I know most of you out there are going to scream "homophobic" at me but it is my belief that homosexuality is a choice and can not be genetic. Here is my reasoning:
1. If you accept evolution as true, a homosexual gene would be inconsistent with evolution. Homosexuals reproduce at a much lower rate than straight individuals but consume the same amount af scarse assets in a society. Development of a "straight" gene would be perfectly consistent with evolution. A "gay" gene provides a lower chance of survival of the society and could not develop, under evolutionary theory.
Not necessarily - survival of the fittest - particularly in a social species where all members might not need to reproduce in order for the family group as a whole to be sucessful - is rarely so linear or black and white. It might benifit the group as a whole to have come non-reproducing members in the group as "aunts" and "uncles" to care for the young while the parents and other adults are foraging.
Or, as another example - take social species where only one male/female mate...selective homosexuality or bisexuality could be a social relief valve that keeps the group together and limits fighting.
2. Because gays reproduce at a lower rate than straights, the "gay" gene would diminish in numbers with each successive generation and would soon virtually disappear. Example: assume generation 1 contains 10% homosexual individuals and 90% straights. If the homosexuals reporduce at half the rate of straights (and the actual rate is probably much lower than this) the compostion of generation 2 would be 5% homosexual and 95% straight. Generation 3= 2.5% homo and 97.5% straight. Do the math for 6 or 8 generations. The percentage of people professing homosexuality in our society is not declining, so there can not be a "gay" gene. It is a choice.
I know the next argument: why do we have any recessive traits at all? Shouldn't all recessive traits disappear in a few geberations? My father had wavy hair which is a recessive trait for an Anglo male. But wavy hair does not result in a lower birth rate. So wavy hair is passed on to each successive generation at the same rate as non-wavy hair.
I know my belief is not PC but it is based on dispassionate scientific assessment.
Actually - I don't give a fig about PC. It's stupid. But just because something is "PC" doesn't make it bad science. Genetics is complicated and very often not a case of simple reseccisives and dominants.
A good quote is: Genetics loads the gun, and environment pulls the trigger. This is particularly true for polygenetic traits.
It's quite possible that any or all of the following genetic factors could be involved:
A simple recessives (unlikely) that would indicate silent carriers.
Multiple genes influencing trait that only show up when a certain threshold is breached.
A common mutation(s) - that easily occurs (such as that for Cystic Fibrosis)
Any of the above in conjunction with certain environmental factors that set it off - such as prenatal environments.
One thing is clear though - many people are bisexual at some point in our lives (as are many other social animals) and then go on to become heterosexual. To me this says homosexual tendancies are normal.
A very tiny number become strictly homosexual - and so much so that even though they go through "ex-gay" types of programs, they admit they still long for same sex relations, and they are aroused by the same sex biochemically and in brain studies. The only thing that changes is the outward appearance of the behavior. To me that says this is not a "choice".
Homosexuality is a choice and not genetic.
See what I said above.
And gays now have exactly the same marital rights as any straight: to marry a member of the opposite gender.
That is disengenius and the same sort of logic could be used to argue against interacial marriage.
Arguably, they have more rights than straights because they are protected by PC and hate crime laws.
And before you paint me with the broad homophobic brush, you should know that I am a volunteer to the AIDS community, bringing home services to final stage patients who are no longer able to leave their homes. I've seen them deteriorate and die and it is not a pretty sight. It is also not a sight for the faint at heart.
And, as final disclaimer, I have studied all aspects of evolutionary theory for 20+ years. I do not believe evolution is a viable explantion for origins.
As I said - I don't give a fig for PC and no, I'm not going to paint you homophobe. But let me add my own disclaimer - I am no youngster and evolution and genetics and animal behavior have been a long standing area of study for me.
As for gay marriage - my thought is why not? But I think it is wiser to push for civil unions and give them all the same legal rights as married heterosexual couples. I believe in equality. Society as a whole may not be ready for gay marriage beyond that yet. Give them time.
It hurts no one - ever thought of that?
