homosexuality. I hope it is obvious that there is no reason these would be the same, and it appears they are not. Second, it is true that homosexuality appears superficially to be counter-reproductive, so we need to ask why it persists. In addition, gay men do not appear to have a higher percentage of gay male sons, as far as we know.


    re: men--it appears that male homosexuality may be vestigial, and related to enhanced heterosexuality in their mothers and sisters. Another possibility or contributing factor is neither genetic nor post-birth environmental, but influence of the pre-natal environment. An interesting finding that points in this direction is that the more older brothers you have, the more likely you are to be gay (male.)
    One factor that any theory must account for is that gay male identical twins are much more likely to have gay male twin brothers than are fraternal twins. That is, male homosexuality does appear to be about 50% (IIRC) heritable.

    I posted a hypothesis about female homosexuality in another thread which I am happy to repeat if anyone is interested.
     
  3. Autodidact

    Autodidact Intentionally Blank

    Messages:
    23,259
    Now here's a question: how do you explain homosexuality-obsession in apparently heterosexual people? Is it genetic? Environmental? How can we explain this abnormality? Does anyone have a theory?
     
  4. Just_me_Mike

    Just_me_Mike New Member

    Messages:
    8,706
    Sure I do. If a child is never taught homosexuality is bad, it is natural to think both men and women are beautiful creatures. Sensation is sensation, whether from a male or female.

    In other words, turn the lights off and it all feels good. It just means our being is attracted to stimulous, but it is our beliefs that control or not control what we allow our being to be involved with.

    Does that make sense?
     
  5. Alceste

    Alceste Vagabond

    Messages:
    26,030
    Closet cases. Every one of them.
     
  6. Autodidact

    Autodidact Intentionally Blank

    Messages:
    23,259
    So are you saying that people like the OP are repressed bisexuals?
     
  7. Quagmire

    Quagmire Imaginary talking monkey Staff Member Premium Member

    Messages:
    42,780
  8. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    Or, that it's a very controversial topic that has the potential to impact our nation, not to mention religious freedoms. Thus is becomes fascinating.
     
  9. Venatoris

    Venatoris Active Member

    Messages:
    693
    I'm going to have to disagree with all of the scenarios in the OP. I relate sexual preference to food preference. I hate black olives.
    Did I choose to hate black olives? No, I didn't make a conscious choice to dislike them, they taste bad to me.
    Is it genetic? I don't think so, unless someone can show me the gene that makes me hate black olives I will not believe that sexual preference is genetic either.
    Is it a product of my environment? Obviously not, everyone in my family loves black olives but me. It is none of the above. Taste is not genetic nor is it a choice and it's definitely not environmental. It is what it is with no rhyme or reason. It's just our nature.

    Am I the only one who thinks this?
     
  10. Autodidact

    Autodidact Intentionally Blank

    Messages:
    23,259
    And the resulting question: should homosexuality-obsessed people be allowed to marry? Views on that?
     
  11. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    ( I don't like black olives also and my mother LOVED them)
    Most likely it is biology, generally things that taste "bad" to people are based on a biological or even psycological level. example, you may not like the look of them and therefore when your brain makes you think it tastes bad.
    Again, as explained above it is not environmental stimuli that shapes us but it is what we do with that information. It is very possible that you have a genetic predisposition to not like olives.
     
  12. Jeremiah

    Jeremiah New Member

    Messages:
    3,369
    What is wrong with you? Why do you have such contempt for homosexuals that you have to debase them like this? It's a natural part of life, get over it, and it is NOT a "flaw".
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
    challupa likes this.
  13. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    I don't have contempt for homosexuals, I have been more than fair in my debates and never brought up what is "right or wrong", brought religion into the argument, or mentioned morality.

    Yes, we agree that flaws are a natural part of life. That still does not mean society is required to provide benefits to people in same-sex relationships that are given to heterosexual couples. The reason those benefits were given was to invest in the future of the nation, and marriage was ruled by the Supreme Court 9-0 to be fundamental to our very existence and survival during the Loving vs Virgina trial. Homosexual relationships and behavior are not fundamental to our very existence and survival.
     
  14. Jeremiah

    Jeremiah New Member

    Messages:
    3,369
    "I don't have contempt for homosexuals"

    You are now lying to me.

    " I have been more than fair in my debates"

    No, you have not. You call it a "defect" and "flaw" without substantiating it as such, at all. Then you group homosexuality with the two most devastating diseases ever to plague humankind. Not only that, but you have demonstrated a poor understanding of the topic and the surrounding elements.

    "Yes, we agree that flaws are a natural part of life. That still does not mean society is required to provide benefits to people in same-sex relationships that are given to heterosexual couples. The reason those benefits were given was to invest in the future of the nation, and marriage was ruled by the Supreme Court 9-0 to be fundamental to our very existence and survival during the Loving vs Virgina trial. Homosexual relationships and behavior are not fundamental to our very existence and survival."

    So now we see the wolf-in-sheepskin.
     
  15. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    The please explain, and disprove that a genetic condition that would inhibit the propagation of a species is not a defect or flaw.
     
  16. OmarKhayyam

    OmarKhayyam New Member

    Messages:
    2,043
    you really like that SC case. I wonder if has occurred to you that several SC decisions are now regarded as shall we say - questionable.

    Dred Scott v. Sandford
    Plessy v. Ferguson

    Seemed like good ideas at the time. We who live in 21st century would differ.
     
  17. darkendless

    darkendless Guardian of Asgaard

    Messages:
    6,285
    Why persist with the notion that homosexuals do not reproduce?

    In another thread you gave evidence for their "bad parenting" so you acknowledge that homosexuals are just as useless as the rest of us at parenting.

    But now you suggest they do not reproduce? Weird is it not?
     
  18. Jeremiah

    Jeremiah New Member

    Messages:
    3,369
    Six billion and counting, on this bloated, hyper-birth-rate, increasingly shrinking hunk of rock. The massive 3-5% of homosexuals, certainly, does not seem to be slowing it down any, nor has it impeded its growth to this point. But it would definitely be nice if it would curve some of the growth rate of your high and mighty "propagation", before it breeds us into a barren wasteland and eventual death of our entire race. Maybe homosexuals are God's backup plan, maybe He is going to increase the number of homosexual to counteract you rabbit-breeding heterosexuals.
     
  19. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    Sounds like someone is angry with the world and/or doesn't have the facts straight. Birth rates are already in steady decline.
    https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2127rank.html

    If it were a natural evolutionary response to overpopulation, a substantial number higher than 3% would be the case. However, it's not.
     
  20. madhatter85

    madhatter85 Transhumanist

    Messages:
    4,109
    Individually we are all capable of the same parenting (except studies have shown women are better nurturers, but at the same note girls with an absent father are more likely to be sexually promiscuous), co-parenting is a completely different story and adds an incredible number of complexities to individual parenting.

    Homosexual behavior does not, and will never have the capacity to reproduce as long as we remain a sexually reproductive species.
     
    Last edited: Nov 3, 2009
Verification:
Draft saved Draft deleted