Anonymous

If Homosexuals Are Correct In Claiming That Homosexuality Is 'In The Genes', Therefore Making Their Practice Quite 'Normal' , Then Doesn't This Also Apply To Paedophiles?

6 Answers

Brock Samson Profile
Brock Samson answered
The entire "gay gene" (the isolation of genetic code which biologically dictates sexual preference) is a topic of debate even among top geneticists, so it is one which should not be debated here given the (assumed) lack of PhD level genetic knowledge in the user base. Rather, we should be looking at the solid facts which are considered cannon among medical professionals (both physical and mental medical practitioners).


It has been shown time and time again that *most* people who are deemed to be homosexual have had this preclusion for their entire life. It is likened to asking a heterosexual person when they "discovered" that they liked members of the opposite sex. The typical answer? "I didnt discover it, I've always liked members of the opposite sex!" Or, at the very least whenever they become sexually aware and started noticing members of the opposite sex. The main point being that there was some sort of built in mechanism for them to be precluded to liking members of the opposite sex. I am sure this is something that every heterosexual person can agree to. It wasnt a "choice" that they are attracted to members of the opposite sex... They just "are".


To bring us back on point, the same can be said about homosexuals. Studies have shown time and time again that they answer in the same way. When did they know that they liked others of the same sex? Either they always have so soon after they started noticing people in an attractive/sexual context.


You also have the scientific evidence which shows that basically every type of mammal (as well as many many others which are not mamals), be it monkeys, dolphins or dogs have been shown to have "homosexual" members. Animals which for no reason other then their own "nature" try to mate with those of the same sex. Now, I highly doubt this is an active decision on the dog's part.
Of course there are always exceptions to every rule. There are those which may not have some natural tendency to be "gay" but as as such, because of environmental factors like sexual abuse, they have adopted those tendencies. People classified in this manner should be taken into account on a separate level from the majority. It would be like saying that just because there are people who get abnormally obese from eating McDonalds 5 times a day, every day for years on end, there arent people who have some sort of biological influence which predisposes them to becoming obese even though they dont eat such an unhealthy diet. In a nut shell, just because we dont have a word or classification to differentiate between someone who was biologically influenced and someone who was environmentally influenced, doesnt mean that there isnt a difference between the two.


As for the pedophile comment, that is a completely different classification of people. The same can be said about bestiality, necrophilia, and so on. These are all brought about by external factors, and as such these are classified as "disorders" by the APA, where as homosexuality is not (it was dropped as a classified "disorder" in 1973). There is no proof or even studies which show these "disorders" (pedophilia, et al) to be innate to people through some biological mechanism. Ultimately meaning that pedophilia is proven to be a learned behaviour no matter what NAMBLA wants us to believe. There really is no debate on this among respected scientists, unlike homosexuality.


In any case, to bring things full circle... While there may or may not be a "gene" responsible for predicating someone towards homosexuality, there is in all odds some sort of biological influence. Theories and studies are abound which cite things such as that lack of or excess hormones during birth can predicate someone towards liking others of the same sex. There doesnt need to be a specific gene for this to be a "natural" occurrence in other words.
thanked the writer.
Josh H
Josh H commented
Way to copy and paste wikipedia
Brock Samson
Brock Samson commented
I'm sorry, please find what *I* wrote in wiki. Post the URL.
Anonymous
Anonymous commented
Good comment, but just as there is a genetic proclivity for homosexuality, it also exists for certain disorders. Just as I was genetically predisposed to alcoholism, it could be argued that any trait, no matter how malicious, could be cause by a genetic predisposition.
Ri Tam Profile
Ri Tam answered
Well sir or ma'am, to get the right answers, look no further than the Bible, in Genesis 2:24-25, Corinthians 7, Genesis 2:24, and I could keep going. Point being is that Man is for Woman and no other way is acceptable in Gods eyes, except for being single and abstaining from immorality. I hope this helps. Take heart and read Gods Word. It is our road map for life here and in eternity! Jesus Christ is Lord of all!
thanked the writer.
View all 4 Comments
Brock Samson
Brock Samson commented
I Corinthians 6: 9 - 10
This verse lists unrighteous acts, and in some translations, homosexuality is mentioned. In the KJV, it says "fornicators". Some translators wrote "homosexuals". The literal translation from greek is "permiscuous men". Putting in the word "homosexual" is a real stretch there.
Brock Samson
Brock Samson commented
Leviticus 18:22
"Thou shalt not lie with mankind as with womankind; it is an abomination."
The Levitical laws were restrictions on the lives of ancient Jews. Jesus throws out these laws in the New Testament. Leviticus is the same book that forbids the eating of ham or pork. These rules don't apply anymore.
Also, the verse is not very clear. It obviously cannot prove that homosexuality is a sin.
Brock Samson
Brock Samson commented
Romans 1:26-27
"For this cause, God did give them up to vile affections: For even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise even the men, leaving the natural use of the woman burned in their lust towards one another"
Lust is a sin. Homosexuals don't have to lust. This is God's punishment on them for sin they had committed, that is clearly stated. They were hetero, who suddenly lusted after their own sex, possible losing attraction for those they love
Anonymous Profile
Anonymous answered
It certainly could. Genetic labeling is a futuristic, and often disbelieved, branch of science. Scientists are telling us that all sorts of our behavioral traits are more Nature than the Nurture we once thought. Anything from obsessive, to disease, to alcoholism, even to pathologically violent behavior, such as rape, molestation, and child abuse.
Lynne Dwyer Profile
Lynne Dwyer answered
A sexual relationship between grown adults can not be compared to pedophiles sexual deviance's. A child is not old enough to form any conclusions, wants, desires, needs that pertain to sexual orientation. A pedophile can not have a relationship with a child. Children aren't capable of having a sexual relationship. Whether it be in years or mind set. Many adults also have a mind like a child
Sonja Profile
Sonja answered
Pedophiles are not born evil, they become evil. Usually by way of being sexually abused themselves as children. Or maybe they are just spawns. Unlike the gay passive communities, that like other adults.
tinga nih Profile
tinga nih answered
I don't think it is all in the genes.. Its more of influential factors.. Social, cultural.. And past life experience so as to paedophiles..

Answer Question

Anonymous