"gay gene" found in lab mice

[Kulindahr]

If the cause for human homosexuality is found, at least it will be proven to not be curable by therapy or drugs... It would be deep-seeded on the genetic level. No more ex-gay testimonials!

And if the cause is biological but not genetic?

hypothalamus or something like that. It can only be proven in autopsy and then it's kind of hard... it is just a theory...

or so I think I recall it going down that way.

I may be completely wrong...lol

The problem was that the study couldn't establish which was cause and which was effect.

 

[clicker]

Hopefully this will lead to a cure for heterosexuality.

LOL!!!! And we all end up bisexual!! Yahoo! Party sexy time!

 

[clicker]

I agree. It is not an accident that 1% to 2% of males are born gay. Nature is not that inefficient. Those genes are doing something very interesting and important, and that is why evolution has preserved them.

But that fact will not stop nearly all gay fetuses from getting aborted, once the technology is available to identify them. We do it now with Down's Syndrome.

Despite awareness of the potential benefits of the genes, society will not be able to stop this behavior. "Would you want your son growing up gay?" doctors will ask. "Why would you want to put anybody through that kind of torture?"

It's only a matter of time before we have effectively 100% straight people in developed societies. It is eugenics, but it is unstoppable. Homosexuality will become a problem of underdeveloped nations, where prenatal screening cannot be carried out for economic reasons.

I highly doubt we're only 1-2% of the population. Usually the anti-gay groups use such statistics.

 

[Kulindahr]

LOL!!!! And we all end up bisexual!! Yahoo! Party sexy time!

My psychologist says all humans are bi -- but the vast majority is in denial.

 

[nijnij]

Also, as funny and strange it may seem, if it comes to that, I do see the Catholic Church espousing our cause.

Why does this seem strange? Catholics are consistently pro-life. That means we oppose abortion, the death penalty, war, and other means of ending human life. Regardless of whether the human is gay or not.

 

[irydion]

Not all Down syndrome children are aborted, and not all gay children will be. Especially since there are religions that forbid it, as well as people who support our case and who would find it inappropriate.

If it's about genes, our number in society is bound to fall down anyway, because gay people are coming out of the closet, are not having heterosexual families, rarely have children (and if they do, they often adopt). So we are taking the gay gene out of the system. If it's a recessive one it will still linger on, but less and less.

Anyway, gay groups could call people not to abort gays, but give them to adoption - to gay couples. That would be the best sollution, wouldn't it? But somehow many people prefer to abort their children instead of giving it to someone else.

Also, I don't know why people think there is only 1 single cause of homosexuality. Genes may be the cause, but it doesn't mean it is the only one.

 

[asu1117]

Hopefully this will lead to a cure for heterosexuality.

You do realize this would result in extinction correct? Even if other, nonconventional ways of birthing children were used, the amount of humans on the planet would plummet until almost nonexistent.

 

[MercuryJones]

You do realize this would result in extinction correct? Even if other, nonconventional ways of birthing children were used, the amount of humans on the planet would plummet until almost nonexistent.

Why would you think such a thing?

If even one in 3 lesbians (if everyone became gay) had a child that would result in an abundant supply of humans. Not as many as today, but more than existed at any one time for most of human history.

 

[DigitalFudge]

So, where is the gay gene?

 

[asu1117]

Ethically, it is questionable, but logically, why shouldn't "the gay gene" be corrected if it is possible to do so? I am going to be hated on to the utmost for this post haha.

If, before I was born, I could choose whether I was straight or gay, I would definitely choose straight. The most important life process, the reason all living things in nature do anything, is to reproduce, and yet gays are not able to do this (comfortably at least). It's not a question of "being normal" or of "fitting in" with everyone else, it's a question of nature.

I do think it is interesting that whatever mutation is in the biological process that brings about homosexuality has not yet been wiped out through the process of evolution. This is what makes me think that it is not necessarily a gene but perhaps something that happens after conception while still in the mother's womb. I firmly do not believe it is created through the nurturing process however.

I have to reiterate for everyone that's going to pounce on me that I AM NOT self-hating or anything. I don't hate other gay people either. I make the best out of it. But given the choice I would choose heterosexuality. And I also agree that a baby should not be aborted just because we can tell it will be homosexual, but I do agree that if it can be "cured" somehow before birth than that is what should be done.

