is homosexuality genetic or is it learned behavior?

Yes between some wackjob social-conservative organizations (who barely even exist outside the USA) together with a few people on the internet versus the medical and social scientific communities of just about every country in the free world.

Hmmm?

 

Which improve dramatically when the stigma directed towards them is lessened:

"Figure 1 illustrates the evolution of the averages of our mental health indicators across the period 1998-2008 for our estimation sample. For individuals in different-sex relationships, both depression and anxiety exhibit mild fluctuations across years. The variations in mental health for individuals in same-sex relationships present a different pattern. Before 2001, there was a substantial gap of sexual orientation for both mental health indicators. From 2001 onward, both indicators for sexual minorities declined drastically and largely converged to those of heterosexuals."

https://voxeu.org/article/mental-health-effects-same-sex-marriage-legalisation

Hmmm?

 

Well isn’t that HILARIOUS. You sourced a COLUMN from VOX which cherry picked the EXACT same study I was going to source when someone questioned me.

The answer to your question is easy. Because your source cherry picked the data. Your source referenced the first of a two part study.

Here’s the second part of the ACTUAL study along with their conclusion:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4655175/

“Between 2.0% and 2.5% of the participants reported same-sex sexual behavior in the preceding year or same-sex attraction. Homosexually active persons and persons with same-sex attraction reported a higher prevalence of disorders than heterosexual persons. There were more disparities in the prevalence of disorders based on sexual attraction than based on sexual behavior. Comparing these results with a previous study, showed that no significant changes over time have occurred in the pattern of health disparities.

...

Comparison between the sexual behavior-based disparities in psychiatric disorders reported here and those reported in NEMESIS-1[1] suggests that the number of disparities decreased somewhat and the pattern of disparities has changed. However, testing the effect of the interactions between time and behavior-based sexual orientation in the 12-month prevalence of any mood disorder, any anxiety disorder, any substance use disorder, and any Axis I disorder (controlling for age, level of education, residency, and having a steady partner) indicated that there were no significant changes in the disparities, with P-values ranging from .29 to .95 (Table 6).”

Perhaps you can explain why in the Netherlands which has a >90% acceptance rate of homosexuality, and have since the early 90’s, that those statistics for depression, self harm, anxiety, psychosis, suicide and a litany of others remain comparable to the US?

Btw it always helps to look at the studies your homosexual propaganda websites are “interpreting” for you. It’s funny your homosexual propaganda failed to mention the study they were cherry picking from’s conclusions before they fed you that erroneous bs huh?

 

Also @Colombine I’d like to point out that your story from VOX is making the VERY same argument that the source.. the actual study... refuted in that second paragraph I quoted from the Conclusions section of the source.

Which means either VOX didn’t read the conclusions (which I think is doubtful given they quoted the conclusion section at least once that I saw). Or they DID read the source’s conclusions and they thought their readers were too stupid to go read the source for themselves.

Which one do you think it is?

 

No disagreement.

 

Then being a teenager is a mental illness.

 

Meaning nothing in a world that list it's steering mechanism a few decades back.

 

The actual Chen and Van Ours study is from 2021. It follows the trend-line on mental health outcomes and how that has been affected since the legalization of same-sex marriage since 2001:

Here's a link to the whole study:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hec.4441

"Table 2 provides our main parameter estimates. The coefficient of indicates that on average before SSML, sexual minorities suffered 0.177 standard deviation higher depression and 0.270 standard deviation higher anxiety than heterosexuals. Both differences are significant. For heterosexual individuals, the legislation of SSM did not have a significant effect on the mental health variables (parameter ). This result verifies the assumption of our DiD approach: the natural experiment did not affect the control group. The parameter estimate is significantly negative for both depression and anxiety. Both mental health indicators of sexual minorities largely though not completely converged to their counterpart of heterosexuals. The legalization reduced the sexual orientation gaps of depression and anxiety by 50% (0.089/0.177) and 87%, respectively. The last row of the table presents p-values indicating whether or not the sum of the coefficients and equals zero. If so, it implies that SSML closed the sexual orientation gap of mental health. Despite the remarkable convergence, the sexual orientation gap was not yet completely eliminated even though such a gap of anxiety post-SSML was significant only at the 10% level."

The study you linked to was published in 2014 with data collected at the latest between 2007 and 2009.

Although Chen & Van Ours used that data to form part of the basis for their conclusion they also analyzed material from numerous additional sources (all linked in their study) right up to 2018, four years after your linked source.

That said, you really don't need a study to show how stigma and legal persecution can have an effect on depression and anxiety on anyone.

I'm sure a young gay person in Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan is likely to be far more depressed and anxious than their counterpart in San Diego with accepting parents a life partner a job and somewhere decent to live.

Improvements in mental outcomes for sexual minorities will not occur at a 100% level anywhere overnight but if any improvement is seen as a correlated to more positive attitudes towards them including favorable legislation such as same-sex marriage then that indicates that such differences aren't inherent.

If it could be proven beyond doubt that such variances were inherent, surely that indicates that a person's sexuality is also inherent otherwise that person could eliminate the variable simply by choosing not to be gay?

 

Sounds like you're missing the 1950s.

 

Not really no. Though that is roughly when the trouble began.

