New Article - Watchtower View of Homosexuality

by jwfacts 40 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

steve2

Scientists find DNA differences between gay men and their straight twin brothers

Homosexuality epigenome markers Chuck Nigash ,Stephen Sedam / Los Angeles Times
Could the molecular signals that turn genes on and off reveal a person's sexual orientation? New research identifies epigenomic "marks" linked to homosexuality. But experts say the origins of partner preference remain a mystery.
Could the molecular signals that turn genes on and off reveal a person's sexual orientation? New research identifies epigenomic "marks" linked to homosexuality. But experts say the origins of partner preference remain a mystery.
(Chuck Nigash ,Stephen Sedam / Los Angeles Times)Melissa Healy Contact Reporter
For men, new research suggests that clues to sexual orientation may lie not just in the genes, but in the spaces between the DNA, where molecular marks instruct genes when to turn on and off and how strongly to express themselves.
On Thursday, UCLA molecular biologist Tuck C. Ngun reported that in studying the genetic material of 47 pairs of identical male twins, he has identified "epigenetic marks" in nine areas of the human genome that are strongly linked to male homosexuality.
In individuals, said Ngun, the presence of these distinct molecular marks can predict homosexuality with an accuracy of close to 70%.

That news, presented at the 2015 meeting of the American Society of Human Genetics on Thursday, may leave the genetically uninitiated scratching their heads.
But experts said the results -- as yet unpublished in a peer-reviewed journal -- offer preliminary new evidence that a man's genetic inheritance is only one influence on his sexual orientation. Through the epigenome, the results suggest, some facet of life experience likely also primes a man for same-sex attraction.
DNA from 4,500-year-old Ethiopian reveals surprise about ancestry of AfricansKaren Kaplan
DNA from a man who lived in Ethiopia about 4,500 years ago is prompting scientists to rethink the history of uman migration in Africa.
Until now, the conventional wisdom had been that the first groups of modern humans left Africa roughly 70,000 years ago, stopping in the Middle East en route to...
DNA from a man who lived in Ethiopia about 4,500 years ago is prompting scientists to rethink the history of human migration in Africa.
Until now, the conventional wisdom had been that the first groups of modern humans left Africa roughly 70,000 years ago, stopping in the Middle East en route to...
(Karen Kaplan)
Over a person's lifetime, myriad environmental factors -- nutrition, poverty, a mother's love, education, exposure to toxic chemicals -- all help shape the person he will become.
Researchers working in the young science of epigenetics acknowledge they are unsure just how an individual's epigenome is formed. But they increasingly suspect it is forged, in part, by the stresses and demands of external influences. A set of chemical marks that lies between the genes, the epigenome changes the function of genetic material, turning the human body's roughly 20,000 protein-coding genes on or off in response to the needs of the moment.
While genes rarely change over a lifetime, the epigenome is constantly changing.
Geneticists suggest that together, the human genome and its epigenome reflect the interaction of nature and nurture -- both our fixed inheritance and our bodies' flexible responses to the world -- in making us who we are.
Ngun's study of twins doesn't reveal how or when a male takes on the epigenomic marks that distinguish him as homosexual. Many researchers believe that a person's eventual sexual preferences are shaped in the uterus, by hormonal shifts during key stages of fetal brain development.
By imprinting themselves on the epigenome, though, environmental influences may powerfully affect how an individual's genes express themselves over the course of his life. Ngun's findings suggest they may interact with genes to nudge sexual orientation in one direction or the other.
"The relative contributions of biology versus culture and experience in shaping sexual orientation in humans continues to be debated," said University of Maryland pharmacology professor Margaret M. McCarthy, who was not involved in the current study. "But regardless of when, or even how, these epigenetic changes occur," she added, the new research "demonstrates a biological basis to partner preference."
To find the epigenomic markers of male homosexuality, Ngun, a postdoctoral researcher at UCLA's Geffen School of Medicine, combed through the genetic material of 47 sets of identical male twins. Thirty-seven of those twin sets were pairs in which one was homosexual and the other was heterosexual. In 10 of the pairs studied, both twins identified as homosexual.
In identical twins, DNA is shared and overlaps perfectly. But the existence of twin pairs in which one is homosexual and the other is not offers strong evidence that something other than DNA alone influences sexual orientation. Ngun and his colleagues looked for patterns of DNA methylation -- the chemical process by which the epigenome is encoded -- to identify the missing factor in partner preference.
Their analysis generated a dataset far too large for a team of humans to make sense of. So they unleashed a machine learning algorithm on the data to search for regularities that distinguished the epigenomes of homosexual twin-pairs from twins in which only one was homosexual.
In nine compact regions scattered across the genome, they found patterns of epigenomic differences that would allow a prediction far more accurate than a random guess of an individual's sexual orientation, Ngun reported Thursday.
McCarthy and other experts cautioned that the discovery of epigenomic marks suggestive of homosexuality is a far cry from finding the causes of sexual preference.
The distinctive epigenomic marks observed by Ngun and his colleagues could result from some other biological or lifestyle factor common to homosexual men but unrelated to their sexuality, said University of Utah geneticist Christopher Gregg. They could correlate with homosexuality but have nothing to do with it.
“Epigenetic marks are the consequence of complex interactions between the genetics, development and environment of an individual," said University of Cambridge geneticist Eric Miska. "Simple correlations -- if significant -- of epigenetic marks of an individual with anything from favorite football player to disease risk does not imply a causal relationship or understanding.”
One longtime researcher in the field of sexual orientation praised Ngun’s use of identical twins as a means of teasing apart the various biological factors that influence the trait.
“Our best guess is that there are genes” that affect a man’s sexual orientation “because that’s what twin studies suggest,” said Northwestern University psychologist J. Michael Bailey, who has explored a range of physiological markers that point to homosexuality’s origins in the womb. But the existence of identical twin pairs in which only one is homosexual “conclusively suggest that genes don’t explain everything,” Bailey added.
While Ngun’s research needs to be replicated in larger studies of twins, it advances the fitful process of better understanding how — and when — a boy’s sexual orientation develops, Bailey said.

