Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is no single 'gay' gene. Sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual identity are far too complex for just one gene.
The evidence suggests that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of a genetic factors and hormonal effects on the development of the fetal brain in the uterine environment.
"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment."
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb.
However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation.
"There's a converging line of evidence between the hormonal studies, the genetic studies , and the neuroanatomical studies. My research has identified candidate genes within these new chromosomal regions that could link together all of these different findings”
You're avoiding the gist of the question, which really is--- If a method is developed to determine a fetus's eventual sexual orientation, would you support or oppose restricting a woman's right to choose based on the results of such an exam or test ? It doesn't matter what science says now. If hypothetically, a test of the brain, or shape of fingernails, or heartbeat rate, or the woman's hormonal balance, or a gene, whatever, could reasonably predict sexual orientations, would you oppose legal restrictions on aborting a fetus based on sexual orientation.
You're avoiding the gist of the question, which really is--- If a method is developed to determine a fetus's eventual sexual orientation, would you support or oppose restricting a woman's right to choose based on the results of such an exam or test ? It doesn't matter what science says now. If hypothetically, a test of the brain, or shape of fingernails, or heartbeat rate, or the woman's hormonal balance, or a gene, whatever, could reasonably predict sexual orientations, would you oppose legal restrictions on aborting a fetus based on sexual orientation.
I feel that this would be the end of a woman's "right to choose".
Gay trumps choice.
I don't think you thought this through much.
The pro-"life" crowd are usually the ones who are anti-gay, not the pro-choice people.
Seems the pro-"lifers" might have a dilemma on their hands if we were able to tell if a first term fetus was going to be gay or not.
First, they would have to finally admit that being gay is an innate trait and not a behavior that is chosen. That wouldn't sit well with their religious beliefs because it would mean that the churches or their Bible translators got it wrong.
Second, they would have to deal with either raising a gay child or aborting it as a fetus.
Of course I'm sure they'd think up something like "The Bible says that gays should be killed, so it's okay to abort gay babies"
One might question liberal "rage" on this issue, when the conservative side is the one who sanctions murdering doctors who perform abortions, fire bomb abortion clinics, and want to force women who are raped to bring the fetus to term...
Well at least there doesn't appear to be any religious nutjobs demanding that a virgin girl who was raped should marry her rapist - as the Bible commands.
You're avoiding the gist of the question, which really is--- If a method is developed to determine a fetus's eventual sexual orientation, would you support or oppose restricting a woman's right to choose based on the results of such an exam or test ? It doesn't matter what science says now. If hypothetically, a test of the brain, or shape of fingernails, or heartbeat rate, or the woman's hormonal balance, or a gene, whatever, could reasonably predict sexual orientations, would you oppose legal restrictions on aborting a fetus based on sexual orientation.
I support a woman's right to choose what to do with her own body.
Sadly, I think there are people who just might abort a fetus just because it was going to be gay. They'd think up some justification or rationalisation to go against their own pro-life stance I'm sure.
There is no single 'gay' gene. Sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual identity are far too complex for just one gene.
The evidence suggests that sexual orientation is determined by a combination of a genetic factors and hormonal effects on the development of the fetal brain in the uterine environment.
"Despite almost a century of psychoanalytic and psychological speculation, there is no substantive evidence to support the suggestion that the nature of parenting or early childhood experiences play any role in the formation of a person’s fundamental heterosexual or homosexual orientation. It would appear that sexual orientation is biological in nature, determined by a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment."
The fetal brain develops during the intrauterine period in the male direction through a direct action of testosterone on the developing nerve cells, or in the female direction through the absence of this hormone surge. In this way, our gender identity (the conviction of belonging to the male or female gender) and sexual orientation are programmed or organized into our brain structures when we are still in the womb.
However, since sexual differentiation of the genitals takes place in the first two months of pregnancy and sexual differentiation of the brain starts in the second half of pregnancy, these two processes can be influenced independently, which may result in extreme cases in trans-sexuality. This also means that in the event of ambiguous sex at birth, the degree of masculinization of the genitals may not reflect the degree of masculinization of the brain.
There is no indication that social environment after birth has an effect on gender identity or sexual orientation.
"There's a converging line of evidence between the hormonal studies, the genetic studies , and the neuroanatomical studies. My research has identified candidate genes within these new chromosomal regions that could link together all of these different findings”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why? It's a dumb question.
