Ebbie: "You may be correct in that assessment, G, but wouldn't you agree that the person was then born with it?"
Yes, they would be, but there is a difference between being 'born with it, and it being 'genetic'. Receptors, crave a 'satisfaction', and create a 'demand' in ALL of us. They also set up habits, both 'good and bad'. Receptors can cause one to feel a need to smoke, drink, do good works, or anything. once they are 'satisfied' they tell the brain to release 'dopamine', which gives the person a feeling of satisfaction. Some babies are born with addictions, in which the receptors have a need to have that substance. That is entirely different than a genetic alteration of DNA. there is a wonderful explanation of receptors in the film 'What the Bleep Do We Know', and how they work. I've posted it several times, but maybe for reasons of resenting my position, some may not have checked it out. If you'd like I could re-post it for you. There is a whole segment devoted to the subject. In the film, it goes so far as to show how receptors can control the moods, of how people perceive themselves...Let's say a person needs to 'feel sorry for themselves' for one of several reasons...once it pulls you down, and you feed that emotion, the receptor is 'fed'...and though it is unpleasant, it is satisfied, though YOU might not 'feel good' about it. It is in the nervous system, and can alter ones reality. Along with that, there is a thing called synapses. It is like a fluid between the nerve ending and the receptor. In studies, people after psychedelics, while they are subjected to the effects, has shown that it alters the synapses, so as the impulse signal travels though it, it changes the reading. For instance, a sound, may be detected as a temperature, or flavor. A color may be detected as an emotion, etc etc. Mothers who, while pregnant, share the same system, being as they are attached to each other. The mother is indeed programming the nervous system of the fetus. If that mother, for instance, has a peaceful pregnancy, chances are the fetus' receptors are programmed for that. If on the other hand, she is in turmoil, and having a resentful time, while pregnant, the child may be inclined to find resentments, to 'satisfy' the receptors, that were programmed in the womb...and affect the child's disposition. While those things are often difficult to detect, outwardly, a mother can come off as one way, but internally be in conflict, which, of course, is being 'read' in the programming of the nervous system of the fetus. In EVERY study looking for the 'genetic link', the hormonal changes have been noted...but often ignored by the politically motivated, because they want to raise the level of 'equality' to that of 'Race Creed or Color'. Race and color are genetic, therefore they want to pass off homosexuality as a 'politically viable status', when in fact, it is NOT genetic, and therefore does not fall into that category. However, they could have made another political argument, that would favor their cause far more persuasively and a more salient argument, that COULD prove their case, but instead they incorrectly chose the genetic argument, and based it on 'bad science'. Because one side of the argument, based a lot of their premise on the 'religious' point of view, they fell down. Because the other side based it on the political point of view, it fell down..even in the last Supreme Court case regarding it. They only ruled on the recognition of what the government was willing to concede, and not on the merits of homosexuality, either way. Had either side argued it differently, basing it on another part of the Constitution, then it would have been ruled more favorable to homosexuals..but they screwed that up, and it is still ambiguous. Had the 'religious' side argued it, basing it on an accurate scientific premise, it would have gone the other way. They screwed up as well! So, I guess it will remain a point of contention, as long as the two sides continue to 'play to their audiences'...moral vs political vs scientific vs legal....and nothing has been accomplished, as far as understanding what it is, and what it is not, and the biases will remain alive in the murky areas of grey......
....unless you know what it is, and what it is not, and how it should be regarded.