WOULD GAY MARRIAGE RESULT IN GAY EXTINCTION?

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 10:15 PM GMT
    A lot of research seems to suggest that being gay is at least in part genetic. If this is true then societies where gays are pressured into coupling with the opposite sex actually ensure the survival of a gene that causes behavior that they want to suppress. But if we allow gays to couple with each other and none are forced to marry and procreate, wouldn't the gene slowly die out?
  • swedeinusa

    Posts: 285

    Apr 03, 2011 10:18 PM GMT
    We're mutatttiooonnsssss

    Naw, because the gay gene is probably carried by our heterosexual sisters/brothers/cousins. And when they have children, the chances for the gay gene would probably pop up, maybe not.

    I mean, for my family, we have this 'one gay a generation thing' on my father's side. My uncle is gay, and so was my Great Uncle. I'm the gay of this generation icon_biggrin.gif I have 2 sisters, and a brother. We suspect one of our nephews to be gay, we don't know yet. Haha.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 10:20 PM GMT
    As long as guys are hot, there will be gays to admire them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 03, 2011 10:24 PM GMT
    dekiruman saidA lot of research seems to suggest that being gay is at least in part genetic. If this is true then societies where gays are pressured into coupling with the opposite sex actually ensure the survival of a gene that causes behavior that they want to suppress. But if we allow gays to couple with each other and none are forced to marry and procreate, wouldn't the gene slowly die out?


    As long as the earth endures and there are human births, there will be gays.
  • LJay

    Posts: 11612

    Apr 04, 2011 1:52 AM GMT
    No.

    Next question.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:00 AM GMT
    There are too many flaws in this logic.

    I'm no scientist, but from my basic understanding of genetics, if homosexuality is indeed something that is in the DNA, it doesn't necessarily mean that it requires a gay person to pass it on to the next generation.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:05 AM GMT
    swedeinmiami saidWe're mutatttiooonnsssss

    Naw, because the gay gene is probably carried by our heterosexual sisters/brothers/cousins. And when they have children, the chances for the gay gene would probably pop up, maybe not.

    I mean, for my family, we have this 'one gay a generation thing' on my father's side. My uncle is gay, and so was my Great Uncle. I'm the gay of this generation icon_biggrin.gif I have 2 sisters, and a brother. We suspect one of our nephews to be gay, we don't know yet. Haha.


    what he said, this is classic mendel's law
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:07 AM GMT
    What swedeinmiami said MINUS the mutation part. If it was a mutation, then it would mean our parents must be gay as well because only carriers of the mutation can pass on the mutation (UNLESS IT WAS ENVIRONMENTAL).

    But, since this whole topic is assuming someone is born gay, then it cannot be environmental.

    Assuming that there may be a gay gene, where do you think you came from then if it was only found in gay people?

    Genes can be turned on or turned off, such as the gene that determines the color of your eyes...

    It would most likely be found in every human being... but is only turned on every now and then, and thus a baby can be created gay...


    Note that I used ''may'' because there is not evidence yet to prove that there is a gay gene.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:08 AM GMT
    No, cause bisexuals will keep marrying and have gay kids, as they carry the gay genes (recessive genes, kind of like two people with brown eyes sometimes having kids with blue eyes, if they carry the gene)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:10 AM GMT
    Being gay is not solely genetic.

    Lots of research going into differences in hormones and masculinizing/feminizing hormone exposure while in the womb.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:22 AM GMT
    Trust me, someone out there will need redecoration sooner or later.. It will reactivate then.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:27 AM GMT
    ZbmwM5 saidBeing gay is not solely genetic.

    Lots of research going into differences in hormones and masculinizing/feminizing hormone exposure while in the womb.


    Not solely, but definitely partly... if twin studies are indicative, they have 50% influence
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:27 AM GMT
    alonelyplanet saidTrust me, someone out there will need redecoration sooner or later.. It will reactivate then.


    WIN!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:27 AM GMT
    alonelyplanet saidTrust me, someone out there will need redecoration sooner or later.. It will reactivate then.


    WIN!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:36 AM GMT
    Pato_Rico saidNo, cause bisexuals will keep marrying and have gay kids, as they carry the gay genes (recessive genes, kind of like two people with brown eyes sometimes having kids with blue eyes, if they carry the gene)



    In addition, some gay men are still going to provide their seed to a surrogate to have a child of their own and some lesbians are going to be artificially inseminated to have a child. It happens now and will happen more in the future. Still, I feel it is unlikely that they will produce a higher percentage of homosexual children than straight couples, although it might seem that way for a while as the gay children of a same-sex couple might have less inhibition about coming out.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:36 AM GMT
    I think global warming will get us before gay marriage.

