AVERAGE USER RATING
Recently On News
Featured Sponsors
Christian Living Resources, Bible Study Tools, Jesus Christ
Five Logical Errors of Born Gay Ideology
Andrew Tallman
"The Andrew Tallman Show," KPXQ-Phoenix
July 31, 2008
It is core doctrine of pro-gay orthodoxy that homosexuals are born gay. Though science has yet failed to affirm or deny this, the vast majority of gays and their supporters are convinced of it. Sexual orientation is seen as something discovered, not chosen. Instead of debating the merit of this assertion, let’s grant the premise that sexual orientation is determined prior to birth by genetic, gestational or other factors. The question is whether any valid conclusions flow from this. I don’t think so.
Error 1: Sexual orientation cannot change
If present at birth, sexual orientation could come from either biology or psychology. If biological, then a medical procedure may be discovered to alter it. Science gushes with the ability to change things we were born with, especially conditions which past generations considered permanent. We can treat genetic diseases, repair cleft palates, perform height-enhancing surgeries and even perform sex-change operations.
Similarly, if the issue is psychological, treatments may be possible. Many traits and behavioral patterns people believe ought or need to be changed can be adjusted by good counseling or psychopharmacology. Simple induction concludes that if medicine goes looking for a treatment for homosexuality, it might find one.
Many gays will be outraged at this line of reasoning. But why? We’ve been told that homosexuality can’t be a choice—apparently because so few would choose it. Clearly some gays would relish the power to turn their unwanted condition into an optional one. And why shouldn’t other gays be happy for those who would then be truly free to choose? After all, they’re happy for sex-change operations, which make it possible for transgender persons to undo the birth nature they think was mistakenly given them. How can gender be so fixably wrong but sexual orientation so unfixably right?
Error 2: I have no choice about how I behave
There are two kinds of inborn behavioral tendencies: the resistible and the irresistible. Unless we are supposed to believe that homosexuality is so involuntary that every gay sex act is literally a matter of biological determinism, we are left with the more plausible alternative: the desire to have gay sex does not compel anyone to actually ever have gay sex. One may not be able to control who attracts him, but he can certainly control who he has sex with. Consider the non sequitur of a gay man offering to explain last night’s particular sexual encounter by saying, “Well, I was born gay, you know.”
Free will is precisely the capacity to resist a carnal urge. If a gay person can refrain from sex even once, he has shown such free will. Thus, sexual choices devolve to him, not to his inborn disposition. Of course, straight people and gay people alike deny their sexual impulses all the time.
Error 3: If I was born gay, then acting upon it must be good
No one denies that gays have strong desires to be sexual with like-minded, like-bodied others. But strong desires do not justify behavior. Otherwise the study of ethics would be nothing more than the articulation of our impulses.
Some men may be born promiscuous (and perhaps most are), but this doesn’t legitimize adultery (or polygamy, for that matter). Since morality involves precisely the question of which desires are good to act upon, gay behavior cannot be justified merely on the grounds of experienced gay desire.
Error 4: If I was born gay, then this is simply who I am
In gay doctrine, being gay isn’t seen as an important part of one’s identity. It’s seen as the definitive center of it. But why should this be so?
I am a Christian, a talk-show host, a baseball fan, right-handed, a philosopher, red-headed, from St. Louis and heterosexual. None of these is the sum or limit of my identity. However, the ones I’ve chosen or chosen to act upon define me far more than those I happened to be born with. Thus, though choosing to have gay sex is certainly a key part of one’s identity, being born with the predilection to do so is not.
Error 5: If I was born gay, God must have made me this way
Of all the untenable conclusions drawn from the born gay premise, this is the most scandalous. Whereas claiming that God has His hand in the creation of every child is uncontroversial, alleging that every element of that child’s physical, emotional and even sexual state at birth are all intended by God is quite another thing. If this pattern of inference were allowed, we would have to believe that God desires every birth defect, handicap, psychological disorder or behavioral tendency we can trace to early childhood. God may allow such things, but that is theological miles from saying that God wanted them.
Yet there is a much deeper blunder embedded in this particular claim. The idea that people have inappropriate inclinations from birth is not unique to the born-gay meme. In fact, it’s so far from unique that it’s actually a cornerstone premise of Christian theology. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants all agree about this one key concept: mankind suffers from original sin, a polluted condition that makes every one of us desire immorality from our birth.
Thus, in a very real sense, one might say that we’re all born gay, although the historically preferred terminology is that we’re all born sinners. We are surely born with corrupt desires, but that doesn’t mean God intended us to act on them.
