Jump to content

The Protestant Community

Welcome to Christforums the Protestant Community. You'll need to register in order to post your comments on your favorite topics and subjects. You'll also enjoy sharing media across multiple platforms. We hope you enjoy your fellowship here! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Christforums

Christforums is a Protestant Christian forum, open to Bible- believing Christians such as Presbyterians, Lutherans, Reformed, Baptists, Church of Christ members, Pentecostals, Anglicans. Methodists, Charismatics, or any other conservative, Nicene- derived Christian Church. We do not solicit cultists of any kind, including Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, Eastern Lightning, Falun Gong, Unification Church, Aum Shinrikyo, Christian Scientists or any other non- Nicene, non- Biblical heresy. God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now
Sign in to follow this  
William

Are gays ‘born that way’? Most Americans now say yes, but science says no

Recommended Posts

PRINCETON, NJ, May 20, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- For the first time, a majority of Americans say that homosexuals are "born that way."

 

According to the latest Gallup poll, 51 percent of Americans say that people are born gay or lesbian, while only 30 percent say outside factors such as upbringing and environment determine sexual orientation.

 

However, science would not bear that out. No fewer than eight major studies from around the world have found homosexuality is not a genetic condition.

 

Peter Sprigg of the Family Research Council says that these numerous, rigorous studies of identical twins have now made it impossible to argue that there is a "gay gene." If homosexuality were inborn and predetermined, then when one identical twin is homosexual, the other should be, as well.

 

Yet one study from Yale and Columbia Universities found homosexuality common to only 6.7 percent of male identical twins and 5.3 percent of female identical twins.

 

The low rate of common homosexuality in identical twins – around six percent – is easily explained by nurture, not nature.

 

Researchers Peter Bearman and Hannah Brueckner concluded that environment was the determining factor. They rejected outright that "genetic influence independent of social context" as the reason for homosexuality. "(O)ur results support the hypothesis that less gendered socialization in early childhood and preadolescence shapes subsequent same-sex romantic preferences."

 

"Less gendered socialization" means, a boy was without a positive father figure, or a girl was without a positive mother figure.

 

In light of the evidence, Sprigg said simply, "No one is born gay."

 

Psychiatrists William Byne and Bruce Parsons summarize the science: "Critical review shows the evidence favoring a biologic theory to be lacking. ... In fact, the current trend may be to underrate the explanatory power of extant psychosocial models." In other words, homosexuality is a psychological malady, not something people are born with.

 

Some homosexuals openly admit that their lifestyle is a choice. Lindsay Miller, who describes herself as a "queer woman," complained in The Atlantic monthly, "I get frustrated with the veiled condescension of straight people who believe that queers 'can't help it,' and thus should be treated with tolerance and pity.”

 

“I was not born this way,” she wrote. “The life I have now is not something I ended up with because I had no other options. Make no mistake – it's a life I chose.”

 

"It's time to send the 'born that way' myth to the graveyard of misbegotten ideas, buried in the plot next to the myth that the sun revolves around the earth,” Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association has written.

 

And yet, the myth continues to gain believers, even among conservatives. According to the new Gallup poll, Republicans are divided on whether Americans are born homosexual (40 percent) or whether same-sex orientation is determined by environmental factors (36 percent).

 

In previous polls, a majority of Republicans have said homosexuality is not innate. Now, according to this poll, they are equally likely to view sexual orientation as inherent, rather than a choice or a consequence of how people were raised. In all, 62 percent of Democrats believe homosexuals were born that way.

 

The issue affects Republican politicians who, like all politicians, base their public statements on the polls. Presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson recently apologized for merely suggesting people choose to be gay or lesbian. Sen. Marco Rubio has said that, while he does not support same-sex "marriage," he believes that people are born gay or lesbian.

 

Fischer says our society and particularly our presidential candidates should make policy based on medical and scientific reality, not polls. "If homosexual behavior is a choice, then our public policy can freely be shaped by an honest look at whether this behavioral choice is healthy and should be encouraged, or unhealthy and dangerous and consequently discouraged," he wrote.

 

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

 

There is no debate over the health threats posed by engaging in the homosexual lifestyle. Fischer notes that the Gay and Lesbian Medical Association admits homosexuals are at greater risk of AIDS, substance and alcohol abuse, depression and anxiety, hepatitis, STDs, and prostate and colon cancer.

 

"This is not behavior that any rational society should condone, endorse, subsidize, reward, promote or sanction in domestic policy or in the marketplace,” Fischer wrote. “It's a choice, and a bad one at that."

