(October 13, 2016 at 1:36 pm)Emjay Wrote:(October 13, 2016 at 1:11 pm)Irrational Wrote: I just had a little bit of read of the article to see if it would interest me enough to read it all later. So I read the part about sexual orientation being fluid and not entirely genetic. Ok, so what? It's never been about that anyway. It's about accepting and respecting each person's identity "choice" and acknowledging their rights as individuals to live their lives the way they see fit, so long as what they do does not infringe upon the rights of others. To me, who you are is who and what you identify with, and not how other people feel they have to define you.
I've never held the view that it was biologically fixed anyway... as in literally born this way. Just essentially born this way through environmental learning that happens as you're growing up and largely under the radar... and probably with some genetic contribution directly or indirectly to certain aspects of it. That's my view. So if this report is plugging that with an agenda, it makes no difference to me; environmentally learned vs biologically fixed is presumably to the Christian the difference between changeable and not changeable, accountable and not accountable. But to me, subconscious learning in childhood is no less changeable or accountable than something that was fixed biologically by genetics. So this distinction they seem to be trying to highlight is a moot point to me.
Exactly, and like with anything to do with being human, it's always going to be an interaction between genetics and environment.
