sexual orientation and innate choice

[|iR|Focalor]

That would seem to imply you also doubt there's anything genetic responsible for heterosexual attraction?

True. Maybe there is, maybe there isn't. I've yet to see anyone pinpoint where any animals instinctual actions reside. Speaking in terms of an animals instincts, that would make homosexuals genetically deficient since their natural instincts prevent them from propagating their own genes, wouldn't it? That's the same thing the Nazi's said about jews, homosexuals, and various other races anyway... so I'm going to go ahead and use this twisted brand of logic to call you a Nazi. God damn, I should be a criminal defense lawyer!

Godwin's Law.

Thread is officially dead.
Zeig Heil!

I think this FBI surveillance photo says it all...

[metaL]

HOW DOES THE GAY GENE GET PASSED ON

[quadz]

HOW DOES THE GAY GENE GET PASSED ON

Again, if I've understood correctly, there may be no "gay gene" just as there is apparently no "grapheme -> color synesthesia gene".

http://seedmagazine.com/news/2006/06/the_gay_animal_kingdom.php

Being gay clearly makes individuals less likely to pass on their genes, a major biological faux pas. From the perspective of evolution, homosexual behavior has always been a genetic dead end, something that has to be explained away.

But Roughgarden believes that biologists have it backwards. Given the pervasive presence of homosexuality throughout the animal kingdom, same-sex partnering must be an adaptive trait that's been carefully preserved by natural selection. As Roughgarden points out, "a 'common genetic disease' is a contradiction in terms, and homosexuality is three to four orders of magnitude more common than true genetic diseases such as Huntington's disease."

So how might homosexuality be good for us? Any concept of sexual selection that emphasizes the selfish propagation of genes and sperm won't be able to account for the abundance of non-heterosexual sex. All those gay penguins and persons will remain inexplicable. However, if one looks at homosexuality from the perspective of a community, one can begin to see why nature might foster a variety of sexual interactions.

The above concept--that of natural selection tuning for community level traits--reminds me of something Richard Dawkins was describing with regard to question of the genetic survival of traits like altruism.  (How to reconcile the flourishing of traits like altrusim at the level of the organism, with the inherent 'selfish' nature of genetic survival mechansims.)

Given the enduring percentages of homosexual traits in hundreds of animal species, it indeed seems to beg the question of whether evolution has arrived at those ratios somehow by tuning for higher level traits.


Regards,

[[BTF]Defiant!]

HOW DOES THE GAY GENE GET PASSED ON

See Quadz answer above.

More simply, genes are complex.  And, one can't dismiss a genetic trait simply because it doesn't appear directly evolutionarily beneficial.  For example, being albino.  Or or sickle cell anemia which indirectly serves to fight off malaria (if I recall correctly).

[metaL]

i wasn't being completely serious with that quote, but I'd say it does involve an issue that should be addressed in a thread like this.

See Quadz answer above.

...

More simply, genes are complex.

   I have a degree in biology, and I must say, you are exactly right!

[deft]

real "proof" will never be found for either side, but for now, i think i'll stick to NOT believing in the improbable, that homosexuality (and what may lie beyond) as we know it was created by mere chance.  afterall, there was just one big explosion and everything turned out wonderfully    lol idiots

[|iR|Focalor]

  THE WORLD IS FLAT!!!