The Truth About Homosexuality

By Selwyn Duke

According to modern dogma, homosexuals are like sprinters: born and not made. Thus, even though psychology’s longstanding nature-nurture debate has concluded that many traits are the result of both factors, it isn’t politically correct to consider even this possibility with respect to homosexuality. But does this biology-is-destiny theory hold water with respect to same-sex attraction? And, if so, what does this say about the behavior’s moral status? Let’s examine the matter.

When discussing same-sex attraction’s cause, the first thing usually mentioned is the much touted “homosexual gene” theory. In fact, the idea has been repeated so often that many today accept it as fact. But the reality is this: Neither the groundbreaking Genome Project nor any other research endeavor has found any such gene. Moreover, it makes no sense from an evolutionary (or selective breeding, if you prefer) standpoint. After all, such a gene would greatly reduce the chances of its bearer procreating, would be unlikely to be passed on, and thus would be a dead-end mutation unable to survive many generations. And, I must say, it’s a testimonial to the emotion-oriented decision-making of secular modernists — who are generally staunch evolutionists — that they would glom on to a theory so contrary to Evolution 101.

Next we have the intrauterine development theory.

Read the rest here.

Comments

[peachy]

"Likewise, however, it’s self-evident that a choice is involved in any behavior; to deny this is to deny free will and reduce man to an animal, an automaton, a thing, completely at the mercy of his hardware (physical make-up) and/or his software (learning). It is to dehumanize him, and that is an awfully high price to pay for the advancement of any agenda."

Impressive article, Selwyn. You must have an awfully big brain. ;0)

[Dan Johnson]

Just crawl into the gutter you crept from. You disgust me.

[Justin]

Dan, what is it you have a problem with? Truth? I saw nothing else in the article.