Monday, June 20, 2005

The Seattle Times: Local News: Born gay? How biology may drive orientation

Being gay is not a ‘lifestyle choice’ – being religious is.

I’m getting a little tired of people arguing over whether we’re born gay, or whether it’s a lifestyle choice that can be changed with the judicious application of just the right amount of brainwashing and electric current. The science is in, and it’s as plain as a pikestaff – for those who want to see –being gay is just part of the normal spectrum of human variation, like green eyes or blonde hair.

The people who steadfastly refuse to see this have all made what really IS a lifestyle choice – to be religious. And even there, the dam is melting. The Revd. Smid of Love in Action in Memphis, the man who locks up gay teenagers to brainwash them with anti-gay guilt, (for a suitably large fee, of course) admits that some people are born gay, and you can’t change them.

This new orthodoxy says you were born that way, but you don’t have to act on your ‘impulses’. You can suppress them, even to the point of being able to function sexually with a woman, marry, and have children. The Rev’d Smid even admits to being one such man himself. Hallalujah!

But Smid says his faith compels him to believe that if he acts on his ‘impulses’, then he’ll never get to heaven and he’ll never rise again at the second coming. Instead he’ll die forever. Better to commit suicide while still pure, he tells his young charges, than give up the struggle and ‘relapse’ into a ‘gay lifestyle’.

What is faith? The irrational belief that something is so, when there is either no supporting evidence, or when what testable evidence there is, all points to the opposite.

So the question is not – did I choose to be gay, or was I born that way?

The real question is – did the Revd Smid choose to be Christian? Of course he did. Religion is not genetic – it is learned. Why does he choose to think in this manifestly dysfunctional manner, live in this fantasy world that is damaging him and dangerous to those he comes into contact with, when there are very fine doctors and therapies that could cure him? And why do we permit it?

I didn’t choose to be gay: but the Revd Smid did choose to be religious, did choose to be Christian, did choose this particularly virulent strain of Christianity, and did choose to foist it on others for his personal profit. But with love and care and appropriate therapy he could be cured. He might feel the occasional irrational urge to pray, but it could be fought down and controlled, with appropriate help. Like a male prostitute who wants to come off the game, he could be taught a trade and become a useful member of society.

Gays and lesbians don’t choose to be what they are – but Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Pagans, Wiccans DID choose their lifestyle. They chose to live this way. And they could - and should – be helped to choose to change.

1 comment:

Louise Allana said...

I understand your anger at the Revd. Smid, but I think you make a mistake in lumping "Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Zoroastrians, Pagans, [and] Wiccans" into a homogenous group that "should – be helped to choose to change".

I would never tell you that you should not be gay. Please do not tell me that I should not be Christian. You note that Revd. Smid is "particularly virulent" - do not then make him the benchmark by which you measure all religion and religious persons.

A little more acknowledgement of complexity in these issues would be appreciated.