Introduction
I’ve always wondered about people who say they were born gay. I guess at one point and time I started to believe this very thing because of the way the media was reporting it. I think Collins does a great job with presenting us with the different possible reasons why people could become homosexaulity: 1) Biological Theories, 2) Parent-Child Relationships, 3) Other Family Relationships and Experiences, 4) Other Early Experiences, and 5) Willful Choices.
Out of all the possible reasons that Collins give, I’m can go along with reasons two through five. However, the Biological component has always intrigued me. I will therefore, seek to see what is actually the truth on this matter; are people really born homosexuals? I will look at the controversy on this subject; what the media have to say; what the scientist have to say; what homosexuals have to say; and lastly, what God has to say.
The Genetic Controversy
There is much controversy over whether a gay gene actually exists or not. Could the gene be a myth or an actual fact? Well to begin, everyone has something to say on this issue including our political leaders like Vermont Governor Howard Dean: “The overwhelming evidence is that there is a very significant, substantial genetic component to it. From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people.” 1
This statement was made to defend his actions of signing a bill which legalized civil unions for homosexuals in Vermont.
Dr. Ruth Westheimer and Dr. Louis Lieberman state in their book entitled “Sex and Morality” that, “The homosexual no more chooses homosexuality than the heterosexual chooses heterosexuality.” 2
On the other hand Linda Bowles, a nationally syndicated columnist commented,
“There is no scientific proof that homosexuality is genetic. There is no scientific basis for viewing homosexuality as anything other than an acquired sexual dysfunction.” 3
In the same article she said, “The bottom line is this: Homosexuals are made, and they can be unmade.” (Ibid)
So with out a doubt there are numerous conclusions on whether or not a person is born gay.
What the Media Say?
Many people have been led to believe that much evidence has been found to sustain the gay gene. The idea that homosexuality is genetic, has received a great deal of media coverage. This coverage has presented the gay gene as a scientific fact. The esteemed research journal Science published a study by Dean Hamer in July of 1993 which claims that there might be a gene for homosexuality. Not very long after, National Public Radio sounded loudly those findings, and Newsweek ran the cover story, "Gay Gene?" The Wall Street Journal also announced "Research Points Toward a Gay Gene.”
When you stop to look at these statement, you find they were completely without merit. However, many sincere people who knew no better believed them. Others took up the idea and proceeded to add their own two cents. Because of these misleading headlines many individuals were convinced that people are born gay without any factual evidences to support the claims.
The American Psychological Association said:
“No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.” 4
Natalie Angier, who wrote an article that appeared in the New York Times had this to say:
“Ushering the politically explosive study of the origins of sexual orientation into a new and perhaps more scientifically rigorous phase, researchers report that they have linked male homosexuality to a small region of one human chromosome.” 5 She went on to say that “The results have yet to be confirmed by other laboratories, and the chromosomal region implicated, if it holds up under further scrutiny, is almost surely just a single chapter in the intricate story of sexual orientation and behavior. Nevertheless, scientists said the work suggests that one or several genes located on the bottom half of the sausage-shaped X chromosome may play a role in predisposing some men toward homosexuality. The researchers have begun a similar study looking at the chromosomes of lesbians.” (Ibid)
These types of announcements catch the uninformed reader off guard and leave the impression that a gay gene has been found. But what do the scientist have to say on this crucial topic? Have those who studied the material themselves found evidence to support the media claims?
What the Scientist Say?
There are three well known scientific studies that have been conducted in this area of genetics. One was performed by Simon LeVay, whose study claimed to have found a difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Another was done by Bailey and Pillard, who studied the wide existence of homosexuality among biological twins and adopted brothers. Then a third study was done by Dean Hamer, who claimed to have found a linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Just to note, all of these men are self-identified gay men except for Bailey. Their work has been interpreted to mean something other than what was intended.
Simon LeVay
Simon LeVay is a writer and lecturer with a background in neuroscience. He is best known for his research on the brain and sexuality. His research, however, borders on a bias type approach because he “…lost his partner of 21 years to AIDS” and “he felt that “. . . if I didn’t find anything, I would give up a scientific career altogether.” 6 Even though he could have possessed a narrow view based on inner emotions, let’s notice some statements that have been made by him.
