Furor over Baptist's gay-baby article

[Judi Lynn]

March 14, 2007, 10:11PM
Furor over Baptist's gay-baby article

By DAVID CRARY AP National Writer
© 2007 The Associated Press



NEW YORK — The president of the leading Southern Baptist seminary has incurred sharp attacks from both the left and right by suggesting that a biological basis for homosexuality may be proven, and that prenatal treatment to reverse gay orientation would be biblically justified.

The Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., one of the country's pre-eminent evangelical leaders, acknowledged that he irked many fellow conservatives with an article earlier this month saying scientific research "points to some level of biological causation" for homosexuality.

Proof of a biological basis would challenge the belief of many conservative Christians that homosexuality — which they view as sinful — is a matter of choice that can be overcome through prayer and counseling.

However, Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Ky., was assailed even more harshly by gay-rights supporters. They were upset by his assertion that homosexuality would remain a sin even if it were biologically based, and by his support for possible medical treatment that could switch an unborn gay baby's sexual orientation to heterosexual.
(snip/...)

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/nation/4632514.html

[DRoseDARs]

1. You win some, you lose some and sometimes you manage to piss everyone off in the process...

Sucks to this guy right now. :shrug:

[NobleCynic]

45. I don't like this preacher, so my sympathy is kind of limited.

But yeah, sucks to be him.

[Zhade]

70. Sucks to be a genocidal bigot? Yeah, but fuck him anyway.

NT!

[David__77]

2. Exactly why I oppose the "biological" argument for sex orientation.

Sure, it plays a role. But the main point concerning homosexuality is that IT IS PERFECTLY MORALLY GOOD, whether or not it is a "choice." That should be the first and last word on the issue from progressives.

[Jawja]

13. Yes.

Whether it is a CHOICE or NOT, it is the individual's right to live according to sexual orientation.

And we know it's NOT biological that people make the CHOICE to be religious nutballs (unless it's stupidity), don't we? What can society do to correct the CHOICE of believing in an intolerant god? :shrug:

[Bake]

19. Why, do you oppose science?

I have heard that there are studies that suggest a biological component of causation in sexual orientation. If science demonstrates that to be the case, it is no longer an "argument" to be opposed or supported. It's just science. Just like evolution is not an "argument." It is what it is.

Let science go wherever it needs to go to discover the truth.

Bake

[BattyDem]

29. Exactly.

And ... if a biological cause is determined, all arguments against gay rights will be obliterated. Discriminating against homosexuality would suddenly become the equivalent of discriminating against people with blue eyes, red hair, brown skin and/or any other biological component of humanity. I don't see any reason why it would have to go to court. It would be automatic because there are already laws on the books and years of precedent - you can't discriminate based on a person's biological makeup.

Science has a way of demolishing fundamentalist beliefs - that why the fundies are so terrified of it. It's also why intelligent, rational people should embrace it.

By the way, just because I don't believe it should go to court, that doesn't mean it wouldn't. I'm SURE the wingnuts would come up with some convoluted argument in order to justify making an exception for this one aspect of human biology so that discrimination could continue. :eyes:

edited for clarity

[Bake]

31. Nice avatar! n/t

Bake

[BattyDem]

32. Thanks!

:hi:

[David__77]

41. I disagree strongly.

Just because something has a biological basis does NOT mean that there will be no discrimination against it. Mark my words!

Many sociologists point to alleged biological bases for certain criminal and other anti-social behavior. Though they argue for "compassion," they certainly do not call for repealing the criminal code due to this. Likewise, theocrats and other bigots will simply state that this is a biological basis that must be resisted, and "good behavior" must be upheld.

[BattyDem]

42. That's not a fair comparison

Criminals and anti-socials have the exact same rights everyone else has ... UNTIL they break the law and/or hurt someone else. Even then, they still have their rights, but they are punished for their behavior - which the law allows. More importantly, the law is applied equally to everyone.

Certain cases - like criminals who are mentally disabled and perhaps not fully aware of their actions - always inspire discussions about compassion, which they should - but how does that relate to gay people? Homosexuals are not criminals and they don't exhibit anti-social behavior. They are average human beings who happen to be sexually attracted to people of the same sex.

Theocrats and bigots will lose their main argument - that homosexuality is a choice - and they will be forced to argue for discrimination based entirely on their religious beliefs and their personal definition of morality. That won't work because every person who doesn't have lily-white skin would realize that if the biological basis for homosexuality can be conveniently ignored in order to uphold discrimination, then the biological basis for skin color can also be ignored. If bigots win the "ignore biology to preserve discrimination" argument against homosexuals, they're not going to stop with homosexuals; they'll go after EVERY minority.

