Because identical twins aren't exactly identical, http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080215121214.htm there are small subtle differences in their DNA.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Most identical twins I've seen have slight differences in their face anyway, so that makes sense.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

homosexuality is not genetic, that would imply that it can be passed down in your chemical makeup. and if that was the case then that gene would have disappeared a looooooooong time ago. if it is at all involved with genetics then it could only be a genetic mutation. in which case would mean that all abnormal sexual preferences and fetishes would be a genetic mutation just the same as homosexuality. it is much more likely that it is just a sexual preference that you develop from your upbringing or personal experiences, or because of some other reasons. people develop sexual preferences and fetishes for many different reasons and homosexuality is the same as the rest just slightly more common.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Homosexuality is totally different to a fetish or other abnormal sexual preferences. Sexuality deals with the gender you're attracted to. Fetishes are particular things or actions that sexually arouse a person. It's like saying that being straight is a fetish when it is a sexuality. I would like to say that scientists think that it has more to do with prenatal hormones that effect brain structure than a specific gene.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

sexuality is not any different than saying sexual preference. it is a sexual abnormality just like the rest of them. no difference, the only reason they call it a "sexuality" is because it is more widely accepted in western society now. sexuality is just a stupid concept created as an attempt make it seem as though gender preference is just a sexual preference. there is no difference between sexuality and a sexual preference.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

ORLY? Then why have they observed homosexuality in over 1500 other animal species? They don't have fetishes. I guess you could say it is a sexual abnormality in the sense that people are statistically less likely to be gay but that doesn't mean that it's not a sexuality. And no the only reason it is considered a sexuality is not because it is becoming accepted more in western society, there have been many cultures throughout history that have accepted homosexual people including many eastern cultures.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

that's bullshit, many species of animals have been observed participating in sexual abnormalities such as Necrophilia, cross species, pedophilia, sexual cannibalism, rape, masturbation, using sex toys, viewing pornography, oral sex, sexual polygamy, and prostitution. I am sick of hearing that bullshit argument, it is only helping my case that it is a sexual abnormality like the rest of these examples. saying that animals doing it makes it natural is obviously not true. animals are just as sexually perverted as humans if not more so than humans because they have no code of morals by which they live.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm with TheCatalyst on this one. Homosexuality IS abnormal. SpearmintMilk's 1500 animal species is really minuscule compared to the billions of species that actually exist. It isn't natural.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I hope you get mauled by Bonoboes

by Anonymous 12 years ago

i once saw 2 bonoboes doing it at they zoo, the guy got hard because they were feeding him

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Scientists have only discovered less than two million species of animals... They think that there maybe 5-100 million all together so no where close to billions. And they haven't extensively studied most of the ones they have discovered so 1500 isn't really that small.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Infact most species are asexual.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

whoops, used to saying billion. Research thing I did, sorry

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Actually it's not that many species that have been observed to do that. Necrophilia (cane toads that were given hormone injections and one alleged case of a duck. That's it.), cross species (animals that have similar genetic make up can have hybrid offspring, there is nothing wrong or perverted about that.) paedophilia (vary rare, and is usually to pass on the male's DNA and can't really be compared to human paedophilia.), sexual cannibalism (also vary rare and only in insects, and it's not really got anything to do with the actual sex, rape (also vary rare and different to human rape (you're right about this one it's because of human's moral codes) masturbation, sex toys (only primates use), viewing pornography (that humans showed them, not naturally), oral sex (part of sex, not really a perversion), sexual polygamy (normal part of sexuality in many species not a perversion). Saying that animals do it makes it natural IS true, because it is occurring in nature therefore, it is natural. Saying that there are homosexual animals is more about showing that it isn't a choice, because animals, like you said don't have a code of morals which they live, in the way humans do, they just...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I didn't say your sexual preference was a choice, just that it is a sexual abnormality. the choice is the action of participating in that sexual abnormality. you cannot control what sexual preferences you develop but you can choose whether or not to participate in them. I don't care if your a homosexual, that's between you and god. what I am speaking of is that you say your sexual abnormality is special, you say that it is different than others such as pedophilia or necrophilia. they are all in the same category which is sexual abnormality. there's no doubt that the latter is worst for obvious reasons, but that doesn't mean homosexuality isn't still a sexual abnormality. it's not special, it's not normal and any sexual acts committed under the category of homosexuality is strictly for reason of sexual perversion.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

