Homosexuality is in less than 5% of people. It's not NEARLY as prevalent as you or the media seem to think.

Oh, it looks like brainbomb cited that statistic too.

Keep in mind that to look for a cause of homosexuality is to presume that it's some sort of deviation from the default. That is, it assumes that everyone would be hetero were it not for some intervention, intentional or otherwise. This might appear obvious from an evolutionary perspective, since heterosexual activity directly promotes reproduction, whereas homosexual activity does not.

But this reasoning is flawed. Homosexuality is prevalent throughout the animal kingdom, especially in the higher mammals. This suggests that homosexuality is an important and fundamental part of the sexuality of social species. In other words, species with homosexuality must have a survival advantage over species that do not; otherwise it would not exist.

Consider how mammalian mothers behave toward their offspring: protective, caring, nurturing. This behavior is pervasive throughout the mammalian class. We don’t ask what causes this behavior. It seems obvious, because we think we can see the mechanism for its survival benefits.

Homosexuality is good for the species. Social species with homosexuality will have closer-knit and better-functioning societies, and they will, in the long run, out-reproduce (and force into extinction) species without it. If this were not true, then homosexuality would not be present, much less ubiquitous.

I honestly can't even argue with a homophobe because I can't understand what they are even trying to say. How can you counter something that makes zero sense as is?

"children of homosexual fathers are nearly 3 times as likely, and children of lesbian mothers are nearly 4 times as likely, to identify as something other than entirely heterosexual. Children of lesbian mothers are 75% more likely, and children of homosexual fathers are 3 times more likely, to be currently in a same-sex romantic relationship."

https://www.frc.org/issuebrief/new-study-on-homosexual-parents-tops-all-previous-research

bo_sox, if you don't want to argue, no one is forcing you to do so.

"During early adolescence, teenagers can become sexually curious and exploratory. During this time, a society that normalizes gay relationships can cause such a teenager to mistake that he or she is homosexual."

lolwut

There is no shortage of material promoting heterosexual behavior. It's not like a teenager will simply not realize that heterosexual attraction is possible and reasonable. Moreover, sexual attraction has a pretty fucking high-quality feedback loop. That's how people who were raised to be straight in societies that only accept straight people and don't even recognize the existence of gay people still realized they weren't straight. If your mistake reaches the point where you are crushing on, fapping to, falling in love with, having sex with, getting married to people of the same sex, I have some fucking news for you: it isn't a 'mistake'.

"Consider how mammalian mothers behave toward their offspring: protective, caring, nurturing. This behavior is pervasive throughout the mammalian class."

How does protectiveness of offspring have to do with homosexuality???

"That's how people who were raised to be straight in societies that only accept straight people and don't even recognize the existence of gay people still realized they weren't straight."

As I said, I recognize the existence of people who were born gay. However, it is certainly not nearly as prevalent as 5%, a figure that is the result of biased media coverage that TrPrado mentioned.

And here we go with the Regnerus study, like you think no one has ever heard of it or examined its methodology or anything.

http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/05/biggest-anti-gay-marriage-study-was-debunked.html

"As I said, I recognize the existence of people who were born gay. However, it is certainly not nearly as prevalent as 5%, a figure that is the result of biased media coverage that TrPrado mentioned."

Prado said "less than 5%". What does this have to do with anything, anyway?

Actually, the media would have you believe it's closer to 10%.

Figures I've read say non-straight individuals are 3-6% of the population.

Also, mostly a knitpicky thing, but normalize is usually used in a statistical context, and doesn't mean the way you're using it.

Just stepping in to say that everything in existence from "how much you use your brain", "homosexual population", and "how many rabbits approve of sparkling wine" has been reported as 10%. In fact, I'd say about 10% of those statistics are actually true. I read it somewhere.

146% of statistics thrown around by non-expert sources are bullshit.

I realize most of you arent single issue voters but how can you support Trump or Cruze who want to reverse the gay marriage law? Isnt that a pretty ignorant stance to take?

Can you also do me a favor: "If you agree with anything leon1122 is saying please never again try to claim you are an advocate for gay rights."

The "gay marriage law" was a Supreme Court ruling and despite what many think, it's not going anywhere. It's an irrelevant issue in this election.

"If you agree with anything leon1122 is saying please never again try to claim you are an advocate for gay rights."

Humans need to breathe oxygen.

I breathe nitrogen. I'm evolved. Fight me.

Jk don't start fights, kids.

Are you truly so snarky to pretend you are dismissing your own obvious homophobic republican sensibilities?

Leon, of course I don't have to argue, but your arguments are so repulsive that it pains me to stand by and watch it happen. I know I'm not changing your mind but I don't care to stand on the sidelines.

I'll just say this - if you are so against indoctrination of people into believing things about themselves that, without societal influence, would not be, please join me in rejecting the inclusion of young children in their parents' religion. Please also join me in fighting the requirement to say the pledge of allegiance in schools each morning. There are plenty more examples of societal indoctrination that are far more prevalent than teenagers being convinced that they're gay even when their not because of "normalization" of sex.

"I'm sure it doesn't work like that in the liberal indoctrination textbooks."
Oh, yeah, about this comment. My school doesn't have some ritual liberal indoctrination. If it does, it's failing MISERABLY. This is ultra-conservative Oklahoma, one of the reddest red states in the country. They aren't going to hand out "liberal indoctrination textbooks." If you believe in that indoctrination conspiracy then you're very delusional.

So what he is saying is that normalization of gay bi lesbian lifestyles is bad, because it encourages non gay people to suddenly and miraculously become gay because its cool or hip to do so. What a fucking crock of shit.

First of all bigotry and shaming have made gay people fearful to come out for decades. These fears dont just go away because of legality. You act as if you speak for society as a whole when in fact you dont. Recognizing that politicians like Trump and Cruze follow the hard right evangelical line of thinking that homosexuality is wrong and shouldnt be encouraged.

Again, what a crock of shit. You cant even own up to the fact that Republicans are complete bigots who want to repeal the gay marriage law. kasich is the only Republican with one shred of intellect who finally says the unpopular but true point: Accept others. Wow what a shocking revelation, accepting others is such a burden.

Gimme a break.

Even sociological normalization does not fit what he means. Calling it normalization is either blatantly false or a major exaggeration. It's not a normalization by any term.

Have they found the gay gene? Serious question.

I only know high school biology, but I'd say it's extremely unlikely that it would just be one or a couple of genes deciding that.

Consider how the 'gay gene' would still thrive quite well after millions of years if it's just passed on from parents to children. It should be easy to imagine that people with this 'gay gene' would be much less likely to create offspring, meaning that gene would all but starve out.

The more complicated it is, the more likely you are to get the myriad of possibilities seen in the LGBT community, for instance, and amongst straight people as well: everyone has their own 'type' in a sense.

I don't believe any sexuality genes have been isolated yet.