[varun]

23. Religion is a choice too

No baby is born a Christian or a Muslim. Yet, it is protected under the consitution.

[Zhade]

71. I'm surprised you haven't been flamed for this, but you're absolutely correct.

All babies are born agnostic atheists, in that they lack both knowledge of purported gods and belief in them.

[yellowcanine]

47. It is either a biological fact or it isn't. It makes no sense to "oppose a biological argument" if

in fact there is a great deal of evidence for that argument. That would be placing ideology on a higher plane than biological fact. "Morality" is too much in the eye of the beholder to be the "first and last word."

[donheld]

3. "He's willing to play God"

This man is the epitome of a Hypocrite.

[MGD]

4. I think we need more homosexuals and fewer preachers in this country.

Me thinks self-serving, superstitious, sanctimonious assholes are the problem, not homosexuals. I wonder if there's a biological basis for being a self-serving, superstitious, sanctimonious asshole and, if so, if society would be better off culling that trait from the gene pool? The constitution guarantees freedom of religion but it needs to guarantee freedom from religion.

[Ian David]

8. We should seek a cure for the genetic cause of extreme religiosity

God and the Brain
Is Belief a Psychological Condition?
A collection of guest articles on the subject.
http://atheistempire.com/reference/brain/main.html


God on the Brain - questions and answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2003/godonbrainqa.shtml


Genetic-Basis-for-Religion
Is God in Our Genes?
http://www2.sunysuffolk.edu/pecorip/SCCCWEB/ETEXTS/PHIL_of_RELIGION_TEXT/CHAPTER_10_DEFINITION/Genetic-Basis-for-Religion.htm


The God Gene: How Faith Is Hardwired into Our Genes
by Dean H. Hamer
Product Details
# ISBN: 0385720319
ISBN-13: 9780385720311
# Format: Paperback, 256pp
# Publisher: Knopf Publishing Group
# Edition Description: Reprint
# Sales Rank: 50,087
http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?z=y&EAN=9780385720311&itm=1


Faith-Boosting Genes
A search for the genetic basis of spirituality
By Carl Zimmer
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000AD4E7-6290-1150-902F83414B7F4945

[MGD]

27. A genetic predisposition towards superstition and meddling in the affairs of others?

I don't doubt it; however, I think the cure for this particular mental illness lies in the environmental component.

[Zhade]

73. The gullible gene?

NT!

[Nikki Stone1]

65. Yes! I'm with you on that.

:D

[az chela]

5. Since I believe that we return to this world many times til we

get things right,I believe that we have been male.female.every race, and how do we experience being in a female and male body without having lived in each one of them.If we come back quickly it could be possible that we bring tendencies from our last life when we might have been a different sex.If not them maybe just maybe we have things to learn that we cannot learn in the body we are in.Either way I do not see anything wrong with either scenario as we are on this earth to learn and grow and how we choose to do it is our decision and no one elses and no one has the right to judge another for learning what they came here to learn.

[TankLV]

57. so what you are saying is that there are some "teacher/coach" fantasies that we should all be

role playing?!

sorry - my mind slipped into the gutter again...

[melody]

6. Yes, but can we genetically engineer Southern Baptist bigot babies?

That's what I'm wondering.

[keroro gunsou]

20. already do...

inbreeding don'tcha know.

if it's bad for the body, imagine what inbreeding of ideas can do...

and by inbreeding i mean not realizing there is more to the world than just yourself and your own ideas.

[Ian David]

7. I thought it was caused by eating tofu

Soy is making kids 'gay'
Posted: December 12, 2006
1:00 a.m. Eastern




There's a slow poison out there that's severely damaging our children and threatening to tear apart our culture. The ironic part is, it's a "health food," one of our most popular.

<snip>

The dangerous food I'm speaking of is soy. Soybean products are feminizing, and they're all over the place. You can hardly escape them anymore.

<snip>

If you're a grownup, you're already developed, and you're able to fight off some of the damaging effects of soy. Babies aren't so fortunate. Research is now showing that when you feed your baby soy formula, you're giving him or her the equivalent of five birth control pills a day. A baby's endocrine system just can't cope with that kind of massive assault, so some damage is inevitable. At the extreme, the damage can be fatal.

Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That's why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today's rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products. (Most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!) Homosexuals often argue that their homosexuality is inborn because "I can't remember a time when I wasn't homosexual." No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many of them can truthfully say that they can't remember a time when excess estrogen wasn't influencing them.

