A recent study has shown that homosexuality may be passed down in a different way than previously thought. Scientists from the National Institute for Mathematical and Biological Synthesis believe homosexuality, rather than being genetic, is epigenetic. Epi-marks are extra “layers” of information that control the expression of genes. They are usually “erased” between generations but scientists think that in the case of homosexuality, that doesn’t happen. These layers of information are passed father-to-daughter or mother-to-son.
Enter the American Family Association’s Bryan Fischer. His interpretation of the study is… interesting. He says that we can no longer say that gays are “born that way” even though the study specifically says they are. He cites the fact that identical twins don’t always share the same sexual inclination, which is true. But the report still supports the idea that gay people are, in fact, born gay. Just because it occurs in a different way than previously thought doesn’t change that.
Fisher continues, praising the scientists for “… bend(ing) in the direction of actual data rather than blindly adhering to … political correctness…” He quotes one of the scientists who commented that if homosexuality were genetic, evolution would have eradicated it. “I’ve often observed that Darwinians should be even more resolutely opposed to the normalization of homosexuality than evangelicals, since the whole point of evolution is the propagation of the species,” he writes. Wait a second… Fischer is agreeing with evolution? Only if it supports his view.
But it gets better — or worse. He points out that we can now routinely screen for 3500 genetic defects in utero and that if there were a “gay gene” it would have been found by now. He further posits that the what this new study is saying is that homosexuality is a birth defect: “Homosexual children, on this theory, are born evolutionarily and genetically disadvantaged. They have been overexposed or underexposed to testosterone because something has gone wrong in the process of genetic transmission. In other words, they are the product of a genetic abnormality at best, a birth defect at worst.” Well, that’s a bit of a reach, isn’t it?
That’s not far enough for Fischer, however. He goes on to write, “… I expect many abortion-minded parents will want to know exactly how strong this epi-marker is in their unborn children so they can decide whether or not to exercise reproductive choice. ” What? Choice? Can this be true? The hypocrisy is dazzling.
Well, perhaps. But, of course, Fischer has to find a way to smear gays in his diatribe. And he does. His “logic process” leads him to believe that the “homosexual lobby” will soon be pushing legislation to forbid “sex selection” abortions. He also thinks that this new epigenetic theory will be banned as well because homosexual activists won’t want it to be true.
He concludes by saying that he really doesn’t believe this new scientific theory at all, even after using it to suggest a form of eugenics. So he spent the time to read the report and write about it, using ugly and insulting language but, in the end, he doesn’t buy it. One marvels at his mental gymnastics. Truly, his attempt to promote abortion — or even suggest it — in the case of people he abhors points to a sickness that is far deeper than an epigenetic code.