Has it ever been scientifically proven that homosexuality is biologically formed ?
970646
Scientific studies have shown a biological basis for homosexuality.
578959
Scientific research has shown that there are genetic differences that have influence on homosexuality...but like any aspect of human behavior, the answers are more complex than a simple answer can give.  There's certainly social, familial, genetic, and other factors all working together that influence both straight and gay behavior.  Those who claim a simple answer like, "it's a choice" or "it's all genes" are both wrong.\n\nWhy does it matter, anyway?  That there are people who are homosexual, always have been and always will be, should be enough for "straights" to treat them just like any other human beings...
382583
While your question is a good one and I praise you for asking it, I would like to address the ramifications if it is openly approved.\n\nThey say they are "born that way".  That simply is not true.  Human sexuality starts mentally.  It is a choice.  God gave man free will.  Now, they want to redefine marriage that has meant between a man and woman for thousands of years.\n\nWhat if their rhetoric is used by child molesters, polygamists, and criminals who say they are born that way.  I will say one thing for them, the people who fornicate are no better.  The over indulgence in sexual perversion of every sort is an abomination.  It is this very thing that heterosexuals do that emboldened the homosexuals to come out.
433113
Several animal species exhibit homosexuality. It can actually be beneficial in an evolutionary sense if care is taken of siblings or other relatives. On the other hand, evolution does not respond to *future* threats, so any genes for homosexulaity would not have had time to spread in response to overpopulation.
844493
People are almost certainly homosexual because of genetics.  There is a great deal of scientific evidence that it is inborn. Beyond scientific evidence there is anecdotal evidence.\n\nThe fruit fly study is actually fairly conclusive. But the pheremonal and eye blink studies are also compelling. I've included links below for those that are interested. Beyond that, research increasingly suggests that at least for males, Xq28 is the crucial gene. I am saddened by this, because I believe that once it is proven, gay people will be wiped out -- and I think that is sad, because given the number of species in which homosexuality exists (see Dr. Bruce Bagemihl's book "Biological Exuberance" from St. Martin's Press) I think it serves a purpose, and has been evolutionarily preferred.  The recent Italian study by Andrea Camperio-Ciani and colleagues pretty clearly shows both how and why a gene or gene set causing homosexuality, particularly in males - would survive and be preferred evolutionarily.\n\nIn addition to scientific evidence is the anecdotal evidence. I never in my life had any sexual feeling for a female -- nor any romantic feelings. I have had romantic feelings for other males since 8. I figured out it was sexual at 11 and came out at 14. I never felt anything for girls, neither do other gay males I know. Some boys manage to suppress it for a time, but when it comes out they admit to having always had the feelings. Likewise for bisexuals, although bisexuals always have feelings for both, and therefore are capable of choice -- for real. Gays are no more capable of choice than straights are.\n\nThere is nothing either wrong or unnatural about being homosexual.  Enjoy the links -- and think about the gay people you know.  While some, particularly younger ones, may be risk takers or may be into drugs --- think about the young straight men you know -- how many of them are risk takers -- or into drugs?  It's gender and age far more than sexuality.  Others are, I would bet, settled, calm, caring and successful.\n\nThe only thing being gay does is change who you sleep with.  No one chooses it however, no one is driven to "that path."  It is simply natural and normal for some people.  As I am sure you would hate to be told consistently, by everyone around you, that being heterosexual was evil, wrong, unnatural -- and "that path" when you know perfectly well it is natural to you, understand that gay people feel the exact same way.  It is natural and normal to a gay person -- and having intercourse with, or romance with -- a member of the opposite gender is unnatural and abnormal. \n\nKind regards,\n\nReynolds Jones\nhttp://www.rebuff.org\nbelieveinyou24@yahoo.com
629977
I think your understanding of the science is not quite there. The "gay gene" (or at least one of several reported as potentially being called such) does not define a trait or characteristic but rather it pre-disposes. That is, it is not like a gene for determining eye colour.  It requires other influences to produce a non-hetero adult.  Some of these determining influences are (or have been) intimated as being one or more of: behavioural, biochemical, psychological or pathological.\n\nFor example, pick any one of the expectant mother's endocrine glands -  and you can be sure that an "over-production" of some hormone has been attributed as (contributing to) the cause of SOMETHING in the post-natal child.\n\nI do take exception to the word "flaw" in your commentary.  It may be a difference and, indeed (as you go on to say), it does then lessen the chances of their procreating but it has no place (being subjective) in the objectivity of a scientific question.