A tongue-in-cheek comment a few posts back got some people really worked up over whether or not "homosexuality" is a choice.
This is one of the best examples of how we let liberals define the argument. Most people seem resigned to the "fact" that homosexuality is a trait that you are born with. While this has been clearly proven in such scientific journals like "Will & Grace" and "The NY Times editorial board" I'm not willing to concede this so readily.
First: There is no conclusive scientific proof that homosexuality is genetic in humans. Surveys don't really hold water because if I insist that I'm gay and I've been that way since birth how are you going to prove/disprove that?
Second: Many "gays" insist that it is in fact a lifestyle choice. These "gays" become instant pariahs in the eyes of the gay mafia.
Third: There is a gay agenda. Please stop telling me that there isn't. It's like saying that the Family Research Council doesn't have an agenda. Or I don't have an agenda. I find it humorous that Basic Rights will deny the existance of a "gay agenda" and then have a web page on what their agenda is.
In conclusion: You don't have to accept the line that has been fed to you that homosexuality is genetic or unchangeable. Let's take the debate back to this point so we can stop debating whether or not pre-teens need gay adults to come to the public schools and counsel them on gay sex.
3 comments:
Can I choose to be a minority too? Actually, I was born a minority: I'm a male!
And I certainly am not going to let my kids choose to be gay.
In all seriousness, I do believe there is strong evidence to support the idea that sexuality is a physical condition as opposed to a pure matter of choice--but not a genetic condition.
I have read numerous studies which support the theory that hormone levels in the mother during gestation can influence the development of the brain, resulting in a physical disposition towards a certain type of sexuality.
The reason you never hear about this, despite the fact that, if true, it would prove that being gay isn't just a choice, is this:
If it is a physical condition related to hormone levels during gestation, then it is something that can potentially be identified and TREATED. As in, CURED.
Now, imagine that doctors can find a way to identify it once it happens, but can't reverse it. Potentially, that could mean that a woman 8 months pregnant could have a test to determine if her kid is gay.
Hmmm... do you think that the gay rights lobby, which traditionally is lockstep in support of the abortion crowd, would suddenly decide that abortion is murder?
And why not treat it, if we can? After all, if a man decides that he is "really" a woman, he can get surgery and hormone treatments to "cure" his physical problem. What would the gay community say to a gay man who CHOOSES (remember kids, it's all about choice) to have treatments to help him become straight?
Why is one patient championed while the other scorned?
And of course, it is entirely possible that, even with a physical link, that being gay is still a matter of choice. It is possible that hormone levels that affect brain development influence your choices, but don't "make" you gay.
And there MAY be a genetic contribution: some people may have a genetic condition that contributes to the hormone levels that may be linked to sexuality.
But this much is certain--homosexuality can NOT be purely genetic. If there were a "gay" gene, it would have been bred out of us, because it reduces reproduction without increasing odds of survival.
This is different from something like hermaphroditia, which is caused by a genetic mistake--unless gays are willing to call themselves mutants...
I know this is not the exact same topic, but certainly related... here is the link to some of my comments concerning discrimination, bigotry, and fear in response to an article I read.
http://www.lifehack.org/articles/
lifehack/bigotry-ignorance-and-fear.
html#comments
Post a Comment