Friday, May 15, 2009
APA: Being Gay Not a Matter of Genetics
Those on the Left have hammered away at society for the past few decades, and, slowly, a great deal of the population has come to accept that being a homosexual is something that you're "born into." Not wishing to argue the science of the human genome and instead arguing the human nature of scientists and the Left, I have found it persuasive to ask those who have come to believe the argument put forth by the Left that if they believed that there was a "gay gene" and that there were scientists mapping human DNA for markers for decades on everything from eye color to colon cancer, wouldn't the Left be trumpeting the discovery of the "gay gene?" Basically, if it was there, don't you think we'd know about it?
There's proof now that even academics are accepting that there is no "gay gene."
Unlikely that this will undo decades of brainwashing by Hollywood, the media, and other Leftist tools, but it's a start.
There's proof now that even academics are accepting that there is no "gay gene."
The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" -- meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are born that way.
Unlikely that this will undo decades of brainwashing by Hollywood, the media, and other Leftist tools, but it's a start.
Labels: Homosexuality, Science
Permalink posted by Rob Huddleston @ 7:09 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
I certainly don't intend to get into a scientific debate with you here (since I suspect doing so would be something akin to debating a turnip).
However, I would like to point out that, when I read posts such as this in the blogosphere, it reminds me of one of so may reasons that I have always been so glad that I am Gay: Because, you see, as a Gay man I will NEVER worry that I will produce offspring that will grow up to be moronic, bigoted, self-righteous little bible thumpers.
Thanks and have a FABULOUS weekend!
However, I would like to point out that, when I read posts such as this in the blogosphere, it reminds me of one of so may reasons that I have always been so glad that I am Gay: Because, you see, as a Gay man I will NEVER worry that I will produce offspring that will grow up to be moronic, bigoted, self-righteous little bible thumpers.
Thanks and have a FABULOUS weekend!
LMAO - The APA statement from your source:
"Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."
The full APA statement:
"Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."
The APA says most people experience no choice and you're offering that statement as PROOF that sexual orientation is a choice!!! HYSTERICAL!
"Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles..."
The full APA statement:
"Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation."
The APA says most people experience no choice and you're offering that statement as PROOF that sexual orientation is a choice!!! HYSTERICAL!
If there's no Gay Gene, then we can't say folks are wrong for being gay. And no matter what science has happened, no one's found a "Gay Gene." Which means that our friends, and our kids, and our neighbors, and our co-workers, and our friends in church who are gay...are gay by the grace of God. Because God made us as we are, all the colors of the rainbow! God loves us, everyone.
The quote mentioned "Although much research has examined the possible genetic ... on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors."
So people claim the existence of a gay gene have no merit. It goes on to say despite the lack of evidence "Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles"
Note it also asserts that homosexuality is not a not a disorder. Its evidence: "Research has found no inherent association..." If there is no disorder because research has found no evidence and that is correct. Why is it wrong to say There is no gene because research has found no evidence.
Choose both or none, but you can not have one and exclude the other.
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html
Post a Comment
So people claim the existence of a gay gene have no merit. It goes on to say despite the lack of evidence "Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles"
Note it also asserts that homosexuality is not a not a disorder. Its evidence: "Research has found no inherent association..." If there is no disorder because research has found no evidence and that is correct. Why is it wrong to say There is no gene because research has found no evidence.
Choose both or none, but you can not have one and exclude the other.
http://www.apa.org/topics/sorientation.html
<< Home
