EPTOn November 30 2010 12:31 eshlow wrote:
I don't understand how threads can go on this long arguing about something that is so simple.
Twin studies indicate that if one of two who is homosexual 50% of the time the other is homosexual. This is referenced in multiple studies on homozygous twins.
This indicates that there are certainly genetics factors involved with the expression of homosexuality in humans, and that there are also environmental factors.
If environmental factors did not matter and it was genetically determined then if one of the twins was homosexual there would be 100% chance that the other twin would be homosexual.
Therefore, saying someone's sexual orientation is a matter of choice is part correct, and saying someone's sexual orientation is genetically determined is part correct.
Neither is fully correct. The problem is we haven't determined when, what, how, etc. are the determining environmental factors that influence the development of homosexuality. However, we have isolated some of the genetic components which is what everyone wants to jump on and proclaim that homosexuality is not a choice and genetic. This is a gross misinterpretation of the data.
As always, nature tends to be a middle ground and does not polarize. Most things are a combination of genetic factors and environmental influence.
I don't understand how threads can go on this long arguing about something that is so simple.
Twin studies indicate that if one of two who is homosexual 50% of the time the other is homosexual. This is referenced in multiple studies on homozygous twins.
This indicates that there are certainly genetics factors involved with the expression of homosexuality in humans, and that there are also environmental factors.
If environmental factors did not matter and it was genetically determined then if one of the twins was homosexual there would be 100% chance that the other twin would be homosexual.
Therefore, saying someone's sexual orientation is a matter of choice is part correct, and saying someone's sexual orientation is genetically determined is part correct.
Neither is fully correct. The problem is we haven't determined when, what, how, etc. are the determining environmental factors that influence the development of homosexuality. However, we have isolated some of the genetic components which is what everyone wants to jump on and proclaim that homosexuality is not a choice and genetic. This is a gross misinterpretation of the data.
As always, nature tends to be a middle ground and does not polarize. Most things are a combination of genetic factors and environmental influence.
I thought everyone knew this, but I guess this thread has gotten off track in the last page or two because clearly some people don't.
The thread is supposed to be about how the genetic factors for homosexuality can propagate given the obvious selection against them. You can't simply answer this by saying "oh, there are also environmental factors." Even if 90% of people born with every genetic factor predisposing them towards homosexuality end up heterosexual due to environmental factors, those genetic factors will eventually disappear unless there is some selective mechanism protecting them. THAT is what we're supposed to be talking about.
