TakeOnIt
Compare opinions of world leading experts and influencers.

Does homosexuality have a significant genetic component?

There is an ongoing debate regarding the degree to which homosexuality is genetic versus environmental. A scientific understanding is important, in part because it can either support or refute a prevalent Christian belief that homosexuality is a choice.

Implications to Other Questions

Should gay and straight couples have the same legal benefits?
Does homosexuality have a significant genetic component?

Experts and Influencers

Suggest Expert Quote (click to expand, no login required)
Agree
Experts In Genetics


Dean Hamer    Geneticist
Agree
I think it’s important because it reinforces the theory that sexual orientation is at least partially genetic and that there are many different genes, not just one or two. I think it is important knowledge because homophobes often argue that sexual orientation is a choice, which simply isn’t true. It is important to have concrete data showing that it is not simply a choice.
06 May 2005    Source


Ebru Demir    Researcher, Research Institute of Molecular Pathology
Barry J. Dickson    Scientific Director, Institute of Molecular Biotechnology
Agree
All animals exhibit innate behaviors that are specified during their development. ... We show that male splicing is essential for male courtship behavior and sexual orientation. More importantly, [it] is also sufficient to generate male behavior in otherwise normal females. These females direct their courtship toward other females (or males engineered to produce female pheromones). The splicing of a single neuronal gene thus specifies essentially all aspects of a complex innate behavior.
03 Jun 2005    Source


Experts In Science


Marc Breedlove    Neuroscience Professor
Agree
I think most of the scientists working on these questions are convinced that the antecedents of sexual orientation in males are happening early in life, probably before birth whereas for females, some are probably born to become gay, but clearly some get there quite late in life.
10 Apr 2007    Source


Disagree
Experts In Homosexuality


Charles Hesse    WordAlone Board Member
Disagree
[The Bible] speaks clearly and emphatically against this lifestyle. ... First and foremost, there is no genetic basis for "same-sex attraction disorder" (SSAD). Genetics is a complicated issue, with many possible inherited predisposing factors for a personality type that could be vulnerable to the development of SSAD. It has been shown in many studies that environmental influences acting on the "vulnerable" individual can lead to confusion and eventual adoption of a homosexual lifestyle.
01 Aug 2007    Source


A. Dean Byrd    Clinical Professor
Disagree
The essentialist argument that homosexuality is biologically determined, and is therefore not amenable to change, continues to find little support in science.
01 Feb 2008    Source


Neutral
Experts In Politics


Sarah Palin    Former Governor of Alaska (Republican)
Neutral
I don't know [whether homosexuality is genetic or learned], but I'm not one to judge and, you know, I'm from a family and from a community with many, many members of many diverse backgrounds and I'm not going to judge someone on whether they believe that homosexuality is a choice or genetic.
13 Sep 2008    Source


Encyclopedia


Wikipedia    World's Largest Encyclopedia
Neutral
No simple cause for sexual orientation has been conclusively demonstrated, and there is no scientific consensus as to whether the contributing factors are primarily biological or environmental.
27 Apr 2009    Source



Comments

Add Your TakeOnIt (click to expand, no login required)
0 Points      the27th      09 May 2010      Stance on Question: Mostly Agree
I've seen the papers. Heritability is practically undeniable, genetic origin is pretty likely, X-linked is plausible.


0 Points      Benja      09 May 2010      Stance on Question: Mostly Agree
Conservatives aren't interested in your complicated papers. They have the bible. The bible clearly says that homosexuality is wrong. Since God is just, he couldn't have made us hard-wired to be evil - evil must be a choice.

This type of reasoning - where scripture is used to determine science facts - is dangerous. This is why I'd disagree with you on the issue of atheists directly challenging religious beliefs. The cruelty of challenging someone's beliefs - which at most is an attack of words (and I'd recommend any attack be done with courtesy and respect) - hardly compares to the cruelty of denying homosexuals legal rights.