Although I have serious doubts about the claim that sexual orientation is determined at birth, the issue is largely academic since nothing important hangs on it. Being born gay doesn’t prevent change, prohibit choice, justify behavior, form identity or implicate God. It just means that the moral challenges of the gay person are different from mine.
Andrew Tallman is the host of The Andrew Tallman Show and a columnist. Andrew’s show is heard daily on KPXQ in Phoenix. Contact him at andrewtallman@kpxq1360.com.
It is core doctrine of pro-gay orthodoxy that homosexuals are born gay. Though science has yet failed to affirm or deny this, the vast majority of gays and their supporters are convinced of it. Sexual orientation is seen as something discovered, not chosen. Instead of debating the merit of this assertion, let’s grant the premise that sexual orientation is determined prior to birth by genetic, gestational or other factors. The question is whether any valid conclusions flow from this. I don’t think so.
Error 1: Sexual orientation cannot change
If present at birth, sexual orientation could come from either biology or psychology. If biological, then a medical procedure may be discovered to alter it. Science gushes with the ability to change things we were born with, especially conditions which past generations considered permanent. We can treat genetic diseases, repair cleft palates, perform height-enhancing surgeries and even perform sex-change operations.
Similarly, if the issue is psychological, treatments may be possible. Many traits and behavioral patterns people believe ought or need to be changed can be adjusted by good counseling or psychopharmacology. Simple induction concludes that if medicine goes looking for a treatment for homosexuality, it might find one.
Many gays will be outraged at this line of reasoning. But why? We’ve been told that homosexuality can’t be a choice—apparently because so few would choose it. Clearly some gays would relish the power to turn their unwanted condition into an optional one. And why shouldn’t other gays be happy for those who would then be truly free to choose? After all, they’re happy for sex-change operations, which make it possible for transgender persons to undo the birth nature they think was mistakenly given them. How can gender be so fixably wrong but sexual orientation so unfixably right?
Error 2: I have no choice about how I behave
There are two kinds of inborn behavioral tendencies: the resistible and the irresistible. Unless we are supposed to believe that homosexuality is so involuntary that every gay sex act is literally a matter of biological determinism, we are left with the more plausible alternative: the desire to have gay sex does not compel anyone to actually ever have gay sex. One may not be able to control who attracts him, but he can certainly control who he has sex with. Consider the non sequitur of a gay man offering to explain last night’s particular sexual encounter by saying, “Well, I was born gay, you know.”
Free will is precisely the capacity to resist a carnal urge. If a gay person can refrain from sex even once, he has shown such free will. Thus, sexual choices devolve to him, not to his inborn disposition. Of course, straight people and gay people alike deny their sexual impulses all the time.
Error 3: If I was born gay, then acting upon it must be good
No one denies that gays have strong desires to be sexual with like-minded, like-bodied others. But strong desires do not justify behavior. Otherwise the study of ethics would be nothing more than the articulation of our impulses.
Some men may be born promiscuous (and perhaps most are), but this doesn’t legitimize adultery (or polygamy, for that matter). Since morality involves precisely the question of which desires are good to act upon, gay behavior cannot be justified merely on the grounds of experienced gay desire.
Error 4: If I was born gay, then this is simply who I am
In gay doctrine, being gay isn’t seen as an important part of one’s identity. It’s seen as the definitive center of it. But why should this be so?
I am a Christian, a talk-show host, a baseball fan, right-handed, a philosopher, red-headed, from St. Louis and heterosexual. None of these is the sum or limit of my identity. However, the ones I’ve chosen or chosen to act upon define me far more than those I happened to be born with. Thus, though choosing to have gay sex is certainly a key part of one’s identity, being born with the predilection to do so is not.
Error 5: If I was born gay, God must have made me this way
Of all the untenable conclusions drawn from the born gay premise, this is the most scandalous. Whereas claiming that God has His hand in the creation of every child is uncontroversial, alleging that every element of that child’s physical, emotional and even sexual state at birth are all intended by God is quite another thing. If this pattern of inference were allowed, we would have to believe that God desires every birth defect, handicap, psychological disorder or behavioral tendency we can trace to early childhood. God may allow such things, but that is theological miles from saying that God wanted them.
Yet there is a much deeper blunder embedded in this particular claim. The idea that people have inappropriate inclinations from birth is not unique to the born-gay meme. In fact, it’s so far from unique that it’s actually a cornerstone premise of Christian theology. Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants all agree about this one key concept: mankind suffers from original sin, a polluted condition that makes every one of us desire immorality from our birth.
