Political Crossfire Forums

[F'losrix]

Tell us how definitive proof of an underlying genetic cause for homosexual orientation would alter your perception of gay people (if at all) and why. Likewise, if it would do nothing to alter your perception, give us the reason for maintaining your current stance on the issue.

We don't need to debate whether or not it is genetic, because there is no definitive proof one way or the other, yet.

[Melchior]

My stance would not change personally, I could still care less about a persons sexual oreintation. Everyone has Equal Rights.

But if this did come out, it would be more arsenal for my position on Gay Rights. :ok:

[ikari]

I'm still sure I wouldn't give a rat's butt.

[Secondary Oak]

I voted yes. It would definitely change my perception of gay people.

[Protostar]

I voted yes. But it also raise an intersting question. If homosexuality was found to have a genetic origin, then it could in time possibly be corrected. So I pose this question only to the homosexuals on the boards:If it became possible to treat homosexuality through gene therapy, would you do it? Would you abandon homosexuality and become a heterosexual like the majority of the population? If not why?

[F'losrix]

Protostar wrote: I voted yes. But it also raise an intersting question. If homosexuality was found to have a genetic origin, then it could in time possibly be corrected. So I pose this question only to the homosexuals on the boards:If it became possible to treat homosexuality through gene therapy, would you do it? Would you abandon homosexuality and become a heterosexual like the majority of the population? If not why?
I would have to say no, because I'm in a longterm relationship, I'm happy with that relationship, and so is my family - they adore my life partner. The only reasons to change would be if I placed a higher priority on not being hated by strangers and on getting the benefits that straight couples get from marriage. None of that is worth trading what I currently have.

If I were younger and hadn't experienced 20+ years of life as an adult, my answer might be different - being gay isn't an easy life.

On the other hand, the experience of being gay has forced me to examine a number of other issues related to liberty, spirituality, etc. that I might not have bothered with if I'd been straight. For me, being initially unhappy over the fact that I was 'different' led me to do a lot of searching and probing for answers about life and why I am who/what I am. Being straight might have been easier, but I can't say that it would have made me a better person than I am today, given what I have experienced as a gay man.

[jimmyz]

This is a little off topic buts lets suppose homosexuality was caused by a 'gay gene'.How would you explain bi-sexualism?Do those people have both 'kinds' of sexual preference genes?

And how would you explain formerly gay people abandoning that life for a straight life?Or straight folks turning to a gay lifestyle?You cannot change your genetic make-up.

I still believe it is more chemical than genetic.But I fall short of calling it a mental condition like bi-polar but do think that scientific studies could better explore a chemical cause.That is if being gay were to be accepted as something 'needing' treatment.

If the part of my brain driving sexual attraction were causing a behavior contrary to nature and societal norms,then YES I would like it to be altered according to my CHOICE.(I am speaking of me personally knowing that I would choose heterosexuality and in no way condemn those who would fore go change and remain gay by choice.)

[Demonic Spoon]

JimmyZ-it could be polygenic...although I do agree it is more likely chemical than genetic.

[jimmyz]

Iluvguns wrote: JimmyZ-it could be polygenic...although I do agree it is more likely chemical than genetic.

Polygenic or monogenic doesn't matter.In the case of bi-sexuality I suppose both the homosexual and heterosexual genes(if we accept that thesis for this discussion) could be present in the same person and possibly in more than one gene.

I still lean to the chemical cause and effect theory,agreed.

[Rozzlapeed]

In reference to the original question, my point-of-view on homosexuality would not change if it were found to be genetic, because I already assume that it must have some sort of innate basis. I don't expect that we will find a specific gene that has a 100% correlation with homosexuality, because then the argument of natural selection would apply, and that gene would have been selected out long ago. No, I think it's pretty obvious that the condition must have either a polygenetic or chemical basis, like the other two posters above.

As to the other question, whether or not homosexuals would seek to be "corrected" if such a method were developed, I think that question would probably be similar to the one that the deaf community is facing in regards to cochlear implants. There is a great deal of cultural value associated with both communities, and if one were to change one's sexual orientation, one might be met with resentment and isolation.

[dmitri]

I'm not sure. My view wouldn't change per se but would alter how I look at homosexuals.
If it turned out that it was caused by a certain gene my idea that, "it was a choice of an individual," would be different. I could no longer look onto that specific person and think, "It was a choice made in his or her life," but rather, "He or she was born homosexual and is living a perfectly normal life."
Now if it turned out opposite to what the former stated my view would once again change. I then would feel as if it was a choice made consciously rather than unconsciously in the individual's life. Which in the end would dismiss the claim that an individual was born a homosexual.