More:
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53327

[noonwitch]

16. Pat Robertson has made comments about low-fat diets being bad for boys

Similar beliefs, that not eating enough meet can cause boys to not get enough male hormones (and that's one thing today's meet has plenty of), which affects their masculinity.

And these are the people who want to decide what is taught as science in school?

[Tansy_Gold]

38. Feminization = more woman-like = BAD, EVIL, GET RID OF IT

This is what makes me so furious.

If something makes boys less masculine, it's bad. Boy = male = good. Real simple.

If something makes girls MORE masculine, that is also bad, since girl = woman = evil /=/ male, because the only thing that's good about woman is man > woman = EVIL.

What it all comes down to is these religious assholes think anything feminine is bad, unless it's something they can conquer, dominate, oppress.

I hate 'em all.


Tansy Gold

[boilinmad]

50. Bravo !!!!!!

...perfectly said !!!!!:applause:

[TankLV]

58. good points all...

[Solly Mack]

9. What a sick fuck

[LostinVA]

10. I thought "God doesn't make junk"?

So, this dude wants to interfere with God's plans?

Tsk tsk tsk. Totally against Baptist teaching.

[trof]

11. Please take the time to read "Brain Sex".

It came out in 1992. It's out of print now, but I think Amazon has used copies and you may find it at your library.
It's a fascinating read and changed my whole way of thinking about male-female-homosexual attitudes and relationships.
Here are a couple of excerpts:

"In the first few weeks in the womb, the tiny foetus isn't noticeably a miniature girl or a miniature boy. It has all the basic equipment, such as vestigal ducts, tracts and so on, to develop as either sex. But as the weeks go by, the genes begin to put the message across. If things go normally, and everything follows the XY blueprint of a boy, the chromosomes will cue the development of the gonads into testes. It's now, at around six weeks, that sexual identity is finally determined - when the male foetus develops the special cells which produce the male hormones or androgens, the main one being testosterone. The hormones instruct the body not to bother with developing a feminine set of sexual equipment, while stimulating the development of embryonic male genitalia.

About the same time, if the baby is female, genetically XX, the reproductive machinery develops along female lines, produces no significant amount of male hormone, and results in a girl baby. Just as the six-week-old foetus wasn't recognisably male or female in appearance, so the embryonic brain takes some time before it begins to acquire a specific sexual identity. If the embryo is genetically female, nothing very drastic happens to the basic pattern of the brain. In broad terms, the natural template of the brain seems to be female. In normal girls it will develop natually along female lines.

In boys it is different. Just as male gender depended on the presence of male hormone, so a radical intervention is needed to change that naturally female brain structure into a male pattern. This literally mind-altering process is the result of the same process that determined those other physical changes - the intervention of the hormones."

---------------

"Embryonic boy babies are exposed to a collosal dose of male hormone at the critical time when their brains are beginning to take shape. The male hormone levels then are four times the level experienced throughout infancy and boyhood. A vast surge of male hormone occurs at each end of male development: at adolescence, when his sexuality comes on stream, and six weeks after conception, at the moment his brain is beginning to take shape. But, as with the development of the rest of the body, things can go wrong. A male foetus may have enough male hormones to trigger the development of male sex organs, but these may not be able to produce the additional male hormones to push the brain into the male pattern. His brain will "stay" female, so he will be born with a female brain in a male body. In the same way, a female baby may be exposed in the womb to an accidental dose of the male hormone - we'll see later how this can happen - and end up with a male brain in a female body."

[Strathos]

18. That's interesting Trof.

I'll have to look for that book.

Thanks.

[Jacobin]

22. Thanks for the post

Interesting.

there does seem to be a biological basis for most things.

[badgerpup]

36. I saw a program on one of the cable science channels about that...

A person was undergoing female to male transgendering.
The documentary was filmed over at least a year and started out with 'her' before starting the treatment.
It finished with him being for all practical intents and purposes a man.

The program was focusing mostly on the way the brain changes and how the different areas either come into or drop out of play.
There were many tests for all kinds of cognitive function at frequent intervals, and you could SEE the way the data changed over time from 'female' to 'male'.

He reported that as the process went on, he was feeling much more comfortable within himself, and that his friends had mentioned that he was 'presenting' very much more confidently and relaxed.

Fascinating...there really is a major cognitive difference in how males and females process information.

[boilinmad]

51. So, let me get this right...

.....I guess the male hormones must wipe out most of the viable brain cells, and only leave the ones that make the hyper-straight male child capable of understanding chicks, beer, sports, and monster truck racing....I get it!! God bless the straight American male:sarcasm:

[badgerpup]

52. No, not at all!

IIRC, there were marked differences in spatial relationships, word recognition, emotional reactions to certain stimuli.

