New Posts
By:
Filters
  • Hi there guest! Welcome to PoliticalJack.com. Register for free to join our community?

If you're born gay...

Corruptbuddha

Corruptbuddha

Governor
...like you're born with Down's Syndrome, could it be corrected with gene therapy in the near future? Could parent detect it and decide to change it in the womb? Much like in China they get abortions if they find out their fetus is a girl?

And please, let't put morality aside....the question isn't should it be done...but could it be done?
 
as it is believed it is as a result of a mutation during gestation , it might be difficult to find it. none today, here tomorrow
 
Really?

I did not know that.

I was under the impression that your genetic makeup was pretty much set at the collision of the sperm and egg? Are there any other mutations that occur in the womb? And if you're right....does that mean abortion is the only answer to stop such afflictions as Downs Syndrome?
 
It should be pointed out that just because a person is "born gay," that doesn't necessarily mean that it's genetic. There is a hypothesis, for instance, known as the "older brother theory," that has been proven remarkably consistent in predicting homosexuality in males.

The theory goes that the more older brothers a male child has, the more likely he is to be homosexual. Supposedly, this is caused by a woman's female body regarding the male fetus inside her as a foreign object. She releases certain antibodies which work to feminize the fetus. The more male children she has, the more adept her body becomes at this process, and the more likely her male child is to be born gay.

This if this theory were proven true, would show that homosexuality can be caused by in utero influences. But in utero influences are not genetic.
 
Patrick said:
It should be pointed out that just because a person is "born gay," that doesn't necessarily mean that it's genetic. There is a hypothesis, for instance, known as the "older brother theory," that has been proven remarkably consistent in predicting homosexuality in males.

The theory goes that the more older brothers a male child has, the more likely he is to be homosexual. Supposedly, this is caused by a woman's female body regarding the male fetus inside her as a foreign object. She releases certain antibodies which work to feminize the fetus. The more male children she has, the more adept her body becomes at this process, and the more likely her male child is to be born gay.

This if this theory were proven true, would show that homosexuality can be caused by in utero influences. But in utero influences are not genetic.
Click to expand...

The Romney's have 5 sons. Should be a gay there somewhere. Of course that theory doesn't work with lesbians.
 
Economics probably plays as much of a role in this, as anything. On the one hand, we know that money isn't the be all and end all, in terms of science. If it were, we'd have cured cancer by now. On the other hand, science generally requires some sort of economic/market motivation, in order for it to do its thing.

In this regard, Downs and homosexuality are quite different. EVERYone would like to see a "cure" for Downs. But nowadays, less than 50% of us even acknowledge homosexuality as something in need of a cure or healing. And, the number will continue to shrink inexorably, on into the future. So..the question becomes - where would the "funding" come from, in some search for a cure to homosexuality?
 
ITALIA said:
The Romney's have 5 sons. Should be a gay there somewhere. Of course that theory doesn't work with lesbians.
Click to expand...

Sigh...I really weary of trying to explain things to people who just can't get it.

There was nothing difficult in my post...but somehow, I have to explain it again.

All right. Let's say every male child has a base 1% chance to be homosexual. Now let's say that chance increases by 3% for every older brother the child has.

Their youngest, with four older brothers, that increases the odds of the youngest child by 12%, add his base 1% chance and you have the youngest child with 13% chance of becoming homosexual.

Where do you infer from this that the Romneys MUST have a gay son somewhere?

(And I made the numbers up to illustrate the point. If the actual chances was 2% + 4% per older brother, the odds are still in the child's favor that he will not be homosexual. It's a chance, not an inevitability.)
 
Patrick said:
Sigh...I really weary of trying to explain things to people who just can't get it.

There was nothing difficult in my post...but somehow, I have to explain it again.

All right. Let's say every male child has a base 1% chance to be homosexual. Now let's say that chance increases by 3% for every older brother the child has.

Their youngest, with four older brothers, that increases the odds of the youngest child by 12%, add his base 1% chance and you have the youngest child with 13% chance of becoming homosexual.

Where do you infer from this that the Romneys MUST have a gay son somewhere?

(And I made the numbers up to illustrate the point. If the actual chances was 2% + 4% per older brother, the odds are still in the child's favor that he will not be homosexual. It's a chance, not an inevitability.)
Click to expand...

Don't be offended. Your favored "theory" has been discussed in general and herein. It's a fun theory.
 
Corruptbuddha said:
...like you're born with Down's Syndrome, could it be corrected with gene therapy in the near future? Could parent detect it and decide to change it in the womb? Much like in China they get abortions if they find out their fetus is a girl?

And please, let't put morality aside....the question isn't should it be done...but could it be done?
Click to expand...

If it's due to X Y Chromosone or something like that, then yes they can adjust your genes.
 
Mr. Italia,

While there may be a male gene, there is no evidence of a lesbo gene. However, they have found a mullet gene, and in women, it's just a natural progression.
 
Patrick said:
Sigh...I really weary of trying to explain things to people who just can't get it.

There was nothing difficult in my post...but somehow, I have to explain it again.

All right. Let's say every male child has a base 1% chance to be homosexual. Now let's say that chance increases by 3% for every older brother the child has.

Their youngest, with four older brothers, that increases the odds of the youngest child by 12%, add his base 1% chance and you have the youngest child with 13% chance of becoming homosexual.

Where do you infer from this that the Romneys MUST have a gay son somewhere?

(And I made the numbers up to illustrate the point. If the actual chances was 2% + 4% per older brother, the odds are still in the child's favor that he will not be homosexual. It's a chance, not an inevitability.)
Click to expand...

Ease up Patrick, I was tongue in cheek with my post. I was just joking maybe Romney has a Gay son. Nothing wrong with it though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top