Scientists May Have Finally Unlocked Puzzle of Why People Are Gay

I think you misunderstand terminology.

Most people in the gay world refer to the "Gay lifestyle" as the gay social scene, going out, dressing up, having casual sex and lots of drama and relationships.

This is exactly analogous to the STRAIGHT social scene, involving going out, dressing up, having casual sex and lots of drama and relationships.

The MAJORITY of GAYS and straights DO NOT DO THIS! They have some friends, try to have steady relationships, go out once in the while but usually work and have rewarding careers and hobbies and sometimes families, (unless they "family values" religious families, in which case they are thrown out into the street).

But they are talking about choosing their social life. They are still gay if they don't. If someone goes either way by casual choice then they are bi-sexual.

 

Sex-specific epi-marks produced in early fetal development protect each sex from the substantial natural variation in testosterone that occurs during later fetal development. Sex-specific epi-marks stop girl fetuses from being masculinized when they experience atypically high testosterone, and vice versa for boy fetuses. Different epi-marks protect different sex-specific traits from being masculinized or feminized – some affect the genitals, others sexual identity, and yet others affect sexual partner preference. However, when these epi-marks are transmitted across generations from fathers to daughters or mothers to sons, they may cause reversed effects, such as the feminization of some traits in sons, such as sexual preference, and similarly a partial masculinization of daughters. The study solves the evolutionary riddle of homosexuality, finding that "sexually antagonistic" epi-marks, which normally protect parents from natural variation in sex hormone levels during fetal development, sometimes carryover across generations and cause homosexuality in opposite-sex offspring. The mathematical modeling demonstrates that genes coding for these epi-marks can easily spread in the population because they always increase the fitness of the parent but only rarely escape erasure and reduce fitness in offspring.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2012-12/nifm-sfe120612.php

 

1) What does this have to do with abortion? Your first sentence appears to be very random and out of place.

2) The fact that you are still framing this as an equality issue when attempting to point out internal conflict on the conservative side illustrates that you either do not understand the conservative position on the issue or you are deliberately trying to misrepresent it in order to make conservatives look bad. The belief that gay people are being discriminated against is a liberal position. To suggest that discrimination is the conscious and willful intention of conservatives who disagree with the liberal agenda on homosexuality is as ridiculous as suggesting that liberals are only pro-abortion because they hate babies and want to kill them. So you are either being ignorant or dishonest here.

 

Could be but either way I don't have a problem with gays nor do I have a problem with people who are against gays.

 

Because they could always find a sexual partner? Perhaps your friends are nymphomaniacs?

Besides...if all you wanted was a sexual partner being in the heterosexual majority puts you are a much greater advantage to finding a sexual partner.

 

No, Men are more likely to have sex for any old reason than women. Got a headache, have sex. Bored have sex. Pissed, have sex. I understand why someone would go gay it's much easier to get along with another male then the complicated women. My problem is I hate hairy people and I'm into smooth tight skinned women.

 

If it is genetic you'd just be teaching your child self-hatred and to be guilty for his or her feelings.

 

If by interesting you mean horrifying and depressing, then yes, I suppose you're right. The idea that people would abort a baby for being homosexual when they wouldn't abort otherwise is as abhorrent as the Indian practice of aborting only female fetuses - almost moreso, because the Indians at least have economic reasons for not wanting female children, even though the cultural impetus for it is stupid. I support one's right to do so, of course, because I don't care for what reason one feels obliged to have an abortion; if a woman wants something out of her body, she should be able to have it removed. But like the act of abortion itself, I find it abhorrent.

Someday bigotry may be cured; until then, there's the ignore button.

 

I don't understand? Why would one have a problem with their child being homosexual?

 

No offense, but the way I see it, the only kind of person who'd ask that question would be gay themselves......

 

I thought it was showtunes...

 

The poster didn't stipulate the gender of said friends.

But the point still stands, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a heterosexual person. Where as (save a few heavily gay populated areas) finding a homosexual partner can be very difficult.

The populations are just vastly different.

 

good question, someday they may find just such a common number of genes that represent bigottedness, should parents be allowed to abort them when discovered?

 

It is actually called the Higgs boson. Scientists are having their little joke calling it the 'god particle'.

 

Someday there might be a cure for ignoramuses who post stuff like the above.

 

People do not 'go gay' any more than you chose to be whatever you are, sexually. Unless, of course, you can tell us when you made this monumental decision?

 

so pro-life conservatives admit they were wrong and it was never a choice, but now are supporting abortion?

.

 

If it didn't hurt so much when I take a (*)(*)(*)(*) I might go gay. But since I don't like pain I'll skip it.

 

Or sick of homophobia. The idea that homosexuals are somehow "lesser" is overplayed and wrong.

 

The whole point is that homosexuality is NOT a "moral value." You could no more teach your child to be straight than you could teach him to be six feet tall. He either is or he isn't.

 

Then how are their bisexuals?

 

Another eugenics advocate? great.

The real future is people geneticaly engineering their children. I'd say in about 10 years it will be very common.

 

Maybe there is a slut gene!

 

Yes, the science IS in on what makes people gay..

Also CONDITIONING AND SEXUAL BEHAVIOR: A REVIEW: http://www.pphp.concordia.ca/fac/pfaus/Pfaus-Kippin-Centeno(2001).pdf
James G. Pfaus,1 Tod E. Kippin, and Soraya Centeno
Center for Studies in Behavioral Neurobiology, Department of Psychology, Concordia
University, 1455 deMaisonneuve Bldg. W., Montre´al, Que´bec, H3G 1M8 Canada