Turns out that your son really isn’t gay just to spite you.

My wife is seven months pregnant. So naturally, a friend just sent me a fascinating article on more scientific proof that some gays aren’t gay because television tells them that it’s cool, but because they really are born that way.

Slate magazine reports on more studies that suggest that homosexuality isn’t a choice, or even that it is genetic, but rather may be due to exposure to hormones in the womb.

After screening out socializing factors and taking into account the theory that genetics may play some role in male homosexuality, though, it seems to be “insignificant” for female homosexuality, Slate summarizes thusly:

So, what’s the common factor? If the study’s design rules out learned influences, and if the results in women rule out genetics, that leaves what the authors call “hormonal influences” or noncognitive differences in the infant environment. According to the Guardian, the same research team has “begun another study to investigate brain symmetry in newborn babies, to see if it can be used to predict their future sexual orientation.” If it can, that will scratch postnatal factors off the list, and the search will narrow to hormones in the womb. Already, the authors point to evidence that homosexuality may be caused by “under-exposure to prenatal androgens” in males and “over-exposure” in females.

Slates take on this is that gays may finally be able to show scientifically that their preferences are not a choice but are, in fact, something they are born with.

And that the implications of this finding may not be quite what some people had in mind.

Because if homosexuality really is due to over-exposure to certain hormones, surely some parents are going to try to protect against said over-exposure. In other words, aren’t some parents going to try some form of hormonal therapy to prevent homosexuality?

They link to article by Rev. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in which he opines, “If a biological basis is found, and if a prenatal test is then developed, and if a successful treatment to reverse the sexual orientation to heterosexual is ever developed, we would support its use as we should unapologetically support the use of any appropriate means to avoid sexual temptation and the inevitable effects of sin.”

What say you about this? Would it be wrong to allow your baby to be treated for homosexuality?

Advertisements

One Response

  1. Fascinating observation – one I haven’t seen yet: treating the unborn to fix their genetic disposition towards homosexuality. I’ll have to consider that one.

    A couple of thoughts regarding genetics and homosexuality.

    1) Were’nt our “genes” affected by the fall. Thus, there are sinful behaviors transmitted via genetics.

    2) However, even if someone is born with the genetic tendancy towards homosexuality, it doesn’t make it moral. A person could be born with the alcoholic gene. Does that mean God wants him to drink himself into oblivion? No. The Word gives us what is moral and immoral. However, God offers grace, forgiveness, and strength to overcome any sin – even homosexuality – if a person is open to Him.

    I wrote a recent article about a fictional conversation between Ray Boltz (who just came out) and Jesus. If you’re interested, you can see it here http://shawnbarr.wordpress.com/2008/09/26/ray-boltz-talks-to-jesus/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: