So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA | Page 9 | TigerDroppings.com

Posted byMessage
AlaTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Aug 2006
13713 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

Yeah that's not what the article states.


Just so we can be clear that I have read the article:

quote:

The hereditary link of homosexuality has long been established, but scientists knew it was not a strictly genetic link, because there are many pairs of identical twins who have differing sexualities. Scientists from the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis say homosexuality seems to have an epigenetic, not a genetic link. Long thought to have some sort of hereditary link, a group of scientists suggested Tuesday that homosexuality is linked to epi-marks — extra layers of information that control how certain genes are expressed. These epi-marks are usually, but not always, "erased" between generations. In homosexuals, these epi-marks aren't erased — they're passed from father-to-daughter or mother-to-son, explains William Rice, an evolutionary biologist at the University of California Santa Barbara and lead author of the study. "There is compelling evidence that epi-marks contribute to both the similarity and dissimilarity of family members, and can therefore feasibly contribute to the observed familial inheritance of homosexuality and its low concordance between [identical] twins," Rice notes. Rice and his team created a mathematical model that explains why homosexuality is passed through epi-marks, not genetics. Evolutionarily speaking, if homosexuality was solely a genetic trait, scientists would expect the trait to eventually disappear because homosexuals wouldn't be expected to reproduce. But because these epi-marks provide an evolutionary advantage for the parents of homosexuals: They protect fathers of homosexuals from underexposure to testosterone and mothers of homosexuals from overexposure to testosterone while they are in gestation. "These epi-marks protect fathers and mothers from excess or underexposure to testosterone — when they carry over to opposite-sex offspring, it can cause the masculinization of females or the feminization of males," Rice says, which can lead to a child becoming gay. Rice notes that these markers are "highly variable" and that only strong epi-marks will result in a homosexual offspring. Though scientists have long suspected some sort of genetic link, Rice says studies attempting to explain why people are gay have been few and far between.


They are proposing that the cause of Homosexuality is NOT Genetic, but Epi-Genetic. In other words, something else is causing the genes to behave differently - something above or outside the gene. This does not mean that it is not hereditary, but it does mean that the deviation is not hardwired into the DNA.

So, what I am saying is that this theory SEEMS to be stating that the causes are NOT genetic, but Homosexuality is also not just a choice. There is a definite internal cause to it.

All that I am saying is that the Bible would not disagree with this hypothesis. But, it would call the cause the hereditary presence of Original Sin.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
AlaTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Aug 2006
13713 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

quote: did you just suggest with this line that science is a religion? quote: Of course.


You stopped early. I added "For some people . . ." Obviously Science as a discipline IS NOT a religion. But, some people invest religious qualities to it and look to it to answer all the big questions and give meaning to life. That really cannot be denied.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
GeauxTigerTM
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2006
11866 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

Of course.




I'll only add for L.A.'s benefit, that this thread did not become derailed with religious nonsense (it was derailed with stupid bull shite from the OP's erroneous title, but be that as it may) until you showed up telling everyone how this confirms the bible on page 7.

A topic that had nothing to do with religion, and you had to bible it up. This is why we can't have nice things here...






Back to top
SoulGlo
LSU Fan
Shinin' Through
Member since Dec 2011
3608 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


Interesting.

I posted a thread a while ago about gays saying "I was born this way" like it was some sort of birth defect. Well, it's not a birth defect. It's a choice, albeit mostly a very deeply rooted choice. That doesn't mean anyone needs to change how they express or act upon their sexuality. If you're gay, own it. Good for you. Don't push your shite in my face. I won't push my shite in yours.

When it comes to marriage and "equal rights," the federal government has no business in the marriage business in the first place. Get them the frick out.






yes, the shite pushing comment was on purpose.






Back to top
AlaTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Aug 2006
13713 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


I said, "Of course" and then added "for some people."

If I was unclear, let me be clear. I was saying that Science can act in a religious way for "some people" because they invest ultimate meaning to it. This is obviously not the case for all people or even a majority and it is definitely not how the scientific discipline was originally designed.

quote:

I'll only add for L.A.'s benefit, that this thread did not become derailed with religious nonsense (it was derailed with stupid bull shite from the OP's erroneous title, but be that as it may) until you showed up telling everyone how this confirms the bible on page 7. A topic that had nothing to do with religion, and you had to bible it up. This is why we can't have nice things here...