When people think of perversion they automatically think that means it is bad. Perversion is just another way to say different from the norm. Homosexuality is different from the norm, thus it is a perversion. That doesn't make it comparable to fetishes. A fetish is how a person has sex, not what gender they have sex with. A straight man can love his wife with all his heart, but still be attracted to children and the same goes for gay men. I have noticed that the difference in sexuality and a fetish is who a person has the capacity to love. We don't equate a fetish with sexuality because a fetish is about sexual satisfaction and a sexuality is about finding someone to be in a relationship with (though some people do bring there fetish into a relationship, which is fine as long as long as everyone involved is mentally or legally able to consent.)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

but having sex with a gender with which you can not reproduce is the same thing as a fetish because it is sex purely for sexual satisfaction. your sexuality has nothing to do with who you can love, anybody has the capacity to love anyone. the concept of loving someone in a romantic way is nothing more than equating the love you already have for that person with your sexual preference. in fact I have a friend who is a homosexual and his first love was a girl who he started dating after he knew he was a homosexual. according to him he doesn't usually like girls but she was special. as I said anybody has the capacity to love anybody.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Sex without the intention of reproduction is not always sex for pleasure. Sex is a way to express love and intimacy between two people. Anyone can love anybody. Sexuality is not black and white, it's more gray than anything. No one is completely straight and no one is completely gay. People usually refer to themselves as the one they are more attracted to. Ever hear of the Kinsey Scale? http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/resources/ak-hhscale.html

by Anonymous 12 years ago

sex without reproduction is always sex for pleasure, you can say it expresses love if you want but it is still sex for pleasure. without reproduction sex can only be because you want to do it for your own personal enjoyment. as I said anybody has the capacity to love anyone, what makes it gay is when you choose to put sex into the equation. and also the ability of both parties to legally consent does not mean it is not a sexual abnormality, nor does it mean it is normal or right. a pedophile could have a child consent to sex, the only difference is that it's not counted as legal consent. a zoophile can ask there dog to consent, and their dog could be quite eager for the opportunity. it does not make it right, and homosexuals are not special, it is the same as any other sexual preference including all other sexual abnormalities.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So people shouldn't use contraception because sex for pleasure is abnormal? I think what makes it gay is when you love someone of the same sex in a romantic way. I was gay long before I had sex. So heterosexuals having sex without the intention to reproduce is the same as an adult having sex with a child? A dog does not speak any human language, I could say anything to my dog and as long as I say it in an excited way he will get excited. A child does not understand sex and will be mentally scared if they had sex. I know we're not special, but we're also not hurting anybody so that does put us above pedophiles and zoophiles.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

sex for pleasure is not abnormal, it is sex for enjoyment and has nothing to do with love. loving someone in a romantic way is just loving someone and then placing your own sexual preference into that equation. you can not love someone in a romantic way without sex already have being placed into the relationship. and that doesn't mean you have to have sex, just that consciously or subconsciously you have equated sex into your thoughts of that person. once again you try to twist around what I have said, heterosexuality shouldn't even be a real term because it is just what is supposed to be. when you get into sexual abnormalities such as homosexuality, the true term for homosexual should be homophile. so let's try not to get wrapped up in terms here and look at what the whole means. legally a child could be anyone under 18, a juvenile. but we could get more complex. what most of us just refer to as a pedophile can be split into pedophile, hebephile, and an ephebophile. say someone who is a hebephile acts a 14 year old if they would like to have sex, they 14 year old agrees. a 14 year old knows what sex is and nowadays they participate in it all the time. but it is a problem

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The problem is what if the 14 year old gets pregnant? their body isnt ready to carry a baby. The age of consent has to do with the mental and physical maturity of the people having sex. Once people have reached maturity (turned 18) they are typically done growing and could handle the physical outcomes of sex. Heterosexual should be a term, it means one who is attracted to the opposite sex. Homosexual means one who is attracted to the same sex. That's why they both end in -sexual, they describe what sex someone is attracted to. Pedophiles are not attracted to a certain sex, they are attracted to having sex with a children and they often times have a totally different sexual orientation. I don't know what makes you think you're right and all the people who are actually educated in this area (psychologists, doctors, and the like) are wrong. Homosexuality is different from paraphilia. Having sex with children hurts people so it is bad. Having sex with my girlfriend hurts no one so it is not bad. How hard is that to understand?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

