1 in 10 (rock, Religious, quote, Viola)

adidasss · 01-10-2007, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DontRunMeOver

I don't agree with that. The only person that can grow up in your specific environment was you. Comparison with your brother's sexuality isn't completely valid because even though he was born to the same family, in the same place, learnt the same language and all that, he wasn't born at exactly the same time (that's be true even if you had been twins), his name isn't Marijan (I assume) and he hasn't experienced anything from the exact same viewpoint that you have experienced it.

Let's just suppose that at the age of 13 you saw a really hot guy soaping himself up in some place with public showers. Your brother didn't see the same guy, at the same age and in the same place and it's from these subtle differences in your formative environment that I personally think big differences in your final sexuality can result.

Anyway, your brother's genetics should be 50% similar to yours so wouldn't that suggest that if he's 100% straight then you're 50% straight by the genetics argument?

Nope, I disagree, to play off your example, even if I had seen a really hot soapy guy at 13 and he hadn't, I believe that if I had not been gay, that event would have gone unnoticed. I understand that our lives haven't been exactly alike, but subtle differences, in my mind, could not have made us into such different people as we are. Genetics played a much more important role.

And as far as our genes being similar, if I'm not mistaken, chimpanzees have about 98% of the same DNA as we do, so a very tiny percentage is needed to make a humongous difference. I have 4 siblings, if my oldest sister has black hair, why does my youngest one have blond hair, by your logic, shouldn't she be at least 50% black haired? To use the Downs syndrome as an example again, shouldn't someone who has a brother or sister with the condition also be 50 percent afflicted? Flawed logic no?