• Fur Affinity Forums are governed by Fur Affinity's Rules and Policies. Links and additional information can be accessed in the Site Information Forum.

Gay genes or choice?

Homosexuality choice or genes?

  • Genes

    Votes: 62 33.7%
  • Choice

    Votes: 36 19.6%
  • Part Both

    Votes: 86 46.7%

  • Total voters
    184

Leon

Hot sammiches and cold beer.

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs

Fighter of the Nightman
That doesn't prove there is no genetic component, just that there isn't a single gene or something obvious like that (but we already knew this).

My opinion is people are probably predisposed to certain things through genetics, but something as complex as this can't be looked at so simply. I'm sure there are many, many genes involved and environmental factors as well.

It is possible that genetics causes people to be predisposed to certain things but emotions aren't physical traits but rather abstractions we use for complex mental processes (in my boyfriend's words; he explains it better than me). Things like that simply can't be explained in terms of genetics but that doesn't mean heredity can't influence you in one way or another.

So I agree with Telnac a bit in that respect, however I don't think it would have any obvious impact.

Okay, I'll go with that. As long as you're not saying you are born gay.
 

Qoph

omurr
I'm sure this has been said already... but the debate isn't between genes and choice. It's between genes and environment.

So far, most studies have shown that both are somewhat involved. However, there are always those extremists who say that gay people are consciously trying to sin against God. There are also those who think that babies are 'born gay'. This is possible, but still probably not completely true, at least in most cases.
 

Hyenaworks

Oh Derpy! That's not a letter
Lets have a fun debate... If homosexuality had a genetic component, would you be against parents screening potential offspring for that component before making a decision to abort said offspring?
 

Qoph

omurr
Lets have a fun debate... If homosexuality had a genetic component, would you be against parents screening potential offspring for that component before making a decision to abort said offspring?

Well, since the only parents that would not want a gay son/daughter would also be morally abliged to NOT abort their children... that would be interesting. I guess there would really be no legal argument against it.
 

Hyenaworks

Oh Derpy! That's not a letter
Well, since the only parents that would not want a gay son/daughter would also be morally abliged to NOT abort their children... that would be interesting. I guess there would really be no legal argument against it.

What makes you think the only parents would be the type to be morally obliged to be against abortion? Plenty of folks support legalized abortions but not homosexuality.
 

Randy-Darkshade

Bike riding squirrel thing.
Lets have a fun debate... If homosexuality had a genetic component, would you be against parents screening potential offspring for that component before making a decision to abort said offspring?

I'd be against it. Being gay does not physically affect someones way of life. I mean they are quite capable of free thought and able to do everything a straight person can. If being gay was a mental or physical handicap that meant they couldn't do any of the above, then I might consider an abortion. But to abort someone just because they will be gay is stupid.
 

Fuh

New Member
It's both, yet neither. It's a combination of the nature/nurture thing.

Nobody chooses who they are sexually attracted to, or who they love. So by that, it's a nature thing. But sexuality can be repressed, or brought out.

And to follow on from that, it's not like most people wake up and say "I'm straight". To a lot of people, they just are. Furthermore, it occurs in nature, among animals, and in humans, goes back as far as human history goes back.

Um, to save getting into a big psychology dissertation, I'll just say "It's both, but mostly comes from nature, more so than nurture".
 

Hyenaworks

Oh Derpy! That's not a letter
I'd be against it. Being gay does not physically affect someones way of life. I mean they are quite capable of free thought and able to do everything a straight person can. If being gay was a mental or physical handicap that meant they couldn't do any of the above, then I might consider an abortion. But to abort someone just because they will be gay is stupid.

Being gay severely impacts your reproduction desires which some couples hoping to someday be grandparents may not wish to deal with.
 

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs

Fighter of the Nightman
Lets have a fun debate... If homosexuality had a genetic component, would you be against parents screening potential offspring for that component before making a decision to abort said offspring?

If they were going to end up being a Prez hiltin, then maybe.

I'm kind of picking on him tonight. Every time I think of him, I rage for a little bit.
 

Telnac

Fundamentalist Heretic
So far, most studies have shown that both are somewhat involved. However, there are always those extremists who say that gay people are consciously trying to sin against God.
Uh... according to Christian Theology, anyone performing any sin whatsoever is rebelling against God.