Levay did find “A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men.” 7 This hypothalamic structure is an area that deals with the hypothalamus, “an important supervisory center in the brain, rich in ganglia, nerve fibers, and synaptic connections.” 8 “It is thought to be involved in the expression of emotions, such as fear and rage, and in sexual behaviors” (Ibid)
In 1991 Simon LeVay studied the brains of the cadavers of thirty-five men, nineteen of whom he believed were homosexuals and sixteen of whom he believed were heterosexuals. LeVay found a group of neurons in the hypothalamus that appeared to be twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the homosexual men. He then suggested that the size of this group of neurons, called the INAH3, might have something to do with sexual behavior. Now, let’s observe his own remarks. One important thing to note is what Levay did not find. According to his own words he said,
“It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. 9
He further states in his book, “The Sexual Brain” that, "Time and again I have been described as someone who 'proved that homosexuality is genetic' ... I did not." 10
Bailey and Pillard
J. Michael-Bailey and Richard Pillard published a study in the Archives of General Psychiatry in December of 1991 on the prevalence of homosexuality among twins.
They studied 56 pairs of identical twins, where at least one brother was a homosexual, and found that 29 of them (52 percent) were both homosexual. They found 6 out of 57 pairs of adopted brothers (11 percent) were both homosexual and also found that 12 of 54 pairs of fraternal twins (22 percent) were both homosexual. They then concluded that homosexuality is caused by genetics. 11
There are, however, some problems with this study as will be pointed out by Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco, who has a Ph.D. in Biology from MIT:
“…there were significant problems with the study. First, if homosexuality is genetically determined, why did only 52% of the identical twins share the same sexual orientation? How about the other 48% of the twins who differed in their sexual orientation? How do we account for them? Second and more importantly, the study was based upon a sample of twins which was not random. As critics have pointed out, Bailey and Pillard did not rule out the possibility that they had preferentially recruited twins where both brothers were gay by advertising in homosexual newspapers and magazines rather than in periodicals intended for the general public. Indeed, it now appears that preferential recruitment did occur in the 1991 study — a more recent 2000 study by Bailey and his colleagues, using volunteers recruited, not from the gay community but from the Australian Twin Registry, revealed that only 20% and not 52% of identical twins share the same homosexual orientation. (J. Michael Bailey, Michael P. Dunne, and Nicholas G. Martin, "Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orientation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample," J. Personal Social Psychology 78 (2000): 524-536.) This is not as significant a difference between identical and fraternal twins as earlier reported. Thus, as the authors of the 2000 paper conclude, it is very difficult to distinguish the genetic from the environmental influences on sexual orientation.” 12
It would be impossible for Dr. Bailey and Dr. Pillard to determine whether it was genetics or environment that caused the twins’ homosexuality unless the twins were separated. Biologist Anne Fausto-Stirling of Brown University expressed: “In order for such a study to be at all meaningful, you’d have to look at twins raised apart.”13
Dean Hamer
Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute studied forty pairs of homosexual brothers and found that thirty-three of the brothers had the same pattern at the tip of the X chromosome known as the Xq28. Hamer estimated that this pattern was responsible for homosexual development in 64 percent of the brothers he studied.
“This study has come under much criticism — the Office of Research Integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services even investigated Hamer for alleged fraud in this study though it eventually cleared him and most significantly, has never been reproduced. In fact, two subsequent studies of other homosexual brothers have since concluded that there is no evidence that male sexual orientation is influenced by an X-linked gene.” 14
Like the Simon LeVay’s study, it is difficult to determine whether the changes in brain structure were the cause of homosexual behavior or the result.
This same study was done by George Ebers of the University of Western Ontario and George Rice. They examined fifty-two pairs of gay brothers and found no connection between the pattern of the Xq28 and the homosexuality of his subjects. 15
“Finally, in 1999, George Rice and George Ebers published their data. In the April edition of Science, the scientists showed that their results, “do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality” (Rice et al., 1999 and Wickelgren, 1999). They found that the gay brothers looked at by the Hamer group were no more likely to share the Xq28 markers than would be expected by chance. This officially sounded the death-knell for the optimism held by Hamer et al. and others looking in this region for the gene leading to homosexuality.” 16
What Homosexuals Say?
