Homosexuality: genetic/environmental, choice/no choice? Why it shouldn't matter

A lot of people argue about whether being gay is genetic or not, a choice or not, as if it matters. Ok, if you're interested in science or sociology I understand.

However, this is why I think it shouldn't matter on any level except general interest:

Scenario 1: Homosexuality IS genetic (and isn't a choice)

That means gay people have as much as choice over their sexual orientation as their natural hair colour, being short or going bald. If this is true, religious people should be ashamed that they are trying to change God's intention. Irreligious people should recognize that such a mutation/variation is not life-threatening (just like blue eyes, or ginger hair) and should therefore not be selected against when IVF/etc happens.

If your argument is "but think about the population issues" think closely about what you're saying. Throughout history there have been gay people, it's only that nowadays many are more comfortable to be open about it (that doesn't mean there's suddenly too many gay people - look instead to the effect of careers/education on birth rates to find your 'problem').

Scenario 2: Homosexuality is environmental (and isn't a choice)

That means it's decided by the experiences/situations a young child encounters in their early days. By age three, a large part of a child's brain development has occurred and I've read that your personality (are you introverted/extraverted) will be decided around this age.

Does someone from 0-3/4 have any choice about how their parents act, or the friends (girls or boys) invited over by parents being friends through school? No, of course not. So again, they have/had no say in this and shouldn't be blamed at all.

Scenario 3: Homosexuality IS a choice.

This is the thing religious people get most worked up about. Although I disagree, let's say being gay IS a choice.

According to the Kinsey scale, everyone lies somewhere between exclusively heterosexual and exclusively homosexual. That means, theoretically, a lot of people might be able to be attracted to either sex (even if one much more than the other).

That means lots of gay people might be 'choosing' to date people of the same sex when they don't have to. Why is that a bad thing? Do you choose when dating (especially online) based on someone's age, height, fitness level, hair colour? Your very superficial if you choose only based on these things, but you're lying if you say none of those have any effect on your decisions. Some people even rule out certain ethnicity due to preference. Why is that ok for ethnicity and not for gender?

------------------

Just something I was pondering when reading YouTube comments today. WHATEVER the truth is concerning homosexuality I don't see what the problem is...

Never mind it's not environmental and not many people have studied the genetic part but homosexuality is not a choice and how do i know this your asking yourself... I know it's not a choice because i don't ever remember asking myself do i want to be gay or do i want to be normal.

I did not choose my sexuality I was and forever be gay. I didn't choose to be bullied. I didn't choose to be sexually abused/raped by kids at school. I didn't choose to be thrown around like i was nothing.

What i did choose one day is that i have had enough of the bullying and being seen as defenseless so i choose to fight back. I did get into alot of trouble with the school i got into trouble with the law a few times. I will never be bullied again nor will i ever take crap from anyone. I learned how to fight i learned so much from all those bullies i learned how to make people feal worthless and unwanted.

I'm not the person that people mess with after a few fights whether it's verbal or physical fighting.

Posted from TSR Mobile

tl;dr although whether homosexuality is a choice or not shouldn't matter, because it's not wrong either way, it does matter, because people use "it's a choice" to generally give substance to the "it's not natural" argument (which isn't valid either; appeal to nature fallacy and homosexuality is natural) and because homosexuality is not a choice, I can use it as one of the points to invalidate their arguments. If it was a choice, I can't use it as a thing to invalidate their argument, but it's not.

But it does matter whether people say it is a choice, because although there is nothing wrong if it was a choice, people use "it's a choice" argument to give their argument substance (however incorrect) and persuade others to believe their belief or ideology, and because it is not a choice, I'm validated to disagree with it. If it was a choice, I can't use "it's not a choice" argument as one of my arguments to invalidate it; I can only rely on my other arguments.

They mainly use the "it's not a choice" argument to support their "it's not natural" argument, which if true, gives their argument substance. Many people appeal to nature (although are inconsistent in their beliefs, and are unknowing hypocrites), so are brought in by this viewpoint. Anyway, why appeal to nature? (Search up "appeal to nature" fallacy.) So it matters not whether it is natural or not (but it's natural anyway.)

Other points not answering question regarding what you said

1. I would personally say "homosexuality is multifactorial; it is (so far) shown to be dependent upon genetic, and environmental factors during foetal development." Or "it's partially genetic" or "it isn't solely genetic."

I haven't used God and Allah interchangeably, because I'm doing it on what argument corresponds more to each religion, but they can be interchangeable.

