[The poster basically argues that while homosexuality can be genetic, it cannot be in your DNA.]
I've studied biology. It can't be in DNA. It can be linked to GENETICS because there can be things linked in traits of either the mother or father, but a "gay gene" can NOT be encoded in your DNA. There is no such thing.
54 comments
I've studied biology
No, you haven't.
Actually, there is evidence that sexual orientation is determined by hormone levels a fetus is exposed to during prenatal development rather than any gene.
As such, it is possible for the offspring of homosexuals to be heterosexual and the offspring of heterosexuals to be homosexual.
She means she had a biology course in high school.
A hereditary trait, as opposed to a congenital one, exactly IS in the DNA. It might be in the nuclear DNA or the mitochondrial DNA, but it's in the DNA. If she is basing her conclusion on the idea that "homosexual DNA" would make the individual unable to reproduce, well, damme, she's wrong. Quite a few homosexuals have had at least one child, and quite a few heterosexuals haven't. Aside from that, there are many carriers of full lethals who are perfectly healthy themselves, and there are instances where the carrier of a lethal may be more fit than the owner of two "normal" alleles.
Is homosexuality hereditary? It's fashionable to say so now. The reality is probably a lot more complex- but as for little Hollie, she hasn't got the beginning of a clue.
"I've studied biology."
You, madam, are a dirty liar.
"It can't be in DNA. It can be linked to GENETICS because there can be things linked in traits of either the mother or father, but a 'gay gene' can NOT be encoded in your DNA."
So, being gay has nothing to do with your DNA yet it can be linked to genetics as an inheritable trait passed on from one or both parents during conception. Does that about sum it up?
And yet you want me to believe that you've studied biology?
"There is no such thing."
Because you say so, apparently, and no other reason.
It can be linked to GENETICS because there can be things linked in traits of either the mother or father, but a "gay gene" can NOT be encoded in your DNA. There is no such thing.
The first part of the sentence may be correct; for example, it could be encoded in your mother's genes, which results in some effect on fetal development. As to the second, we don't actually know that one way or another.
The only part of this that is correct is the part that says that "a 'gay gene' can NOT be encoded in your DNA. There is no such thing." And that part's only correct because homosexuality would have to be polygenetic, so there'd have to be more than one gene involved. But I'm guessing that's not what Hollie meant, so she was right by accident. And she was still wrong about the rest of it.
So going by your logic, there's no such thing as a 'religion' gene. Therefore you've just admitted that we're all born Atheist; that 'spirituality' isn't innate, ergo the 'soul' doesn't exist. QED.
Annihilated your argument - and the justifications of your beliefs' existence - much?
As someone who actually studied biology, the answer is a yes and no. Yes, there is a gay gene per say, but whether it is turned on or off is determined by DNA methylation. Methyl groups turn on growth genes when you hit puberty and turn them off when you are done with puberty.
aptly named site, dontchathink?
science does not work that way, thank you, bubye
"Actually, there is evidence that sexual orientation is determined by hormone levels a fetus is exposed to during prenatal development rather than any gene."
I would say that human sexuality is far too complex to attribute to a single metaphorical lightswitch, and that it can be affected by multiple factors, including genes, hormones, and life experiences. Possibly many others. I have never understood the human tendency to think that one answer necessarily rules out all others.
It can't be in DNA. It can be linked to GENETICS
I think crustaceans are like totally gross, but I love crabs, lobsters, crayfish, shrimp ...
Um...if you'd studied ANY biology at all, you'd know that:
DNA AND GENETICS ARE THE SAME FUCKING THING!!
In my high school biology class, the teacher actually had to stop when talking about evolution and said she was legally required to mention creationism, and god etc. Who knows, with the increased attention to text books, they could teach some crazy crap now.
...so...like...mitochondrial DNA...from the mother but not in actual personal code...kind of thing...no, I can't pretend that's what you mean. Drat.
I wonder what biology thing hollie here believes he or she understands that would make this statement logical.
I think poe. But just in case I would like to point out that I haven't studied biology since school, 20 odd years ago, I didn't do particularly well and I still know more about the subject than hollielovesyou.
Actually, if you take it as badly articulated, it's not entirely inaccurate.
"It can be linked to GENETICS because there can be things linked in traits of either the mother or father."
The father part is probably wrong, but perhaps the maternal grandfather - if the theory quoted by QuasiRodent is indeed a major contributor. The degree of hormone fade with aging might be a variable not unlike male pattern baldness, hereditary.
Maybe if I smash my head against a wall hard enough this will somehow not be idiotic and become correct.
Wait, nope, that'll never happen.
Don't you love it when a fundy starts out by saying 'I've studied ...' , and then immediately begins spouting out pure nonsense?
Of course his friends will think he's a genius.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