My view of acceptance wouldn't change though. Love is love. When two people love each other it doesn't need to be bound by gender. I hold no grudges against sexual preference.

[ieatfood]

Homosexuals always have a choice.

THey can choose not to show their homosexuality.

YOu may think it wrong for people to advocate homosexuals inhibit their own urges. But that doesn't change the fact that acting on these urges is a choice nonetheless.

If we found a genetic link to pedophiles, would that make it ok?

What if we found that a gene made it more likely that a person is a rapist. would that change anyone's view on rape? I think not.


btw, i have nothing against homosexuality
i think people should be free to do whatever they want
i am just pointing out that it wont change anyone's opinion.

[PrinceJunius]

I don't really care if they find a genetic cause for homosexuality for not. Does my screwing of other guys affect anyone else here? No, it does not. That's good enough for me, and that should be good enough for the rest of America.

You can keep your stupid marriage benefits or whatever. If you can only feel happy in a marriage by ensuring that no f**s crash your party, than more power to you. Just leave me alone.

[dmitri]

ieatfood wrote: If we found a genetic link to pedophiles, would that make it ok?

What if we found that a gene made it more likely that a person is a rapist. would that change anyone's view on rape? I think not.
Rape is forcing someone to have sex. Pedophilia is (in most cases) an adult forcing a minor to have sex or an adult fantasizing about having sex with a minor. I think the distinctions between both of those and homosexuals is very different. Where rape and pedophilia aren't consensual, homosexual relationships are. What makes the two situations you mentioned wrong is that their both forced upon a person...pinning a woman down and raping her is wrong. A man forcing a 7 year old boy to engage in sexual activity is wrong. Both can cause severe psychological damage to the victim. I really don't think homosexuality does that to anyone. In essence, your analogy wasn't very good.

[Rozzlapeed]

PrinceJunius wrote: I don't really care if they find a genetic cause for homosexuality for not. Does my screwing of other guys affect anyone else here? No, it does not.

I think there is a valid reason for finding out if it is innate or not. My dad is under the impression that if we were to allow gay men to marry, it would make homosexuality more popular, thereby causing more men to "turn gay," just because they can. If homosexuality were found, scientifically, to be innate, and not by choice, that would help me when I try to tell him that he's being an idiot.

[F'losrix]

jimmyz wrote: This is a little off topic buts lets suppose homosexuality was caused by a 'gay gene'.How would you explain bi-sexualism?Do those people have both 'kinds' of sexual preference genes?
Good question, and one which helps illustrate that both genetics and sexuality are a lot more complex than we'd probably like them to be.

I truly think the answers lie in how polygenetics predisposes some people to have a different reaction to various stimuli, and that this process builds upon itself all the way from gestation through puberty until a person's sexual orientation becomes more or less fixed. I don't by any means discount the role of chemistry as a part of this - but I believe the chemical process would be largely driven as a response to the underlying genetics. I think we'll find that the entire process is too complex to be controlled or altered to produce a 'postitive' result. I think if we start screwing around trying to 'fix' what we think is 'wrong' with a person's sexual orientation, we'll probably make matters worse instead of better.

I think we'll find that it isn't a completely different set of genes, but more likely a shared set with a few variations that cause orientation to be expressed less strongly in the case of bisexuals.

[F'losrix]

ieatfood wrote: Homosexuals always have a choice.

THey can choose not to show their homosexuality.

YOu may think it wrong for people to advocate homosexuals inhibit their own urges. But that doesn't change the fact that acting on these urges is a choice nonetheless.

If we found a genetic link to pedophiles, would that make it ok?

What if we found that a gene made it more likely that a person is a rapist. would that change anyone's view on rape? I think not.


btw, i have nothing against homosexuality
i think people should be free to do whatever they want
i am just pointing out that it wont change anyone's opinion.

I've addressed some of this in another thread:

Homosexuality, Choice & Blame

I do think it's an unreasonable demand to expect homosexuals to keep their sexual orientation hidden. That doesn't mean I think it needs to be announced to everyone. One of the challenges that gay people have faced is that of recognition - how to find each other. To that end, some have adopted flamboyant behaviors to call attention to their different sexuality - and doing so isn't even necessarily a conscious effort on their part. I think a lot depends on how a gay person is first introduced to the rest of their 'community' - which crowd they fall in with, what media they examine and the portrayals contained therein as they begin to explore what it means to be gay in the context of our society and the various gay subcultures. People naturally adopt the speech patterns, modes of dress and other behaviors that help them fit in to whatever segment of society they feel emotionally safest in.