Unfortunately (religious) people might use the argument that "God said the purpose of life, or marriage, was to reproduce." But, firstly not everyone is religious, secondly carrying on from the first point (as their beliefs don't apply to non-religious people) by the theory of evolution there isn't any sort of thing like a biological purpose, and thirdly not all marriages are religious; marriage predates religion and there's legal marriages etc. etc.

Unfortunately (religious) people might use the argument that "Allah done it (made homosexuals that way) as a test, and they must persevere/resist temptation, and they would be reward more greatly later (in the next life?)" or "it isn't same-sex attractions which Allah forbid, but same-sex acts."

Unfortunately non-religious people use the "purpose of life is to reproduce" argument as well. All groups might think that any deviation from the norm (which by the way, is dictated by majority) is bad, or unnatural, which is a misuse of both the words "normal" and "natural" and any variations of such (in their meaning-based word families.)

Those people who say that "if everyone was gay, the human race would go extinct" are silly.
I generally just say that "if everyone was a doctor, no one would be a farmer and we'd all die of starvation."
Also same-sex couples want children, and even a homosexual male can impregnate a homosexual female, and if there were only homosexuals left on Earth, I'm pretty sure many would decide to reproduce regardless.
Also they generally imply socialisation or choice is a factor, as they use that argument in defence of why we shouldn't accept it, as if accepting it would make more homosexuals. This isn't also applicable because there isn't reason to believe socialisation is a factor, and it isn't a choice.

2. Many people use the argument of "it's a choice, but not their choice." which doesn't make sense at all, and I usually have to explain the meaning of the word "choice". And many people believe you choose your environment, which is just not true. I usually list off several things during childhood which you don't choose.

3. I do think sexual behaviour and (past) experiences would affect self-identified/identified position on the Kinsley scale, because identifying yourself would be a subjective thing. It would also affect the preferences with the sexes or genders. I just think your sexual orientation (mainly so far decided by genetic and epigenetic factors during foetal development) would give the most influence as to where it is at. Also homophobia for example would affect your self-identified/identified position.

Posted from TSR Mobile

It doesn't matter in the sense that it isn't wrong to be gay whether you choose to be or not. However it does matter in the sense that still to this day, there are things like 'conversion therapy' and being is a criminal offense in about 80 countries in the world and homophobic people thinking you can get 'recruited into being gay' so these people need to be educated because they have false information and spread hatred based on false information. It is also false to think it is a choice, as a gay person I know that I didn't choose to be gay any more than a straight person chose to be straight, so again, homophobic people who say it is a choice are in the wrong. Nothing good has ever come out of people being ignorant and misinformed...

As far as I am concerned, this argument is about as pointless as evolution vs creationism, every sensible person in today's world knows evolution is real and God did not create the world in 7 days. Those who don't think so are just being dumb asses and are generally seen as stupid and no one realy takes them seriously, same applies to homophobes who are ignorant about the biological reasons for homosexuality, science has already established biological differences between gay and straight people and it is known that hormonal and genetic variatians cause people to have differing sexual orientations. Hateful people ignore facts though just like creationists ignore facts, evidence and logic too. There is no hope for some people. And besides, you don't need science telling you whether it's a choice or not if you have a brain. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that you can't help who you are attracted to or who you fall in love with, it just happens because it is an instinct. You cannot choose to fall in love with someone.

Are you homosexual

Posted from TSR Mobile

I don't think I've ever seen someone type so much after saying "tl;dr", lol.

Well.. thank you very much for adding information to the discussion, though it's not much of a discussion at the moment.

As you've asked, yes. But I was hoping to avoid that question as people who disagree with this will now claim I'm lying/bias.

Don't worry as to your own credibility; only if someone can give reasons to believe you've been biased, can they doubt your actual credibility or validity. (The people doubting are at fault otherwise.)

Like if a religious person done a study on homosexuals, and gave absurd conclusions, one shan't say investigator is religious; biased unless it is shown/heavily suggested that the investigator being religious has made him biased/affected the study.

One can't be disproven by bias by association or principle.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Hi. I'm sorry you've been bullied because you're gay. I understand that it's not a choice, but the point of this thread was to show people who think it might be a choice that, even if they were right, that doesn't make homosexuality wrong.

It's against my religion.

But, its not affecting my life if someone is gay and i wouldn't treat them any different. It's also accepted in today's society, so personally I've not got a problem with it. And I don't see how it being generic, a choice or being born with it affects my life.

You don't see how because it simply doesn't.