many 14 year olds have gotten pregnant before and given birth just fine. that is not an argument against pedophilia (or hebephilia) because you could say the same for having sex with another 14 year old. and if pregnancy is the only problem then does that mean it is ok if they use contraception? having sex with someone who knows what they are doing does not actually hurt them if the are at agreement. what if it's a 14 year old boy and a grown woman. he is not hurt, in fact many boys his age would love to be in his position.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Ever heard of 14 year old boys? I thought not.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

when an adult has sex with a 14 year old. say a 14 year old boy has sex with a 30 year old women, he is not hurt by this encounter. and a female zoophile can make the argument that when she had sex with her male dog the she was only giving her loving companion what he wants. anyone is capable of loving anything but when you put sex into the equation then it becomes what people in different circles refer to as romantic interest. same as what I will now refer to as a homphile. Peta members think animals are above humans, so when you place sex into those views it would be seen as zoophilia. I agreed before that homophiles are above pedophiles and zoophiles but that does not put you into a special classification and you can not always use the excuse "we are not hurting anyone like them" as your answer for why you are better. I apologize for the low detail of this post I wrote more on the first response but it got cut of because I forgot about the length limit.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

We are not in a "special classification," we are in a different classification. I was born in America, so I am an American. But I am also from Alabama so I classify myself as an Alabamian. Is that a "special classification?" Heterosexuals are classified by what sex they are attracted to, and so are homosexuals. There's nothing special about it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

no that is just going down on the tree and getting more specific, it is not a different tree entirely. homophiles are people who participate in a sexual abnormality just the same as the other people who participate in other sexual abnormalities.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No, they are people who are attracted to a certain sex. You don't have to participate to be a homosexual, you just have to be attracted to the same sex. I have to get more specific because you fail to see that it does not end where you want to end it. You have to dig a little deeper to see that being called a homosexual is not a "special classification."

by Anonymous 12 years ago

you know there is really no point to this argument, I have already made up my mind about this and so have you. no matter how long we argue about this I will not change your views and you will not change mine. we both see our own decision on what the truth is. there is no reason to argue a senseless argument.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's not senseless. You are trying to argue that I am the same as a pedophile because of my sexual orientation. You refuse to look deeper and see the whole picture and you insist on insulting me and all other homosexuals by your absurd comparisons.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I did not say you were the same as a pedophile, in fact I freely admitted to homosexuals as being above them. I said that your sexual preference is in the same category which is sexual abnormalities. and I never made any insults, you just take my argument as offensive. if you stop and think about it though I think you will find that the only actual problem here is that you take offense to my argument. I think what you should do is reexamine how you take people's arguments and try not to be offended you will probably feel much better. for example I am a conservative, and if a liberal comes to me and says that I am stupid because of my views , my response will be "why should I care what you think, your just some pansy ass liberal." I'm not offended, they might be at my response but I'm not. I think if you just look at me and say "why should I care what you think." you will probably feel a lot better. learning to do this is a very effective way to deal with people who you don't agree with. like me, I don't care what your views are that is why I believe arguing with you about this subject to be senseless.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

You can say you wouldn't care what someone said about you all day long, it's an easy claim to make on the internet, but it's easier said than done. You put my sexual orientation on the same level as a fetish. You won't even go deeper into what homosexuality really is because you know that once you do you will see that homosexuality is not a fetish, but a legitimate sexual orientation. I am human and get offended. I can admit that. I'm sure you get offended too, you just don't voice. I say what I think.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

those are my views and the way I see it, homosexuality is is nothing more than a sexual abnormality the same as any other. I have my views you have yours. but this is the internet, it's full of offensive shit. you say that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality because it doesn't hurt anybody. well there is nothing wrong with words, the only way they hurt you is if you make them. I can see nothing deeper to go into, it is nothing more than two people of the same gender who feel an attraction to each other. feel free to state what it is you believe is the deeper part of homosexuality, but don't expect it to change anything. obviously I say what I think, otherwise you wouldn't be offended. I'm not gonna not voice my words just because someone doesn't like it. if someone doesn't like what I say then they don't have to listen.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