Camille Paglia, a lesbian activist, has declared, “No one is
born gay. The idea is ridiculous. Homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.” 17
The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality published this statement in one of their articles from the “Born that Way” theory: “No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.” 18
From Science 1994 we read,
“Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated.”Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute." (Ibid)
Again, according to Pro-family activist Greg Quinlan, an Ex- Homosexual, “There is no biological evidence, not one repeatable study, not a single genetic test that gives any validity to homosexual behavior as a "born" trait. No one is born Gay, no one!” 19
Stephen Bennett is a former homosexual who said: “I am living proof that homosexuals can change, that no one is born gay.” 20
I think we can safely say that the likely hood of there being a gay gene is very unlikely.
What God Says?
As we consider lastly what God has to pronounce on the subject of homosexuality, let’s be reminded that the Bible never condemns genetic problems. As Bro Jackson said, “Being left-handed is not wrong. Having red hair is not a sin. Baldness is not a form of evil. On the other hand, homosexual activity is explicitly condemned in the Scriptures.” 21
Homosexuality under the Law of Moses
This practice of homosexuality has been around from the beginning. Gods view about this degrading conduct has always been the same. Moses records the Words of God’s law this way: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Lev. 18:22) The word “abomination” according to Webster means: “The act of abominating or state of being abominated; detestation; extreme aversion; that which is abominated or abominable; hence, hateful or shameful vice.” 22 This exact Hebrew word is used in Psalms 88:8 which the RSV translates as a “Thing of Horror.”(emp. mine TE) “The frequency of this word attests to its importance; it occurs 117 times in all.” 23 Homosexuality to God is a “thing of horror.” Such horror that demanded the death penalty in the Old Testament:
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” (Lev. 20:13)
The phrase “their blood shall be upon them” denotes responsibility and thus choice. Everyone who chose to pursue this lifestyle suffered the penalties. Such was the case of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 19 says that the men of Sodom “compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter” (v4). The men asked Lot, “Where are the men which came in to thee this night” (5)? After this suspicious inquiry, they give the reason for their actions: “bring them out unto us, that we may know them” (v5). The word “know” is a euphemism or mild about expression to describe the sexual relationship. The same word is used in Genesis 4:1 where it said that “Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain…” The men of Sodom sought sexual relationships with those other men and “…the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire ...” (Gen. 19:24).
Who can deny the severity evolved in this sin? The Old Testament is given that we may learn and be admonished not to make the same mistakes (Rom.15:4; I Cor. 1:1-10). The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are given to us and “are set forth for an example” (Jude 7).
Homosexuality under the Law of Christ
The New Testament is mans final opportunity to adhere and obey, being Christ’s “Last Will and Testament” (Heb 9:15-17). Now let us notice some things about homosexuality under this testament by which we will be judged (Rom. 2:16; Jo. 12:48).
Paul affirms that men and women who lie with those of the same sex “dishonour their own bodies between themselves” (Rom. 1:24). Even in Paul’s time the “women did change the natural use into that which is against nature” and the men left “…the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly…” (Rom. 1:27). This is not hereditary but pure passion because “every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed” (James 1:14). “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections” (Rom.1:26) “…through the lusts of their own hearts…” (Rom 1:24).
Since Paul has identified the fact that this ungodly practice did exist in the first century look at his further condemnation of the matter. In first Corinthians 6:9-11 Paul classifies homosexuals as those who are “abusers of themselves with mankind.” Those words are translated from one Greek word (arsenokoitēs) which properly denotes“one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual.” 24
Note that those who commit this sin (homosexuality) “shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” No one who leads a homosexual lifestyle will enter the gates of Heaven “unless they repent.” This practice is “contrary to sound doctrine” (I Tim. 1:10). It is opposed to everything that man is about. When God told Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to “…Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…” (Gen. 1:28) he certainly did not have in mind adoption, but procreation, and that is something that Homosexuals can not accomplish!
Conclusion
Looking at the evidence that I have found, it very hard to come to the conclusion that Biological reasons give rise to homosexuality. I don’t believe there is a Biological component. Having said that, I do believe that these people need help. They need the very help that the church supposed to be putting forth.