\n\nMy last point, I would especially like you to consider, when deriving your conclusion, and that is:\n\n1)Given the empirical approach of Science (building blocks to construct knowledge) \n2)the increasing specialisation of its adherents (e.g. from scientist to chemist to biochemist to neurochemist to neuro- toxicist)\n3)the continued existence of non-heterosexuals (despite bell book and ban e.g. Aversion therapy)\n\nIs there an overarching reason that non-heteros exist? \n\nIf there is a scientific reason for their existence (cause as yet undetermined) it has not been recognised because the different strands of Science (which would combine to prove or, at least postulate the idea), together with perhaps Psychology and Philosophy are so distended from one another.     \n\nI hope that this was reasoned enough and provides food for thought.\n\nRegards
403385
Depends on who you ask, but neither is. If you read the oldest and purest form of the bible it says nothing about being gay. It is true that the old testament talks about spilling the sperm and wasting, but you have to understand the science (or lack thereof) of the time. They believed that the whole baby was in the sperm and the womb was just an incubator. There for any time a man climaxed out side of a woman, it was killing a child. Many laws in the old testament were built off this belief. \nAnd also note that all the law about this are in the old testament, when Jesus came he said because of his death, the old laws were void. As for the new testament, remember that most of the  books were written by more then person, some books by many of different people. Their students (their intentions may have been good) pieced together teaching and  beliefs from themselves and the disciples. \nMy advice would be to do a lot of research on both sides of the argument, and look with yourself. There is a good book called "Gay theology with out apology" I don't know the author. good luck.
384636
According to most scientists and psychologist, being gay is physiological verses psychological. There is a part of the brain called the hypothamalus. In heterosexual men this gland is larger than a heterosexual woman’s which is much smaller in size. Recent studies of autopsies performed on gays reveal the size of hypothamalus’ of homosexuals (both male and female) aren’t as large as a heterosexual male or as small as a heterosexual female.\n\nHomosexuality occurs naturally in most species of animals.\n\nForgoing the physical causes of homosexuality, socialization, environment and personal beliefs often have an influence on whether a person live a gay or straight life. For instance, a person who believes they may be gay might suppress those feelings if they are raised in an environment where homosexuality is considered taboo and self expression is censored. On the other hand, a person with homosexual tendencies may be more willing to explore those feelings if raised in an environment which encourages expression and self individualism.\n\nSince our sexuality doesn’t develop until long after birth, I don’t see how anyone can be born heterosexual or homosexual. \n\nSome uninformed individuals claim homosexuality is a choice. The question to those people would be, “Did you have to choose to be straight.” The answer will almost always be, “Hell no!” Just as a heterosexual could no more “choose” to be gay, a homosexual would have a difficult time choosing to be straight.\n\nAs for religious arguments, the passages in Genesis merely explain heterosexual relationships and does not condemn or even speak to homosexual acts. The only direct mention of homosexuality in the Bible can be found in the Old Testament under Leviticus along with the sins of wearing woven clothing (cotton), eating shell fish, shaving, and not allowing women to preach the word of God, amongst other forgotten sins. These sins were made non-sins by the words of Jesus. That is why good “Christians” can shave, while wearing their cotton briefs and eat oyster without having to worry about going to Hell.\n\nIn the New Testament, many newer interpretations claim that the rapists who came to Lot’s house were gay, but they were rapists, which rape is a sin. In another passage the words used to describe male prostitutes has been translated into “homosexuals” by watered down modern day Bibles. Prostitution is a sin, but at the time, there was no homosexual culture to condemn.\n\nThe most prolific argument against Biblical condemnation of homosexuals came from Jesus who was to be God’s final word on the subject. When given the opportunity to condemn homosexual behavior, He did not.\n\nWhen you see the word “homosexual’ in a Bible understand there was no word to describe homosexuality at the time of the writing of the Bible. Go to the King James Version and read the same passages. Those translations of those same words pertain only to male prostitution and rapists, which are both sins.\n\nLastly, many lost Christians say the Bible says intercourse is for the purpose of reproduction only and the only reason man was put on this earth was to reproduce. Well I can’t find one Christian who says they only have intercourse for the purpose of reproduction. As for the misnomer man was put on this earth for the sole purpose of reproduction, what about people who for one reason or another cannot reproduce? Are they all going to hell? If all of the world’s trees produced fruit, the fruit would lay rotting on the ground.