 

The Gallup poll, taken May 6-10, also reports a new record high number of Americans support same-sex "marriage."

 

The poll is based on telephone interviews with a random sample of 1,024 adults, aged 18 and older, living in the United States. The organization says its margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points at the 95 percent confidence level.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most of the success of the sodomite lobby has come from claiming that homosxuals are born that way, and absolutly equating homosexuality with race. Pedophiles believe they were born that way every bit as much as homosexual do. We all feel that we were born more or less the way we are now. We also feel like we were born speaking our native language, even though we know better.

 

The science I'm familiar with refutes the claim that people are born homosexual. There are no homsoexual genes. If an an identical twin is a homosexual, his identical twin probably isn't, unless they were raised together. Sexual attraction, as many thinking people would realize and as science shows, is fluid. A man likes a woman in high heel shoes, but not because of condition of birth, but because men have been conditioned to find high heels attractive.

 

A recent study showed that homosexual high school students are almost twice as likely to cause/become pregnant than just the subset of heterosexual high school students who are sexually active. That reflects a lack of sexual restraint, not a different sexual orientation. The leading cause of heterosexual AIDS transmission is from homosexual men to women. We've long known statistics about homsoexual promiscuity that would make all but the most reprobate heterosexuals blush.

 

I believe that the leading cause of homsoexual desires from youth is homosexual abuse. Any kind of sexual abuse of a child tends to cause long-term sexual problems.

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can anybody know what sexuality a baby is born with? Babies can't tell us, at least not yet. So all we have to go by is the testimony of folk who are heterosexual to tell us if they were "born that way" and the testimony of homosexual people to tell us if they were "born that way". I can't speak for any of you but I reckon "born that way" is what a lot of people think about their own sexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Homosexuals would love for science to find a 'homosexual gene' .. and have been desirous of that for years. Should that happen, they could point to the data and proclaim that ''they were born that way'' thereby escaping the responsibility for their own actions. Thieves are not 'born that way' .. nor are murderers .. nor any other sin we engage in. In plain and simple terms, sinning is the willful disobedience towards God .. and His law.

Edited by Eagle
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How does science say "no"? Is there a "non-gay gene" or something?

 

Inquire on identical twin studies.

 

God bless,

William

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The scriptures suggest that false worship has consequences among which is sexual immorality including same sex sex acts between men and between women.

 

 

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

 

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen. For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (Romans 1:18-27 KJV)

So the idea in Romans chapter one appears to be that same-sex sex acts is a kind of curse that comes from worshipping and serving the creature more than the Creator. And that might apply to formal paganism as well as rampant consumerism; anything that leads to excessive focus on what God created to the exclusion of the one who created.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, I think the jury is still out on this one. For example, Bailey and Pillard (1991) found that 52% of monozygotic (identical genes) twin brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual, while 22% of dizygotic (fraternal, different but related genes) twin brothers of homosexuals were homosexual, and 11% of adoptive brothers (entirely unrelated genes) of homosexuals were homosexual. In any case, the idea that genes determine sexual behaviour is simplistic fallacy. Rather, the notion is that our genes predispose us to certain behaviours, sometimes strongly, sometimes more subtly. These tendencies may be reinforced or weakened by environmental factors. In other words, both nature and nurture are important. Nevertheless, 'tis my belief that both influences may be overridden by our alleged freedom of will.

 

Hope this helps. Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited by 2ndRateMind
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I think the jury is still out on this one. For example, Bailey and Pillard (1991) found that 52% of monozygotic (identical genes) twin brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual, while 22% of dizygotic (fraternal, different but related genes) twin brothers of homosexuals were homosexual, and 11% of adoptive brothers (entirely unrelated genes) of homosexuals were homosexual. In any case, the idea that genes determine sexual behaviour is simplistic fallacy. Rather, the notion is that our genes predispose us to certain behaviours, sometimes strongly, sometimes more subtly. These tendencies may be reinforced or weakened by environmental factors. In other words, both nature and nurture are important. Nevertheless, 'tis my belief that both influences may be overridden by our alleged freedom of will.

 

Hope this helps. Best wishes, 2RM.

I agree with the underlined comment. The rest is possibly correct - I am no geneticist - so I make no comment on the claims about a genetic basis for homosexuality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If God made people homosexual, then why would he ever destroy them as he did in Sodom, and Gomorrah?

(Genesis 19:1)

Also Paul told us that those who sinned, and homosexual acts was included in those sins, would never enter the kingdom of Heaven.

