Lifestyle choice
Homosexuality can be inherited from parents, which is, I admit, a bit odd. I mean, parents tend to not have matching sets of naughty bits so, you know, there’s that.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
December 11th, 2012 at 8:30 pm
Read the second sentence in that article again. You see the words “mathematical modeling”? Yeah, exactly.
The evidence for inheritability is pretty thin. Unlike, say, alcoholism. However, we don’t use the genetic basis of that to approve, excuse or condone drunkards. Nor does it prove that they aren’t individuals with free will, and the ability to choose how they live their own lives. The whole “genetic” basis for homosexuality has always struck me as a little silly, and mostly irrelevant.
December 11th, 2012 at 8:37 pm
Our actions are always our choice.
Even if one is “wired” that way, one still has to actively engage in it.
Quite a bit different than being born black or white.
So, the “civil rights” argument is invalid.
December 11th, 2012 at 11:48 pm
>So, the “civil rights” argument is invalid.
WTF? I always thought my civil rights allowed me to do anything consensual by myself or with any other adult, and now you tell me I’ve got to get a pass from some people like you Branden?
Fuck that shit.
December 12th, 2012 at 12:24 am
Standard Mischief,
Nobody is proposing preventing anybody from doing something in the privacy of their own home. The current debate has nothing to do with Civil Liberties, but instead is about subsidies, entitlements and govt sanction of personal behavior.
It is not a matter of the govt in our out of the bedroom. The current marriage debate is about the govt being in the bedroom and favoring one sort of morality, or the govt being in the bedroom and favoring another sort of morality.
December 12th, 2012 at 1:53 am
Clearly it’s not genetic, no one is born gay.
December 12th, 2012 at 5:29 am
I remember little boys at school that hung around with girls and talked like queers. It seemed pretty obvious at the time that there was something very different about them. I knew I liked pretty girls before I started kindergarten. I don’t have any trouble believing people are born gay.
That being said, it pisses me off that governments favor any kind of relationship. I’d like the government out of the bedroom and out of the church.
December 12th, 2012 at 10:33 am
I know this may come as a surprise but sometimes gay people end up, for one reason or another, having heterosexual sex. And then, of course, there’s in vitro.
December 12th, 2012 at 11:39 am
I also knew I liked girls at age 5 ;). And in fifth grade, my daughter is on her third crush for a boy, and not the one that has a crush on her. These guys have an agenda, even if it is only grant money from other people with an agenda, and they’ll come up with all kinds of nonsense.
Comparing it to alcoholism is mildly relevant. Nobody has established an alcoholism gene and so far nobody has determined whether alcoholism is even polygenic or polymorphous. “Choice” might be too strong a word. Certainly cognitive-behavior can help but the success rate is very low.
December 12th, 2012 at 12:06 pm
I love how some of you argue all day about the freedom to keep arms and dispise the gov for telling what you can and can’t do… But willfully support the gov telling someone else what the can and can not do. Hey, guess what…. YOU’RE the problem here.
Some of the same people that mock their anti-gun opponents for being on the losing side of history, are, against gay rights/marriage, very much on the losing side of history.
Hypocrites and assholes, nothing to see here, move along.
December 12th, 2012 at 12:16 pm
Other Steve. This is likely the best comment blog on the internet. Everybody tries to contribute to the thread with facts or sincerely held opinions.
Please, do not try to replace me as the biggest ranter, here. Where will I go? 😉
Most of the comments I have seen so far are not anti-gay, just skeptical of the “science”.
December 12th, 2012 at 1:00 pm
Michael>It is not a matter of the govt in our out of the bedroom. The current marriage debate is about the govt being in the bedroom and favoring one sort of morality, or the govt being in the bedroom and favoring another sort of morality.
The angle I don’t see anyone taking is why must the government be sanctioning marriage (originally a religious ceremony) at all.
In fact, for much of our countries earliest history, having broken away from the official church of the state (The Church of England) there were no laws regarding this religious ceremony.
So what happened? It appears the state laws came about thanks to Jim Crow, those Mormons getting all plural, and the need for the state to hand out entitlements.