So, even mentioning the religion that over 70% of Americans claim as their own is a foul? It was meant as a side comment that addressed the complete disavowal of any religious argument against homosexuality while Science is possibly floating a theory that would actually be compatible with what the Bible says.

I am NOT saying that this proves the Bible or God. I am simply saying that for those who are religious - which is A LOT of people, by the way, their reasons for opposing homosexuality are rooted in their desire to be faithful to their religion that also opposes it. IF Science is floating a theory that is actually compatible with the arguments of Christianity, then that will only bolster the claims of religious people instead of dissuading them.

If you cannot see how this is related to the current political controversy over gay rights and gay marriage then I don't really know how to help you. The presence of Christianity and the Bible and religious adherents in America is probably something that you should just get used to. It is not going away and yes, it does influence political arguments. Why is that so hard to see?



This post was edited on 12/13 at 4:07 pm


Back to top
GeauxTigerTM
LSU Fan
Member since Sep 2006
11866 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

So, even mentioning the religion that over 70% of Americans claim as their own is a foul? It was meant as a side comment that addressed the complete disavowal of any religious argument against homosexuality while Science is possibly floating a theory that would actually be compatible with what the Bible says.


The thread had gone 7 pages discussing the validity the study. Wait, that's not true. It was mostly discussing the validity of the article which was reporting on the study, but whatever. Point is, you felt the need to insert religion here. I'm not saying you shouldn't be able to do that...just that you doing that will AUTOMATICALLY garner responses from people who do not subscribe to your religion. Take a look at the last 2 pages.

quote:

If you cannot see how this is related to the current political controversy over gay rights and gay marriage then I don't really know how to help you. The presence of Christianity and the Bible and religious adherents in America is probably something that you should just get used to. It is not going away and yes, it does influence political arguments. Why is that so hard to see?


Hey...I'm not arguing with you. I agree!!! It's why I've lobbied to not have religious topics banned. The problem is that by allowing you to state things like you have, it ought to allow a counter argument from folks like me who do not subscribe to your religion. When that happens, people lose their shite and start complaining to the landlord about all the mean atheists.

But again...this thread was religion free until page 7. Somehow it managed up until then.






Back to top
Tom288
Florida Fan
Member since Apr 2009
18029 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

Well, it's not a birth defect. It's a choice


Link? Thanks in advance.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
AlaTiger
LSU Fan
Member since Aug 2006
13713 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


I have absolutely NO problem at all with people disagreeing with me about religion. I expect it here and welcome the dialogue.

I do not try to insert religion into every thread and I understand the rules against it here. I brought it up in this case because religion is completely tied to the "gay rights" debate and is the #1 reason why there is still opposition to homosexuality (not the only reason, just the primary one). So, when a study comes out that could end up bolstering the religious argument against homosexuality in a way, then it has political merit.

I saw this thread earlier and avoided it. But, I thought that the possibility of Science actually agreeing (in a sense) with the Biblical argument against homosexuality was a case of irony - at least in the way that Science has been used by anti-Theists.

I was more trying to provide a commentary on an aspect of the debate instead of trying to push a certain point of view, even though I am unapologetically Christian.






Back to top
WildTchoupitoulas
112 posts
Member since Jan 2010
15845 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

The article CLEARLY says that there is no, and never will be, genetic links to gay behavior.

Is this the mantra they teach at Camp Gaybegone to repeat in moments of stress?

Because it looks more like you're trying to convince yourself more than anyone else...


...not that there's anything wrong with that.






Back to top
  Replies (0)
Tom288
Florida Fan
Member since Apr 2009
18029 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

the possibility of Science actually agreeing (in a sense) with the Biblical argument against homosexuality


Where did this happen?






Back to top
  Replies (0)
TrueTiger
LSU Fan
Chicken's most valuable
Member since Sep 2004
10777 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


This got me wondering.

Between this theory and global warming, which one is more believable?






Back to top
WildTchoupitoulas
112 posts
Member since Jan 2010
15845 posts

re: So it turns out being gay is not in the DNA


quote:

Between this theory and global warming, which one is more believable?

Dude, throw in the theory of evolution and the germ theory, and I just throw my hands up.






Back to top
  Replies (0)


Back to top