Sexual Orientation Cons

Sexuality is one of the most divisive issues in America. Should lesbian, gay, or bisexual (LGB) people receive protection against discrimination? Should they be allowed to get married? Is conversion therapy ethical? These disagreements rest on ideas of what is natural for people to be. Heterosexuality is seen as the default, natural state, and this conception shows up in arguments about marriage and conversion therapy, with a range of negative consequences for queer people. However, straightness is not any more natural than queerness.

The article dives into the 'gay gene’; a gene where individuals had hoped that would be the answer to peoples orientation. While scientists have found some new information regarding chromosomes and genetics, there still is no simple answer that reassures anyone that there is a single 'gay gene ' that defines their orientation.

It is a fair assumption to say that America is approaching a new age in understanding and accepting the many variations of human sexual orientation. More same-sex couples have fostered children than ever before in our nation 's history. Institutions such as military and professional sports have (slowly but surely) began to accept openly gay members. Most importantly, a recent amendment to the Marriage Act of 1961 now defines marriage as a union of two people; an amendment which removed the prohibition of same-sex marriages. These landmarks in the progression of social awareness surrounding sexual orientation are derivative of scientific findings disputing the "choice" theory. As outlined in Simon LeVay 's book, Gay, Straight, and the Reason Why, the result of someone 's sexual orientation "emerges from the prenatal sexual differentiation of the brain" (LeVay 2011: 271) What LeVay means in this context is, "whether a person ends up gay or straight depends in large part on how this process of biological differentiation goes forward, with the lead actors being genes, sex hormones, and the brain systems" (LeVay 2011: 271). Much research, proven and theoretical, has been done on the concept of what makes people gay. Many factors surrounding socialization in regards to sexual orientation have undergone extensive scientific scrutiny (LeVay 2011: 77). Although there is evidence that suggests social and environmental elements play a role in sexual orientation, it is

Just because someone may feel happy with being with someone of the same sex should not deprive them from being in the military. These people are just as capable as the next man or woman. There were and still are people in the military that were already transgender and they were still performing the same way any regular person would. But because they did not know that they were transgender they still did not judge them. “For many in the military, the concern about transgender soldiers has long been about unit cohesion and fighting readiness - the deep trust and close cooperation essential for every small unit, who must work and potentially fight shoulder to shoulder in the trenches. And transgender soldiers could upset this cohesiveness, critics say” (Bruinius 10). Before many of these people knew about the transgender soldiers they trusted them with their whole heart, so what is so different about them now that you find out they are of the opposite sex? Their ability to do has not changed at all, the only thing that’s different is the structure of their body. Their mindset was always the same, their heart, their love for their country is still there, it will always be. So why should someone be discriminated for being gay or a transgender. These people are not just being judged based on who they are, they are

Corvino’s article “Why Shouldn’t Tommy and Jim Have Sex?” discusses the defense for homosexuality, claiming that there is nothing wrong with it. Someone who is homosexual is someone who is sexually attracted to members of their own gender and partakes in romantic relationships with them. The ancestries of same-sex attraction aren’t completely understood, and many who are involved with such feelings didn’t choose them or want them. Despite much debate over the naturality of homosexuality, scientists have remained unable to locate a genetic cause for homosexuality. While genetic factors may have a role in sexual attraction, it is an exaggeration to claim genes to cause homosexual behaviors. For example, twins share the same genes but do not

In the United States of America, 1.8 percent of men and 1.5 percent of women identify themselves as homosexuals (Volokh 1). This means that in a group of one hundred men, around two of them are homosexuals, and the same goes for women. The background regarding sexual orientation is vast, and a lot of different definitions of the concept have been introduced throughout time. Nevertheless, although homosexuality is fairly common in the United States, many people still misunderstand it. The different types of sexual orientations and their difference from other sexual-related terms, such as gender role and gender identity, are all confused by the general population. Sadly, even today, there are people that believe in a right or wrong sexual orientation. Moreover, the origins of sexual orientation are highly discussed and debated by the scientific community, with theories including biological and environmental explanations. The importance of such origins resides in the fact that this nature-nurture debate is capable of changing people’s perspectives towards homosexuality, and even though the media has done a great job by transforming any sex-related topic from a taboo to an acceptable conversation point, society still needs to grasp a lot about sexual orientation. Particularly, the fact that sexual orientation is a complex, largely misunderstood human characteristic resulting from a combination of biological and environmental factors that play an essential role in society’s

One global issue that impacts the world is origins of sexual identity. People being born gay or it being a choice is a frequently asked question. Although there is no solid evidence of gay biological genes, it is highly uncommon for someone to choose their sexual orientation. This topic is important to me because I am a part of the LGBT community and GSA. I stand up for our rights and dislike the judgement towards the LGBT community. People are born gay, it cannot be changed through any type of therapy or religious camp, and people shouldn’t be judge by it.

