Wednesday, June 27, 2007

The Science of Gaydar

The gay reporter David France writes in NY Mag:
And the cumulative findings support the belief now widely held in the scientific community that sexual orientation -- perhaps along with the characteristics we typically associate with gayness -- is biological. "We're reaching a consensus on a broad question," says J. Michael Bailey, a psychologist at Northwestern University. Is sexual orientation "something we're born with or something we largely acquire through social experience? The answer is clear. It's something we're born with."
After 20 years of gay gene propaganda, there is no such consensus. It is an open scientific question.

Even young people who support same-sex marriage are not convinced. A new NY Times poll asked:
48. Do you think being homosexual is something people choose, or do you think that it is something they cannot change?
34% of all adults say they choose, while 43% of 17-29 year-old said they choose. If there were really some scientific proof, then no one would have to bother with these silly arguments and polls.

Those folks aren't learning what is being taught in Maryland, according to this:
According to the American Psychiatric Association, there are no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological cause for homosexuality. But now the Montgomery County Board of Education has done what science and medicine could not do by declaring in its newly approved curriculum that homosexuality is "innate" or inborn. The board could not produce any factual evidence for what it will now teach students -- only political "pledges" and payoffs for last year's school board elections as claimed by gay rights activists.
Homosexuality could be innate without any specific biological cause being known, but there is no proof that it is innate either. There are some known correlations with innate characteristics, just as there are for IQ, criminality, and other mental properties.

No comments: