Is there evidence that homosexuality
Is biologically determined?

Understanding homosexuality is a challenge for many people. Determining what factor(s) cause it is complicated in itself. Several experiments and tests have already been conducted to determine the factors that influence homosexuality. However, opposing views arise to challenge the results. Due to the alternative perspectives, the difficulty in concluding which one to believe has increased. The writers of the articles “Evidence for a Biological Influence in male Homosexuality” and “The Biological Evidence Challenged” state their views and provide explanations to support their opinions.
Throughout the article written by LeVay and Hamer, the evidence presented clarifies where they stand. Among the list of evidence provided is that the sexual orientation of a male is influenced by heredity due to the fact that “it directly examines the genetic information, DNA.” Furthermore, if there is a gene that influences an individual’s sexual orientation, there is a great possibility of that trait being passed down from generation to generation. Experiments conducted led to the possible conclusion that the region Xq28 carries a gene influencing male sexual orientation. However, there are a few flaws to their interpretation of the results. Among them are stated in the article. A replication of the experiment is necessary, the separation of the particular gene has not been achieved, and the importance of the region has not yet been determined. Moreover, the supposed gene that influences homosexuality suggests that it acts indirectly on the choice of their sexual orientation. LeVay and Hamer mention their perspective on the cause of homosexuality that was derived from extensive experiments.
Throughout the article, “Evidence for Biological Influence in Male Homosexuality,” LeVay and Hamer succeed in presenting where they stand on the issue by providing evidence concluded by the experiments conducted. Although evidence is provided in their article, it is complicated to understand the reasoning behind them. Knowledge about certain terms in the article is necessary prior to reading the arguments in order to understand their perspective. They clarify their purpose of developing such a strong belief on a highly opposed issue. The intention of their research and claim is to eliminate the vague images of homosexuals and give people a clearer understanding of the issue. In several parts of their claim, improvements are mentioned. Among the qualities of a successful argument are to provide possible improvements necessary to obtain sufficient results in the future.
Byne threatens the argument of biological influence in “The Biological Evidence Challenged.” Throughout his argument he criticizes the claims made by LeVay and Hamer. He referred to several resources to support his view. Among them are Greek myths that respected those driven towards the same gender and were looked upon as the “most manly of men and womanly of women.” He demolishes the prenatal hormonal hypothesis made by LeVay and Hamer. Furthermore, he suggests that parents are an influential factor to their child’s sexual orientation. Through his research on the statistics of homosexuality within a family he concluded that it strongly supports the idea of society influencing an individual’s sexual orientation. He points out the flaws of LeVay and Hamer in that the experiments were lacking important factors and thus obtained insufficient results. Among the problems are that genes actually “specify proteins and not behavior” concluding that genes might affect one’s personality which could eventually influence their sexual orientation. Byne achieves in clarifying his perspectives on the issue of biological influence on homosexuality.
Byne attempts to sway the readers to believe that homosexuality is not biologically influenced with his criticisms towards the alternative perspective. However, throughout his intention of persuading the readers he fails to suggest or provide any new claims that he developed on his own. The entire argument ridicules the other perspectives on the issue. In a way, his claim is merely an argument in that he simply reverses the other viewpoints to favor his supposed “argument.” An important aspect of raising a good argument is to mention other viewpoints. Byne succeeds in doing so but fails to meet other standards of raising a good argument.
Analyzing the different perspectives on the biological influence on homosexuality remains complicated in various aspects. Even by criticizing the opposing views does not eliminate the difficulty of developing an opinion on the issue. Questions remain unanswered. In some cases, the evidence