 

So why would God make such people who could never be servants of his?

 

(1 Corinthians 6:9-19) “You know perfectly well that people who do wrong will not inherit the Kingdom of God: people of immoral lives, idolaters, adulterers, catamites, sodomites, thieves, usurers, drunkards, slanders and swindlers will never inherit the kingdom of God

 

No being homosexuality is a thorn that Satan gives people. He lets people have lustful feeling, which they enjoy, for those of the same sex. When these people believe that those feelings are from themselves, and act on them they are then Satan’s servants.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Actually, I think the jury is still out on this one. For example, Bailey and Pillard (1991) found that 52% of monozygotic (identical genes) twin brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual, while 22% of dizygotic (fraternal, different but related genes) twin brothers of homosexuals were homosexual, and 11% of adoptive brothers (entirely unrelated genes) of homosexuals were homosexual. In any case, the idea that genes determine sexual behaviour is simplistic fallacy. Rather, the notion is that our genes predispose us to certain behaviours, sometimes strongly, sometimes more subtly. These tendencies may be reinforced or weakened by environmental factors. In other words, both nature and nurture are important. Nevertheless, 'tis my belief that both influences may be overridden by our alleged freedom of will.

 

On the face of it, that's very strong evidence that people are not born homosexuals. Two other points: The authors of that study probably used a loose definition of homosexual to raise the double incidence percentage. And, adopted children are reasonably more likely to be homosexual, because of abuse causing adoption or abuse resulting from adoption.

 

It appears to me that university researchers have given up trying to build a scientific case for people being born homosexual. But, activists are 100% committed to the position that homosexuality is as congenital as race. Democrats don't have much interest in the truth.

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I appreciate one has to handle statistics carefully. Nevertheless, this study suggests than sharing exact genes with a homosexual makes it around 5 times more likely that one will be homosexual, and sharing related genes makes it twice as likely. To me, at least, this is a good case for a strong genetic influence on sexuality. However 'strong' or 'loose' the definition of homosexuality used, provided that definition is consistently applied, this relationship would presumably stand, even if the absolute figures might vary.

 

Best wishes, 2RM.

Edited by 2ndRateMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A psychologist told me there is no genetic difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. I can personally attest to the fact that it is a decision, not hereditary. It often stems from abuse when they are young. Why would God be against something that is beyond our control to avoid, such as genetics and the sin of homosexuality? He wouldn't. They are sinners like everyone else, in need of a Savior. Then they must repent, just like the rest of us. That's true for all sin, not just homosexuality. Homosexuality is a product of environment, not heredity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, I appreciate one has to handle statistics carefully. Nevertheless, this study suggests than sharing exact genes with a homosexual makes it around 5 times more likely that one will be homosexual, and sharing related genes makes it twice as likely. To me, at least, this is a good case for a strong genetic influence on sexuality. However 'strong' or 'loose' the definition of homosexuality used, provided that definition is consistently applied, this relationship would presumably stand, even if the absolute figures might vary.

 

The closest we have to a control number is 11%, which itself is three times higher than the general population. This demonstrates strong environmental influence from adoption. When the environmental factor is increased by fraternal, the percentage doubles, even though there has been change in genetic relatedness. So, we have already established a very strong environmental factor. Identical twins maximise the environmental factor, resulting in in five times increase from our control number. Yes, the genetic factor is also maximised, but from the previous two numbers, there's little room to genetic to make a difference. You need to further consider that that 55% is based on identical twins raised together.

 

Sodomites equate homosexuality with race. But, in race, in race the double incidence is 100% in all cases. But, the twins studies allow only a possibility of minor genetic predisposition.

 

Then you need to consider the mechanism of any potential genetic predisposition. Is their "sexual orientation" bent? Maybe the genetic predisposition is created by something that has nothing directly to do with what they're attracted to, but rather is a genetic predisposition than enhances to environmental factors. Maybe they hit puberty earlier. Maybe there is something about their looks that attracts homosexual predators. Given that homosexuals are more likely to have been molested as children and given that some appearances are more attractive than others... do the math.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A psychologist told me there is no genetic difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals.

