Posted on 05/31/2014 5:53:32 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Lady Gaga’s mega-hit song “Born this Way” sold millions of copies affirming what many people believe: homosexuality is hardwired. In fact, people think that’s as axiomatic as saying the earth revolves around the sun. No rational person rejects the idea. The only hold-outs, it is said, are either ignorant of science, homophobic, or bigots (read: Christians). But before I explain why this view is beset with problems, let me make a tactical suggestion.
Many Christians get defensive when someone says homosexuality is inborn. I understand the temptation to argue against this claim. But it’s a mistake to try to show it’s false, at least initially. That’s because the claim is not an argument. It’s just an opinion and, therefore, not necessarily true. In order for their claim to become a bona fide argument, it must be supported with evidence or reasons.
So, instead of defending your convictions, make them defend their claim. Simply ask, “What evidence do you have that homosexuals are born that way?” Then wait and listen. This is totally appropriate and not just a rhetorical trick. It’s how the burden of proof works. Whoever makes the claim bears the burden to show it’s true. Since they’ve made the claim, it’s their job to back it up, not your job to prove them wrong.
If they don’t have evidence for their claim, then it’s fair to graciously explain that their view is unreasonable – that they don’t hold their view for good reason. If they do offer evidence for their view, only then is it appropriate to respond with a counter-argument.
With that tactic in mind, let’s look at three problems with the born-that-way theory. The first is the most egregious. A simple scientific fact-check demonstrates that no study has proven that homosexuality is biologically determined.
Decades of research to discover a “gay gene” have been unsuccessful. It’s now uncommon for scientists to think that homosexuality is solely genetic. Perhaps the most powerful line of evidence is found in twin studies. Since identical twins have identical genetics, it would follow that if one twin was homosexual, the other would also have to be homosexual 100% of the time. But both twins are homosexual in less than 15% of the cases.[1]
Not only is the genetic effect extremely low, but it also accounts for shared environmental factors. In other words, even saying that the genetic contribution to homosexuality is 15% is not accurate because identical twins are usually raised together and share a similar environment. In order to isolate the contribution of genetics, one would have to study identical twins raised apart. That way you eliminate the effect of their environment.
It was also speculated that homosexuality had a biological basis. But research that correlates brain anatomy/physiology with homosexual behavior doesn’t prove causation. In other words, even if the brains of homosexuals have structural differences from those of heterosexuals, that might suggest their behavior changes their brain, not necessarily the other way around. This is possible due to neuroplasticity – the lifelong ability of the brain to change in response to the environment, behavior, brain injury, or even acquiring knowledge. For example, blind people’s brains have a different neurologic structure because reading braille using fingers is a different behavior than using eyes to read.
What’s surprising is that pro-gay researchers and organizations acknowledge the dearth of evidence for a biological cause to homosexuality. The American Psychological Association (APA), for example, once held the position in 1998 that, there is “evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person’s sexuality.” However, a decade of scientific research debunked this idea and caused the APA to revise their view in 2009. Their new position reads: “Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors”[2] [emphasis mine]. A pro-gay group like the APA wouldn’t revise their statement unless there was overwhelming evidence that necessitated a position change.
A second problem with the born-that-way theory is that even if true, it wouldn’t prove that homosexual behavior is moral. Consider that scientific research has discovered genes they believe contribute to alcoholism, unfaithfulness, violence, and even many diseases. Are we to believe that because there is a genetic contribution to these behaviors (or even if they were genetically determined) that they should be regarded as morally appropriate? Of course not. So, proving homosexual behavior is appropriate by appealing to a genetic determinant is equally spurious.
This mistake in thinking is known as the naturalistic fallacy. You can’t get an “ought” from an “is.” Even if homosexuality is natural, it doesn’t prove it ought to be. And scientists who are attempting to prove homosexuality is inborn agree. Harvard geneticist Dean Hamer, himself a homosexual, says, “Biology is amoral; it offers no help in distinguishing between right and wrong. Only people guided by their values and beliefs can decide what is moral and what is not.”[3] Simon LeVay, a Harvard trained neuroscientist and also openly gay, concurs: “First, science itself cannot render judgments about human worth or about what constitutes normality or disease. These are value judgments that individuals must make for themselves, while taking scientific findings into account.”[4]
A third problem stems from the mere existence of the “ex-gay” community. If homosexuality is, as many pro-gay advocates state, as inescapable as eye color, then how do they explain former homosexuals? Eye color is genetic, something that one is born with and can’t change. But sexual orientation is fluid, as evidenced by the changed lives of thousands of men and women.
