Posted on 09/09/2014 2:27:02 AM PDT by servo1969
If there was reputable scientific evidence that some people were born homosexual, I would have no problem accepting this. After all, my theology tells me that as human beings, we are all created in God’s image and yet we are a fallen race, and so all of us carry aspects of that fallen nature to the core of our being, and that could theoretically include homosexuality.
But the fact is that there is simply no reputable scientific evidence that anyone is born gay.
As stated by gay activist and history professor John D’Emilio, “‘Born gay’ is an idea with a large constituency, LGBT and otherwise. It’s an idea designed to allay the ingrained fears of a homophobic society and the internalized fears of gays, lesbians, and bisexuals. What’s most amazing to me about the ‘born gay’ phenomenon is that the scientific evidence for it is thin as a reed, yet it doesn’t matter. It’s an idea with such social utility that one doesn’t need much evidence in order to make it attractive and credible.”
In other words, because the “born gay” idea has proved so useful, the fact that there’s virtually no scientific support for the theory hardly matters. It’s an idea that has worked wonders for gay activists and their allies.
As noted years ago by gay scientist Simon LeVay, “There [was] a survey in the New York Times that broke down people on the basis of whether they thought gays and lesbians were born that way or whether it was a lifestyle choice. Across the board, those who thought gays and lesbians were born that way were more liberal and gay friendly.”
And so, the argument goes, “If I’m born this way, how can my attractions be wrong? And if I’m born this way, how can you expect me to change?”
Of course, even if no one is born gay, that doesn’t mean that homosexual attractions are not deeply rooted. In most cases, those feelings are very deeply rooted to the point that many gay men and women truly believe they were born gay.
And even if no one is born gay, that doesn’t that homosexual attractions are easily changed. In most cases, they are not.
But why base a so-called civil rights movement on lies? Why not tell the truth?
One of the most gay-friendly professional organizations in our country is the American Psychological Association, and yet even the APA states that, “There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation.”
Similarly, in England, the pro-gay Royal College of Psychiatrists recently backtracked on an earlier statement that homosexuality was biologically determined, now saying that “sexual orientation is determined by a combination of biological and postnatal environmental factors.” And while they stated clearly their belief that homosexuality was not a mental disorder and that it should be accepted, they added, “It is not the case that sexual orientation is immutable or might not vary to some extent in a person’s life.”
That’s why psychiatrist Nathaniel S. Lehrman, former chairperson of the Task Force on Religion and Mental Health said in 2005, “Researchers now openly admit that after searching for more than 20 years, they are still unable to find the ‘gay gene.’” (In the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons.)
Why then do we constantly hear about people being born gay? First, it has worked wonders for gay activism; second, many gays and lesbians believe it to be true, since as far back as they can remember, they felt that they were different.
But political expediency and personal feelings do not change the facts, and those facts remain the same: There is no clear scientific evidence that anyone is born gay
According to lesbian researcher Lisa Diamond, “The queer community has been obsessed with cultivating the idea that we all have fixed sexual identities. We’ve crafted terrific narratives and political platforms based on the notions that all gays are ‘born that way.’ But what if sexuality is more complex? What if biology actually intersects with environment, time, culture and context? Could we possibly be more fluid than we’ve supposed?”
Camille Paglia, a social critic, academic, feminist, and lesbian, was even more blunt, famously stating in her book Vamps and Tramps, “Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction. . . . No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous . . . homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.”
Paglia also asked, “Is the gay identity so fragile that it cannot bear the thought that some people may not wish to be gay? Sexuality is highly fluid, and reversals are theoretically possible.”
Remarkably, when a school chaplain in Tasmania, Australia, posted Paglia’s opinion on social media, there was an outcry against him, causing him to issue a public apology: “I’ve made a mistake and learnt from it. I’m deeply sorry for any offence I’ve caused. I was very careless in posting that image for discussion. I will work with my employers to ensure there is no repeat.”
Despite this apology, he was still fired – and the organization he worked for was Christian! That is how toxic today’s climate has become, and yet this chaplain simply posted the accurate reflections of a lesbian academic. How could this be considered hateful or bigoted?
