a TIME magazine piece entitled “Why You're Gay: A New
Study Shows Why Boy Rats Like Other Boy Rats,” author John Cloud explains the origins of
homosexuality by citing a study in Psychological Science which apparently says
nothing about homosexual behavior at all.
Researchers found that
male rats who were raised with a bunch of sister rats are “less reliable
heterosexuals” than their counterparts who weren’t. Rats with lots of sisters
apparently did not attempt as many hetero-rat-sexual encounters as other rats,
but, according to researchers, were just as fruitful, producing as many
offspring as their buddies but requiring fewer sexual encounters to do so. Say
the researchers, “males from female-biased litters mate as efficiently as males
raised in other sex ratios.”
From what I can tell
- I didn’t spend the $35 required to read the whole study - there is no mention
in the paper at all of homosexual behavior. There does not seem to be any
indication that having a bunch of sister rats inclined any of the rats toward
homosexuality at all.
So perhaps the
author is just having a little fun with the topic (as I did with the title of
this column), since the title of the TIME article suggests the study in
question represents a breakthrough in understanding the origins of
homosexuality but offers nothing of the sort.
The supposed thesis,
by the way, is actually bad for the “born that way” crowd, since it would be an
argument for environment rather than heredity as a shaping force in sexual
You will notice that
homosexual activists have gone quiet in the last decade-plus about the mythical
“gay gene.” It’s never been found; even homosexual researchers admit as much.
And if it does exist, and is discovered, the homosexual lobby won’t want
anybody to find out about it.
They know that with
advances in pre-natal genetic screening, any carriers of the gay gene likely
will wind up butchered in the wombs of their mothers just like Down syndrome
babies are. They would fall victim to the sacred rite of child sacrifice that
calls for the shedding of innocent infant blood to appease the god of Death.
It would be odd -
suddenly, homosexual activists would then be forced to become the most ardent
pro-lifers you’ve ever seen. “Why, you can’t dismember homosexuals before
they’re even born, that’s discrimination, that’s blatant homophobia, we can’t
have that, we’re going to put you in jail for committing a hate crime, you
Even if some genetic
predisposition to homosexuality is discovered, it changes nothing, for the
simple reason that sexual behavior is always, always a choice. I may not be
able to keep myself from experiencing unwanted sexual impulses - nobody can do
that - but I can always, always choose which sexual impulses to yield to. You
can ask Tiger Woods about how smart it is to deny none of your sexual impulses.
People argue that
some folks have a genetic, hereditary predisposition to alcoholism. We would
never say to such individuals, “Hey, in most cases, we tell people not to drink
themselves into a stupor - it will destroy your life, your marriage, your
family, your career - but hey, go ahead, you’re born that way, you can’t help
it, knock yourself out, wreck your life, don’t worry about it.”
Of course not. We’d,
say, hey the road may be a little tougher for you than others, but you
have got to get control of these dark impulses before they wreak utter and
total havoc in your life. I’m here to help, what can I do?
That’s the same
message we have for homosexuals: sexual behavior is a choice, homosexual
behavior will leave you diseased, lonely, and dead, you’ve got to learn to
resist homosexual impulses, I’m here to help.
resist the offer of such help, well, I guess that’s a choice too, isn’t it?
noted, the opinions expressed are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the American Family Association or American Family Radio.)