The thing that makes it go deeper than a fetish is that is not how or what a person likes to have sex with, it is the gender they want to have sex with. Homosexuals have the opportunity to be in a mutually beneficial relationship whereas pedophiles do not benefit children, nor do zoophiles benefit animals. Homosexuals can establish loving, committed relationships and can have for more than just their own pleasure, just like heterosexuals. Fetishes are selfish and all about your own sexual satisfaction. When you have sex in a loving relationship, it isn't all about you. It's about pleasing your partner. That is what sets homosexuality apart from a fetish and places it on the same level as heterosexuality. It is much more than two people of the same sex who are attracted to each other, just like heterosexuality is more than two people of the opposite sex who are attracted to each other.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm sure some pedophiles, or zoophiles might argue against that statement. what if a zoophile claims to love their dog as a partner and not as a pet. a dog will always love there master, or perhaps the dog sees itself as the alpha. anyone with any kind of sexual preference could make a similar claim. years ago most people said homosexuality was wrong, now it is widely accepted by many as normal. eventually pedophiles and zoophiles will make the same arguments for how they are normal and should be accepted. for how it isn't their fault because they were born that way. it is bound to happen, interracial relationships were seen as wrong a long time ago as well. I disagree with homosexuality and nothing you can say will change that. I do not feel as though anybody should not be able to be a homosexual. but I will not think that it isn't wrong, to me it is just a sexual abnormality.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

With those -philias only one side can argue that they are in love. Both people in a heterosexual or homosexual relationship can express love. You're using the slippery slope argument which has been proven wrong time and time again.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

that is true but it doesn't mean they won't still argue it. and they can still argue that they were born that way, and some could even argue that it does not hurt anybody. they can as well come up with new arguments. perhaps it is wrong, perhaps they won't try to argue that what they do isn't wrong. you never really know.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

They do try to argue using those reasons, but they're arguments don't fit. I make those arguments for homosexuals because they are true for us. They are not true for pedophiles and the like.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

so according to you people with other sexual preferences besides heterosexuality and homosexuality choose to be that way? a pedophile is the way they are purely because they for no good reason just decided they want to victimize children? or zoophiles say "you know what would be awesome, fucking an animal"? or a sexual masochist just decided that they were turned on by taking a beating? that statement seems a bit hypocritical. everybody but homosexuals and heterosexual choose what they are sexually into.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm not saying that. They could have been born that way, but if they act on it is hurtful. Me acting on my sexuality doesn't hurt anything and that can be proven. Pedophiles cannot prove that they do no harm and neither can zoophiles or necrophilliacs Again, my arguments fit with my sexuality, they do not work for fetishes.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

what if someone agrees to donate their body to a necrophiliac after they die? what if a zoophile gets naked and gets down in front of an animal and that animal mounts them, it does not seem to do any harm and both parties are in agreement. people will always come up with an argument for why what they do isn't wrong. and to them it makes sense and is completely valid. but to everyone who is not in that group it is a stupid argument. people have there own morals and there will always be someone who does something absolutely repulsive but they can not comprehend why everybody thinks what they are doing is wrong. I'm sure the way some people say see it your argument for acceptance is no more valid than theirs.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

An animal will hump a person because they have instincts to tell them that mounting someone will show that they are dominant. A living person can give consent to someone else to have sex with their dead body, but the body itself cannot give consent. My argument has never been proven invalid when used for homosexuals, but I have been proving it wrong for fetishes. I am not doing anything repulsive, pedophiles, zoophiles, etc are. Every argument they have has been shot down, but none of mine have.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

it still doesn't hurt them, if anything it puts them in a higher position. well a person is allowed to donate their body for scientific purposes, or donate their organs after they die, so why is it different than donating your body to someone to have sex with. that's subjective, you say it isn't repulsive but some people would, there is no way to prove something like that because it is opinion.in the Philippines the age of consent is 12, here we would say that is disgusting and just all around wrong. but they see no problem with it, because all of this, this whole argument is subjective and there is no way either of us could ever prove we are wrong or right.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Right: No one gets hurt Wrong: Someone gets hurt Is that really so hard to understand?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

not everything is black and white, just because no one gets hurt doesn't make something right. have you never heard of a victimless crime?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