69056
Yes, they are. Just as in humans, animals often form long-term same-sex relationships. In animals with a seasonal breeding pattern, homosexuality can even be seasonal. Male walruses, for example, often form homosexual pair bonds and have sex with each other outside of the breeding season, but will revert to a heterosexual pattern during the normal breeding season.
918768
Genetics may play a partial role in sex-preference but there is no "gay gene".  Obviously this would be an evolutionary dead-end.  It is more likely a combination of genetics and childhood development.
634539
Yes, they REALLY can.  Science has proven this again and again, but the right-wing, fundamentalist Christians continue to rant and rave about SIN!  Well, give this a read: \n\n"Lesbians' brains react differently to sex hormones than those of heterosexual women, new research indicates.  \n\nThat's in line with an earlier study that had indicated gay men's brain responses were different from straight men ? though the difference for men was more pronounced than has now been found in women.\n\nLesbians' brains reacted somewhat, though not completely, like those of heterosexual men, a team of Swedish researchers said in Tuesday's edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.\n\nA year ago, the same group reported findings for gay men that showed their brain response to hormones was similar to that of heterosexual women.\n\nIn both cases the findings add weight to the idea that homosexuality has a physical basis and is not learned behavior."\n\nNobody would CHOOSE to go through the hell that many homosexuals are put through every day.  Their sexual preference "choice" has been made for them at birth via their genetic code and their destiny.\n\nAnd you people who spend all your time trying to preach to homosexuals about all the SIN they are engaging in should get wise, stop worrying about problems that DON'T CONCERN YOU, and worry about YOUR OWN SIN!  "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you!"  These "sinners" are doing you no harm, so leave them alone and worry about your own problems...and believe me you have PLENTY!
413385
Yes, transexualism is very very real. And if anybody says otherwise, then they do not know what they are talking about or are being very very ignorant.\n\nIt has existed in human society since the dawn of ages and a paper has been written on it by Socrates and Plato in regards to it outlining the benefits of same sexed unions, making reference to the brain and not social conditioning.\n\nIn later years, studies and papers have been written by many esteemed socio-biologist and genetisist on the subject as well. One of them being Dr. Levy.\n\nDr. Levy had worked on the genetic aspect of it, working down to the chromosome level, identifing the x22 gene that differentiates our sexuality and the extent or it. Brain size also playing a factor in human sexuality.
374039
It is a good question but I don't think there are any hard and proved answers.  There is a grid called the "Klein Sexual Orientation Grid"  Alfred Kinsey along with a few others don't think that sexual orientations are eternally fixed.\n\nI am in somewhat a similar situation.  I was mad about girls just girl crazy as a teen etc.  I have also been interested in certain aspects of males too.  My interest is more than it was before in males.  Thinking more about males has not been my choice it just happens. I don't think that sexual orientation is in anyway a choice.  I think it has something to do with perhaps chemical changes in the brain.\n\nGo with the flow and accept yourself for who you are now.  Can you regain your attraction to women if you nurture it? I really really doubt it (it is not a choice). I wonder the same thing for myself too. \n\nIt may have something to do with androgen's or the Hypothalamus in the brain.\n\nI have included a helpful Wikpedia link about Biology and sexual orientation.  Have a look under Studies of brain structure.