My apologies if this has cut and pasted badly - but this mainstream news item from last October shows that the research on identical twins and sexual orientation is far from cut and dried regarding sexual oritentation being a post-birth "preference", as suggested by Cofty.
cofty

Surely a healthy position is to respect all expressions of adult sexuality, regardless of where individuals are on the spectrum, provided it involves consent adults.
Which is precisely what I said.
cofty

this mainstream news item from last October shows that the research on identical twins and sexual orientation is far from cut and dried regarding sexual oritentation being a post-birth "preference", as suggested by Cofty.
Actually I said the opposite to that and I said it very clearly.
The article on epigenetics agrees with my comments.
PS - Right click in the text box and select "paste as plain text" to avoid formatting problems.
steve2

Cofty, I have a sense that this could be in the wording you have used rather than any actual disagreement per se. So, at times when you state you have previously said something "very clearly", you don't seem open to your phrasing perhaps leading to the misunderstanding.
If your words are misconstrued or misunderstood, one response is to say, "I said it clearly enough the first time", another is to have a look at the wording and see how others may have misunderstood it and clarify it.
For example, in your second to last post you raise the issue of "choice" and embed it in a sentence that states you "think it is simplistic to say that is no element of choice is involved in every case."
At one level, I can say "Of course!" but at another wonder how the individual "chooses" a preference - as from a gradation of orientations.
BTW, thanks for the info on copying articles as plain text. Much appreciated.
cofty

Steve - You stated that I suggested that it is cut and dried that sexual orientation is a post-birth preference.
I did not. I said the exact opposite. I don't know how to state my thoughts more clearly than I already did without providing more opportunities for others to misunderstand.
I said "there is a gene on the x chromosome that seems to be involved in sexual preference".
I also said there are elements of nature and nurture and that the balance between those may vary along the spectrum of exclusive homosexual - bisexual - exclusively hetrosexual.
I concluded with "we should just respect the sexual freedom of consenting adults".
Half banana