 

Sin sir is inherent to the human condition. We are all born sinful because we are all born selfish. Yes even the best of us. We literally cannot help ourselves because we are not omnipotent omniscient nor omnipresent, though some of us given enough power and very little self restraint can just about manage omniannoying. It is why we live in a world on the cusp of collapse.

 

Thanks for sharing.

Can't quite fathom "omniannoying" but I can see it might have an etymological basis.

 

Then why is homosexuality singled out?

 

Sure they can be born with it. People are born with mental illness all the time. That doesn’t change the fact that REGARDLESS of how they’re treated (poorly in the us and well in the Netherlands) they STILL have a grossly disproportionate rate of mental illness when compared to heterosexuals.

The reason your source pinpoints on depression and anxiety are because those two mental illnesses are unique. Depression and anxiety are HIGHLY affected by environmental outcomes. So it does stand to reason, as you said, that those two factors WOULD be helped by the normalization of their behavior.

However most of the other issues they were looking at in the original study (psychosis, dissociative identity disorder, bipolar disorder, OCD, conversion disorder, schizophrenia and a host of others) are less likely to be attributed to how you’re being treated and more to do with essentially a malfunction in neurological normalcy. Homosexuals are grossly overrepresented in these categories when compared to their heterosexual counterparts REGARDLESS of what country they’re in or their rate of acceptance in said country.

That means there is something INHERENTLY disordered about the homosexual brain. They have a mental illness. They need treatment. They do NOT need to have their mental illness normalized.

 

Because homosexuals refuse to acknowledge their sin and more specifically expect Christians to accept them as not being sinful.

What I mean is, many Christians divorce but very few of them will tell you that their divorce wasn’t a sin and they don’t have to ask for forgiveness nor repent. Whereas the homosexuals do not expect they have to be forgiven or repent for their behavior and can continue living in sin (as practicing homosexuals) while claiming to be Christian and expecting other Christians to treat them as such.

 

We can absolutely live without sin if Jesus is to be believed. In fact there were two people in the Bible who were without sin other than Jesus Christ.

 

For the record there is only one acceptable reason for divorce according to Jesus. That is sexual immorality.

 

No, JC was the only one. There were people like Noah and John the Baptist who were obedient but there is no claim about them having lived a sinless life.

 

False.

Luke 1:5 There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain priest named Zacharias, of the division of Abijah. His wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6 And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord and were blameless in his sight.

Hence why Jesus tells people to go and sin no more after he heals them and they have seen the power of God. Hence why Jesus tells us if we want to see heaven we must be perfect just as our father in heaven is perfect. As Jesus told you, “with men it is impossible, but with God all things are possible.”

 

Sure, righteous and blameless, but not sinless.

The Bible is very clear about it: All have sinned.

 

How can you sin if you keep ALL of the commandments and ordinances of God and are BLAMELESS in his sight? They couldn’t have sinned if they kept all of gods commandments and ordinances. Sin is transgression of the will of God and they never transgressed it.

In truth Zacharias actually does end up sinning but not elizabeth. But Zacharias went 80+ years without sinning. And his ONLY sin in his life was not believing God when God told him he was going to get Elizabeth pregnant at around 80 years old. Which, while it’s still a sin, is pretty dang understandable lol

Regardless, Elizabeth NEVER sinned and to call her a sinner is bearing false witness.

 

They were not that way throughout their lives, but you are free to believe whatever makes you happy.

"Both of them were righteous in the sight of God, observing all the Lord’s commands and decrees blamelessly." It means they were observing all commands at that time in their lives. That is why they were chosen to be the parents of John.

Jesus was the only man without sin, which is why He, and He alone qualified as the perfect sacrifice.

Everyone who is 'saved' is blameless aka their sins will not be held against them.

Keep your accusations to yourself. Disagreeing with your view does not make anyone a false witness.

 

Your argument is completely antithesis to EVERYTHING Jesus taught.

Why would Jesus tell people to go and sin no more if they couldn’t live without sin?

Furthermore the ONLY people in the ENTIRE Bible from Genesis to Revelation who are described as keeping ALL of the commandments and ordinances of God and being BLAMELESS in his sight are Jesus, Zacharias and Elizabeth.

Your assertion that they were declared such simply because at that EXACT moment in time, they happened to be following the commandments is illogical. Your logic doesn’t hold up to scrutiny. There were literally THOUSANDS of people... MILLIONS even... who could make the claim that I’m CURRENTLY living within the commandments of God.

But NONE of them were EVER described as keeping all of the commandments and ordinances of God and being blameless in his sight. Ever. Except for Jesus, Zacharias and Elizabeth. The state YOU describe is nothing really special given that millions of people would have been within that same state. But the state that the Bible describes Zacharias and Elizabeth was one of uniqueness and notability to the point they needed to include it in the Bible.

Now I haven’t done this. But I’m fairly confident that if I look it up, the same word used to describe Jesus as being blameless and without sin is the same word used to describe Zacharias and Elizabeth as such. Wanna make a friendly wager?

 

I’m not sure why I even have to explain this to you. You CANNOT be blameless if you are a sinner. Period. Those concepts are mutually exclusive. In the context which we are speaking, you CANNOT be both.

 

Which is exactly what Jesus taught. TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WISH TO BE TREATED.