ng fraternal twins to identical twins. Within each set of twins, one was homosexual. The doctors were out to prove that if one twin was homosexual there was a pretty good chance that the other was too. This would prove homosexuality to be true because if the chemical make-up of one were so similar to the other then they would both be gay (Newman 2) Pillard and Baileys study showed that the identical twins had a much greater chance of both being gay then the fraternal twins did. They found that, among identical twins, 52 percent were both homosexual, as opposed to the fraternal twins, among whom only 22 percent shared a homosexual orientation(Dallas 114). Because the study was done with twins, Pillard and Bailey concluded higher incidence of shared homosexuality among identical twins meant that homosexuality was genetic in origin(Dallas 114)In 1993, Dean Hamer of the National Cancer institute and his co-workers performed further studies towards the genetics of homosexuality. They studied thirty-two pairs of non-identical homosexual brothers. No two pairs were related. Hamer and his colleagues found that two- thirds of them (twenty-two of the sets of brothers) shared the same type of genetic material.(Newman1). Researchers in the past have claimed that the homosexual gene was past down maternally. Because of this, Hamer looked closely at the region of the X chromosomes in which most of the brothers shared. Hamer concluded that the region in question, known as the Xq28, might carry a kind of gene associated with homosexuality(Watson 2).Although all of the research is reportedly conclusive and is sometimes quoted as factual, they do not prove that homosexuality is genetic. For this reason, all three have flaws and holes in the research. Dr. William Byne of Columbian University calls inborn evidence inconclusive, and compares it with trying to add a hundred zeros so you can get one.(Dallas 117).Dr. LeVays research was not uniformly consist...