I agree with your points (and I have read the further posts and debates). Although I'm bisexual, so it doesn't necessarily pertain to me. Or maybe they will find the bi gene too, regardless for this post i'm going to assume it's just gay or straight. If I were gay and could have had the choice I would most definitely chose to be straight. If I had the choice now.. I'm unsure. Because I am attracted to women, I can easily chose to marry a woman and have children, the traditional heterosexual way. Which is what I do intend to do, I want a family, I want children of my own and I don't care to go through hardships same sex couples do in this area since I don't have to.

I guess it would just make sense for me to choose to be heterosexual, call me self-loathing or a gay hater if you like. But I'm not. I'm just saying I would rather take the easier path. I don't feel that being discriminated against gives enough 'growth of character' or 'makes one stronger' to make up for the pain of it. I've become a stronger, better person because of a number of struggles in my life, why add injury to insult?

 

[asu1117]

Why would you think such a thing?

If even one in 3 lesbians (if everyone became gay) had a child that would result in an abundant supply of humans. Not as many as today, but more than existed at any one time for most of human history.

And what makes you think that one in every three lesbians will want to carry and give birth to a child? It's possible that they will, I'm not arguing that. But it's also a possibility that they won't. And maybe they wouldn't like being forced into carrying on the population after people abolished the heterosexuals.

You also realize that saying you want to "cure" heterosexuality is no better than others saying they want to cure homosexuality.

 

[MercuryJones]

And what makes you think that one in every three lesbians will want to carry and give birth to a child? It's possible that they will, I'm not arguing that. But it's also a possibility that they won't. And maybe they wouldn't like being forced into carrying on the population after people abolished the heterosexuals.

1. Currently about one in three lesbians already do that, so there's no reason to think it would diminish in a world of all gays.
2. You must think people are pretty fucking stupid if we'd just decide to go extinct rather than just, duh, make some babies.
3. You do know this is all just silliness anyway, right?

You also realize that saying you want to "cure" heterosexuality is no better than others saying they want to cure homosexuality.

You also realize I never said any such thing, right?

 

[asu1117]

1. Currently about one in three lesbians already do that, so there's no reason to think it would diminish in a world of all gays.
2. You must think people are pretty fucking stupid if we'd just decide to go extinct rather than just, duh, make some babies.
3. You do know this is all just silliness anyway, right?



You also realize I never said any such thing, right?

Yes, I do realize you said no such thing. But you did argue in it's defense when I disagreed with it.

And if people ever did decide to go through with this to the point where need they had to start impregnating lesbians to survive, then yes I would think people are pretty fucking stupid.

 

[MercuryJones]

Yes, I do realize you said no such thing. But you did argue in it's defense when I disagreed with it.

No, I argued against your foolishness, which was separate from the other poster's silliness.

 

[BostonPirate]

a new friend!!

hello asu, how are ya tonight?

 

[asu1117]

a new friend!!

hello asu, how are ya tonight?

Hey, I'm doing well thanks. How are you?

 

[BostonPirate]

Hey, I'm doing well thanks. How are you?

been a very nice night I must say.

 

[asu1117]

been a very nice night I must say.

That's great, hope it continues.

 

[bankside]

James Watson, the Nobel prize-winner who worked out the structure of DNA with Francis Crick, has expressed his opinion that we will soon have a prenatal test for homosexuality.

His opinion is that all gay fetuses should be aborted, to save them the pain of a homosexual life. This is a humanitarian gesture, like shooting a horse with a broken leg, or aborting a Down's baby.

In China today, it is relatively common to abort a perfectly healthy fetus because it is the wrong sex.

Perhaps another solution to the "problem" of a painful homosexual life would be to screen for and abort the homophobes.

 

[Kulindahr]

You do realize this would result in extinction correct? Even if other, nonconventional ways of birthing children were used, the amount of humans on the planet would plummet until almost nonexistent.

Of course it wouldn't.

We'd have the cure for homosexuality, too, so everyone would be bisexual. We'd just reach equilibrium at a healthier human population for the planet, and all be better for it.