Again, this does not mean that same-sex attractions and desires are not deeply rooted in some people’s lives, nor does it mean that they chose to be gay. (You can choose to act on your attractions but that doesn’t mean you chose to have the attractions.)
It simply means that one of the major gay activist talking points, one that has even infiltrated parts of the church, is based on lies, not truth.
It’s time we speak the truth in love. Lies never help anyone in the long run.
Amazing so many accepted an opinion with nothing scientific to back it up. What’s more is how amusing the born gay advocates view bisexuals as being in denial. Guess they can’t be born bisexual but can be born gay.
I was amazed at how quickly those in the church jumped on the bandwagon of the supposedly “Gay Gene”. Only months after the the two “researchers” had announced their biased findings it was already theology amongst church lefties and they would not even speak to you about the methodology of the research or the presupposed outcomes driven by gay theory. I can understand being sick to the eye teeth of being accused of being the mean or bad guy, the homophobe but how quickly people will swap the truth for a lie is staggering!
Thank-you and God Bless for speaking the truth.
very good point.
Of course! “Gay” is something you’re born with but gender is something you can choose.
It’s kinda like the leftist dogma, against creation and supportive of evolution. If they are such staunch supporters of Darwinian theory why do they want to have massive, “social welfare” programs? Shouldn’t they promote natural selection?
Other questions. Guns are bad for everyone! (except their bodyguards?) “Pro-choice” is not acceptable (life IS a choice) within the perimeter of an abortion clinic?
“Live and let live” and “tolerance” doesn’t apply to religious observances in the public square, (nor smoking, fatty foods and drink) just flag burning and gay parades?
And let’s not forget, “paper or plastic”?
If people were born sodomizers, it would not change the fact that it is a disorder. People are born with disorders for a host of reasons and many remain mysteries.
If one day we all woke up to find sodomy appealing or acceptable, it would have no bearing whatsoever on whether it is intended or whether it is moral or whether it is to be considered good behavior.
In truth, it is a disorder...a disorder, of which, all associated behaviors are bad behavior. The consequences of that bad behavior, can be both spiritually and physically, harmful and deadly. The unnaturalness, alone, is a good insight into exactly why God considers the behavior evil.
Man has to be careful not to write evil into the law. Unfortunately our Supreme Court is very careless, or very deliberate, in that respect. Our blessings have ceased...the ball is in the people’s court.
“It’s an idea with such social utility that one doesn’t need much evidence in order to make it attractive and credible.”
Boy, does that apply to a lot of current movements.
I was born naked. But when I was born I don’t remember even thinking about sex. Since I was naked I wasn’t thinking about sex, I guess I should be an asexual nudist.
It depends on how you define "help" and "the long run."
Kind of laughable to think there might be a genetic marker that indicates one has a “fecal fascination” and will completely disregard design tolerances in favor of perverse self gratification.
Given that little boys and girls usually prefer to associate with same-sex friends (remember cooties?), is it possible that introducing children to sex at an early age would convinced them they are gay?
What would change if today there were scientific evidence one way or the other?
Ping
I remember back in the early 90’s, Time Magazine ran a cover story about there being a “gay gene” and that homosexuals are “born that way.” Nowhere in the article was there one shred of hard evidence, all conjecture. Was I surprised? Hell no!
Even if it’s true (which it decidedly is NOT), some people are also born with a predisposition to alcoholism. Or sociopathy. Or diabetes. Those are all treated like the diseases they are and the fact that one is genetically susceptible to them does not excuse their exercise or make it more palatable. Those people are treated! No one makes a cottage industry out of defending them or forcing unafllicted people to accept their disease as “normal.”
Twin studies support this point very strongly.
http://girlsjustwannahaveguns.com/identical-twin-studies-show-the-only-gay-genes-that-exist-are-made-by-versace/
You want to know an idea with social utility? Christianity. And by extension, a rigorous ethic of honor, decency, and conscience. Yet Christianity is the favorite strawman of the social utilitarians, despite its proven value over 2,000 years.
With attendance being down, that was a means to fill the pews......
I wonder what the signifigance of that is. Maybe it creates extra room for other stuff, like their well-known flair for interior decoration and window treatments.
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.