There is no such thing as a victimless crime. Someone steals my wifi and I am the fictim of slower internet because more devices using it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

well I believe it is wrong for religious reasons, I will never say that it is right. I believe it is the crime of putting yourself before god. that is my view and I really don't want to put my religion into this. that is a law I live by and you are not bound by it therefore to you there is nothing wrong, but to others there is. no matter who you are and what you do you will never be in a position were everyone accepts what you do. and you shouldn't feel as though everyone should accept it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I don't feel as though everyone should accept it, I feel as though no one has the right to think it is wrong. You brought your religion into this long before now. You're only reason for thinking it's wrong is religion. That's the only reason people ever have to think it's wrong.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

well you don't have the right to tell people what they can or cannot think, you can't force people to think a certain way, this is not Nazi Germany. and my thoughts don't hurt anyone so get over it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I have the right to tell you whatever I want to. People have the right to think whatever they want about anyone, and I am still allowed to think that people shouldn't be allowed to think it's wrong. Your thoughts are offensive. You know that sticks and stones saying? Yeah, that's nothing but pure bull shit.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I could say your "sexuality" is offensive to me as well, people get offended, so what? ignore it, get over it, or get away from it. the beauty of freedom is that you don't have to be around things that offended unless you choose to do so.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How could my sexually be offensive? Does it scream out that you have to be a fag as well? Or is it just different from what you like? There's a difference in being offensive and being different.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How are my thoughts offensive? does it scream that you can't be a fag at all? or is it just different from what you like? there is a difference between being offensive and having freedom of thought. like I said, if your offended by something then ignore it, deal with it, or get away from it. if I have to deal with homosexuals then they have to deal with my disagreement.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Your thoughts scream that my existence in wrong. How is that not offensive? You don't have to deal with homosexuals. You can't even tell when someone is gay unless they told you. You can just act like they don't even exist. Simple, right? I would love to pretend that no one disagreed with homosexuals, but it's hard when those people keep me from doing certain things. I don't keep them from doing anything though, so feel free to ignore my existence.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

because it's my right to think whatever I want. it is only offensive if you take it that way, like I said if you don't want to be offended then get away from the things that offend you. with most homosexuals it is not hard to tell, you people like to flaunt your "sexuality". when homosexuals flaunt their "sexuality" you can't ignore it, they flaunt in front of you waiting for someone to tell them it's wrong so they can bitch about how people are intolerant. you have the same rights as anyone else, no one is stopping from doing anything that they can't do either, and if your talking about the marriage thing then just move somewhere where it is legal. but according to you you sure would like to force them to accept you, it seems like you are the bigger problem than I. I don't need to ignore your existence because I can just deal with it.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

"with most homosexuals it is not hard to tell, you people like to flaunt your "sexuality". when homosexuals flaunt their "sexuality" you can't ignore it, they flaunt in front of you waiting for someone to tell them it's wrong so they can bitch about how people are intolerant. " With that logic a heterosexual person is flaunting their sexuality when they kiss in public, they're not "flaunting" they're showing affection, same as a homosexual couple.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

okayokay. im jumping into this to just point one thing out. gays are simply attracted to someone of their own sex. maybe they're in love. maybe they just want to fuck and run. whatever. either way, their state of mind is the same as anyone elses. things like nectophilia, pedophilia, etc are PARAPHILES, conditions charactarized by intense, constant, controlling fantasies and urges about the object of their desire. they are possessed by it to the point of irrationality. the health of a homosexual's mind is just as good as that of a hetero or bisexual's, but is incomparable to the health of the mind of a paraphile. that is a difference. on a side note, id like to inquire what you know about what god wants. i have tea and biscuits with him every thursday afternoon (jesus attends occasionally when hes not busy appearing on burnt toast) and he told me he adored gays. in fact, he created them because the world was lacking in interior design and fat girl bffs. thats all.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

With heterosexuals it is not hard to tell, you people like to flaunt your sexuality, what with all your holding hands in public and wedding rings and what not. Don't forget about those engagement and wedding announcements in the paper. Can't you people learn to keep it in the bedroom? Your thoughts are offensive because they imply that my relationship is inferior. Even if that didn't anger me, it would still be offensive. I do not have the same rights as everyone else. In many places I can be fired from my job just for being gay. I don't think straight get fired for being straight. Up until recently I could not openly join the military, and if I joined in the closet no one would alert my partner of my death. Yeah, sounds totally equal. I shouldn't have to uproot my life just because people are intolerant of my relationship. I do not affect anyone by getting married in the state I currently live in, but the fact that it is illegal for me to do so affects plenty of people. The opinions people hold against gay marriage is what keeps me from doing what millions of straight people get to do since opinions ultimately determine how people vote in elections concerning gay marriage. M...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Omg I know, it's so offensive when two people like each other and it doesn't affect me.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

