"If God had thought homosexuality a sin, he would not have created gay people."
This is a very common saying that is used when talking about LGBTQ+ and the Bible. The Bible gives clear teaching that the LGBTQ+ lifestyle is sinful. For those that try to justify the sin, a common phrase is that they are "Born that way". The most famous piece of evidence used to support this is the Simon LeVay and Dean Hamer studies on the genetics of gay people.
Simon LeVay's Study (1991)
Simon LeVay's is a British-American neuroscientist who has conducted significant research in the biology of sexual orientation. In his study, he analyzed brain structures, specifically the hypothalamus, in deceased heterosexual and homosexual men. The Study found that the hypothalamus was smaller in homosexual men compared to heterosexual men.
The anterior hypothalamus of the brain participates in the regulation of male-typical sexual behavior. The volumes of four cell groups in this region [interstitial nuclei of the anterior hypothalamus (INAH) 1, 2, 3, and 4] were measured in postmortem tissue from three subject groups: women, men who were presumed to be heterosexual, and homosexual men. No differences were found between the groups in the volumes of INAH 1, 2, or 4. As has been reported previously, INAH 3 was more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the women. It was also, however, more than twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the homosexual men. This finding indicates that INAH is dimorphic with sexual orientation, at least in men, and suggests that sexual orientation has a biological substrate.
n a Newsweek article, we learn why LeVay did this study:
- He was already convinced that it was biological.
- His gay lover had tragically died of AIDS and after a bout with depression and two weeks in the hospital he decided to do this study.
- “I felt if I didn’t find any [difference in the hypothalamuses], I would give up a scientific career altogether” (as quoted in Gelman, et al., 1992, p. 49).
- He actually DID give up science and became a leading gay activist and educator.
His results have been criticized for:
- Lack of a significant difference between the samples of gay and straight men.
- An overlapping middle-ground where the samples are indistinguishable.
He responded to these criticisms by agreeing that they are valid.
“It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain” (as quoted in Byrd, et al., 2001, emp. added).
Simon LeVay's 1991 study on hypothalamic structures in homosexual and heterosexual men has faced criticism for several key issues: the small sample size, all homosexual subjects having died from AIDS-related complications which could affect brain chemistry, and inaccuracies in measuring the tiny INAH3 nucleus. Additionally, the control group’s sexual orientation was presumed, not confirmed, which is problematic given some also died of AIDS. Critics like William Bynealso point out that hormonal changes from AIDS could influence hypothalamic size, and the overlapping sizes between groups challenge the direct link between INAH3 size and sexual orientation. Additionally, neurophysiologist Kenneth Klivington noted that brain changes could occur throughout life as a result of experience, further complicating the question of whether hypothalamic size determines or is determined by homosexuality.
E. Byne, “The Biological Evidence Challenged,” Scientific American (May 1994): 50-5.
(S. LeVay).
Dean Hamer's Study (1993)
Dean Hamer is an American geneticist, known for his research in AIDS and human behavior. His study was examining the role of the X chromosome in male sexual orientation. The study suggested a link between the Xq28 region and homosexual orientation in men.
The role of genetics in male sexual orientation was investigated by pedigree and linkage analyses on 114 families of homosexual men. Increased rates of same-sex orientation were found in the maternal uncles and male cousins of these subjects, but not in their fathers or paternal relatives, suggesting the possibility of sex-linked transmission in a portion of the population. DNA linkage analysis of a selected group of 40 families in which there were two gay brothers and no indication of nonmaternal transmission revealed a correlation between homosexual orientation and the inheritance of polymorphic markers on the X chromosome in approximately 64 percent of the sib-pairs tested. The linkage to markers on Xq28, the subtelomeric region of the long arm of the sex chromosome, had a multipoint lod score of 4.0 (P = 10(-5), indicating a statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.
Hamer stated that there was a, and I quote, “statistical confidence level of more than 99 percent that at least one subtype of male sexual orientation is genetically influenced.”
Hamer’s conclusions also came under fire for:
- Lack of a control group.
- A co-scientist who worked with him later came out and said that Hamer specifically hid the results of a control group in order to support his intended end.
- Unrepeatable results.
George Rice and his colleagues from Canada looked intently at the gene Xq28. They then observed: “Allele and haplotype sharing for these markers was not increased over expectation. These results do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality” (1999, 284:665, emp. added). Rice, et al., included 182 families in their study. They noted:
Rice said, “It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer’s original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer et al., we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as was reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position Xq28” (284:667).
A 2nd Lab Also Failed to Reproduce the Results
Alan Sanders of the University of Chicago (in June of 1998) said that he, too, had been unable to verify Hamer’s results. That study was of 54 gay brother pairs. True Origin Article
Info on Rice and Sanders found on this link.
With this criticism and an investigation opened he said “The best recent study,” Hamer conceded, “suggests that female sexual identification is more a matter of environment than heredity.” He told Scientific American that homosexuality was “absolutely not” rooted solely in biology.
Science has disproven this
Research On Genetic Factors Involving Twins
IIf being gay were solely genetic and dependent on how one was born, identical twins, who share identical genes, would both typically be homosexual if one twin identifies as such. However, in a study utilizing a registry of 25,000 (John L. Hopper) twins conducted by Michael Bailey at Northwestern University, homosexuality was observed in both twins in only about one out of every nine instances, amounting to approximately 11%. The study did not look into environmental factors, and it is possible that since twins often share a home, that was the factor for those that had a common same sex attraction.
[The Data]did not provide statistically significant support for the importance of genetic factors.
Further Insights from Twin Studies
The largest twin registry studies reinforce that same-sex attraction (SSA) is mostly influenced by nonshared individual experiences rather than genetics or shared environments (J. Michael Bailey, Richard C. Pillard). Genetic contributions to SSA are weak to modest, averaging 22% for men and 33% for women and expected to drop with more data (J. M. Bailey et al.). In contrast, nonshared environmental factors account for around 63% of SSA.
For example, the Santtila, Sandnabba, Harlaar, Varjonen, Alanko, and von der Pahlen (Pekka Santtila et al.) survey, which involved 2,334 pairs of twins, found that nonshared environmental factors were the predominant influence on SSA. These findings were echoed by other large studies, such as those by Langstrom, Rahman, Carlstrom, and Lichtenstein (Niklas Långström et al.), which used Scandinavian health records to ensure a relatively unbiased sample.
These studies collectively indicate that SSA results from unique individual reactions to personal experiences rather than deterministic genetic or environmental factors. Shared environmental factors, including family upbringing, have minimal impact on SSA. Instead, these studies collectively indicate that SSA results from unique individual reactions to personal experiences rather than deterministic genetic or environmental factors. (N. E. Whitehead).
William Reiner Study On Surgically “Shifted” Children
William Reiner, a psychiatrist at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, explored the question of environmental influences on sexuality with a group that had been surgically shifted from boys to girls. These boys had been born with certain genital deformities; because it is easier to fashion a vagina than a penis, the boys were surgically made into girls at birth. In many cases, they were raised as girls, kept in the dark about the surgery, and thought themselves female long into adulthood. Invariably, Reiner found that the faux females ended up being attracted to women. If societal nudging was what made men gay, at least one of these boys should have grown up to be attracted to men. There is no documented case of that happening.
Even if it were true, Christian theology and it's moral values are not dependent of how someone is born. However, many studies have shown us that this is simply not true:
This claim that people are born LGBTQ+ often cites studies like those by Simon LeVay and Dean Hamer, which suggest genetic or biological bases for homosexuality. However, subsequent research, particularly twin studies, has shown that sexual orientation is not genetic or based on environmental factors