Comments on: Dr. Francis Collins comments on homosexuality and genetics

By: Ana

Ana — Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:55:15 +0000

Tem um comentário de uma pessoa aqui ,que diz que a maioria dos homossexuais foram abusados na infância, ele só esqueceu de pesquisar que também tem muitas pessoas que hoje héteros que foram também abusas.Tem muitos pedófilos que também foram abusados.Nada
ver ser homossexual com abuso sexual.Abuso sexual atinge qualquer classe social e sexual.

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:36:45 +0000

I’ve said it before, but it would be interesting to someday do a similar study involving heterosexuals. It would be MUCH for difficult, I think, to compensate for the social desirability factor though.

By: Jayhuck

Jayhuck — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:21:41 +0000

“You never know. >60% of environment contribution could be Satan’s work.” – LOL 🙂 🙂

By: ken

ken — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 15:16:13 +0000

Marty asked in post 130187: why does a 20% prevalence automatically point to a genetic influence? Don’t twins almost always grow up in a remarkably similar environment? It is because they were raised in the same environment that the twin studies are important. Since the environments are similar, the significant variable becomes the genetics. So when you compare identical and non-identical twins and see a significantly higher concordance with the identical twins, then that suggests a genetic factor. It doesn't prove a genetic factor because there may be other variables involved. Further, the twins studies do show that it isn't only based on genetics, because then the concordance between identical twins would have been much, much higher.

By: Marty

Marty — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 03:27:59 +0000

Regarding the twins studies, i've often wondered -- why does a 20% prevalence automatically point to a genetic influence? Don't twins almost always grow up in a remarkably similar environment?

By: Boo

Boo — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 10:50:44 +0000

Okay Warren, so Quinlan mischaracterizes Collins, and you do a whole blog post on it.
I know you chastized me for bringing this up earlier, but remember this lil thread?
/2008/05/12/apa-issues-statement-regarding-gid-and-the-dsm-v/
J. Michael gets all huffy and indignant about people mischaracterizing Zucker’s views on preventing homosexuality, but then, whoops, Jenn Burleton shows up in the comments with the quotes to prove Bailey was talking out of his butt. You have no response regarding Bailey’s slander of Transactive, so I have to try this once again:
Why the double standard with your pal J Michael?

By: Evan

Evan — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 16:25:44 +0000

Lynn David wrote:

What gets me is that people such as Quinlan must have such a dogmatic need for homosexuality not to be genetic. Since 1992 or so the Baptist General Conference has said:

We believe that a homosexual orientation is a result of the fall of humanity into a sinful condition that pervades every person. Whatever biological or familial roots of homosexuality may be discovered, we do not believe that these would sanction or excuse homosexual behavior….

You never know. >60% of environment contribution could be Satan’s work.

By: Drowssap

Drowssap — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 14:03:27 +0000

Lynn David

I think the article on FBO says that only 7% of all same-gender oriented men might have been so effected. Small amount, but I inflated Francis Collins 20% to 66.6%, so I guess I could inflate FBO to the other 33.3% of biological gay men.

The Fraternal Birth Order Effect (assuming it’s true) shows that an immune response can turn OSA into SSA. Right there scientists know to look for various immune responses. There could be a few main ones and because twin concordence is so low most of these events probably occur after birth.
That’s a safe, simple guess that an average college biology student could make.

By: Judy S

Judy S — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:21:03 +0000

Lynn David wrote: What gets me is that people such as Quinlan must have such a dogmatic need for homosexuality not to be genetic. Since 1992 or so the Baptist General Conference has said:
We believe that a homosexual orientation is a result of the fall of humanity into a sinful condition that pervades every person. Whatever biological or familial roots of homosexuality may be discovered, we do not believe that these would sanction or excuse homosexual behavior….
So why not Quinlan?
———————— If he were to admit genetics as part of the answer, it could alter his job.

By: Lynn David

Lynn David — Mon, 22 Sep 2008 06:03:34 +0000

Ah… Fraternal Birth Order – that makes sense. The idea of an “ear infection that occurs around the age of 1 or 2” precluded my thinking about an immune response in a woman effecting her unborn in the womb during the first trimester.
I think the article on FBO says that only 7% of all same-gender oriented men might have been so effected. Small amount, but I inflated Francis Collins 20% to 66.6%, so I guess I could inflate FBO to the other 33.3% of biological gay men.