Government shouldn’t be in the morality business period.
December 12th, 2012 at 2:24 pm
A lot of folk, especially gay guys, tend to try the opposite gender for a bit. Not everyone — my brother’s still proud to have kept his ‘gold star’ — but it’s common enough that gold star is an actual term in the community. His boyfriend’s about as much of a stereotype as you could expect to see, as a guy studying to be a nurse and quite prone to cliched mannerisms, but he’d had a girlfriend before and not exactly minded the sex so much as preferred a different type.
You’ve also got partial carriers, either in the form of bisexuality, or in the form of straight folk who’ve only got some of the epigenetic markers, but not enough for the guys to favor a cock-flavored lollipop. I can go both ways, and am currently in a het relationship, so if the SO and I didn’t absolutely loathe children, there’d be one method. One epigenetic marker isn’t passed down from generation to generation, and that’s number of older siblings: the oldest child is more likely to be straight, even with all other genetic matters being similar, than a fourth or fifth kid.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:24 pm
I am sure that just like Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes, there is Type 1 “Genetic” Homosexuality and Type 2 “Adult Onset” Homosexuality.
In the case of Types 1, you just have to live with it.
But in Types 2, perhaps diet and exercise is an effective treatment for both.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:25 pm
It’s just something that happens, like being left-handed.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
I support their right to have a consensual relationship with anyone, it’s none of my business. My wife and I don’t have a marriage license, we were married by our pastor and that’s good enough. I saw no reason to pay a fee to marry. The IRS doesn’t care and my local county/state shouldn’t either.
December 12th, 2012 at 3:41 pm
This. And despite the way things have changed even over just the last decade, it’s frequently due more to social pressure or fears of family rejection than any actual desire to be with someone of the opposite sex.
And even if it were 100% genetic, without any non-genetic influences either way, and 100% absolute (i.e., no bisexuality at all), there are still these things called “recessive genes” that allow otherwise reproduction-inhibiting traits to remain in the population.
So, yes. It is entirely possible that homosexuality is inheritable – even if the people it’s inherited from are not themselves gay.
December 12th, 2012 at 8:03 pm
“Government” or “society” has a vested interest in promoting monogamous heterosexual relationships, therefore the tax and insurance benefits for marriage. Monogamous because of the public health benefit of not having STDs, plus not having children from incestuous relationships, and heterosexual, because the bone smugglers (just heard that today, have to use it) won’t produce the next generation of workers, taxpayers, and soldiers.
If you don’t swing that way, fine, but don’t demand the benefits that exist to influence your choice, without taking that choice.
December 12th, 2012 at 9:49 pm
So, if they can find the epigenetic marker that promotes homosexuality, do think some folks will do their best to not pass this marker on?
Heh.
December 12th, 2012 at 10:37 pm
So, Mr Evilwrench, if the government can describe a “vested interest” in something, they are free to control you life over it?
I suggest you read “1984” or even “Brave New World.”
Or maybe some German history from the late 1930s.
Or some histories of the Ukraine under Stalin from say the late 1920s.
December 12th, 2012 at 10:38 pm
Kristophr,
Look up the Italian definition/translation of sinistre. Close to sinister. It means “left-handed.” And the Italians tried (maybe are still trying) to wipe it out.
December 13th, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Hmm – interesting to bring up Civil Rights.
I have no problem with kids shooting guns, If they have permission from their guardians, and they are properly taught and supervised. In some cases, even without parental permission.
I have a serious problem with kids having gay sex with adults. If the parent gives permission, that is just evidence of bad parenting.
But I know that anti-gun folks think the same way about guns: if the parents give permission for a kid to shoot a gun, then the parent is a bad parent.
The difference I see is that I’m presuming gay sex is an adult manipulating and using a kid, with a high chance of bad outcomes, whereas I presume shooting will have good outcomes – fun, healthy, builds coordination, confidence, and focus.
December 13th, 2012 at 11:07 pm
These threads always end up showing how gunnies are usually pseudo-libertarians.