Posted on 01/13/2005 8:00:33 AM PST by Laissez-faire capitalist
Gay activists and their supporters often say, "Why would someone choose to be gay?" But why would someone want to change political parties? Why would someone want to change their religion? Maybe it's just what they feel like they need to do, or be.
Gay activists and their supporters often resort to using this phrase or one similar to it. They state: Why would someone choose to be gay in a world where they will face grief and opposition over their sexual orientation?
To which I respond: Why would a Muslim choose to convert to Christianity in a region of the world like Sudan or Iran where they will face grief, opposition, persecution, or even death over their religious orientation?
As well, why would someone choose to change their political orientation, to say Republican, in a family which is strictly union Democrat, and which has voted exclusively Democrat for generations, when they will face grief and opposition over their political orientation?
Now, some may respond that you cannot compare sexual orientation with political or religious orientation, since one makes the choice to convert from one religion or political orientation to another, and that one doesn't choose to be gay, that they are "born that way."
Gays aren't "born that way", though.
Numerous scientific studies, posted at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1300464/posts, show these things:
1.) Environment plays a strong role in homosexuality developing. Almost all of the experts who have done some type of study on homosexuality say that homosexuality cannot be explained apart from reference to environmental factors.
2.) There is a strong prevalance of same-sex sexual abuse in the childhoods of homosexuals.
3.) Many homosexuals themselves link their homosexuality to their sexual victimization experiences.
4.) Gender Identity Disorder, gender confusion and other environmental factors have been shown to play a role in homosexuality developing in some individuals.
5.) There is no "gay gene." Identical-Twin studies, as well as other studies, have smashed this possibility.
6.) Personal choice, to some degree, is involved in all behaviors, sexual or otherwise. Even some lesbians agree with this. Genetic or environmental factors are never overwhelming.
So, you can see that the argument of "Why would someone choose to be gay in a world where they will face grief and opposition over their sexual orientation", doesn't hold water, and neither does the lie of gays being "born that way."
Consenting adults should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as no one's rights are infringed upon. If you can find a clergy member who will marry you and your brother, in a free country, you should be able to do it.
Did I say that? I wrote what I wrote to another poster who had written: "no one ever said that parents abuse their kids." And I brought up that someone had said that very thing on this thread. So what's it to you?
"They stand out in a crowd."
Not in San Francisco, they don't...
I have never heard that comment, but I think I like it. Whoever said it is correct.
Summary of research studies on this issue. Perhaps "many of the people who believe that homosexuality is caused by molestation" read these studies.
Only the Larry Kramers of the world believe kids seek out these "experiences" because they "innately know" that they are homosexual. (Kramer lies to himself to justify unexcusable child abuse.)
There are standards for studies involving peer-review and publication in a reputable journal (not a vanity press) that must be met for consideration. I know there are lots of people who've read studies and essays and reports that match with what they already believe, but I don't think they're experts in the field.
There's a double standard for "science" people want to believe and science people don't want to believe. The same people who find a study saying that homosexual men die at age 40 (44 without AIDS) would also say, without any background, that "more study" is needed before they'd given a second thought to accepting the theory of evolution or global climate change.*
*which, by the way, is happening. The open question is how much humans have contributed to it and whether there's anything that can be done to stop it, which is why Kyoto is essentially a waste of time and an albatross we're well rid of. There's way more unanimity about climate change and evolution than there is about whether homosexuals are all child molesters.
To put it simply, if I read a study defending evolution, would that mean every creationist FReeper would have to bow to that?
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.