Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    When people try to defend homersexuals they often use the argument that they had no choice and that you should not discrimate against somebody who was just born the way they are.

    That argument to me makes no sense. In my opinion being homersexual is a choice. The reason is natrual selection.

    If being homersexual is not a choice it must be part of your genes.

    If it is part of your genes then you would pass the gene on to your children. However homersexuals DO NOT have children generally.

    How could being homersexual be predefined like the colour of your skin if the 'gay' gene is never passed on.


    This leads to the conclusion that being homersexual is a choice because it would not be genetically passed on.


    (I have nothing against homersexuals and their lifestyle choice)


    Opinions?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    homosexuality doesnt have to be genetic or be a choice
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    HOMERSEXUALS. Fail. The whole of that post was a fail.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Haha. What a thread.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by turn and fall)
    When people try to defend homersexuals they often use the argument that they had no choice and that you should not discrimate against somebody who was just born the way they are.

    That argument to me makes no sense. In my opinion being homersexual is a choice. The reason is natrual selection.

    If being homersexual is not a choice it must be part of your genes.

    If it is part of your genes then you would pass the gene on to your children. However homersexuals DO NOT have children generally.

    How could being homersexual be predefined like the colour of your skin if the 'gay' gene is never passed on.


    This leads to the conclusion that being homersexual is a choice because it would not be genetically passed on.


    (I have nothing against homersexuals and their lifestyle choice)


    Opinions?
    I don't think Homosexuals would choose to be part of a group that's discriminated and persecuted against? And, if you swap 'straight' with 'homosexual' would you consider being 'straight' a choice? Don't know enough about the gene thing to comment upon though...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    This has to be a troll. Either that or OP is totally retarded.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm sure I read somewhere that it is more to do with exposure to specific hormones in the mother womb that makes them gay not really genetics
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    PS Reviewer
    Yawn.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    It's homosexual, ffs.

    The thought that it is genetic follows the same reasoning as any other genetic code. You can be a carrier as well as actually having the gene that changes you - colour blindness for example.

    You cannot choose who you fall in love with, however it is your choice whether you decide to live a particularly "Camp" lifestyle or whether you choose to hide it. Hiding it and pretending to be straight is not recommended - just look at the people coming out now who married because when they were our age it was illegal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    The post is stupid.
    Btw OP.Don't try to justify the fact that you are still in the closet.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've definitely always wanted to be a homersexual.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yay for trolls!

    Anyway, in response to your totally sincere post, I believe it's a combination of genetics and environmental. Genetics-wise, things are rather more complicated than your picture above. There's likely to not just be one "gay gene", it's a complicated makeup of various factors, and so not easily selected against, I suppose. Or so says the article I just found when googling, which is probably what you should have done in the first place.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This is probably a troll thread because nobody's that retarded, but i'll go for it anyway.

    Being gay is an attraction to your own gender, and not being attracted to the opposite. How would you ever choose who to be attracted to? Moreover, why would you ever choose; as in, there must be reasons for you to choose being gay over being straight. Why would being gay attract some people and not others; that in itself could never be a choice.

    More importantly, as with many other sexual characteristics, there's increasing heaps of evidence to suggest human sexuality is developed through hormone exposure at a specific time during fetal development. I'll link you the studies if you're interested. Which is why there's also a correlation between more feminine personality traits and homosexuality, (correlation only), as both are affected by oestrogen levels at different points in utero.

    They think it might have something to do with genetics, but definately not 100% genetics; maybe a genetic predisposition. And a genetic predisposition in the mothers at that.

    Also, you're talking **** when you jump to the conclusion that it must be in your genes, and it must go against natural selection, if it's not a choice. That's just retard talk.

    It's actually been shown that the chance a baby is born gay increases with each new child (in boys, haven't found many studies done on lesbians). So the youngest male has a much higher chance of being gay (chance, not guaranteed.), this has also been linked to oestrogen levels in the womb, as above. It has been theorised that this is a sort of evolutionary population control; and as it's more of a trait of the mother that causes it than the son, it is able to be passed on despite the seeming anti-evolutionary qualities homosexuality seems to have.



    Also, the biggest arguement is the ******* millions of gay people in the world who say it's not a choice. Why would we lie? I found out I was gay at 11 and it ****** with my ****** mind. If I could choose to be straight, I, and the majority of those I know, would do so.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I'd **** a doughnut.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Is homersexuality being sexually attracted to The Simpsons?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Doh.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Your opinions and conclusions are as bad as your spelling.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by turn and fall)
    When people try to defend homersexuals they often use the argument that they had no choice and that you should not discrimate against somebody who was just born the way they are.

    That argument to me makes no sense. In my opinion being homersexual is a choice. The reason is natrual selection.

    If being homersexual is not a choice it must be part of your genes.

    If it is part of your genes then you would pass the gene on to your children. However homersexuals DO NOT have children generally.

    How could being homersexual be predefined like the colour of your skin if the 'gay' gene is never passed on.


    This leads to the conclusion that being homersexual is a choice because it would not be genetically passed on.


    (I have nothing against homersexuals and their lifestyle choice)


    Opinions?
    How do you explain that many animals are gay?
    ''..actually, some same-sex birds do do it. So do beetles, sheep, fruit bats, dolphins, and orangutans. Zoologists are discovering that homosexual and bisexual activity is not unknown within the animal kingdom.''

    Are you telling me that a beetle had the brain to think you know what, females are soo 2008, I'm going to go for the guys this year!

    It has nothing to do with natural selection.

    I don't think you really know what you are talking about.. you are saying ''If it is part of your genes then you would pass the gene on to your children. However homersexuals DO NOT have children generally.''
    Let me explain, you have 2 parents, 1 with blue eyes and 1 with brown eyes. When you were made you were giving genes for blue eyes AND brown eyes, yet you only got eye colour. Some are more dominant than others. So if a 2 people have 3 kids and 1 is gay that could still mean they ALL have a gay gene but only in 1 of them the gene managed to become the dominant one. Which means that the 2 other straight kids have kids when they are older, they pass the gene on again and one of their kids could be gay..


    EDIT: Although the existance of a so-called ''Gay Gene'' is not widely accepted yet, more and more evidence suggests there is such gene.

    Sources:
    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...gayanimal.html

    Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene

    Sources gay genes:
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/re...y-1580244.html

    http://anglicansamizdat.wordpress.co...was-preserved/
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Being genetic is not the only way something can not be a choice.

    OP has a very simplistic view of genetics and of natural selection.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: October 3, 2010
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.