There are women who have had long-term, lesbian relationships with other women and then changed and became attracted to men. There are also men who have had same-sex attractions since puberty, spent a decade in gay relationships, and then developed attractions to the opposite sex. Many of these people have gone through some form of counseling or therapy, but many have not.
The fact that even one person has changed is evidence that homosexuality is not hard-wired. But that there are thousands of individuals who share this experience is significant counter-evidence against the born-that-way theory. I know many of these people. They can’t all be lying about their life.
Instead, what they offer is hope. Since many people are dissatisfied with their same-sex attractions, these changed lives represent an opposing voice to the cultural chorus that claims homosexuals are born that way.
[1] Bailey JM, Dunne MP, Martin NG. 2000. Genetic and Environmental influences on sexual orientation and its correlates in an Australian twin sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 78:524-36. The figure is the pairwise concordance, not probandwise concordance.
[2] Retrieved on February 2, 2012, from http://www.apa.org/helpcenter/sexual-orientation.aspx
[3] Hamer, Dean & Copeland, P. (1994). The Science of Desire (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1994), 214.
[4] LeVay, Simon, “Sexual Orientation: The Science and its Social Impact,” in Reverso, 2000, p.
If they are born that way, we can test for it. What if they test Negative for homosexuality? Does that mean they aren’t gay?
What if I test Positive? Can I be an oppressed minority?
Baptist ping
They entertain a thought, then act on it.
You’ve heard of the expression “Born with a silver spoon in his mouth?”
People are born gay. We know this because of polling data and circumstantial evidence.
Besides, they FEEL they were born gay and that is settled science. And you can’t argue with settled science. You just can’t. Nor should you be allowed to disagree. As a matter of fact, the government should punish people who disagree because.....bullying.
I believe God had a plan for me before I was conceived. I was born Christian. If they were born queer they are of satan.
I think Freud had it right - a refusal to move from adolescence to adulthood. I’m wondering if this Elliott creep who did in all those poor kids was, in fact, a latent homosexual...he certainly wasn’t moving into adulthood.
Homosexualty are these wires getting crossed up due to environment, sexual abuse, and other issues...
It's really that simple...
I knew one set of twin boys not identical, one was an all star handsome rugged ladies man. The other was cute brilliant kid who thinks he is a homosexual. I have no explanation.
RE: If they are born that way, we can test for it.
I agree. The question is this -— is there DEFINITE proof that there is a genetic test? If so, have they identified the specific gene?
RE: What if I test Positive? Can I be an oppressed minority?
You can agitate for it. Heck they already are successful in forcing people to deem them an oppressed ( there for a need to be protected ) minority.
People are born OCD or schizo. Does that mean we shouldn’t treat them?
It’s a feel-good article that misses the point that, if you can’t prove that it can be a by-birth condition, you also can’t prove that it can never be a by-birth condition. If you claim that someone must submit proof for their theory, then it is not unreasonable that you should also bear the onus of providing proof for your theory that says their theory is bunk. This guy tries to eat his cake and have it too.
Seriously, if they ever develop a test, the game is over. That’s why they will never find the gene.
Daddy loved the athlete more so the other child wanted to punish him for it. That’s why my older brother is gay. Because I was born.
Thanks I was talking about this with my girlfriend last night, you’re argument is solid and in going to use it. I already weened her away from liberal economic issues and now I’m working on the social issues.
RE: Homosexualty are these wires getting crossed up due to environment, sexual abuse, and other issues...
I think you’re making the homosexual case for them, the argument is ALMOST SIMILAR to what they would make with the exception that they wouldn’t call it cross-wire. They’d probably call it wired differently.
At any rate because they are ( as you said ), they would argue that they are BORN THAT WAY and there’s nothing they can do about it.
THEREFORE, their lifestyle should be treated as normally as anyone who was born genetically different.
RE: Seriously, if they ever develop a test, the game is over.
What does the game-is-over mean?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.