Quote:
Originally Posted by HydrogenBond
I was making a distinction between natural and synthetic homosexuality. Some of the earliest debates were between homosexuality being a mental condition versus due to natural or genetic causes. Science seems to lean toward genetic. But the science never said, all forms of gay behavior, are genetic.
As an analogy, some people are said to have genes that create a propensity toward alcoholism. But choosing to have a drink does not mean one has the drunk gene. They are two different things, with the first genetic and second due to reasons connected to choice.
Humans have free will and choice, with choice being impacted by culture, peer pressure, marketing, etc. This is where natural homosexual arguments start to break down, and mental arguments play an increasing role. This is the synthetic side. In the example above, one can become a drunk, even without the drunk gene. All one needs to do is form a habit, and you may not be able to tell the difference between them and someone with the drunk gene.
I was curious about the relative proportions of natural and synthetic or matter and mind. Does anyone have an estimate? Maybe once the illusive gay gene is found we could get some hard numbers.
|
So, . . . did you mean "elusive" or "illusory" or some other word?
Did you happen to read the abstracts I posted a week or so ago? Several genetic and prenatal indicators of sexual preference have been identified--nothing so simple as a "Gay Gene." There is also no "Straw Man Gene," which is what homophobes seem to be hoping for.
So once research I've posted has been disproven--and I have a couple dozen other sources I can cite if the ones I've already cited aren't enough--then you'll be ready to start trying to find some research of your own.
So little time. So little effort.
--lemit
