There Is No "Gay" Gene

.

“Well, as I have said, there is no gay gene. And there are factors more influential than biology.”

“The best data, of course, [comes from the Framingham Study],” said Dr. McHugh. “If you are a man and you grow up in a rural environment, you are four times less likely to have homosexual relationships than if you grow up in a metropolitan area. That's not left-handedness.”

“If you are a lesbian, you are much more likely to be college-educated,” he said. “That's not something that happens at conception.” Dr. Paul R. McHugh, the Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University and former psychiatrist–in-chief for Johns Hopkins Hospital.

I can't say I care much if there is or isn't. If it's what you want to do and no one has to get hurt for yall to enjoy have at it. Dont let people stop you from being you IB. I support you gay gene or not.

I can't say I care much if there is or isn't. If it's what you want to do and no one has to get hurt for yall to enjoy have at it. Dont let people stop you from being you IB. I support you gay gene or not. Originally Posted by Trey

I agree. You don't have to defend yourself IB. Come all the way out. If it makes you feel better, I do think gays are born that way. Are you voting for Buttgieg?

I can't say I care much if there is or isn't. If it's what you want to do and no one has to get hurt for yall to enjoy have at it. Dont let people stop you from being you IB. I support you gay gene or not. Originally Posted by Trey

It's evident Dr. McHugh is on record as denying your excuses: one is NOT "born that way". If you want a cake for your wedding, find a baker who supports your lifestyle without using the American court system.

I agree. You don't have to defend yourself IB. Come all the way out. If it makes you feel better, I do think gays are born that way. Are you voting for Buttgieg? Originally Posted by themystic

Butt-is-good with the (D) after his name is your boy, Mystic. Suck it up and deal with it!

People are "born that way" in a lot of different ways that have nothing to do with sexual preference. Trisomy 21 are "born that way"...Cleft lip and cleft palate are "born that way"...Congenital heart defects are "born that way"...those predisposed to depression or schizophrenia are "born that way"....what's the big deal here?

People are "born that way" in a lot of different ways that have nothing to do with sexual preference. Trisomy 21 are "born that way"...Cleft lip and cleft palate are "born that way"...Congenital heart defects are "born that way"...those predisposed to depression or schizophrenia are "born that way"....what's the big deal here? Originally Posted by FriscoKiddo

FYI, Lady Gaga wasn't spreading propaganda about those other conditions.

The Framingham study? That was a heart study of the population of Framingham Massachusetts. Can you trust a psychiatrist who quotes Freud to explain something in the realm of genetics? While there may be no gay gene, changes in the X chromosome are related to male homosexuality and it is somewhat heritable. Something is occurring in the womb after conception that’s altering the X chromosome. Could there be environmental factors too, after birth, that cause boys to be more likely to become homosexual? Well, yes, maybe-- see the Wikipedia article below. That's not as cut and dried as the fact that there are biological differences between gay and straight men.

While there may indeed be something about life in the city that causes mothers in urban areas to be more likely to bear gay male children, I’ll call bull shit on there being 4x as many gays growing up in cities. Having grown up in a rural area, the reason, if that’s true, is people in small towns stay in the closet, so don’t self report as being gay. As one of my buddies in high school said, "If I saw one of our bulls mounting another one of our bulls, I'd shoot them both dead there on the spot." And he was serious. Although his father would have gone ape shit crazy if he had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biolog...al_orientation

https://www.newscientist.com/article...l-orientation/

https://www.sciencenews.org/article/...eness-straight

https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...homosexuality/

There's no "gay" gene. The one study that suggested such was found to have too many exceptions to be worth the paper it was written on.

Homosexuality may be triggered by environmental factors during childhood ... The finding is highly controversial because it suggests that some men are not born gay, but are turned homosexual by their surroundings....

Epigenetic changes are known to be triggered by environmental factors such as chemical exposure, childhood abuse, diet, exercise and stress.

(The Telegraph)

There's no "gay" gene. The one study that suggested such was found to have too many exceptions to be worth the paper it was written on. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Nobody says there's a gay gene any more, indeed it's not that simple.

From your source, "Homosexuality may be triggered by environmental factors during childhood ... The finding is highly controversial because it suggests that some men are not born gay, but are turned homosexual by their surroundings...."

Is it possible that environmental factors after birth and during childhood would not only cause a boy to be more likely to become homosexual, but also cause him to have a small INAH3 region in the hypothalamus? Possible I guess, but unlikely:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/253/5023/1034

In other words, there are biological differences between gay and straight men.

Nobody says there's a gay gene any more, indeed it's not that simple.

From your source, "Homosexuality may be triggered by environmental factors during childhood ... The finding is highly controversial because it suggests that some men are not born gay, but are turned homosexual by their surroundings...."

Is it possible that environmental factors after birth and during childhood would not only cause a boy to be more likely to become homosexual, but also cause him to have a small INAH3 region in the hypothalamus? Possible I guess, but unlikely:

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/253/5023/1034

In other words, there are biological differences between gay and straight men. Originally Posted by Tiny

The whole premise behind Lady Gaga's song is that there is a "gay" gene. Again lib-retards such as she -- including tens of thousands of her fans -- deny science.

At the risk of taking this slightly off topic, do you believe the Republican Party should reach out more to the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community? A friend of mine who's a staunch Republican believes many Millenials are becoming Democrats because they view Republicans as being anti-LGBT. He believes if the Republicans don't change on this and other social issues, they won't at some point be viable as a political party.

Put another way, should the Republican Party be a big tent party? And how big should the tent be?

Obummer would be a GOOD case study...

At the risk of taking this slightly off topic, do you believe the Republican Party should reach out more to the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community? A friend of mine who's a staunch Republican believes many Millenials are becoming Democrats because they view Republicans as being anti-LGBT. He believes if the Republicans don't change on this and other social issues, they won't at some point be viable as a political party.

Put another way, should the Republican Party be a big tent party? And how big should the tent be? Originally Posted by Tiny

I believe the Democrap party is closer to non-viable then the Republican party...for MANY reasons!!

At the risk of taking this slightly off topic, do you believe the Republican Party should reach out more to the LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender) community? A friend of mine who's a staunch Republican believes many Millenials are becoming Democrats because they view Republicans as being anti-LGBT. He believes if the Republicans don't change on this and other social issues, they won't at some point be viable as a political party.

Put another way, should the Republican Party be a big tent party? And how big should the tent be? Originally Posted by Tiny

This whole issue is out of proportion to the actual LBGT numbers in the population which is estimated to be something like 5%. People like me are repulsed by the lifestyle but do not have an issue with what this crowd does behind closed doors.

It's when they parade their perversity on public streets, demand that others kowtow to "beliefs" that are not scientifically based and use the American legal system to force their perverse views on others that they cross the line of being acceptable.

The LGBT crowd isn't advocating for "inclusiveness". It is demanding to be in control. There's no negotiating with people like that. When they say "their way" or "no way", I am down for "no way".

[QUOTE=I B Hankering;1061448642]It's evident Dr. McHugh is on record as denying your excuses: one is NOT "born that way". If you want a cake for your wedding, find a baker who supports your lifestyle without using the American court system.

I'm not sure where I fall on that cake issue honestly. If that was what you wanted to dig up and debate here you could have added something to your copy paste effort of a first post.

I would've gone to someone that wanted to make my cake and fuck that cake shop. Prop up the other shop near by.

But the use of religion to discrimanate aginst someone or some group... does it stop at cake? Does it stop with gays? You tell me.