I think that the Los Angeles Times science correspondents need to do some research to understand what they are reporting. The article on twins DNA whilst comparing results of different research, tends to assume that homosexuality must be genetic and its a matter of locating it. This had been the case for a number of years since genes falsely appeared to be the answer to all biology questions.
Yet it would be with good reason, not to expect to find a specific 'homosexual' gene because exclusive homosexual activity so programmed in any species would soon render its bearer's lineage extinct. Which is another reason why at birth, sexual preference need not be differentiated, just the impulse for sexual activity must be latent in the newborn. This does not imply that same sex preference may indeed be found to be caused by epigenetic factors.
The other article from the same newspaper on a 4500 year old Ethiopian was all over the place and made little sense so it might be better to look to the scientific data in the first place rather than rough journalism.
@ Balaam's ass, funny how God is so obsessed with regulating human sex...
I have an idea that the gay Bethelite is often trying to resolve the terrible dilemma he suffers from by using the anti gay rhetoric to reinforce his determination to battle it out inside the organisation. I imagine most fail. It must be dreadful.
Half banana

I think that the Los Angeles Times science correspondents need to do some research to understand what they are reporting. The article on twins DNA whilst comparing results of different research, tends to assume that homosexuality must be epigenetic and its a matter of finding it. A genetic cause of homosexuality had been sought for a number of years since genes falsely appeared to be the answer to all biology questions.
Yet it would be with good reason, not to expect to find a specific 'homosexual' gene because exclusive homosexual activity so programmed in any species would soon render its bearer's lineage extinct. Which is another reason why at birth, sexual preference need not be differentiated, just the impulse for sexual activity must be latent in the newborn. This does not imply that same sex preference may indeed be found to be caused or influenced by epigenetic factors.
The other article from the same newspaper on a 4500 year old Ethiopian was all over the place and made little sense so it might be better to look to the scientific data in the first place rather than rough journalism.
@ Balaam's ass, funny how God is so obsessed with regulating human sex...
I have an idea that the gay Bethelite is often trying to resolve the terrible dilemma he suffers from by using the anti gay rhetoric to reinforce his determination to battle it out inside the organisation. I imagine most fail. It must be dreadful.
sparrowdown

Good job, Paul. I like the way you call a spade a spade right from the outset. WT is indeed a disseminator of intolerance, judgement and division. The nicey-nicey "face" they like to portray to the public contains a sly message couched in language that softens their bigoted stance but their stance is very clear cut and that is that homosexuals that do not change their ways will be disfellowshipped and shunned and ultimately destroyed at armageddon.
Their message really is that simple no matter how much they dress it up, slap some corny animation on it and call it "loving."
steve2

Cofty, thanks for your patience. I had misunderstood your earlier post. Your subsequent post has clarified it for me. I perhaps got side-tracked by the word "choice" in one of your statements. I appreciated your going to the trouble of removing all doubt. I can only agree with your conclusions.
jwfacts

The difficulty that I faced with this article is that there are passages in the Bible quite blatantly against homosexuality. I have read articles that attempt to prove otherwise, but the reasoning is quite a stretch. So I have tried to steer clear of any doctrinal debate on the topic, and rather highlight how Watchtower is unnecessarily harsh with its stance. If a person concludes that the Bible stand is unreasonable in the process of researching the topic, then that is not a bad outcome as well.
Steve - To be 'fair', if you go back to the 1970s, many organizations, religious or otherwise, were writing incredibly uninformed things about causal factors in homosexuality - in that regard, the organization's literature hardly 'stands out'.
As Jehovah's spokesmen, they should not be swayed by public ignorance. I agree though that JWs will dismiss those articles as old light, as illogical a stance as that is, which is why I have included a range of quotes from each decade since then.
Steve - it does seem a bit OTT to describe the literature as "slanderous" - unless you are speaking figuratively?
I will change slanderous to malicious. Then again, Watchtower does love searching for figurative statements, it allows so much flexibility in interpretation, so maybe JWs will feel comfortable if I leave in some figurative terminology.

New Article - Watchtower View of Homosexuality

Share this