I am not a biologist but I understand the big picture and the logic.
Doc, to be honest, in today's world, genetic studies have advanced so much. It is impossible that the presence of a gene is missed/unverified.Even if you cannot isolate the specific part of the genome that leads to homosexuality it doesn't mean there is no genetic/hormonal. You can find other evidence that hint towards a genetic cause of homosexuality.
For example having older brothers may mean a hormonal/genetic imbalance in younger siblings which can be taken as a hint of hormones/genetics causing homosexuality rather environmental factors.
In fact... NO. First of all, you cannot eliminate the social and psychological factors in an "in vivo" study. That is why, in medical/clinical research, it is not taken as reliable as an in vitro study. Secondly, there is a phenomenon known as "Replication Fallacy" and "Conditional Probability Fallacy" which has plagued much of the research nowadays. It produces biased results, by biased mindsets. It is more common in "in vivo" studies.When there are multiple studies that fall on the same conclusion which does not involve society and environment, then there is a strong conclusion to be made there as well.
Well, in an evidence based analysis/discussion/debate/syllogism, it does not matter where you live. We are talking about the hardcore facts here, revealed by the analysis of occidental research and findings.Also, Ill give you some extra information but you do not have to take it as evidence this is just for your info... I think you live in a Muslim country where you cannot meet Gay people openly. But I live in the West and Ill share my experience. I have met lesbian women and I can tell they are lesbian before I even know them. Just last week I met a girl and it was strange that I felt no sexual tension with her at all. It is as if she is my brother or something, later I found out that she is lesbian.
Not the Big picture, but you do fall for the picture painted in front of you.
Doc, to be honest, in today's world, genetic studies have advanced so much. It is impossible that the presence of a gene is missed/unverified.
To tell you the truth, the proposition of a male homosexual gene was retracted because they made it up, but the linkage they tried to put forth under evolutionary aspects (and the one you also quoted for the hunter's tribe) could not explain the Lesbian phenomenon. Do you also have an explanation of Lesbianism in a hunter's society and in evolutionary context?
In such metaphysical contexts, the meaning of the words "May/Might" means that the study is inconclusive and the results cannot be generalized.
What is evident here is that they are trying to find a reason to rationalize homosexuality, but they are unable to find one yet. However, this is conclusive that there is no "Gay Gene" found. There is no conclusive study to support the hypothesis that homosexuality is prenatal.
In fact... NO. First of all, you cannot eliminate the social and psychological factors in an "in vivo" study. That is why, in medical/clinical research, it is not taken as reliable as an in vitro study. Secondly, there is a phenomenon known as "Replication Fallacy" and "Conditional Probability Fallacy" which has plagued much of the research nowadays. It produces biased results, by biased mindsets. It is more common in "in vivo" studies.
Well, in an evidence based analysis/discussion/debate/syllogism, it does not matter where you live. We are talking about the hardcore facts here, revealed by the analysis of occidental research and findings.
However to give you a pretext, I have lived in both the western countries and in Muslim countries as well. I have also seen people in West, who abhor the idea of homosexuality. Moreover, I have also seen gay and trans etc. in Muslim countries. So your disposition that I have a natural tendency to be anti-gay is based on the societal influences is totally false.
I am very objective about the topic here. Give me a solid evidence that a gay gene exists and I am not haughty enough to negate you just because I personally do not think that there is a genetic link to it. However, I expect the same in reciprocation. Conversely, if you are predisposed with the notion of defending homosexuality because in your society it is accepted as such, then it is not a reasoned debate, rather a partial argument.
To be an atheist, a person needs to be very objective about the facts and reasoning. Not only should he be able to question the religious thought, he should also be able to take things coming up from "commercial and sponsored researches" with a pinch of salt.
To be honest... No.I dont understand your position on this. What do you think is the cause for homosexuality and do you think there is no hormonal or genetic cause?
Actually Doc, I don't seem to have any reference from Quran which "Promotes" slavery.You have dug yourself into a hole bro.
Im not talking about history, I am talking about Qurans guidance with regard to slavery. If you are a Muslim then I am sure you agree that Quran is meant to be a guidance for all times not just a specific time in history.
It is allowed, under conditionsSo let me ask you a question and prove me a liar once and for all...
1. what is the instruction given in this book of guidance for all time about slavery? Is it allowed or is it haraam like pork and wine?
Yes, because in that way you prevent the evolution of brothels in your society and prevent STI's and STDs. Moreover, as described earlier, that the child who is born is the legal heir of the male. This ensures the"Preservation of the gene pool"2. What is the instructions in Quran regarding sex slaves? Are you allowed to have sex with your female slaves or not?
Yes, indeed it is thoroughly discussed in Quran, but not thoroughly read and understood by many who discuss about it. We have a habit of cherry picking. We mostly highlight what suits us.Slavery is thoroughly discussed in Quran so it shouldnt be hard for you to answer these.
I am waiting for your answers. Cheers!