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.
She was bemoaning the fact that she had “decided” to be a lesbian. She was about 30 years old, 5 feet tall and had to weight 200 pounds. She had the look of a person who had always been that fat so I guess that a man had never considered her as a prospect. She probably figured that finding a girl friend was the only way for her to go.
Whatever, at that point in her life she was admitting that it had been her choice.
Definitely God had a plan for you...but you were not born a Christian...that takes a act of faith...
I don’t see a link for your book on the my web searches, do you have a link?
RE: 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.
If I say and insist that MH370 is in an airport hangar in Pakistan and someone asks me where the evidence is of that, on WHOM is the burden of proof? Me or the questioner?
If I cannot show positive evidence that the plane even flew to Pakistan, why is the burden of proof that it did not fly to Pakistan on the one questioning my assertion?
RE: People are born OCD or schizo. Does that mean we shouldn’t treat them?
Gays would argue that homosexuality is not a disease like OCD or schizo.
You’re right...a theory is an unproven claim.
correction: that is Mr. gaga. His penis fell out of his outfit during a performance.
I get that point, but my point was their brains get cross wired due to outside factors not the way they were born...
I'd love to see an honest study of the percentage of boys abused or molested by homosexuals at a young age who get imprinted by that event who become homosexuals ...
My guess would be a much higher number than the norm..
I degreed in a creative field and have been employed in it all my professional life. So, I’ve encountered a fair number of homosexuals as a result. My observation, the effeminate ones were molested. The less effeminate ones hate women.
Barring evidence one way or the other, it's a stalemate. If we don't know, then telling ourselves what makes us feel good/superior, etc., does not mean we are right. It seems that the Catholic/Christian folks who detest homosexuality in and of itself without regard to whether the homosexuals are the in-your-face perverts or of the more quiet and unassuming nature, have some need for it to be an absolute, across-the-board choice with no chance of any cases to be "natural by birth". If God can allow kids to be born with serious birth defects and a host of maladies, why can He not allow some folks to be born homosexual? Call it a sin if you like, but understand that no one is free from sin but by the body and blood of Christ and that any sin is grounds for the penalty of spiritual death, we have all been as disgusting in God's eyes, before being redeemed in Christ, as the worst perverted homosexual. We all wish to find some sort of moral/spiritual superiority and we delude ourselves with our "righteousness". We get diverted with the delusions to the point where we focus on them and neglect many opportunities to carry God's Word and the Good News of the Gospels. We get so delude that we think we are purveyors of God's opinion when we may have no idea if the folks we look down our noses at are saved or not. If they are saved, they are every bit as pure and holy in God's eyes as we are. If they are not saved, we need to try to carry the Good News, not the condemnations, if we are to do the only godly work we are capable of - carrying the message.
I maintain that, if you cannot provide proof for your side of the theory, it is hypocritical to demand proof from the other side.
Even parents having a child baptized, doesn't make the child a Christian.
Sadly it seems many homosexuals are the victims of child sexual abuse.
1. If in fact homosexuals are born that way, God already knew that.
2. God knows they are ‘born that way’ and He still said “Do not engage in homosexual sex.”
A genetic predisposition to a condition doesn’t make the behavior any less sinful in God’s eyes.
If my genetic history means I develop diabetes, does that mean I can go ahead and eat all the carbs I want because I was “born this way”?
I think it’s both.
A small percentage may be born that way, mother nature isn’t perfect, but the larger majority are indoctrinated into it in some way.
Homosexuality is a sexual perversion. I don’t care if it is from nature or nurture. Either way it is not acceptable to me.
Makes no difference, lots of us are born stone hard killers, but we don't kill cause it's against the law, many are born thieves, they don't steal cause it is wrong. All men are born adulterers, yet most of us stay faithful to our wives because we know adultery is wrong. Using "I was born that way" is bull dung, plain and simple.
Homosexuals know what they do is wrong, but unlike most, who put wicked desires aside and live decent lives, homosexuals only seem interested in spitting in the face of God and bribing politicians with sex and/or money.
Gays would argue that homosexuality is not a disease like OCD or schizo.
We don't let people with OCD or schizo define what their disease is.
We actively research ways to treat or cure conditions like OCD, schizophrenia, Downs, Spina Bifida and a myriad of others.
We have found genetic links to heart disease and cancer and thus have developed treatments.
The medical community itself often encourages abortions of babies that are perceived as defective.
> 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.
a) Low self-esteem; accepted and received with open arms into the gay club, b) the creepy uncle or scout leader that’s gay who convinces them they are gay so they can molest them, c) friend’s that fall into a or b who lead them further down the path, d) the Feds using the gay culture to turn them into activists to promote party platforms and keep progressives and liberals in office, e) the Feda disseminating propaganda online and in schools to curb population growth, and f) a gay president and Soros who want to promote the gay lifestyle to destroy the family unit and Chistianity to permanently cripple the backbone of the U.S. so a NWO can be formed which can be exploited for extreme profit never heard of before.
Their numbers say it is not genetic, i.e., they should be able to trace a line but they cannot.
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.