If homosexuality is genetic

How do homosexuals reproduce?

If homosexuality is genetic, it is obviously a recessive gene.

Also, many homosexuals reproduce via coitus with a member of the opposite sex. Whether they are hiding their orientation or simply using a low-tech method for conception is largely irrelevant.
 
If homosexuality is genetic, it is obviously a recessive gene. Also, many homosexuals reproduce via coitus with a member of the opposite sex. Whether they are hiding their orientation or simply using a low-tech method for conception is largely irrelevant.

Are the offspring of these unions homosexual?
 
No I am not. The question is, do you understand genetics well enough to have a discussion about it. The OP suggests you do not.

I asked for information because I don't understand the subject. Wasn't that clear?

Now, do you have any knowledge of the subject to share?
 
If homosexuality is genetic, it is obviously a recessive gene.

Also, many homosexuals reproduce via coitus with a member of the opposite sex. Whether they are hiding their orientation or simply using a low-tech method for conception is largely irrelevant.

Sorta violates the hole being queer thing then. Makes it seem more like a choice.

I dot mind watching your side twist itself in knots.

Triple F admitted it is a choice and he would know given e is a queer
 
I asked for information because I don't understand the subject. Wasn't that clear?

Now, do you have any knowledge of the subject to share?

That is unlike your previous behavior on these forums.

Whether homosexuality is genetic, environmental, or a combination of the two has not be determined. But if homosexuality is genetic it would not mean it would kill off those carrying the gene. If it is a recessive gene, it only surfaces in certain circumstances. The dominant gene would win out most of the time. If heterosexuality is 'H' and homosexuality is 'h', then a mating of a couple that both carried the recessive gene 'h' would result in one of the following: HH, Hh, and hh. And the HH and hh would each be a 1-in-4 while the Hh would be 2-in-4 (or half). Since there may be other factors involved, it could be even more rare than that.

I hope this helps. I am impressed that you said you did not understand and asked.
 
That is unlike your previous behavior on these forums.

Whether homosexuality is genetic, environmental, or a combination of the two has not be determined. But if homosexuality is genetic it would not mean it would kill off those carrying the gene. If it is a recessive gene, it only surfaces in certain circumstances. The dominant gene would win out most of the time. If heterosexuality is 'H' and homosexuality is 'h', then a mating of a couple that both carried the recessive gene 'h' would result in one of the following: HH, Hh, and hh. And the HH and hh would each be a 1-in-4 while the Hh would be 2-in-4 (or half). Since there may be other factors involved, it could be even more rare than that.

I hope this helps. I am impressed that you said you did not understand and asked.

Thanks.
 
Sorta violates the hole being queer thing then. Makes it seem more like a choice.

I dot mind watching your side twist itself in knots.

Triple F admitted it is a choice and he would know given e is a queer

No, it does not violate anything. Does masturbation mean virtually all men have a fetish for their own hand? No. It means that the mind is a bigger part of their ability to perform than their orientation. I have seen gays state that it is a choice and state that they never had a choice. Apparently it is different for different people. I do not choose to ignore all those who's statements disagree with my beliefs.
 
No, it does not violate anything. Does masturbation mean virtually all men have a fetish for their own hand? No. It means that the mind is a bigger part of their ability to perform than their orientation. I have seen gays state that it is a choice and state that they never had a choice. Apparently it is different for different people. I do not choose to ignore all those who's statements disagree with my beliefs.

I don't ignore them either. But it can't be both can it?

If they choose why should we accomodate?

That is why they make the argument that it isn't a choice.

But then that gets us back to the genetic thingy. Which makes them an abomination of nature.

I guess you are a "moderate" on the issue ;)
 
Back
Top