 

Given the tools available to researchers, by now, they would have easily tracked down genes that create significant potential of homosexuality, if there were such genes.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read in one medical report that SOME gays (or homosexuals as we term it here) are born with an elongated brain somewhat protruding at the back. It is an abonormality, according to the report, that points to the homosexuality of the baby. Maybe that validates the claim of one psychologist here by the name of Dr. Margie Holmes, that gays are of 2 types - the inborn and the acquired. And as per the data of some research, those with acquired homosexuality can be cured and those inborn cannot. I'm sorry if I am not clear on this but the gist of my post is the 2 types of gays - a born gay and an influenced gay. Maybe more studies will come up with conclusive findings on the matter why some people are gay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Maybe that validates the claim of one psychologist here by the name of Dr. Margie Holmes, that gays are of 2 types - the inborn and the acquired.

 

This is indeed the current scientific view of homosexuality.

 

I'm now a little perturbed recalling the brutal 'rehabilitation' methods used in the past to turn homosexuals into heterosexuals.

 

Acquired homosexuals have more chances to solve their any problems (if they have any at all) with psychanalysis and then make the sexuality choice for themselves, but that still leaves us with the inherent ones. The ones who cannot seem to be attracted to the opposite sex no matter what.

 

A psychologist told me there is no genetic difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals. I can personally attest to the fact that it is a decision, not hereditary.

 

The genetic difference is miniscule, only a few gene variants have been linked with homosexuality but the correllation is still doubious.

However this can only attest to the behaviour coming from our primordial brain (the one responsible for the insticts of sustenance).

The conscious decision comes from the higher cognitive functions, neuroscience calls it the telencephalon (=newer brain), philosophy calls it the soul.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In any case, the idea that genes determine sexual behaviour is simplistic fallacy. Rather, the notion is that our genes predispose us to certain behaviors, sometimes strongly, sometimes more subtly. These tendencies may be reinforced or weakened by environmental factors

 

This is dead on! We are born with predispositions toward certain actions (this is what behaviorists believe). We make our own choices and we have to live with them. I was literally asked in a debate (yesterday) on when I chose to be heterosexual. Truth is that most people don't pay attention to their 'attractions' until puberty. That's when guys start to notice girls and vice versa. Homosexuals have likewise made this claim that their attractions started in puberty (and hence, they can't be 'born' that way either).

 

'tis my belief that both influences may be overridden by our alleged freedom of will.

 

And that's where the Holy Spirit comes in, His grace is sufficient for any sinful struggle. He gives us the will to fight our natural proclivity toward sin.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The genetic difference is miniscule, only a few gene variants have been linked with homosexuality but the correllation is still doubious.

 

This is the problem with most religious people who get involved in this debate. They do not have a strong enough science background to actually read the scientific reports to understand that there is no ´link´ between genes and homosexuality.

 

this is the way the process works

1. Scientists publish some study about genes and homosexuality

2. Mainstream media does generic article saying ´scientists link genetics to homosexuality´ which is a complete misstatement of the actual research

3. Religious people argue against the article written by the media without actually reading the original research, and turn the fight into ´beliefs´ rather than science

 

Why? because everyone is lazy, both sides of the argument don´t want to actually ready the science and debate the results of the science, they just want to turn it into a war of opinions, because any moron can argue their opinions without research.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is dead on! We are born with predispositions toward certain actions (this is what behaviorists believe).

 

I agree. A comparable predisposition could be language. We learn language, though which language is not determined by birth.

 

Here's a very short video on the topic of homosexuality by John Piper. He pretty much sums up my personal view:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is the problem with most religious people who get involved in this debate.

 

One of the major issues I believe happening is the participation of "religious" people. This forum's intent and direction is theology, but it just happens right now we have more people that are religious in nature - they're more focused on other people's behavior rather than God.

 

Why? because everyone is lazy, both sides of the argument don´t want to actually ready the science and debate the results of the science, they just want to turn it into a war of opinions, because any moron can argue their opinions without research.

 

I believe this is why we have recently swung to a religious leaning, not enough people actually know what is written in the Scriptures which results in opinionated responses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the poll cited above is that it really doesn´t indicate what most people believe, but that most people just want the issue to go away. The Christian religion loses influence in the world when we focus on stuff like homosexuality. We are seen as judgmental, angry and hateful, and to be honest, watching some church leaders on TV, I understand it. We need to stop bringing up homosexuality as the root of all problems in the world and instead look at things like love and charity. People need to read Mathew every month, and really focus on what Jesus said in his own worlds and make living the way he describes as the focus on our lives. In the 4 gospels, Jesus talked about ´judging others´ about 48 times... the only time I remember him talking about anything related to sex, was when the woman was about to be stoned for adultery... and instead of using that moment to teach about adultery, what did he use that moment to teach us ´let those among you who have never sinned, cast the first stone´.(do not judge others).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×