Jesus was said to be the “Wonderful Counselor.” If Jesus has given us a pattern that we should follow, then that leads me to understand that we should be counselors as well. Many times people know what’s right and wrong; it’s not the knowledge of the sin that’s the problem. Often times the problem is not knowing how to overcome the sin; that’s where we come in.
Works Cited
1Harrub, Brad and Miller, Dave. (2004) This is the Way God Made Me”—A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene. Retrieved from www.apologeticspress.org/modules. php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=2553
2Lieberman Louis and Westheimer, Ruth. (1988) .Sex and Morality: Who Is Teaching Our Sex Standards? Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. pg. 168
3Bowles, Linda. (1999) .Sorry, no gay gene. Retrieved from www.worldnet daily.com/news/ article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=12969
Ibid
4American Psychological Association. (2005). Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality. Retrieved from www.apa.org /pubinfo/answers.html#choice
5Angier, Natalie. (1993). Reports Suggests Homosexuality is Linked to Genes. Retrieved from www.query.nytimes.com/gst/health/article-page.html?res=9F0CE1D A163A F935A25754C0A965958260
Ibid
6Pierce, Dan. (2003). The Gay Gene: Assertions, Retractions, and Controversy. Retrieved from www.bio.davidson.edu /courses/genomics/2002/Pierce/gaygene.htm
7Levay, Simon. (1991). A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1887219
8Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. (2003). Hypothalamus. Retrieved from www. education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/hypothal
Ibid
9Nimmons, Dvaid. (1994). Sex and the brain - neurobiologist Simon LeVay found a link between brain structure and homosexuality. Retrieved from www.findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_n3_v15/ai_15 242680
10Levay, Simon. (1999). The Sexual Brain. Bradford Book Publications. pg. 122
11Bailey, J. M. and Pillard, R. C. (1991). A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Retrieved from www. archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/12/1089
12Austriaco, Nicanor Pier Giorgio. (2003). Myth of the Gay Gene, The. Retrieved from www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_ view.cfm?recnum=5798
13Inqueery. (2004). What Does Science Say About Homosexuality? Retrieved from www.inqueery.com/html/science_and_homosexuality.html.
14Austriaco, Nicanor Pier Giorgio. (2003). Myth of the Gay Gene, The. Retrieved from www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_ view.cfm?recnum=5798
15Inqueery. (2004). What Does Science Say About Homosexuality? Retrieved from www.inqueery.com/html/science_and_homosexuality.html.
16Pierce, Dan. (2003). The Gay Gene: Assertions, Retractions, and Controversy. Retrieved from www.bio.davidson.edu /courses/genomics/2002/Pierce/gaygene.htm
17Jackson, Wayne. (2001). The Progressively Aggressive “Gay” Movement. Retrieved from www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/aggressiveGays.htm
18NARTH. (2004). Is There a "Gay Gene"? Retrieved from www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Ibid
19Quinlan, Greg. (2004). Ex-Gay Activist Testifies at Ohio DOMA Hearing. Retrieved from www.narth.com/docs/domahearing.html
20Bennett, Stephen. (2003). Former Homosexual Says 'No one is born gay. Retrieved from www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=79372
21Jackson, Wayne. (1999). The Sexual Orientation Controversy. Retrieved from www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/ orientation.htm
22New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language. Deluxe Ency. Edition. Delair Pub. 1981, pg. 3
23Archer, Gleason L., Jr., Harris, R. Laird, , and Waltke, Bruce K. (1980). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.Vol. 2. Moody Bible Inst. pg. 976
24Thayer, Joseph H. (2000). Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament. Hendrickson Pub. pg. 75
I’ve always wondered about people who say they were born gay. I guess at one point and time I started to believe this very thing because of the way the media was reporting it. I think Collins does a great job with presenting us with the different possible reasons why people could become homosexaulity: 1) Biological Theories, 2) Parent-Child Relationships, 3) Other Family Relationships and Experiences, 4) Other Early Experiences, and 5) Willful Choices.
Out of all the possible reasons that Collins give, I’m can go along with reasons two through five. However, the Biological component has always intrigued me. I will therefore, seek to see what is actually the truth on this matter; are people really born homosexuals? I will look at the controversy on this subject; what the media have to say; what the scientist have to say; what homosexuals have to say; and lastly, what God has to say.
