A recent study in South Korea has definitely raised some eyebrows... http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/15/have-scientists-found-gay-gene/ There is substantial biological evidence to support homosexuality in nature. Hundreds of species of animals, both in the wild and in captivity, have been observed engaging in homosexual behavior. Roughly 8% of rams in a wild population have been documented to only pursue other rams and ignore ewes. Bonobo chimps which share approximately 98% of our genetic code utilize sex and engage in rampant bisexual behavior, using sex as a social bonding agent. [youtube]ggl5ZGaJFFM[/youtube] However, I have long supported epigenetic theories on homosexual behavior. If homosexuality was purely genetic, then one would expect that in every case where one identical twin was gay, the other would also have to be gay. Afterall, identical twins share the exact same genetic code. However, this is not the case. But scientists have discovered that hormones that we are exposed to in the womb can differentiate brain development between twins, and may even increase likelihood of one being gay. Furthermore, if one identical twin is gay, the likelihood that the other is gay does statistically increase. The same pattern holds true for fraternal twins. Birth order studies have shown that for each older brother a male has, the chances of him being gay increase substantially. Studies where the fetal hormones of rats have been manipulated have also produced interesting results. [youtube]z6zPh97qYd4[/youtube] [youtube]0_bfVvo3dd8&feature=related[/youtube] [youtube]saO_RFWWVVA&feature=related[/youtube] There is also a certain dishonesty to the idea of a "gay gene". Its an oversimplification of genetics. There is no single gene that causes height, skin color, or personality, or any other complex feature of human beings, and yet sexual orientation is suppose to be caused by a single gene? In actuality, the argument that there is no gay gene comes from the Rice study which disproved another study that indicated a potential gay marker in the genetic code. The Rice study could not recreate the results of an earlier study which suggested a certain set of genes could not be responsible for sexual orientation. To make matters worse, there is a strong political divide regarding homosexuality. A good share of religious organizations have found the potential for a biological cause of homosexuality to be great enough to issue proclamations that even if such finding were found, it would not change the immoral nature of homosexuality and that gays would still be called upon to bear the burden of their "ailment" and live celibate lives. Some individuals have gone so far as to argue that homosexuality is a disease that clearly has a biological cause and which needs to be treated and cured. So what are your thoughts? I know I've asked if sexuality is immuteable before, but this is a more specific question. Is homosexuality genetic? Is it epigentic? Is it pyschological? I think a poll is in order.