444425
Not yet, but scientists are working on it. Scientists have successfully grown eggs out of sperm cells in fish (see article). One day it will be possible for gays and lesbians to have biological children.\n\nhttp://www.livescience.com/animalworld/060206_fish_story.html
219241
Scientists have reported that they've found an "extremely unusual" trait in the cells of some mothers with two or more gay sons, providing more evidence to suggest that homosexuality might be inherited.\n\n\nMothers of multiple gay sons were about six times more likely than other women to process their X chromosomes in a certain way, researchers discovered.\n\n\nResearchers aren't entirely sure what the findings mean, said study co-author Sven Bocklandt, a postdoctoral researcher at UCLA. Making things more complicated, about 75 percent of mothers of multiple gay sons don't have the trait.\n\n\nStill, the study, released Tuesday in the journal Human Genetics, raises plenty of questions, Bocklandt said, especially as researchers try to figure out whether homosexuality has genetic roots and if there truly is a "gay gene" -- or genes.\n\n\n"What everybody wants is the gene, and we don’t have it yet," Bocklandt said. "But this is an independent confirmation that the X chromosome is involved."\n\n\nBocklandt and colleagues looked at a phenomenon known as X-chromosome inactivation, in which cells inside the bodies of females automatically turn off -- or inactivate -- one of their two X chromosomes. That leaves them with one working X chromosome -- just like males, who have a single X and a single Y chromosome.\n\n\nNormally, each cell in a female's body randomly turns off one or the other X chromosome. In some cases, such as when families share a genetic disease, there is "extreme skewing" -- one X chromosome is more likely to be turned off than the other, Bocklandt said.\n\n\nIn the new study, the researchers looked at 97 mothers of one or more gay sons and 103 women with no gay sons to see what their blood cells did with their X chromosomes. The researchers recruited many of the women with the help of PFLAG.\n\n\nThey found that nearly a quarter of the mothers of multiple gay sons inactivated the same X chromosome -- in other words, nonrandomly -- compared to just 4 percent of the women without gay sons. Of those with one gay son, 13 percent inactivated the same X chromosome.\n\n\nDr. Ionel Sandovici, a genetics researcher at the Babraham Institute in Cambridge, England, who is familiar with the research findings, cautioned that the study is small, with just 44 mothers of multiple gay sons being examined. More research in larger groups must be done to confirm the results, Sandovici said.\n\n\nThe research does provide "circumstantial evidence" that the X chromosome contributes to the development of male sexuality, Sandovici said. But "we still understand very little about molecular mechanisms of sexual orientation, and this seems to be rather a complicated biological puzzle."\n\nBut of course its Nature vs. Nurture and its possible that the person could just become gay because of his environment/experiences or just be born that way.
999926
No.  Homosexuality has been around for thousands of years.  If people would pay as much attention to their history classes as they do to their Bible Studies, they would know that.  It is a PROVEN MEDICAL FACT that the brains of homosexuals are different than heteros.  A homo males brain reacts more like a hetero females, and a lesbian's brain, more like a hetero males.  They PHYSICALLY respond differently to phermones.  It is not an abomination, it is a physical difference that they have NO control over, and the Bible thumpers need to accept it and move on.
271982
Good point Pazion. But I still say in millions of years we still have seen no physical evidence that this is genetic. There have been no new emergence of a new gender. We are still born male and female. Again, in the next million years we may find that we were wrong in our assumptions. But we will be dead and therefore we still will not care. So it's a lost point even discussing it.