by Elysse Baumbach, 1/11/16
Psychologist says there is little scientific evidence that
sexual-orientation is biological, but two powerful men forced the sexual
revolution on the country.
Medical Xpress posted a strange
article. It’s clearly pro-LGBT, aimed at helping society accept the small
minority of people with non-heterosexual orientations. Yet it makes a strong
admission that undermines the whole rationale for giving homosexuals legal
protection: the belief that gay people are “born that way.”
Patrick Grzanka and Joe Miles, psychologists from the University
of Tennessee at Knoxville, went about trying to decipher the source of
anti-homosexual bias. They were surprised that the argument that homosexuals
are “born that way” seem to have little effect. They wrote a paper “challenging the notion that the belief that people are born with their sexual orientation—a
belief that has proliferated in the past 20
to 30 years, particularly among social and biological
scientists—is the key to improving attitudes toward
lesbian, gay and bisexual people.”
Grzanka noted that beliefs about the nature of sexual orientation have profound implications
for science, policy and the law. Arguments that sexual
orientation is inherent and unchangeable have been used in landmark court cases to serve as the foundation for civil
protections and privileges, such as marriage, and to
challenge harmful faux-medical practices, such as
so-called sexual orientation “conversion therapy.”
Grzanka and Miles just want to help gays. They want to turn
heterosexuals away from homophobia. They want to help activists, teachers and
politicians understand how best to “more effectively foster acceptance of sexual minorities and create a safer
and more welcoming society.” They
are appalled by “horrific attempts
by physicians, clergy and
psychologists to turn sexual minorities into heterosexuals.” LGBT activists could hardly ask for better allies in the
scientific community. But then Grzanka lit this bombshell:
“And yet there is little scientific evidence to
suggest that the categories we use today in the United States—categories that
are historically quite new—originate in the body at all,” he said. “I think
social scientists, lawyers, biological researchers and activists all need to
examine why it is that many of us are so deeply
invested in biological explanations of sexual orientation,
particularly when they appear to have limited efficacy in terms of promoting
more positive attitudes toward sexual minorities.”
Wait a minute; if it’s not biological, if it’s not genetic—and
if that has been the whole reason for the gay rights movement—what is it? Is it
a choice? You can’t change a leopard’s spots, but you can change a human
being’s choices. Why, then, is sexual conversion therapy harmful?
Gay
Science?
As we have seen, science journals and reporters have jumped on
the gay-rights bandwagon, showing full support for the LGBT agenda
(e.g., Live Science) even to the point of
publishing frauds (remember the Lacour fraud, 12/12/14). Live Science happily announced
this week that more young people are reporting same-sex attraction.
But then watch this paragraph: The latest findings showed that
92 percent of women and 95 percent of men identified themselves as being
heterosexual or straight. Just less than 2 percent of men
and a little more than 1 percent of women identified themselves as gay or
lesbian, which is consistent with past survey data results.
There has not been
a wide swing toward homosexuality in the general population, despite decades of
indoctrination. Some may be more open to discuss “same sex attraction” than
before, but that’s a gray area not the same as homosexuality itself; as Intellectual Take-Out reminds us, not all
deep friendships are ‘gay.’ Many happily married family men share deep
friendships with other men; the Duck Dynasty guys are the farthest one could
imagine from gay, but they work together, play together, and do a lot of their
guy things (especially duck hunting) apart from the girls.
Same with women. Everybody knows; put couples together in a
party, and the men will naturally gravitate to male huddles, having
conversations about manly things (sports, fitness, cars), and women will chat
happily in groups with other women. Men often confide in other men, and women
with other women. And if either sex did not find their gender attractive,
nobody would ever work out or strive to look good. These considerations are as
old as mankind and have nothing to do with homosexuality.
“Gay” may be wishful
thinking, too. Medical Xpress reported from a new
“gay journal” LGBT Health (complete
with rainbow logo) that “Transgender veterans diagnosed with significantly more mental and medical health disorders,”
including “depression, suicide thoughts or
intentions, serious mental illness,
and post-traumatic stress disorder.” In fact, transgender veterans were “significantly more likely to suffer from all ten of
the mental health conditions examined” including the above.
Heterosexuals, meanwhile, may not feel very gay (happy) about
the new decision by the FDA to lift the
lifetime ban on gay men donating blood (Medical Xpress). That ban had been
imposed to protect the public from HIV which
is primarily carried by gay men. But how many realize that HIV is still a huge problem in the gay community? It’s
not discussed as much now as it was in the 1980s, but Science Magazine just stated that
“Despite the relative success of antiretroviral therapy (ART)for individuals infected with human immunodeficiency
virus (HIV), the rate of
new diagnoses has remained fairly constant.” The article speaks
of “men at risk of transmission” without
stating the obvious: it’s gay men engaging in gay sex.
Microbiologist Neal Nathanson wrote Science Magazine to express concern over
their claim death rates from AIDS have
dropped dramatically for two decades. That’s only a half-truth, he says: “According to the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention (CDC), the number of
people living with HIV has been rapidly increasing.” How many people know
that?
Is the FDA trying to be
politically correct in spite of this data, not wanting to offend gay men who
might feel sidelined if they can’t give blood? WND asks, “where is the
science” in the FDA’s ruling? Oh, they can always
tell a person infected through a tainted blood transfusion, “Don’t worry, you
won’t die; we have treatments for AIDS now
that can prolong your life.” What kind of reassurance would that be for
unwittingly receiving a scourge that will affect their bodies, their medical
costs, and their reputations? Would this not also open a new avenue for
transmission via heterosexuals infected by a transfusion who later give blood
without knowing they were infected?
The ban has worked; there is no scientific reason to change it.
Such government decisions play Russian Roulette with the lives of the 98% of
straight Americans citizens, apparently for political correctness, so as not to
hurt the feelings of the 2% who don’t want to be looked at as abnormal in any
way.
Comments
I agree
with these guys about the FDA’s dumb idea to contaminate the blood supply
again.
I think
the gay community at its best is a subculture of creative folks who have
escaped the tyranny of the Bible. My experience has been that they are
hilarious when they are together. It’s
like hanging out with a black group, they have a lot of fun being part of the
black subculture.
I am
straight, but I’ve never been very biblically judgmental.
I don’t
believe gays should have become political and pushed to become the next
“protected class”, because I don’t think they need protecting. Those I’ve known
have been extremely competent and accepted by their straight colleagues.
Their
relationships do seem to be more difficult, tenuous and volatile than straight
relationships. They may struggle with their emotions more than others. I’m sure
that their desire to marry each other may have to do with seeking more
stability in their relationships and their need to be accepted by straights.
There is
a problem with promoting the gay lifestyle in public schools. Kids who feel like outcasts may seize upon
this fad and talk themselves into thinking they are gay or trans-sexual. They
are being told that they can’t help it because they were born gay and that
doesn’t seem to be true.
The
higher incidents of other mental problems in the gay community can mean that
they are more susceptible to choosing to be gay as a way to cope. There are
certainly other gays who have been traumatized as children by the opposite sex
and lost trust completely. I suspect some of the more brilliant gays and
straights I’ve known have been bipolar.
The bottom
line is that they should be free to do as they wish without any more help from
the government.
Norb
Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader
No comments:
Post a Comment