Presentation on theme: "Session 4 – Homosexuality Pt.2 Having spent a week looking at the Biblical case against homosexuality, we will now look at other areas that support the."— Presentation transcript:
Session 4 – Homosexuality Pt.2 Having spent a week looking at the Biblical case against homosexuality, we will now look at other areas that support the view that the Bible presents us with
What about the claim that homosexuality is genetic and they are born that way? Brad Harrub, Ph.D. and Bert Thompson, Ph.D. and Dave Miller, Ph.D. On April 14, 2003, the International Human Genome Consortium announced the successful completion of the Human Genome Project—two years ahead of schedule. The press report read: “The human genome is complete and the Human Genome Project is over” (see “Human Genome Report...,” 2003, emp. added).
Evan S. Balaban, a neurobiologist at the Neurosciences Institute in San Diego, noted that “The search for the biological underpinnings of complex human traits has a sorry history of late. In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to homosexuality. None of the claims...has been confirmed (as quoted in Horgan, 1995).” What did they discover about a “gay” gene?
The human X and Y chromosomes (the two “sex” chromosomes) have been completely sequenced. Thanks to work carried out by labs all across the globe, we know that the X chromosome contains 153 million base pairs, and harbors a total of 1168 genes (see NCBI, 2004). The National Center for Biotechnology Information reports that the Y chromosome—which is much smaller— contains “only” 50 million base pairs, and is estimated to contain a mere 251 genes.
Educational institutions such as Baylor University, the Max Planck Institute, the Sanger Institute, Washington University in St. Louis, and others have spent countless hours and millions of research dollars analyzing these unique chromosomes. As the data began to pour in, they allowed scientists to construct gene maps—using actual sequences from the Human Genome Project. And yet, neither the map for the X nor the Y chromosome contains any “gay gene.” But occasionally you’ll hear the claim that they’ve found the “gay” gene
LeVay reported that clusters of these neurons (INAH) in homosexual men were the same size as clusters in women, both of which were significantly smaller than clusters in heterosexual men. LeVay reported that the nuclei in INAH 3 were “more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the women. It was also, however, more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the homosexual men” (1991, 253:1034). We’ve found the gay gene then? This proves it’s genetically based?
Simon LeVay—Brain Differences In 1991, Dr. LeVay reported subtle differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men (1991). LeVay measured a particular region of the brain (the interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus—INAH) in postmortem tissue of three distinct groups: (1) women; (2) men who were presumed to be heterosexual; (3) and homosexual men.
Study has never been reproduced. As William Byne noted, LeVay’s work…“Has not been replicated, and human neuroanatomical studies of this kind have a very poor track record for reproducibility. Indeed, procedures similar to those LeVay used to identify nuclei have previously led researchers astray Problem: Additionally, of nineteen homosexual subjects used in the study, all had died of complications of acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).
LeVay has admitted: “It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain” (as quoted in Byrd, et al., 2001, emp. added). AIDS has been shown to decrease testosterone levels, so it should be expected that those who suffered from that condition would have smaller INAH
Bailey and Pillard 1952 study by Kallmann. In this famous work, he reported a concordance rate (or genetic association) of 100% for sexual orientation among monozygotic (identical) twins (1952, 115:283). 52% of identica twins of homosexual men were homosexual 22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual 11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were homosexual
Dean Hamer—The Gay Gene on the X Chromosome In many families, gay men had gay relatives through maternal lines. Thus, they concluded that a gene for homosexuality might be found on the X chromosome
If there was, in fact, a “gay gene,” then all of the identical twins should have reported a homosexual orientation. More adoptive brothers shared homosexuality than non-twin biological brothers. 9.2% of non-twin biological siblings reported homosexual orientations (Bailey and Pillard, 1991, “A Genetic Study of Male Sexual Orientation”) 48% of identical twins of homosexual women were likewise 16% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
Of the 40 pairs of homosexual brothers he analyzed, Hamer found that 33 exhibited a matching DNA region called q28—a gene located at the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome. In summarizing their findings, Hamer and colleagues noted: “Our experiments suggest that a locus (or loci) related to sexual orientation lies within approximately 4 million base pairs of DNA on the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome” (1993, 261:326, parenthetical item in orig.).
One of the most significant problems with Hamer’s approach is that he and his colleagues did not feel that it was necessary to check whether any of the heterosexual men in these families shared the marker in question! Additionally, Hamer never explained why the other seven pairs of brothers did not display the same genetic marker Obviously if they possessed it the theory would fall apart
Someone else checked out the Xq28 chromosome George Rice and his colleagues from Canada looked intently at the gene Xq28. They then observed: “Allele and halotype sharing for these markers was not increased over expectation. These results do not support an X- linked gene underlying male homosexuality” (1999, 284:665, emp. added). Rice, et al., included 182 families in their study. They noted:
“It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer’s original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al., we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as was reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28 (284:667).” Other studies have also been done and do not agree University of Chicago psychiatrist Alan Sanders
A bigger problem with this idea of homosexuality and gay orientation being genetic A child born with Down’s syndrome will carry that chromosomal abnormality throughout his or her life. Problem: Many people have been able to successfully change their sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual How to you change your genetics?