Thus, in a very real sense, one might say that we’re all born gay, although the historically preferred terminology is that we’re all born sinners. We are surely born with corrupt desires, but that doesn’t mean God intended us to act on them.
Although I have serious doubts about the claim that sexual orientation is determined at birth, the issue is largely academic since nothing important hangs on it. Being born gay doesn’t prevent change, prohibit choice, justify behavior, form identity or implicate God. It just means that the moral challenges of the gay person are different from mine.
Andrew Tallman is the host of The Andrew Tallman Show and a columnist. Andrew’s show is heard daily on KPXQ in Phoenix. Contact him at andrewtallman@kpxq1360.com.
Most Recent User Comments
Report this post
LegendsOfBatman
8/10/2008 1:48 AM
Here's the response I wrote to the discussion that linked me here:
Scripturally, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Logically, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Scientifically, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Scripturally: We are told we have a sin nature. However, we are not told how that sin nature is manifested. Some are bent on being gay; some are bent towards violence. But, if we are born with a sin nature, then, it would stand to reason, we are born certain ways.
Logically: Are only gay people the only ones to choose their sexual desires?
We've heard it said, "You can't help who we fall in love with". Except gays?
Did we choose to be straight? Then how do we then say, they chose to be gay?
Scientifically: There is indeed evidence that supports the idea of a "gay" gene. Interestingly, in the 80's they discovered that there is a "murderous" or "violent" gene.
This may be of interest too. Initially, when scientists discovered the "gay gene" the gay community was up in arms. They were angry, thinking it insulting to say they had no choice in the matter.
However, as it became clear that they are born gay, the Christian community has been the ones outraged, and the gay community has embraced it. Oddly, rather than be biblical, the christian community refuses to accept reality, as does the gay community.
Scriptural evidence we SHOULD be using: "If anyone would follow me, they should deny themselves and take up their cross daily".
So, the argument should NEVER be, "Are they born gay?" But, rather, like every sinner, "Are you willing to follow Christ, by denying who you and your sin nature are?"
Tim
Scripturally, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Logically, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Scientifically, there is more evidence to support people are born gay, than not.
Scripturally: We are told we have a sin nature. However, we are not told how that sin nature is manifested. Some are bent on being gay; some are bent towards violence. But, if we are born with a sin nature, then, it would stand to reason, we are born certain ways.
Logically: Are only gay people the only ones to choose their sexual desires?
We've heard it said, "You can't help who we fall in love with". Except gays?
Did we choose to be straight? Then how do we then say, they chose to be gay?
Scientifically: There is indeed evidence that supports the idea of a "gay" gene. Interestingly, in the 80's they discovered that there is a "murderous" or "violent" gene.
This may be of interest too. Initially, when scientists discovered the "gay gene" the gay community was up in arms. They were angry, thinking it insulting to say they had no choice in the matter.
However, as it became clear that they are born gay, the Christian community has been the ones outraged, and the gay community has embraced it. Oddly, rather than be biblical, the christian community refuses to accept reality, as does the gay community.
Scriptural evidence we SHOULD be using: "If anyone would follow me, they should deny themselves and take up their cross daily".
So, the argument should NEVER be, "Are they born gay?" But, rather, like every sinner, "Are you willing to follow Christ, by denying who you and your sin nature are?"
Tim
KarenGross
8/8/2008 10:36 PM
Very well written. The nature/nurture debate will likely go on forever. If living a gay lifestyle is an abomination to the God who created us, then claiming that God made an individual this way means that God is very cruel indeed. However, it is a good point that we are each born with a sin nature, and we each may have slightly different temptations to deal with. I can't imagine an alcoholic or a pedophile claiming that God made me this way - therefore I am not responsible for my actions or my lifestyle.
- Read more feedback
- Give us your feedback on this article - (login required to comment)
1. When visiting Athens Paul said nothing of their homosexuality while preaching to them about The unknown god.
2. Contrary to popular misinterpreation of the Bible Sodom & the surrounding areas were not destroyed due to homosexuality.
Ezekiel 16:49 "Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant overfed & unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. They were haughty & did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen"
For those who respond with "homosexuality is detestable things" might I point out even if this is what is intended isn't it interesting homosexuality is NOT mentioned by name but the two major sins within the church are? unconcerned & overfed!
3. Paul mentions in Romans 8-10 "If God made us this way, why are we still responsible?" His response: "What business is that of your's?" Ie, Yes, we are still responsible.
Tim