As for pedophilia and rape - our attitudes wouldn't change because as someone else pointed out, both represent objectively observable harm to a person who doesn't or can't give informed consent to the act. The practice of homosexual behavior between consenting adults poses no such threat.

[ieatfood]

Skeptical Mystic wrote: ieatfood wrote: Homosexuals always have a choice.

THey can choose not to show their homosexuality.

YOu may think it wrong for people to advocate homosexuals inhibit their own urges. But that doesn't change the fact that acting on these urges is a choice nonetheless.

If we found a genetic link to pedophiles, would that make it ok?

What if we found that a gene made it more likely that a person is a rapist. would that change anyone's view on rape? I think not.


btw, i have nothing against homosexuality
i think people should be free to do whatever they want
i am just pointing out that it wont change anyone's opinion.

I've addressed some of this in another thread:

Homosexuality, Choice & Blame

I do think it's an unreasonable demand to expect homosexuals to keep their sexual orientation hidden. That doesn't mean I think it needs to be announced to everyone. One of the challenges that gay people have faced is that of recognition - how to find each other. To that end, some have adopted flamboyant behaviors to call attention to their different sexuality - and doing so isn't even necessarily a conscious effort on their part. I think a lot depends on how a gay person is first introduced to the rest of their 'community' - which crowd they fall in with, what media they examine and the portrayals contained therein as they begin to explore what it means to be gay in the context of our society and the various gay subcultures. People naturally adopt the speech patterns, modes of dress and other behaviors that help them fit in to whatever segment of society they feel emotionally safest in.

As for pedophilia and rape - our attitudes wouldn't change because as someone else pointed out, both represent objectively observable harm to a person who doesn't or can't give informed consent to the act. The practice of homosexual behavior between consenting adults poses no such threat.

you're missing the point
people still view homosexual as immoral
that will not change
you cannot change it
and finding out that homosexuality is genetic wont change it either

it has nothing to do with harm
it has to do with people's morals

[F'losrix]

ieatfood wrote: you're missing the point
people still view homosexual as immoral
Agreed. That they view it as such doesn't mean I have to accept their viewpoint. I can tolerate their right to hold that viewpoint, but I don't have to respect it.

Quote: that will not change
Not for some people. For some it may, with the passage of more time than I have left in this life.
Quote: You cannot change it
If my words can provide the catalyst for some people to change their minds on the issue, great. If they want to ignore what I say, that's their prerogative.

Quote: and finding out that homosexuality is genetic wont change it either
Again, not for a lot of people. It might make some of them question and rethink the issue, though.

Quote: it has nothing to do with harm
it has to do with people's morals
I base my morals on the standard of harm. If others don't, that's their choice. I'm under no obligation to agree with that choice, nor to accept their view that homosexuality is immoral.

[Rozzlapeed]

ieatfood wrote: Skeptical Mystic wrote: ieatfood wrote: Homosexuals always have a choice.

THey can choose not to show their homosexuality.

YOu may think it wrong for people to advocate homosexuals inhibit their own urges. But that doesn't change the fact that acting on these urges is a choice nonetheless.

If we found a genetic link to pedophiles, would that make it ok?

What if we found that a gene made it more likely that a person is a rapist. would that change anyone's view on rape? I think not.


btw, i have nothing against homosexuality
i think people should be free to do whatever they want
i am just pointing out that it wont change anyone's opinion.

I've addressed some of this in another thread:

Homosexuality, Choice & Blame

I do think it's an unreasonable demand to expect homosexuals to keep their sexual orientation hidden. That doesn't mean I think it needs to be announced to everyone. One of the challenges that gay people have faced is that of recognition - how to find each other. To that end, some have adopted flamboyant behaviors to call attention to their different sexuality - and doing so isn't even necessarily a conscious effort on their part. I think a lot depends on how a gay person is first introduced to the rest of their 'community' - which crowd they fall in with, what media they examine and the portrayals contained therein as they begin to explore what it means to be gay in the context of our society and the various gay subcultures. People naturally adopt the speech patterns, modes of dress and other behaviors that help them fit in to whatever segment of society they feel emotionally safest in.

As for pedophilia and rape - our attitudes wouldn't change because as someone else pointed out, both represent objectively observable harm to a person who doesn't or can't give informed consent to the act. The practice of homosexual behavior between consenting adults poses no such threat.

you're missing the point
people still view homosexual as immoral
that will not change
you cannot change it
and finding out that homosexuality is genetic wont change it either

it has nothing to do with harm
it has to do with people's morals

That's what they said about interracial marriage. And divorce. And many other things for that matter.

What appears now to be great rock of tradition will eventually shift with the sands of time...