Sorry, Fundanutters, There's No Such Thing As An "Ex-Gay"
Tragically, religious nutters are allowed to keep torturing gay kids and adults under the pretense that they're "converting" them. Excuse me, but aren't the people we should really be worried about those who are obsessed about how others get off? A study shows pretty good evidence for the argument that being gay is biological, and starts in the womb. Randoph E. Schmid writes for the AP:
Men who have several older brothers have an increased chance of being gay, researchers say, a finding that adds weight to the idea that sexual orientation has a physical basis.The increase was seen in men with older brothers from the same mother — whether they were raised together or not — but not those who had adopted or stepbrothers who were older.
"It's likely to be a prenatal effect," said Anthony F. Bogaert of Brock University in St. Catharines, Canada, who did the research. "This and other studies suggest that there is probably a biological basis" for homosexuality.
Bogaert studied four groups of Canadian men, a total of 944 people, analyzing the number of brothers and sisters each had, whether or not they lived with those siblings and whether the siblings were related by blood or adopted.
His findings are reported in a paper appearing in Tuesday's issue of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
S. Marc Breedlove, a professor in the neuroscience and psychology department of Michigan State University, said the finding "absolutely" confirms a physical basis.
"Anybody's first guess would have been that the older brothers were having an effect socially, but this data doesn't support that," Breedlove said in a telephone interview.
The only link between the brothers is the mother and so the effect has to be through the mother, especially since stepbrothers didn't have the effect, said Breedlove, who was not part of the research.
Tim Dailey, a senior fellow at the conservative Center for Marriage and Family Studies disagreed.
"We don't believe that there's any biological basis for homosexuality," Dailey said. "We feel the causes are complex but are deeply rooted in early childhood development."
Dailey helps answer the question "How are radical feminists like fundamentalists?" The answer is both have seen solid data proving their opinions wrong -- but their opinions are all that counts!
If you're going to live a non-evidence-based life (ie, believe in god and belong to a religion), at least be modern enough to be like these guys, the "Faith In America" crowd. The tag line on their site: "Religion-based bigotry...let's end it now and forever." Here's the statement from the front of their Web site:
We as Americans can see clearly how religious teachings have been used in the United States to justify prejudice and discrimination against minorities.We can look back at the words recorded in those dark chapters in our history and the evidence is undeniable:
"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts."
—Jefferson Davis, President of the Confederate States of America."The right of holding slaves is clearly established in the Holy Scriptures, both by precept and example."
—Rev. R. Furman, D.D., Baptist, of South Carolina"Who demand the ballot for woman? They are not the lovers of God, nor are they believers in Christ, as a class. There may be exceptions, but the majority prefer an infidel's cheer to the favor of God and the love of the Christian community. It is because of this tendency that the majority of those who contend for the ballot for woman cut loose from the legislation of Heaven, from the enjoyments of home, and drift to infidelity and ruin."
— Justin Fulton, 1869, in opposition to women's right to vote."Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement there would be no cause for such marriages."
— Statement by Virginia trial judge in 1959 case that led to 1967 U.S. Supreme Court striking down laws in 16 states that prohibited interracial marriage.It is difficult to imagine that less than 30 years ago in over 15 states one of today's leading conservative Supreme Court Justices, Clarence Thomas, a black man, could have been charged with a felony for marrying his current wife, a white woman.
For the vast majority of Americans, this kind of discrimination, often justified with misguided religious teachings, would be unthinkable today.
Faith In America asks a simple question:
Is using religious teachings to deny equal rights to gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people any less wrong than using religious teaching to discriminate against people of color, against equality for women or against people of different cultures wanting to marry?
Here's their info page with more:
The mission of Faith In America, Inc. is the emancipation of lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people from bigotry disguised as religious truth. The world’s great religious traditions practiced within the United States of America emphasize the love of neighbor as well as the love of God. Compassion, justice, freedom, and respect for the dignity of all people are their most authentic and noble expressions.However, in the United States, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are victims of religious teachings based on ignorance and fear instead of knowledge and respect. This abuse of religion influences all aspects of public life in America, including civil laws and social attitudes. Because of it, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people are denied equal rights and protection under civil law. They are discriminated against and socially ostracized. Physical violence against them is incited. In order to end the persecution of gay people in America, religious teachings that justify bigotry must be publicly exposed and denounced.
For anyone who's interested, the cognitive psychologist Martin Seligman does a very reader-friendly assessment of the evidence on "conversion" in this book:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0449909719/sr=8-3/qid=1151609999/ref=pd_bbs_3/103-1868018-6639845?ie=UTF8
The book is great on a lot of other issues as well.
Lena at June 29, 2006 12:43 PM
Looks like an interesting read, based on the reviews. The only thing the naysayers have to say is that he was cruel to the dogs he used as test subjects. But the enthusiasts all seem to love it.
I have to admit, I'm not comfortable with the idea of mistreating animals.
Patrick at July 1, 2006 4:28 AM
"he was cruel to the dogs he used as test subjects."
That was over 40 years ago. Let go of the grudge and read his book. Read 'em all.
Lena at July 4, 2006 10:14 PM
dxcgq shkplnmv gvzwjxtp vwino yagjesz wmkinqu krdfatw
gdtcxopq meohwd at August 4, 2006 8:36 AM
Leave a comment