To your sexual pleasure comment: One of my friends is gay, but he has an irrational fear of other men's penises, so he has said he'll never have sex.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

So by your logic you have a condom fetish every time you have protected sex with a girl you don't want to get pregnant.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I think I heard that it's a recessive gene, or something like that.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

How come 30-40% of the time if one identical twin is gay the other one is two, but if you grabbed two random nonrelated people, if one was gay there is only a 2-3% chance of both of them being gay? Twin studies point to homosexuality being partially genetic, but mostly influenced by environment. Now, if two twins are raised together why do they not share a sexuality 100% of the time? Twins are born genetically the same, but their personalities are still different. Homosexuality is not only determined by genetics and the environment, but also by how they react to the environment. One twin might get more attention boys or from their mother, so the other twin would subconsciously turn to girls either because they feel like boys do not like them or to fill in the void they have of their mother giving more attention to the other sister.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I'm Pikabeau's twin. Guess what? I'm mostly straight. Except for my whole Megan Fox deal ;3 And this guy comparing homosexuality to a fetish is just plain dumb. Love isn't a fetish, bro -.- I guess that because using a condom is not reproductive sex, protected is a fetish.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Oh hi boo :3

by Anonymous 12 years ago

No one actually cares. Just live and let die.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

It's neither genetic nor a choice. It's simply who you are. Some people are born straight, some are born gay.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

One twin can have epilepsy while the other is perfectly fine. One twin can get cancer while the other doesn't. Similarly, one twin can be gay.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Firstly, I don't believe there's any such thing as "gay" and "straight". I believe there's a spectrum, and people can fall anywhere within the spectrum, as well as moving along it as they are changed by life experiences and people they meet. For instance, if 0% on the spectrum is "straight", 50% is "bi" and 100% is "gay", then I would put myself at about the 20% mark. But, at times in my life I've been at a 0% and at others even as high as 40%. The majority of people are closer to the "straight" end of the spectrum because that is what is biologically needed to procreate. So, using this theory, as identical twins are not ENTIRELY genetically identical, and do not have entirely identical lives, it is perfectly plausible for one to be further down the spectrum than the other, causing them to identify with a different sexual orientation. However, as pikabeau said above (nice Wikipedia skills btw :D), identical twins show 30% concordance for sexual orientation, meaning they will be much more likely than two random unrelated people to be at similar places on the spectrum. That, in itself, is evidence that position on the spectrum IS at least partially genetic, otherwise that's one ...

by Anonymous 12 years ago

I thought this would be a really long interesting debatewith a bunch of people, but 50 of the comments are 2 people who refuse to agree to disagree.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Ok about bringing religion in, TheCatalyst, you seem to be overlooking some important bible verses. What happened to us ALL being children of god, not just straight people? It isn't our place to judge others. I honestly have a hard time believing that god would condemn two people for LOVING each other. As for it being an abnormality, that only applies in the sense that it's less common than heterosexuality. I have an unusual stomach condition that I was born with. Does that mean, since I'm abnormal, I've done something terribly wrong? (ps I am a Christian, too, and I think the theme of love is more prevalent throughout the bible than the damnation of gays)

by Anonymous 12 years ago

isn't it possible that one twin can be influenced by certain hormones more than the other during development? i've heard a theory that hormones from the mother's body can lead to the brain developing differently, resulting in homosexuality.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

There is a 52 percent chance that if one identical twin is gay the other one will be too. So maybe the question in this case is why is one of them straight?

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Nobody ever said it's genetic. I think of sexual orientation as similar to what foods you like/dislike. For instance, I absolutely hate eggplant. It's not a choice, it's not like I can just decide to change my mind and like it. But it has nothing to do with genetics either. It's just a personal preference that I can't control. I imagine homosexuality is the same way.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

Exactly! It's not necessarily a choice, and it's not really part of any biological make up. In my eyes it's like your personality. You don't decide what makes you laugh or the things you're good at, they're inherent thing that's just part of you.

by Anonymous 12 years ago

If theres a set of identical twins and one of them is mentally handicapped its because they chose to be that way................right?

by Anonymous 12 years ago