 Gay activists regularly claim that they were "born that way" and thus cannot change their desires or stop their activities. Yet there are numerous documented cases in which homosexuals have changed. The "Masters-Johnson Institute" reported that:
The answers to these seemingly "esoteric" questions matter a great deal. For one thing, the political stakes are high. The March 3, 1993 New York Times/CBS News Poll reported that a
majority of those who believe that gays "cannot change" favored permitting homosexuals to serve in the military. Only a third of those who believed it is a choice felt the same way.
Many opinions about gay rights hinge on the question of whether gays are "born that way" and/or "can't change." For instance, 57% of those who believe it is immutable consider homosexuality an acceptable life style vs 18% of those who consider it a choice. But if homosexual activity is no more inevitable or unchangeable than drunkenness or drug use, most people seem willing to insist that homosexuals abandon their destructive behavior.
Two prominent "homosexual" psychiatrists, examining the evidence of their own lives as well as those of others, came to different conclusions in this long-running debate. The first of these, Sigmund Freud, saw his homosexual urges as pathological. Through self-analysis, he overcame them and eventually rejoiced in the "greater independence that results from having overcome my homosexuality." The second of these, Richard Isay, confronted his desires, pronounced them "natural," divorced his wife and joined the gay subculture.
In 1992 Isay admitted that the "conviction among most, though not all, dynamically oriented psychiatrists in general and psychoanalysts in particular [is] that homosexuality can and should
be changed to heterosexuality." Yet, while acknowledging this consensus among his colleagues, Isay called attempts to change homosexual desire "the greatest abuse of psychiatry in America today." Why? Because the "attempt to change is extremely harmful." Instead, society should change to accommodate homosexuality.
Dr. Isay, who chairs the "American Psychiatric Association's" committee on "Gay, Lesbian, and Bisexual Issues", argues that homosexuality "is constitutional [that is, biological in origin]." To support his position, he cited as proof two 1991 studies - the "gay brains" research of Simon LeVay and the "gay twins" study of Bailey & Pillard.
In 1993, Drs. William Byne and Bruce Parsons, researchers at the New York State Psychiatric Institute, critically reviewed "the evidence favoring a biologic theory" presented by LeVay
and Bailey & Pillard. They concluded in the "Archives of General Psychiatry" that "[t]here is no evidence at present to substantiate a biologic theory" of sexual orientation!
How could these researchers dismiss as inadequate the very studies that were fundamental to Dr. Isay's argument - and that even conservative columnist William- F. Buckley referred to in 1993 as proving that homosexuals are "born that way?"
Byne & Parsons remembered that from the 1940s through the 1970s it was widely argued and "believed" in the scientific community that male homosexuals had a deficiency of male hormones. However, only 3 "studies had indicated lower testosterone levels in male homosexuals, while 20 studies found no differences based on sexual orientation, and two reported elevated testosterone levels in male homosexuals." In spite of these other studies, textbooks alluded to the supposed "fact" of hormonal differences for "three decades". But this "scientific" belief was false.
Gay Brains:
Gay Twins:
The evidence supporting the "born that way" claim of Isay and other gay activists is tenuous. It has been uncritically accepted and hyped by the media and some less-than-careful
researchers. But it hasn't been replicated by others and is riddled with technical problems.
On the other side is a body of "scientific evidence" that suggests that "homosexuality is adopted by people who are confused, sexually adventurous and/or rebellious". This evidence suggests that sexual orientation is "flexible, not immutable". And the evidence comes from the largest studies on the subject, conducted by researchers on both sides of the gay rights debate.
Sexual Preference Shifts
Unlike biological changes, the shifts in sexual orientation began at age 18 or later for half of both gays and lesbians. Sexual changes, five or more years after puberty, are "exceptionally" late and without biological precedent in development. But changes in "tastes" (e.g., food or entertainment) often take place around age 18.
Other Evidence
Consistent with these results, the "Family Research Institute (FRI)" conducted a nationwide random survey of 4,340 adults drawn from 5 U.S. cities in 1983 and found:
These are the kinds of sexual choices one would expect from the sexually adventurous or confused. Unless Dr. Isay and his supporters are willing to believe that people are "born" to fall in love, get married or to have sex with animals, some measure of choice, rather than biological inevitability, must have been involved.
The ability to change explains the FRI findings that:
People Can Change
And a survey of 50 wives who had no homosexual experiences or interests up to age 30, but who participated in homosexual sex acts as part of "swinging" (where married people swap partners) reported that all of these women eventually considered themselves to be bisexual.
These are among the findings that seriously challenge the claim that sexual orientation is predetermined before or after birth, or even that it is permanently fixed in adulthood.
If sexual orientation is actually a matter of choice like drug use, we can expect that more of our youth will try homosexuality the more that it is tolerated and encouraged. Along these lines, Dr. Christopher Hewitt's analysis of the frequency of homosexuality in various societies is summarized in the below Table: "Societies that accept homosexuality have more of it and those that disapprove of and punish it have considerably less of it."
 With the above in mind, consider our society's future in light of D. Minkowitz's December 29, 1992 editorial in the national gay magazine, The "Advocate": "I am increasingly impatient with the old chestnut that our movement for public acceptance has not increased and will not increase the number of gay men and lesbians in existence. `There are more of us than there used to be,` historian John D'Elmilio has written. Firmly believing this, I wanted to... argue the morality of teaching kids that gay is OK even if it means that some will join our ranks...." Indeed. Youth are often attracted to excitement and rebellion. The gay movement is growing. Minkowitz also argued that the "born gay" claim is nothing more than a smokescreen: "most of the line about homosex[uality] being one's nature, not a choice, was articulated as a response to brutal repression.... 'We didn't choose this, so don't punish us for it!' One hundred years later, it's time for us to abandon this defensive posture and walk upright on the earth. Maybe you didn't choose to be gay - that's fine. But I did." When Kinsey asked 1700 homosexuals in the 1940s how they "got that way," only 9% claimed that they were "born gay." In 1970, a similar percentage was recorded for 979 gays in San Francisco. But in 1983, after the gay rights movement started to politicize the issue of homosexual origins, 35% of a random sample of 147 gays said that they were "born that way". Perhaps those who "commit adultery", "molest children" or "practice homosexuality" are "born with" unusual biological influences. But there is no hard evidence of this. In fact, it appears that participation in these activities, like drug abuse or any other chosen behavior, is a combination of will and opportunity. No matter how such desires come about, members of society are rightly expected to control their behavior and not endanger others. 
 Send E-mail to Russ: webslave for Christ ( russ@jesuswept.com ) with questions or comments about this web site and it's content. Last modified: Thursday, December 05, 2002 |
