I wouldn't completly rule out nurture either.  

The gay or straight thing isn't exactly like bign Male or Female or something like that.

Additionally, what is seen as attractive in men and women does vary culturally and as time passes.

A man born today and that same man born in 1200 AD would be attracted to two totally different kinds of women.

It's not unreasonable to think that a man born today, and a man born a thousand years from now may be attracted to totally different genders.

There just isn't any nurture evidence because nurture evidence is almost impossible to gather and usually relies on the absense of nature evidence.

Since people are far more complicated then would allow for easy study.

It could be a combo of both Nature and Nurture.  Afterall homosexual relationships in some cultures were generally seen as rights of passage and practically universal.

The gene in that pic is soooooo gay!!

I don't belive in this.
If this was in genes don't you think that gays would be already extinct after so many thousands of years ?

IMHO it all comes from culture.

Great read. I also think people don't choose to be gay not necessarily beause of a "gay" gene but because from all the gay people I've met, I haven't met anyone who "has decided" to become gay.

That's the equivalent of saying you don't believe hair color is genetic because wouldn't we be all blondes by now?

That doesn't make any sense. Blonde hair is a recessive genetic, and mainly still exists because blonde people have children with other blondes. It's highly unlikely that the world would ever go all blonde.

Relating to the thread, I don't like the idea of a gay gene. Many of the people that discriminate against gays are just awful and cruel people. Now, there are those who disagree with homosexuality and may see it as going against their beliefs, and I have nothing against those people. But there is an extreme, and there are millions who belong to that extreme. In my opinion, I want gays to stand up for their rights and image to the rest of the world. A gay gene is just an excuse, saying "I can't help it" is not going to change anyone's minds. Perhaps there is a gay gene, and that'd be just fine. But standing up for one's self is the only way to get the respect of others.

You managed to fail twice in single sentence.

First because hair color has nothing in common with a person having children while being homosexual certainly has.

Second because the chosen by you color is genetically endangered to become extinct and natural blondes are getting more rare with every passing century.

kasz216, you are right, i wasn't aware that women can have a small percentage of testosterone in their bodies.

Since no one found a reason for existing gay people i belive its not just one factor (like you said a combo between nature and nurture) but a bunch of them added each other. Now what is their weight? (its like global warming, no one knows how much weight is man made CO2 providing to the change because there are many other factors)

----

again, as anybody seen this?

"among them penis and ring-finger length – both longer in homosexuals"

If size matters to you turn gay!!!

Haha, guys ease up on Truckosaurus, you know what he meant lol.

You don't necessarily need 2 blonde parents to produce a blonde child - it's quite possible to have a blonde child with parents of brunette or even black hair.

I found this quite interesting to read - I enjoyed my Genetics courses I've taken so far and I plan to take more. Time to do a little bit more research on this gene and see what it's function is (if it's even known).