XPost: rec.audio.opinion, alt.religion.scientology   
   From: spam@spam.com   
      
   On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 04:26:02 -0500, flipper  wrote:   
      
   >On Mon, 30 Aug 2010 06:55:39 GMT, spam@spam.com (Don Pearce) wrote:   
   >   
   >>On Sun, 29 Aug 2010 19:07:09 -0700 (PDT), "Shhhh!!!! I'm Listening to   
   >>Reason!"  wrote:   
   >>   
   >>>> >What about that whole random thing?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> That's part of it. As long as you have two populations, one of which   
   >>>> breeds better than the other, the worse will eventually die out. I   
   >>>> think we can agree that homosexuals have a poorer breeding record than   
   >>>> heteros. This observation alone should be enough to convince that   
   >>>> homosexuality isn't an inherited trait.   
   >>>   
   >>>I disagree. As long as there's discrimination there's a reason to hide   
   >>>one's orientation. Look at all the "conservative republicans" who have   
   >>>been outed, yet have families. Ditti those in the military. And those   
   >>>are just two examples.   
   >>>   
   >>>In a vacuum your argument might even work. It doesn't in real life   
   >>>though.   
   >>   
   >>I have no idea how your response addresses my post. I am talking about   
   >>genetics; no more and no less. Whether - and even how - anybody is   
   >>"outed" has absolutely no bearing on the matter.   
   >   
   >Sure it does, because humans can counter or, at least, mask what would   
   >otherwise be instinctive behavior and I presume he's proposing that   
   >cultural taboo would be one incentive to do so.   
   >   
   >Your 'genetic' presumptions, especially in the context of behavior,   
   >are too simplistic. For example, the gene could also require an   
   >environmental trigger to be expressive.   
   >   
      
   What you say refers to particular individual circumstances. Genetics   
   doesn't work that way. It operates at the level of the huge. You can   
   manipulate all you like at the local level, and in the short term, but   
   in the end evolution will win.   
      
   Anyway, the effect would have occurred long before societies started   
   developing opinions about homosexuality. No, it is clear that there is   
   no gene for homosexuality.   
      
   d   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)