Brittish neuroscientist says that being gay is genetic

[pr_capone]

possibly for DC but hopefully we can have a nice conversation without it turning to flame fest.

http://www.canada.com/life/Baby+were...565/story.html

When it comes to sexual orientation — and homosexuality in particular — it turns out that Freud and others who theorized that it stems from early parental relationships, childhood abuse or choice were traipsing up the wrong path.

According to pioneering British-American neuroscientist, Simon LeVay (and Lady Gaga), the answer is simple: Baby, you were born this way.

"Sexual orientation is an aspect of gender that emerges from the prenatal sexual differentiation of the brain," says LeVay, who was one of the first researchers in 1991 to connect brain development to sexual orientation. "Whether a person is gay or straight depends in large part on how this process of biological differentiation goes forward, with the lead actors being genes, sex hormones and the brain systems that are influenced by them."

...

[Bump]

Originally Posted by Pants

Anyone with a brain could have concluded this on their own.

this

the only argument that anybody has whether or not it's genetic is "THE BIBLE DONT SAY SO" which isn't good enough for anybody who can think for themselves.

[listopencil]

Originally Posted by Donger

Being attractive or not isn't an abnormality. Being equipped as a guy (or gal) and wanting the same sex is.

That's debatable. "Homosexual" behavior is seen in creatures other than man, and self-destructive/socially destructive behavior has been observed in mankind. What do you consider abnormality?

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by listopencil

That's debatable. "Homosexual" behavior is seen in creatures other than man, and self-destructive/socially destructive behavior has been observed in mankind. What do you consider abnormality?

This line isn't going anywhere. Someone who is religious will say God said so, and someone who isn't will pull crap stats from crap researchers and/or just ignore your point and say they know gay people are deviant just because, and you may be deviant yourself for not knowing that.

The law is cleaner, more relevant, and its somewhere between difficult and impossible to argue that gay marriage bans are constitutional.

If someone is an ignorant or hateful bigot, I don't really care as long as they aren't a threat and everyone enjoys equal protection under the law.

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by alnorth

sure, and this isn't particularly difficult to do. You work, making $80,000 per year, your wife is a stay at home mom. Boom, done, you benefit greatly on your income tax by being married.

Or maybe the kids are out of the nest, you make more money now, and the better half wants to be productive? OK fine, through raises over the years into your 40's and 50's, maybe you now make about 100k and the wife makes about 40k. Marriage is still a sweet deal for you both.

If your wife makes about as much as you, and if you both make very substantial incomes, then suddenly marriage doesn't work out so well any longer. Thats when the marriage penalty kicks in: when you both are doing VERY well, then you'd be better off by living in sin.

Ok, example #1 is legit. I get that.

As far as the others, well if you're using the standard deductions you're getting screwed plain and simple, because two single standard deductions are more than a married filing jointly deduction. But to be fair, the article I posted said something about that changing in 2003, so I don't know if it's as bad as it used to be and I stopped paying attention to the difference quite some time ago because it pissed me off so bad.

The Mrs and I do make roughly the same amount, but we're not doing VERY WELL (at least by my definition) by any means and I cannot see how we benefit taxwise in any way.

[teedubya]

this thread is gay due to the genetics of the previous posters.

[Dante84]

Originally Posted by beach tribe

Edit: Posted for the obvious reasons. If you thought skin tone, shoot yourself.

You have just sentenced everyone on CP to death.

[Dante84]

Originally Posted by teedubya

this thread is gay due to the genetics of the previous posters.

TELL ME BOUT THEM WEATHER BURSTS, GILBERRT!!!

[PornChief]

my eldest son used to call his 8 y.o brother a bundle of sticks constantly, not that he was or anything, it's just what teen boys do, call each other bundle of stickss. Not even sure he actually knew what a bundle of sticks was when he started. Wife gets sick of it and says to him "Stop saying that! If he grows up to be gay, I will never forgive you!' I was like, wtf.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

As far as the others, well if you're using the standard deductions you're getting screwed plain and simple, because two single standard deductions are more than a married filing jointly deduction.

Incorrect. The married standard deduction is EXACTLY 2x the single standard deduction.

[Gonzo]

This study is bull shit. A few years ago, I read a story that male homosexuality was caused by an abnormally sized brain stem. I always figured that was due to the constant pounding to the back of the throat.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Bugeater]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Incorrect. The married standard deduction is EXACTLY 2x the single standard deduction.

Well that wasn't always the case, and as I mentioned I stopped paying attention to it quite a few years ago. Nevertheless, that makes it a wash and I still don't see where the average person gets a tax break for being married.

[englander]

Damn yahweh witnesses'

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Bugeater

Well that wasn't always the case, and as I mentioned I stopped paying attention to it quite a few years ago. Nevertheless, that makes it a wash and I still don't see where the average person gets a tax break for being married.

its pretty simple. The high punishing tax brackets hit individuals quick, if you have a life partner willing to jump through the marriage hoops with you, you suddenly have a great big pool of allowed extra income to reach that bracket, so you are better off unless your spouse also makes bank.

Seriously, the point where the "marriage penalty" kicks in is nowhere close to middle class, it happens when husband and wife both make serious money, which probably doesnt happen often.

2011 Standard deductions:

Single: $5,800
Married Jointly: $11,600

2011 Brackets:

Single

10% from 0 to $8,500, then
15% up to $34,500, then
25% up to $83,600, then
28% up to $174,400, then
33% up to $379,150, then
35% up to infinite

Married Jointly

10% from 0 to $17,000, then
15% up to $69,000, then
25% up to $139,350, then
28% up to $212,300, then
33% up to $379,150, then
35% up to infinite

Simple examples assuming only standard exempions, and ignoring EIC. (If you wanna do an earned income credit analysis, feel free to go sick on that, I don't feel like looking up the rules on that program.)

#1 husband 80k, wife nothing

Taxes Due, Filed Seperately: $14,675 + 0 = $14,675 (18.3%)
Taxes Due, Married Filed Jointly: $9,410 (11.8%)

Marriage Saving (penalty): +$5,265

No surprise here, everyone agrees being married to a stay at home spouse helps (before even figuring in EIC, if applicable) due to the higher deduction and higher bracket lines.

#2 husband 100k, wife 40k

Taxes Due, Filed Seperately: $19,993 + $4,705 = $24,698 (17.6%)
Taxes Due, Married Filed Jointly: $24,350 (17.4%)

Marriage Saving (penalty): +$348

Hmm... caught up to par a bit quicker than expected. Still its interesting how the effective tax is still not 18% when going from 80k to 140k when married. This is also pretty close to a max reality for most people, how many people have over a combined 140k income, really?

Anyway, now the marriage penalty:

#3 both 125k each

Taxes Due, Filed Seperately: $26,993 each = $53,986 (21.6%)
Taxes Due, Married Filed Jointly: $56,126.5 (22.5%)

Marriage Saving (penalty): ($2,140.50)

No need to look at higher incomes. When the single and married brackets synch up at the high end of the 33% bracket (~380k single or joint) the marriage penalty becomes a really big deal. But, its a big deal for really, really high incomes, and politically people dont feel sorry for people who are that rich. If money is that big of a concern, maybe they shouldn't get married.

[PornChief]

all these arguments over tax brackets! surely gays don't want to marry for financial reasons, sillys.

[Donger]

Originally Posted by listopencil

That's debatable. "Homosexual" behavior is seen in creatures other than man, and self-destructive/socially destructive behavior has been observed in mankind. What do you consider abnormality?

Something that is not a societal norm. In this case, homosexuality.