It is my observation that the average person gains insight into the nature vs. nurture debate when some particular human trait that is politically or socially volatile at the time is announced as having a specific genetic origin. This observation was confirmed when, in surfing the web, I came across an article entitled, "Female Inner Ear Comes Out of the Closet (1)." While reporting on a study published by a UT psychology professor who found that homosexual women exhibit tones in the inner ear similar to those of male test subjects, the Daily Texan journalist, with no explanation or sources, effortlessly mixes and confuses the social construction with the "science" of sexual

Homosexuality has become an important issue in our community creating much controversy. The liberal citizens of our country congratulate those who have made the hard decision to “come out.” The decision to be openly homosexual is hard for some because of the rare acceptance that they receive. Society has made it so hard for homosexuals to be accepted, given the discrimination and hate crimes against them. The rights that have been taken from homosexuals, such as marriage, have led to a quest for knowledge on the question of whether homosexuality is biological or simply a choice. Researchers and scientists have been working diligently to find the answer to this question. If homosexuality is proven to be biological, many doors could open

Discrimination based on sexual orientation has been denounced morally based on the argument that those who fall outside of the “normal” heterosexual orientation were “born that way”. The rationale behind this judgement is that those who did not choose something should not be discriminated against because of it. There already exists a societal consensus that it is unfair (and even immoral) to discriminate against someone based on their race, hair colour, disability etc., and many believe that those within the sexual minority status should be included in that list. William S. Wilkerson, however, argues that there is some aspect of sexual orientation that is constructed through conscious choice—by means of how an individual interprets their feelings and desires. His theory rests on the assumption that no human experience is self-evident (including sexual desire) and thus they are all open to interpretation, and involving some level of choice. Wilkerson contends that since the sexual desires individuals experience can be interpreted, then so can the meanings behind the desires—which make up ones understanding of their sexual orientation. Wilkerson uses two arguments to make his point—a direct and an indirect one—both of which argue that sexual desires are indeterminate until the individual interprets them to mean what they choose it to mean. The focus of this paper will be to challenge Wilkerson’s indirect argument against the notion of the given, which, he believes, is

The question of whether homosexuality is a choice remains a topic in which everyone seems to have an opinion. Whether it is for psychological or religious reasons, some people still think being gay is the worst thing you could be. Newsweek.com states that, “blaming people for being gay is like blaming them for being left-handed”. They have also stated that the APA has now cleared up on the subject of mental health in an LGBT individual, staying that is “not a mental illness or disorder with no identifiable dissimilar psychopathology, as both heterosexual and homosexual behaviors are normal aspects of human sexuality” Stephanie Fairyington, author of “The Gay Option”, has dealt with this as a personal issue firsthand. In her article she explains that one can’t choose to be gay, just like they can’t choose their personality. She even goes as far to say to her mother that, “If there were a straight pill,’…’I’d swallow if faster than you can say the word gay.” (Fairyington, p 50) Stephanie Fairyington also addresses whether it is a choice to act on these thoughts, and if is up to the individual if they go through with them. This paper will also view the legality and moral standpoints of homosexuality from the viewpoints of Joyce John Pierre, author of “A New Normal”.

In today’s world people can be describe in the terms of gay, straight, or bisexual. Some people can find these labels uncomfortable. Some believe it is a decision you make and others believe gay is something you are born with. By using the perspective of proposal argument, this situation can be regarded with a more vivid explanation about sexuality. Overall, it can be argued that sexual orientation is a trait that people are born with based on brain studies of the hypothalamus, genes and

This question has been asked for many years: is being homosexual a decision, or are people born that way? During the1990’s people thought it was an illness or a disgrace to the family, but now homosexuals are perceived differently due to studies. Neuroscientists of the Christianity Today Newspaper, argue that homosexuality can be a natural response of the hypothalamus itself based on the size of hypothalamus the child is born with. Neuroscientists have questioned “does its size determine homosexuality, or does homosexuality determine its size?” (Dallas). Yet, no one can be sure since the test was done on two deceased men. This being said, people can believe homosexuality is a gene that they are born with. This situation has aroused through this century as research rises concerning behaviors from the structures of the brain. In order to continue to convince the reader that people can be born homosexual and it is not a choice that they make as they grow. The article “Born Gay?” written by

Recently, in most countries globally, rights that support homosexuality have been passed. Due to this current situation, many researchers decided to find out if it is true or not, whether parents who are gays influence the way their children grow up in relation to their sexuality (Patterson, Charlotte and Rachel, p.121). This subject has been a sensitive topic for quite a while and many people avoid in many cases to discuss about it. Some researchers concluded that children who are under the care of homosexual parents end up being gay in the future, while others in their studies said that gay parents raise their kids normally as other heterosexual parents. This argumentative paper debates on whether parents influence their kids’ sexuality. It analyzes extensively both sides that is, the ones that agree that indeed it is affirmative that gay parents raise gay children and those that refute that notion.

The question of what causes some people to be sexually attracted to members of their own gender generates many different answers. In recent years, startling new research (Barinaga, 1993, p.17) has indicated that homosexuality is possibly inherited and determined by biological differences in Brain structure and genes. This study raises an interesting question: If homosexuality is hereditary, is there any basis for societal discrimination against something innate? If it is nature, it is good. If it is good, it should be accepted. A genetic component in sexual orientation would send a message to homosexuals and the society that homosexuality is not a fault, and not the fault of anyone other than nature. Gays and lesbians are born in nature, just like some people who are inherited left-handed gene from their parents.