- Text smaller
- Text bigger
Homosexual lobbyists are effectively using the anti-discrimination angle of the civil rights movement for advancing the gay rights platform. Their current efforts to redefine marriage are now backed by activist judges in Massachusetts and local officials in San Francisco. In response to these most recent assaults on traditional American values and the fundamental institution of marriage, President Bush announced his support for a constitutional amendment barring same-sex marriage in the U.S., which has ignited a firestorm of public debate.
Immediately amid the debate by various talking heads, an abuse of scientific terms and concepts have been bandied about, including evolution of the human race, the functionality and compatibility of male-female DNA versus male-male or female-female DNA and the genetic disposition of gays and lesbians.
First, same-sex marriage does not represent evolution of the human race. In fact, viewing homosexuality as an evolutionary advancement is inconsistent with the theory of evolution itself. According to Darwinists, evolution is the progression and diversification of the species. The mechanism is descent by modification characterized by natural selection and survival of the fittest, all of which require propagation of a species. In the absence of modern medicine, a factor not contemplated by Darwin, same-sex marriage would bring reproduction to a screeching halt, leading to the eventual extinction of the human race.
Second, the functionality of male-male or female-female DNA is nonsensical. The issue lurking behind such references is that two sperm or two eggs cannot by themselves reproduce or create human life. Moreover, compatibility or mixing of same-sex DNA to create life through artificial reproductive technologies is not currently a viable option for gay couples. Worse, it is in grim league with human-cloning experiments.
Third, some obviously think homosexuality is driven by genetic instruction hard-wired before birth. This has led to an intense search to prove a genetic link to sexual orientation. The question here is “Why try to attribute genetic causes to sexual orientation?”
The reasons vary. Undoubtedly, it counters the argument that lesbian and gay behaviors are unnatural or crimes against nature. It also provides a “guilt free ticket” for individual action and absolves personal responsibility. There are even those who think a biological component will serve to afford gays more legal protection against discriminatory practices.
Whatever the reason, it is important to understand that molecular biology reveals that genes alone do not determine the structure and function of an organism. The structure and function of an organism is determined by a combination of genetic instructions plus the unpredictable interaction of genes with each other and their environment, as well as non-genetic factors such as choice and accident. Regarding sexuality, most scientists agree that genes, hormones and environment collectively shape development.
As to the hunt for the gay gene, research has proven inconclusive. The most highly referenced work was done more than a decade ago by molecular geneticist Dean Hamer and his colleagues. They claimed that they found a genetic link to male homosexuality, but attempts to duplicate their results were unsuccessful. Even with tremendous amounts of genetic research done by the human genome project, no gay gene or genetic predisposition to homosexuality has been found.
In stark contrast to the hunt for the gay gene, there is growing support that homosexuality is a developmental disorder and a changeable predisposition. The evidence is a rather uniform picture of poor family dynamics that has emerged from those seeking change from the homosexual lifestyle. It is often seen as a rift in the father-son or mother-daughter relationship growing up, feelings of rejection among one’s peers during childhood and adolescence, and instances of sexual abuse and/or incest.
Ironically, the same people who promote gay marriage and anticipate discovery of a gay gene also believe evolution is an unassailable fact. In fact, if you believe evolution you cannot logically believe that homosexuality is a genetically driven advancement. It does not promote the propagation of our species or lead to any other. To the contrary, it would lead to the extinction of the human race. What’s more, homosexuality does not even represent social or cultural progression. Growing support that homosexuality is a result of poor family dynamics or criminal abuse is also inconsistent with advancing the human race.
The plain fact is science does not favor homosexuality and its focus du jour of same-sex marriage.