The Genetic Controversy
There is much controversy over whether a gay gene actually exists or not. Could the gene be a myth or an actual fact? Well to begin, everyone has something to say on this issue including our political leaders like Vermont Governor Howard Dean: “The overwhelming evidence is that there is a very significant, substantial genetic component to it. From a religious point of view, if God had thought homosexuality is a sin, he would not have created gay people.” 1
This statement was made to defend his actions of signing a bill which legalized civil unions for homosexuals in Vermont.
Dr. Ruth Westheimer and Dr. Louis Lieberman state in their book entitled “Sex and Morality” that, “The homosexual no more chooses homosexuality than the heterosexual chooses heterosexuality.” 2
On the other hand Linda Bowles, a nationally syndicated columnist commented,
“There is no scientific proof that homosexuality is genetic. There is no scientific basis for viewing homosexuality as anything other than an acquired sexual dysfunction.” 3
In the same article she said, “The bottom line is this: Homosexuals are made, and they can be unmade.” (Ibid)
So with out a doubt there are numerous conclusions on whether or not a person is born gay.
What the Media Say?
Many people have been led to believe that much evidence has been found to sustain the gay gene. The idea that homosexuality is genetic, has received a great deal of media coverage. This coverage has presented the gay gene as a scientific fact. The esteemed research journal Science published a study by Dean Hamer in July of 1993 which claims that there might be a gene for homosexuality. Not very long after, National Public Radio sounded loudly those findings, and Newsweek ran the cover story, "Gay Gene?" The Wall Street Journal also announced "Research Points Toward a Gay Gene.”
When you stop to look at these statement, you find they were completely without merit. However, many sincere people who knew no better believed them. Others took up the idea and proceeded to add their own two cents. Because of these misleading headlines many individuals were convinced that people are born gay without any factual evidences to support the claims.
The American Psychological Association said:
“No, human beings can not choose to be either gay or straight. Sexual orientation emerges for most people in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed.” 4
Natalie Angier, who wrote an article that appeared in the New York Times had this to say:
“Ushering the politically explosive study of the origins of sexual orientation into a new and perhaps more scientifically rigorous phase, researchers report that they have linked male homosexuality to a small region of one human chromosome.” 5 She went on to say that “The results have yet to be confirmed by other laboratories, and the chromosomal region implicated, if it holds up under further scrutiny, is almost surely just a single chapter in the intricate story of sexual orientation and behavior. Nevertheless, scientists said the work suggests that one or several genes located on the bottom half of the sausage-shaped X chromosome may play a role in predisposing some men toward homosexuality. The researchers have begun a similar study looking at the chromosomes of lesbians.” (Ibid)
These types of announcements catch the uninformed reader off guard and leave the impression that a gay gene has been found. But what do the scientist have to say on this crucial topic? Have those who studied the material themselves found evidence to support the media claims?
What the Scientist Say?
There are three well known scientific studies that have been conducted in this area of genetics. One was performed by Simon LeVay, whose study claimed to have found a difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Another was done by Bailey and Pillard, who studied the wide existence of homosexuality among biological twins and adopted brothers. Then a third study was done by Dean Hamer, who claimed to have found a linkage between DNA markers on the X chromosome and male sexual orientation. Just to note, all of these men are self-identified gay men except for Bailey. Their work has been interpreted to mean something other than what was intended.
Simon LeVay
Simon LeVay is a writer and lecturer with a background in neuroscience. He is best known for his research on the brain and sexuality. His research, however, borders on a bias type approach because he “…lost his partner of 21 years to AIDS” and “he felt that “. . . if I didn’t find anything, I would give up a scientific career altogether.” 6 Even though he could have possessed a narrow view based on inner emotions, let’s notice some statements that have been made by him.
Levay did find “A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men.” 7 This hypothalamic structure is an area that deals with the hypothalamus, “an important supervisory center in the brain, rich in ganglia, nerve fibers, and synaptic connections.” 8 “It is thought to be involved in the expression of emotions, such as fear and rage, and in sexual behaviors” (Ibid)
In 1991 Simon LeVay studied the brains of the cadavers of thirty-five men, nineteen of whom he believed were homosexuals and sixteen of whom he believed were heterosexuals. LeVay found a group of neurons in the hypothalamus that appeared to be twice as large in the heterosexual men as in the homosexual men. He then suggested that the size of this group of neurons, called the INAH3, might have something to do with sexual behavior. Now, let’s observe his own remarks. One important thing to note is what Levay did not find. According to his own words he said,
“It’s important to stress what I didn’t find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn’t show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. 9
He further states in his book, “The Sexual Brain” that, "Time and again I have been described as someone who 'proved that homosexuality is genetic' ... I did not." 10
Bailey and Pillard
J. Michael-Bailey and Richard Pillard published a study in the Archives of General Psychiatry in December of 1991 on the prevalence of homosexuality among twins.
They studied 56 pairs of identical twins, where at least one brother was a homosexual, and found that 29 of them (52 percent) were both homosexual. They found 6 out of 57 pairs of adopted brothers (11 percent) were both homosexual and also found that 12 of 54 pairs of fraternal twins (22 percent) were both homosexual. They then concluded that homosexuality is caused by genetics. 11
There are, however, some problems with this study as will be pointed out by Nicanor Pier Giorgio Austriaco, who has a Ph.D. in Biology from MIT:
“…there were significant problems with the study. First, if homosexuality is genetically determined, why did only 52% of the identical twins share the same sexual orientation? How about the other 48% of the twins who differed in their sexual orientation? How do we account for them? Second and more importantly, the study was based upon a sample of twins which was not random. As critics have pointed out, Bailey and Pillard did not rule out the possibility that they had preferentially recruited twins where both brothers were gay by advertising in homosexual newspapers and magazines rather than in periodicals intended for the general public. Indeed, it now appears that preferential recruitment did occur in the 1991 study — a more recent 2000 study by Bailey and his colleagues, using volunteers recruited, not from the gay community but from the Australian Twin Registry, revealed that only 20% and not 52% of identical twins share the same homosexual orientation. (J. Michael Bailey, Michael P. Dunne, and Nicholas G. Martin, "Genetic and Environmental Influences on Sexual Orientation and Its Correlates in an Australian Twin Sample," J. Personal Social Psychology 78 (2000): 524-536.) This is not as significant a difference between identical and fraternal twins as earlier reported. Thus, as the authors of the 2000 paper conclude, it is very difficult to distinguish the genetic from the environmental influences on sexual orientation.” 12
It would be impossible for Dr. Bailey and Dr. Pillard to determine whether it was genetics or environment that caused the twins’ homosexuality unless the twins were separated. Biologist Anne Fausto-Stirling of Brown University expressed: “In order for such a study to be at all meaningful, you’d have to look at twins raised apart.”13
Dean Hamer
Dean Hamer of the National Cancer Institute studied forty pairs of homosexual brothers and found that thirty-three of the brothers had the same pattern at the tip of the X chromosome known as the Xq28. Hamer estimated that this pattern was responsible for homosexual development in 64 percent of the brothers he studied.
“This study has come under much criticism — the Office of Research Integrity of the Department of Health and Human Services even investigated Hamer for alleged fraud in this study though it eventually cleared him and most significantly, has never been reproduced. In fact, two subsequent studies of other homosexual brothers have since concluded that there is no evidence that male sexual orientation is influenced by an X-linked gene.” 14
Like the Simon LeVay’s study, it is difficult to determine whether the changes in brain structure were the cause of homosexual behavior or the result.
This same study was done by George Ebers of the University of Western Ontario and George Rice. They examined fifty-two pairs of gay brothers and found no connection between the pattern of the Xq28 and the homosexuality of his subjects. 15
“Finally, in 1999, George Rice and George Ebers published their data. In the April edition of Science, the scientists showed that their results, “do not support an X-linked gene underlying male homosexuality” (Rice et al., 1999 and Wickelgren, 1999). They found that the gay brothers looked at by the Hamer group were no more likely to share the Xq28 markers than would be expected by chance. This officially sounded the death-knell for the optimism held by Hamer et al. and others looking in this region for the gene leading to homosexuality.” 16
What Homosexuals Say?