...of course, this is the case for homosexual sex as it is for two unmarried heterosexual people who get it on; not like THAT will ever be taught in Sunday School!

Back on topic, I really don't understand the whole Nature vs Nurture debate. Study after study after study show that BOTH have an important role to play in how people develop. Children are no more "born gay" than they are "born alcoholic." There may be some genes that predispose someone toward a certain behavior set, but that hardly means anything's set in stone.
 

Ieatcrackersandjumpcliffs

Fighter of the Nightman
Uh... according to Christian Theology, anyone performing any sin whatsoever is rebelling against God.

...of course, this is the case for homosexual sex as it is for two unmarried heterosexual people who get it on; not like THAT will ever be taught in Sunday School!

Back on topic, I really don't understand the whole Nature vs Nurture debate. Study after study after study show that BOTH have an important role to play in how people develop. Children are no more "born gay" than they are "born alcoholic." There may be some genes that predispose someone toward a certain behavior set, but that hardly means anything's set in stone.

Of course not, you wean kids into stuff like that.
 

Lobar

The hell am I reading, here?
Lets have a fun debate... If homosexuality had a genetic component, would you be against parents screening potential offspring for that component before making a decision to abort said offspring?

Eugenically selecting against such insignificant traits to make "designer babies" is wrong. The means of how you carry out the selection are irrelevant, and specifically naming abortion is just loading the question.
 
Last edited:

Randy-Darkshade

Bike riding squirrel thing.
Being gay severely impacts your reproduction desires which some couples hoping to someday be grandparents may not wish to deal with.


Just because someone is straight DOES NOT INSTANTLY mean they want kids. I have a friend who is straight and he hates the idea of having his own kids.

So that is BS excuse. Also if people want to abort a child just because it wont make them grandparents is also highly selfish of the parents.
 
Last edited:

Randy-Darkshade

Bike riding squirrel thing.
I completly agree with what you're saying.
But I just wanted to point out that, in the future, abortion may not be the only option.
I think science is quite close to allowing us to "pick and choose" what genetic traits our children have (eg eye clolur, gender, ect.). Of course, at the moment, we do not know the full extent of this, if giving someone one trait will unintentionally affect another, and to what digree.

But yeah, I totally agree with you.

Didn't scientists already say that in the future that may be very possible to do? I am sure I once watched on the news sometime ago that scientists wanted to pick and choose genes to fix genetic disorders like down syndrome.
 

lacygunner

New Member
I started to read this thread, and then decided about 1/2 way through that it has been a waste of time. Everything here has been as retarded at watching the special Olympics.
You have one particular idiot who just seems to spout BIG fancy words, while using a slightly snobby demeanor to it, so he can call people straight fu*%ing idiots, w/out really calling them that right out.
Granted there is some interesting theories here, but all the B.S. in between will give anyone a splitting migraine and major regrets for trying to read through this in the first place.
So why don't people stop posting threads about big debatable topics, such as this one, and find something that can have more evidence and research to put behind it.
There is still WAYYY to much out there that isn't known about this topic, and so there for it should not be debated in the first place. Honestly, debating such a mysterious topic is like trying to spit into the wind.
 

Randy-Darkshade

Bike riding squirrel thing.
I started to read this thread, and then decided about 1/2 way through that it has been a waste of time. Everything here has been as retarded at watching the special Olympics.
You have one particular idiot who just seems to spout BIG fancy words, while using a slightly snobby demeanor to it, so he can call people straight fu*%ing idiots, w/out really calling them that right out.
Granted there is some interesting theories here, but all the B.S. in between will give anyone a splitting migraine and major regrets for trying to read through this in the first place.
So why don't people stop posting threads about big debatable topics, such as this one, and find something that can have more evidence and research to put behind it.
There is still WAYYY to much out there that isn't known about this topic, and so there for it should not be debated in the first place. Honestly, debating such a mysterious topic is like trying to spit into the wind.

It's called getting peoples opinions. The OP was just asking what our thoughts were on the subject. Just because there is still much to learn does not mean we can not have our own thoughts and ideas.

If you don't like that, then gtfo.
 

Viva

Now with 90% more of 90% less
I changed my mind. It's both

There are gay geneS, and they do cause feminine and homosexual behavior.

But

You can choose to ignore your homosexual impulses, or retrain yourself through straight camp or whatever the hell else they have these days, but you will wind up unhappy.

So...it's both
 
Last edited:
Top