Homosexuality is linked to genetics- evidence found

Post Reply New Topic

Prove that the treatment was permanent? Absurd. Even drug addicts often go back to their addiction after treatment, and the same is true of homosexuals. But at least drug addicts are honest and seek treatment, even repeatedly, and don't try to claim it is somehow a "civil right."

Nevertheless, many homosexuals get treatment and they do benefit from it, just as I said.

Perhaps the most notable group of people treating homosexuals is NARTH and you can see research, read reports, etc at http://www.narth.com. NARTH has no political or religious ties... they are Medical Doctors, PhDs and other mental health professionals who are trying to help the homosexuals who want to be helped.

Of course, the homosexual activists hate organizations like NARTH, calling them "homophobic" and all that, and I suppose that's what is to be expected of people in denial. But NARTH is rooted in science, not emotionalism, politics or religion. Here is just a part of one of the many research documents, done by professionals from major universities, using scientific method, that can be found on the NARTH site:

"All of the aforementioned research studies from four different countries, each utilizing large, countrywide samples, reveal that homosexual behavior is not genetically determined. Rather, the data find that human sexuality is malleable, and environmental experiences and influences can and do shape its expression. Moreover, these findings are supported by decades of anthropological and sociological evidence that reveal that rates of homosexual behavior fluctuate--sometimes greatly--with changes in the social, cultural, and legal climate. The more an environment affirms or encourages same-sex sexuality--whether an urban center or a university campus--the more homosexuality there will be in that setting."

If a gay person can become straight by whatever means, that must also mean that any straight person can be made gay. But can this really be done? Should it be done? Science aside, there are psychological, political, social, and spirtual aspects of such a transformation to consider.

You don't much social intelligence, do you?

I am appalled.

I don't know if you realise this, but being homosexual or being straight are not the only possible options. Alfred Kinsey's research showed that most people are actually more or less bisexual. while it is possible to choose to be in a man/woman relationship when one is bisexual, it is not possible to make one switch from being 100% homosexual to being 100% straight or the other way round.

from the NARTH website:


looks like what these guys are trying to do is to make bisexual people choose the straight option. sure, why not, as long as they don't force it on anyone.

no therapy would ever make me homosexual, so why should I believe that it could be the other way round? because a bunch of bisexuals went through an enlightening "therapy"?

Well, I guess if we define 'benefit' as 'no longer practise homosexuality' then I guess they benefit, but this seems a rather perverse definition. Also:

"The American Psychological Association Committee on Lesbian, Gay, & Bisexual Concerns states that therapy to change sexual orientation is rejected by most medical and mental health associations that have taken a position on the topic, on the grounds that it is often damaging to people's well-being.[17] The American Psychiatric Association states that "ethical practitioners refrain from attempts to change individuals' sexual orientation."[18] Major organizations that reject therapy to change sexual orientation include the American Psychiatric Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Association of School Administrators, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Association of School Psychologists, and the National Education Association.[19]" (from wikipedia)



This doesn't go any distance towards establishing that homosexuality is a malady, & I don't understand why the observation that 'human sexuality is malleable' is supposed to have any bearing on the question of whether it has a genetic basis. In fact, if all that has to happen for homosexuals to start appearing everywhere is that we don't actively discriminate against them, that would seem to suggest that it is a strong natural urge. I'm afraid you & NARTH still have all your work cut out for you.

NARTH does not seem to appreciate the ethics of forcibly remodelling one's sexual preference. Just because a thing can be done doesn't mean it should be done.

A couple generations ago, any boy or girl who was naturally left-handed was most
unnaturally forced to write with their right hands in school. Why? Because the
"left-handers" were evil.

Thanks to oppressive Christian idealogues

right hand = good

left hand = evil

Last edited by slowmutant on 02 Dec 2008, 12:00 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What if sexuality was a hoax? What if everyone felt everyway with sexual feeling?
What would you do?

is that how you personally feel about it?

I know I couldn't be made into anything other than straight.

Sexuality is not a hoax.

How would you know?

because he's got one?

He's got one what? You aren't being specific?

Why do people give a s**t about controlling other people’s private lives? I guess there is a little bit of sociopath in all of us.

And yes homophobe is about fear. Even people who are ok with homosexuality might be freaked out about their perception of homosexual sex

I think people can be born gay, but sexuality is spectrum so some people move about. That isn't a reason to force anyone into a particular sexuality.

Those banging on about Darwin. Most evolutionary scientists have moved beyond traditional Darwinism. Darwinism is pretty unelaborated, not belittling the significant step forward it was. Even so many people still don't get what is meant by survival of the fittest or the fact that Darwin didn't coin the term himself.

Populations can wipe themselves out by being too successful. Cyanobacteria very nearly wiped out all of life (i.e. themselves), and turned the earth into a giant snowball for 160 million years. When people are saying save the earth, they are really saying save the ecosystems that we need and what we value. Life is a careful balance: There are catastrophic tipping points that could destroy all of life. There is a huge complexity and dynamism in life it is simplistic to think 'man a woman have sex, and make babies and only this is good'.

I mean, he's got a sexuality, so he's pretty sure they're not a hoax. That's all.

It's an absurd suggestion. Sexuality allows for human reproduction and thus the continuation of the species. Sexuality is real, all right. Ever see a Ricky Martin video?

Seriously, what you just suggested was nothing more than an oxymoron.