The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) released the results of a two-year study stating: “Before treatment, 68 percent of the respondents perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, with another 22 percent stating that they were more homosexual than heterosexual. After treatment, only 13 percent perceived themselves as exclusively or almost entirely homosexual, while 33 percent described themselves as either exclusively or almost entirely heterosexual (see Nicolosi, 2000, 86:1071).”
“Individuals who have partners of the same sex are biologically unable to reproduce (without resorting to artificial means). Therefore, if an alleged “gay gene” did exist, the homosexual population eventually would disappear altogether.” “Although 83 percent of respondents indicated that they entered therapy primarily because of homosexuality, 99 percent of those who participated in the survey said they now believe treatment to change homosexuality can be effective and valuable” One more interesting problem…
Paul Cameron, Ph. D. “Two large studies asked homosexual respondents to explain the origins of their desires and behaviors - how they "got that way." The first of these studies was conducted by Kinsey in the 1940s and involved 1700 homosexuals. The second, in 1970, involved 979 homosexuals. Both were conducted prior to the period when the "gay rights" movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins. Both reported essentially the same findings: Homosexuals overwhelmingly believed their feelings and behavior were the result of social or environmental influences.”
Should we impose our views on other? Where is the argument at? Defining marriage Should homosexuals have the same “rights” as heterosexuals do in marriage? They do have the same rights as heterosexuals do! Everyone has the same rights in this country… Every male can marry a female, every female can marry a male They want to change and create new rights
They say they want the same benefits as we get in heterosexual relationships? Why though does the government give incentives for two heterosexuals to get married? The primary reason is procreation! It’s good for the country Other reasons have to do with family structures being a healthy environment for children to be raised
What’s the problem with changing the definition of marriage? The arguments (like with abortion) can not be consistently applied to other areas of life If we should redefine marriage to mean one man and one man, what is the problem with continuing to define it? Should we make it legal to marry your siblings? Or for a father to marry his son? Just as long as they can’t reproduce and cause problems in offspring?
What about those who are interested in marrying and having relations with animals? What about those who want to legally practice polygamy? Nothing is genetically wrong with the practice, so should we legal that practice as well? Where do we draw the line and say “That’s not marriage”?
Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s. First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.
Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility. Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the “marriage” between two individuals of the same sex.
Gay couples adopting The number of children raised by lesbian and gay parents has skyrocketed in the last two decades. According to 2000 census data, nearly 600,000 American households are anchored by a same-sex couple, and nearly a quarter of them are raising children. Not the Biblical environment for children Doesn’t give the child the aspects of a caring/loving mother, and a strong/leading father figure like the Bible speaks of
Gay men lifespan shorter than non gay men: "The life expectancy for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for men in general. Robert S. Hogg et al., "Modeling the Impact of HIV Disease on Mortality in Gay and Bisexual Men," International Journal of Epidemiology 26 (1997): 657.“ (Exodus Global Alliance) Health problems with a homosexual lifestyle Lower life expectancy
Breast Cancer higher among Lesbians: "Breast cancer is the most common cancer diagnosed among women and is the leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, following cancers of the skin and lung. Sex of women with women at greater health risk than women with men: "For women, a history of sex with women may be a marker for increased risk of adverse sexual, reproductive, and general health outcomes compared with women who reported sex exclusively with men."
Recent research has identified risk factors for breast cancer that may differentially affect lesbian and bisexual women, including nulliparity and higher rates of alcohol consumption and overweight, that may place this population at geater [sic] risk than heterosexual women of developing breast cancer."
2% of U.S. population is gay yet it accounts for 61% of HIV infection: "Men who have sex with men remain the group most heavily affected by new HIV infections. While CDC estimates that MSM represent only 2 percent of the U.S. population, they accounted for the majority (61 percent; 29,300) of all new HIV infections in 2009. Young MSM (ages 13 to 29) were most severely affected, representing more than one quarter of all new HIV infections nationally (27 percent; 12,900 in 2009)." HIV problems What if they are monogamous through life?
"In their study of the sexual profiles of 2,583 older homosexuals published in Journal of Sex Research, Paul Van de Ven et al. found that "the modal range for number of sexual partners ever [of homosexuals] was 101–500." In addition, 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent had between 501 and 1000 partners. A further 10.2 percent to 15.7 percent reported having had more than 1000 lifetime sexual partners. Paul Van de Ven et al., "A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men," Journal of Sex Research 34 (1997): 354."
For wanting to be accepted, the homosexual community sure doesn’t accept others beliefs Christians running a bed and breakfast only allowed married couples to stay at their B&B, and instead of just finding somewhere else, what does the LGBT movement do? Sue them.
Churches can be sued or in a lot of legal trouble if they decide to not perform a homosexual wedding! The homosexuals don’t want tolerance between different beliefs, they want everyone to agree with them. Vocalizing your beliefs on homosexuality is called hate speech now… while homosexuals can cuss out Christianity with no consequences
What should our goals be politically? Banning homosexual marriage is what Christians should vote for because: 1: God created marriage between one man and one women 2: There is no economic benefit to homosexual marriages like with heterosexuals 3: Homosexuals are at risk for great health problems 4: If they adopt or have kids unnaturally, the children always lack father or mother
Memory verse 1 Thessalonians 4:3: “ For this is the will of God, your sanctification: that you should abstain from sexual immorality;”