Embyonic stem cell research

[JPaul]

Are they really clones, by definition, when they've developed simultaneously, rather than had their genetic material harvested from a grown, or at least older individual, albeit that they both initially came from the same cell?

Yup they are really clones, there are a few definitions of what a clone is. One of them fits identical twins.

[JPaul]

top answer on google was:

Bailey and Pillard recruited 110 pairs of male twins, half identical, half fraternal. In each case, they knew that one twin was gay. They then sent a questionnaire to the other brother in each pair, to determine his sexual orientation. Among the identical twins, 52 percent of the brothers were gay. Among the fraternals, the number was 22 percent, high enough above the background population rate to suggest that there was something distinctive in those families. The researchers found a very similar pattern with lesbians.

52% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual men were likewise homosexual
22% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
11% of adoptive brothers of homosexual men were likewise homosexual

J.M. Bailey and R.C. Pillard, “A genetic study of male sexual orientation,” Archives of General Psychiatry, vol. 48:1089-1096, December 1991.
Bailey and Pillard (1993): occurrence of homosexuality among sisters
48% of identical (monozygotic) twins of homosexual women were likewise homosexual (lesbian)
16% of fraternal (dizygotic) twins were likewise homosexual
6% of adoptive sisters of homosexual women were likewise homosexual

Bailey, J. M. and D. S. Benishay (1993), “Familial Aggregation of Female Sexual Orientation,” American Journal of Psychiatry 150(2): 272-277.

Other studies found lower correlations, but the same pattern & conclusions, i.e. closest correlation for homosexuality in siblings goes: identical twin then fraternal twin then non twin.


Edit: Snny, identical twins are clones ^_^ just not manmade ones

Thanks for that. So it would appear that there may be a genetic element in homosexuality, which then may be effected by environment, then personal choice decides whether a person acts out their desires. See that makes sense.

[MagicNakor]

My point is that neither is something you born with nor choose.

If you meant

So it would appear that there may be a genetic element in homosexuality, which then may be effected by environment, then personal choice decides whether a person acts out their desires. See that makes sense.

then I'd agree, though that doesn't excuse your intentional shock statement. But compared with limesqueezer you're a bloody saint.

/still drunk
//also Farking

[limesqueezer]

This thread is getting filled with illogical statements based on something that someone that is fat or gay said or prooven for his type of people in usa. This thread is ignoring almost everything logical anybody before that said and becoming something what you can call a thread where fat or gay people are trying to justify themself. And besides that its way off-topic.

Is embryonic stem cell research ethical ?

[Busyman]

This thread is getting filled with illogical statements based on something that someone that is fat or gay said or prooven for his type of people in usa. This thread is ignoring almost everything logical anybody before that said and becoming something what you can call a thread where fat or gay people are trying to justify themself. And besides that its way off-topic.

Is embryonic stem cell research ethical ?

You need to read about different body types then. How is it that there are fathers then sons lacking in fat but eat lots of food and don't exercise? You think they both just take in bread and water?

Also stop equating obesity to gayetty. Gayetty involves a person's feelings. Obesity doesn't.

[Busyman]

If you meant

So it would appear that there may be a genetic element in homosexuality, which then may be effected by environment, then personal choice decides whether a person acts out their desires. See that makes sense.

then I'd agree, though that doesn't excuse your intentional shock statement. But compared with limesqueezer you're a bloody saint.

/still drunk
//also Farking

No I don't believe there is a genetic element in what in particular a person likes sexually.

Is a fetish genetic?

[Mr JP Fugley]

If you meant



then I'd agree, though that doesn't excuse your intentional shock statement. But compared with limesqueezer you're a bloody saint.

/still drunk
//also Farking

No I don't believe there is a genetic element in what in particular a person likes sexually.

Is a fetish genetic?

How can you extol the virtues of using logic, whilst at the same time totally ignore it yourself. Logic and indeed scientific method dictates that one observes, records and concludes. One does so without pre-conceptions.

Your method would appear to be, decide what I want to believe then totally ignore anything which contradicts it.

There is no excuse for it, only mitigation. Mitigation would be things like a, he's 14 or b, he's quite dense or c, he's a bigot and has no interest in looking at the evidence.

[j2k4]

Interesting that the same scientists who see a genetic predisposition to homosexuality insist that pedophiles can be rehabilitated.

BTW-It should be noted that this is the same scientific community that insists that global warming is a man-made phenomena.

wait

WHAT

how many scientific communities are there?

I speak here of that part of the scientific community which pursues exclusively American funding in order to study nonsensical issues like who (rather than what) is to blame for global warming.

You seriously think there is only one?

Did you seriously compare homosexuality to pedophila?

And I don't recall ever waking up one day and thinking "Hmm, I think today I'll be gay/straight."

Good Lord.

I meant that the same group that insists (with the certainty of those who worship exclusively at the altar of science) that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition do not conclude similarly about pedophiles; like this:

THESE are homosexuals, and are to be left to their lifestyle for they cannot change...

However-

THOSE are pedophiles, and can be rehabilitated.

See the difference?

I find this curious, and if no one else does, I wonder why?

[Busyman]

wait

WHAT

how many scientific communities are there?

I speak here of that part of the scientific community which pursues exclusively American funding in order to study nonsensical issues like who (rather than what) is to blame for global warming.

You seriously think there is only one?

Did you seriously compare homosexuality to pedophila?

And I don't recall ever waking up one day and thinking "Hmm, I think today I'll be gay/straight."

Good Lord.

I meant that the same group that insists (with the certainty of those who worship exclusively at the altar of science) that homosexuality is a genetic predisposition do not conclude similarly about pedophiles; like this:

THESE are homosexuals, and are to be left to their lifestyle for they cannot change...

However-

THOSE are pedophiles, and can be rehabilitated.

See the difference?

I find this curious, and if no one else does, I wonder why?

Bingo.

Pedophiliacks (by their very nature) have victims, homosexuals (on the surface)don't and that's why there will always be a separation in folk's minds science-wise.

Homosexuals say they can't help being homosexual. Pedophiles say the same. Even when threatened with jail time, etc.

Since everyone seems to boil everyone down to these two choices:

Born with it
Choose it

What say of pedophiles? Are they born pedos, or did they wake up one day and decide to be sexually attracted to kids.

I say it's neither. I'm not talking action. To act on what one feels is a choice.

What you feel is what you feel whether you act on it or not.

[Mr JP Fugley]

Since everyone seems to boil everyone down to these two choices:

Born with it
Choose it

By everyone I assume you mean Busyman.