    I've often wondered if an increase in homosexuals is nature's way of keep down overpopulation. Alternately it could be that more people feel free to be themselves now.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 2:40 AM GMT
    No.
  • DiverScience

    Posts: 1426

    Apr 04, 2011 2:46 AM GMT
    No.

    It will only be "bred out" under limited circumstances.

    A) It's not linked to a beneficial trait (think sickle cell anemia, which is maintained in the population because a single copy of the gene confers malaria resistance).

    B) It's actively detrimental to breeding.

    B seems obvious, but only if you assume A and additionally that it's a mono-genetic trait. That is, if gayness is a single gene (which we know it's not) and there's no benefit to the trait, then the detriment to breeding will cause the trait to be lost.

    Now if, instead, gayness comes from a collection of genes, and if perhaps certain collections of them confer a benefit (say... good parenting) then it will be maintained, the same way that sickle cell is maintained.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 3:02 AM GMT
    some research i heard of suggested that the more boys a woman had, the larger the chance to be gay, due to the Y chromosome being attacked by the mothers body. The more boys she had, the higher her bodies immune response to the Y chromosome. Of course im an only child so its hard to say in my case, though if my mothers body simply had a high enough trigger, her immune response to carrying a male cud have made me gay, according to the research anyways.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 4:46 AM GMT
    I think the only thing that matters is that whoever is born in the future has a chance to be happy and fulfilled, regardless of what they want, who they like, or who they are.

    That being said, if for some reason the gay population dropped drastically in some sort of synchronized global phenomena I can imagine the lives of those homosexuals left to be exponentially worse than gay people have it now. For some reason I visualize the masses hunting them down and publicly killing them in these really savage rituals. That'd actually make a really good screenplay, a post-apocalyptic dystopia where there are only a handful of gay people in the world and the world collectively turns on them to "finally eradicate them", tossing countless years of civil and human rights progress out the window.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 4:49 AM GMT
    Ariodante saidI think the only thing that matters is that whoever is born in the future has a chance to be happy and fulfilled, regardless of what they want, who they like, or who they are.

    That being said, if for some reason the gay population dropped drastically in some sort of synchronized global phenomena I can imagine the lives of those homosexuals left to be exponentially worse than gay people have it now. For some reason I visualize the masses hunting them down and publicly killing them in these really savage rituals. That'd actually make a really good screenplay, a post-apocalyptic dystopia where there are only a handful of gay people in the world and the world collectively turns on them to "finally eradicate them", tossing countless years of civil and human rights progress out the window.



    LOL! Ariodante.. you and the things you come up with. You superstar you!
  • needleninja

    Posts: 713

    Apr 04, 2011 4:54 AM GMT
    i think there are several factors that can probibly make being gay endagered, but not extintc (these are hypothetical of course). one being that science having a way of minipulating genetics to turn someone straight. 2nd being that more females chose to remain single. 3 as possibly being diseases. and 4 being a law to erase homosexuality.

    but its an opinion on possibilities, and i still think that we wont be extinct.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 4:56 AM GMT
    _Mohammed_ said


    LOL! Ariodante.. you and the things you come up with. You superstar you!


    You can play romantic gay lead number 3. I promise I won't have your character die until like 1:20 into the film!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 5:00 AM GMT
    Ariodante said
    _Mohammed_ said


    LOL! Ariodante.. you and the things you come up with. You superstar you!


    You can play romantic gay lead number 3. I promise I won't have your character die until like 1:20 into the film!


    1 hr, 20 mins...at the end?!?! oh how honorable!

    hehe icon_twisted.gificon_twisted.gificon_twisted.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 04, 2011 5:01 AM GMT
    _Mohammed_ said
    Ariodante said
    _Mohammed_ said


    LOL! Ariodante.. you and the things you come up with. You superstar you!


    You can play romantic gay lead number 3. I promise I won't have your character die until like 1:20 into the film!


    1 hr, 20 mins...at the end?!?! oh how honorable!

    hehe icon_twisted.gificon_twisted.gificon_twisted.gif


    This is going to be one of those films that lasts way over 2 hours. Think of Children of Men...but with scenes of men doing men...=o!