Dr. Michael L. Brown penned a very interesting column for One News Now in which he disputes the idea that LGBT individuals are born with their homosexual tendencies. The fact of the matter is, there is absolutely no scientific evidence to back up the ‘born gay’ claims made by activists.
Brown cites a number of sources in his article, one of the most thought-provoking being a homosexual activist and professor named John D’Emilio. D’Emilio is quoted as saying:
“‘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.”
We’ve seen this happen before within the liberal community; in fact, the Left’s normal idea of acceptable public policy is that which sounds good yet has no evidence to back it up. In this case, the ‘born gay’ argument is a nice theory for those who throw it around, but it has never even remotely been proven to be true.
In conjunction with this idea, as noted 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.”
Brown argues that deeply-roted homosexual tendencies most likely cause gays to feel as though they were born that way, but there is no fact which proves those feelings to be accurate. Even the American Psychological Association (APA), a very gay-friendly organization, has stated, “There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation.”
In addition, the pro-gay Royal College of Psychiatrists recently backtracked on an earlier statement that homosexuality was biologically determined. The organization now publicly maintains that “sexual orientation is determined by a combination of biological and postnatal environmental factors. It is not the case that sexual orientation is immutable or might not vary to some extent in a person’s life.”
Perhaps the most damning statement against the born gay movement comes from psychiatrist Nathaniel S. Lehrman, who said that “Researchers now openly admit that after searching for more than 20 years, they are still unable to find the ‘gay gene.'”
Lesbian researcher Lisa Diamond wondered:
“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?”
Lesbian feminist Camille Paglia was even more blunt, stating, “Our sexual bodies were designed for reproduction …. No one is born gay. The idea is ridiculous … homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait. 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.”
Members of the gay community who have come forward with views and evidence which oppose the ‘born gay’ argument are hushed by the media. Anyone who shares their opinions and who happens to be heterosexual is quickly branded as homophobic. Do you believe the theory that those of the homosexual persuasion were born that way? Or do you side with science in this argument? Tell us your opinion in the comments section!