Camille Paglia, a lesbian activist, has declared, “No one is
born gay. The idea is ridiculous. Homosexuality is an adaptation, not an inborn trait.” 17
The National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality published this statement in one of their articles from the “Born that Way” theory: “No. There is no evidence that shows that homosexuality is simply "genetic." And none of the research claims there is. Only the press and certain researchers do, when speaking in sound bites to the public.” 18
From Science 1994 we read,
“Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits, only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated.”Unfortunately," says Yale's [Dr. Joel] Gelernter, "it's hard to come up with many" findings linking specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated. "...All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute." (Ibid)
Again, according to Pro-family activist Greg Quinlan, an Ex- Homosexual, “There is no biological evidence, not one repeatable study, not a single genetic test that gives any validity to homosexual behavior as a "born" trait. No one is born Gay, no one!” 19
Stephen Bennett is a former homosexual who said: “I am living proof that homosexuals can change, that no one is born gay.” 20
I think we can safely say that the likely hood of there being a gay gene is very unlikely.
What God Says?
As we consider lastly what God has to pronounce on the subject of homosexuality, let’s be reminded that the Bible never condemns genetic problems. As Bro Jackson said, “Being left-handed is not wrong. Having red hair is not a sin. Baldness is not a form of evil. On the other hand, homosexual activity is explicitly condemned in the Scriptures.” 21
Homosexuality under the Law of Moses
This practice of homosexuality has been around from the beginning. Gods view about this degrading conduct has always been the same. Moses records the Words of God’s law this way: “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.” (Lev. 18:22) The word “abomination” according to Webster means: “The act of abominating or state of being abominated; detestation; extreme aversion; that which is abominated or abominable; hence, hateful or shameful vice.” 22 This exact Hebrew word is used in Psalms 88:8 which the RSV translates as a “Thing of Horror.”(emp. mine TE) “The frequency of this word attests to its importance; it occurs 117 times in all.” 23 Homosexuality to God is a “thing of horror.” Such horror that demanded the death penalty in the Old Testament:
“If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” (Lev. 20:13)
The phrase “their blood shall be upon them” denotes responsibility and thus choice. Everyone who chose to pursue this lifestyle suffered the penalties. Such was the case of Sodom and Gomorrah. Genesis 19 says that the men of Sodom “compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter” (v4). The men asked Lot, “Where are the men which came in to thee this night” (5)? After this suspicious inquiry, they give the reason for their actions: “bring them out unto us, that we may know them” (v5). The word “know” is a euphemism or mild about expression to describe the sexual relationship. The same word is used in Genesis 4:1 where it said that “Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain…” The men of Sodom sought sexual relationships with those other men and “…the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire ...” (Gen. 19:24).
Who can deny the severity evolved in this sin? The Old Testament is given that we may learn and be admonished not to make the same mistakes (Rom.15:4; I Cor. 1:1-10). The cities of Sodom and Gomorrah are given to us and “are set forth for an example” (Jude 7).
Homosexuality under the Law of Christ
The New Testament is mans final opportunity to adhere and obey, being Christ’s “Last Will and Testament” (Heb 9:15-17). Now let us notice some things about homosexuality under this testament by which we will be judged (Rom. 2:16; Jo. 12:48).
Paul affirms that men and women who lie with those of the same sex “dishonour their own bodies between themselves” (Rom. 1:24). Even in Paul’s time the “women did change the natural use into that which is against nature” and the men left “…the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly…” (Rom. 1:27). This is not hereditary but pure passion because “every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed” (James 1:14). “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections” (Rom.1:26) “…through the lusts of their own hearts…” (Rom 1:24).
Since Paul has identified the fact that this ungodly practice did exist in the first century look at his further condemnation of the matter. In first Corinthians 6:9-11 Paul classifies homosexuals as those who are “abusers of themselves with mankind.” Those words are translated from one Greek word (arsenokoitēs) which properly denotes“one who lies with a male as with a female, sodomite, homosexual.” 24
Note that those who commit this sin (homosexuality) “shall not inherit the kingdom of God.” No one who leads a homosexual lifestyle will enter the gates of Heaven “unless they repent.” This practice is “contrary to sound doctrine” (I Tim. 1:10). It is opposed to everything that man is about. When God told Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden to “…Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth…” (Gen. 1:28) he certainly did not have in mind adoption, but procreation, and that is something that Homosexuals can not accomplish!
