re: One step closer to tying homosexuality to the human genome

quote:

---

so are you changing your name to RainbowHelicopterPilot?

---

DAMMIT!!


that typo is gonna frick me in my arse isn't it? Please say yes

quote:

---

That being gay could be a birth defect such as down syndrome?

---

It's not impossible. FTR, there is no "choice" about Down Syndrome. You have it or you don't.

(no message)

quote:

---

Dude, I have smoked you on the Aids and cancer stats for homosexuality several times.

---

What?

Everyone leaving a thread as you continue posting to yourself hardly constitutes winning the argument. After a while, I jut choose to step aside. It's never good to argue with an idiot for too long, they will bring you down to their level and then beat your arse with their experience.

You believe in things such as objective morality because your religion says it exists, and that's fine. Don't expect me or anyone else to just take your word for it though.

Thanks for your response

"The Guardian is hoping readers won't notice how deliberately and intentionally the paper has purposely avoided any word that might even suggest biological causation. "Influenced by, affected, some impact, played a role, involved." Not exactly a rousing case for the "born that way" crowd.

It even gets worse from there:

"The gene or genes in the Xq28 region that influence sexual orientation have a limited and variable impact. Not all of the gay men in Bailey's study inherited the same Xq28 region. The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

I'm not sure it gets any clearer and less ambiguous than that: "The genes were neither sufficient, nor necessary, to make any of the men gay."

One problem all along for gay activists is that even a cursory survey of sexual orientation among identical twins makes the "born that way" meme impossible to accept.

Identical twins have identical DNA, which is why they are called identical twins. If one has blue eyes, so will the other. If one has black hair, so will the other. If one is tall, so is the other.

If sexual orientation is genetically determined, then the concordance rate among identical twins should be 100%. If one twin is gay, so should be the other. Alas, the concordance rate, according to researchers Peter Bearman from Columbia and Hannah Bruckner from Yale, is somewhere between 5% and 7%. Oops"


"The flawed thinking behind a genetic test for sexual orientation is clear from studies of twins, which show that the identical twin of a gay man, who carries an exact replica of his brother's DNA, is more likely to be straight than gay. That means even a perfect genetic test that picked up every gene linked to sexual orientation would still be less effective than flipping a coin."

In other words, the genetic evidence for biological causation is so poor you'd have better luck predicting orientation by throwing darts blindfolded.






Roger Roger, that was way to easy to crush your 1991 dumb arse article


Any more articles from the 90's and 80's I can rip apart for you.

quote:

---

If sexual orientation is genetically determined, then the concordance rate among identical twins should be 100%. If one twin is gay, so should be the other.

---

Can't. Breath.

It's so sad that religion does this to some people.

Roger don't knock all Christians. I know a lot of gay Christians. Yes they do read the King James Bible.

Why are you still responding to Mr. Down Syndrome Gene guy. Seriously, you'll get dumber.