Conclusion
Looking at the evidence that I have found, it very hard to come to the conclusion that Biological reasons give rise to homosexuality. I don’t believe there is a Biological component. Having said that, I do believe that these people need help. They need the very help that the church supposed to be putting forth.
Jesus was said to be the “Wonderful Counselor.” If Jesus has given us a pattern that we should follow, then that leads me to understand that we should be counselors as well. Many times people know what’s right and wrong; it’s not the knowledge of the sin that’s the problem. Often times the problem is not knowing how to overcome the sin; that’s where we come in.
Works Cited
1Harrub, Brad and Miller, Dave. (2004) This is the Way God Made Me”—A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene. Retrieved from www.apologeticspress.org/modules. php?name=Read&cat=1&itemid=2553
2Lieberman Louis and Westheimer, Ruth. (1988) .Sex and Morality: Who Is Teaching Our Sex Standards? Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. pg. 168
3Bowles, Linda. (1999) .Sorry, no gay gene. Retrieved from www.worldnet daily.com/news/ article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=12969
Ibid
4American Psychological Association. (2005). Answers to Your Questions About Sexual Orientation and Homosexuality. Retrieved from www.apa.org /pubinfo/answers.html#choice
5Angier, Natalie. (1993). Reports Suggests Homosexuality is Linked to Genes. Retrieved from www.query.nytimes.com/gst/health/article-page.html?res=9F0CE1D A163A F935A25754C0A965958260
Ibid
6Pierce, Dan. (2003). The Gay Gene: Assertions, Retractions, and Controversy. Retrieved from www.bio.davidson.edu /courses/genomics/2002/Pierce/gaygene.htm
7Levay, Simon. (1991). A difference in hypothalamic structure between heterosexual and homosexual men. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=1887219
8Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. (2003). Hypothalamus. Retrieved from www. education.yahoo.com/reference/encyclopedia/entry/hypothal
Ibid
9Nimmons, Dvaid. (1994). Sex and the brain - neurobiologist Simon LeVay found a link between brain structure and homosexuality. Retrieved from www.findarticles. com/p/articles/mi_m1511/is_n3_v15/ai_15 242680
10Levay, Simon. (1999). The Sexual Brain. Bradford Book Publications. pg. 122
11Bailey, J. M. and Pillard, R. C. (1991). A genetic study of male sexual orientation. Retrieved from www. archpsyc.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/48/12/1089
12Austriaco, Nicanor Pier Giorgio. (2003). Myth of the Gay Gene, The. Retrieved from www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_ view.cfm?recnum=5798
13Inqueery. (2004). What Does Science Say About Homosexuality? Retrieved from www.inqueery.com/html/science_and_homosexuality.html.
14Austriaco, Nicanor Pier Giorgio. (2003). Myth of the Gay Gene, The. Retrieved from www.catholicculture.org/docs/doc_ view.cfm?recnum=5798
15Inqueery. (2004). What Does Science Say About Homosexuality? Retrieved from www.inqueery.com/html/science_and_homosexuality.html.
16Pierce, Dan. (2003). The Gay Gene: Assertions, Retractions, and Controversy. Retrieved from www.bio.davidson.edu /courses/genomics/2002/Pierce/gaygene.htm
17Jackson, Wayne. (2001). The Progressively Aggressive “Gay” Movement. Retrieved from www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/aggressiveGays.htm
18NARTH. (2004). Is There a "Gay Gene"? Retrieved from www.narth.com/docs/istheregene.html
Ibid
19Quinlan, Greg. (2004). Ex-Gay Activist Testifies at Ohio DOMA Hearing. Retrieved from www.narth.com/docs/domahearing.html
20Bennett, Stephen. (2003). Former Homosexual Says 'No one is born gay. Retrieved from www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=79372
21Jackson, Wayne. (1999). The Sexual Orientation Controversy. Retrieved from www.christiancourier.com/penpoints/ orientation.htm
22New Webster’s Dictionary of the English Language. Deluxe Ency. Edition. Delair Pub. 1981, pg. 3
23Archer, Gleason L., Jr., Harris, R. Laird, , and Waltke, Bruce K. (1980). Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament.Vol. 2. Moody Bible Inst. pg. 976
24Thayer, Joseph H. (2000). Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament. Hendrickson Pub. pg. 75
RSS Feed