I just thought it was a fascinating study and with excellent control, seeing as how you basically started out with one viable human being and got a very different viable human being out of the same brain.

I would have liked to see the same type of program on someone who was undergoing male to female transgendering and was willing to have it documented like that.

My deepest appreciation to these folks.

[TankLV]

60. hey - common now, we're trying to take this into the gutter & all you want to talke about is actual

science things and stuff...!

Go ahead, boilinmad, I believe you were trying to make a point there...

[VegasWolf]

55. Out of curiosity, then how did that study account for Lesbianism or bisexuality? nt

[Joe Bacon]

12. Stick it YOU KNOW WHERE, Rev. Mengele!

Another insane statement from the Southern Fried Baptists. :puke:

[iam]

14. Conservatism

is the dark black, Liberalism is our salvation. Science is the torch liberalism will use to chase away the darkness. Have faith fellow believers, faith in yourselves, faith in our humanity and faith in our destiny.

[sarcasmo]

15. Another in the long line of proud to be an Atheist moments.

It's obvious that these people will never shut their pie holes. Take them for what they are a hate group. I am waiting to get flamed for saying this, but can't we make the assumption that evangelicals are a hate group.

[yardwork]

34. It's certainly fair to recognize that this guy's comments are hate speech

Since not all evangelicals or fundamentalists say such things, it's not right to call them a hate group. But it's fair to point out hate speech whenever it occurs.

[sarcasmo]

35. After all of the hate from the likes of Robertson, Dobson, Falwell and now this guy

they are still not a hate group? I guess you can't paint a broad brush, but if over fifty percent of them think like this doesn't that make them a group?

[yardwork]

37. Many Christian evangelicals are very liberal

It's not accurate to call evangelicals a "hate group." It's not accurate to refer to Christian fundamentalists as a hate group. I find many of them to be personally annoying and completely wrong about many things, but that's a far cry from being a hate group.

There are hate-filled individuals supposedly representing each group, unfortunately.

[TankLV]

62. The whole idea of "evangelicals" is abhorent. and should be discouraged.

Their MAIN purpose is to "evangalize" - CONVERT OTHERS TO THEIR FUCKING "BRAND" OF RELIGION!

By their very nature, evangelicals start out on the wrong footing...

ALL evangelicals can go fuck themselves and leaves the rest of us us ALONE!

If you get in MY face about YOUR religion, don't be surprised to get a "blacK eye" in return, either literally or figuralively.

Period.

[Zhade]

72. Indeed. It's arrogant, based on no proof whatsoever, and debilitating.

NT!

[LiberalFighter]

17. What are they going to do? Have every baby take a gay medical test?

[Toucano]

53. They'll play some Donna Summer and see if he starts to dance inside the womb.

LOL!

Gay medical test! ROLF!

[Zhade]

74. Not fool-proof - I have no interest in her music.

:D

[slackmaster]

21. I see it as a small move in the right direction

An acknowledgement that homosexuality has biological roots would obliterate the rational foundation for moral judgements about sexual orientation.

[w4rma]

43. Agreed. (nt)

[Unvanguard]

46. Only it has been acknowledged for a long while

particularly among religious Jews and Catholics, that sexual orientation may be innate, and they've consistently said that same-sex intercourse (which IS a choice) is immoral anyway.

And there is no "rational foundation" for "moral judgements about sexual orientation", and there has never been any.

[slackmaster]

49. I could construct a quasi-rational construct based on assumptions of Biblical inerrancy

And I am sure you could too. The sad fact is that there are a substantial number of people who swallow the whole thing hook, line, and sinker without ever thinking of questioning it (which I had finished doing by age 15 and have never looked back).

[Unvanguard]

64. True, but why would innate sexual orientation undermine that? n/t

[slackmaster]

66. As I stated earlier, innate == not a matter of choice

I do believe that (well, maybe except for one guy I know) homosexual orientation is absolutely not a matter of choice any more than blood type or skin tone or eye color or which hand is dominant. In that context, calling homosexual orientation (behavior notwithstanding) immoral cannot be defended rationally any more than one could say being left-handed indicates demonic possession. Someone might still say it, but their bigotry becomes undeniable.

[SemperEadem]

24. all of a sudden, fundamentalists are giving credence to scientists?

Oh, they must have unintelligent design as a basis for their science education.... figures.

[Maven]

25. Paging Dr. Mengele

Dr. Mengele, please come to the nearest internment camp courtesy phone.

[NMMNG]

26. F*ckers

They won't support genuinely therapeutic medical treatments, but they'll go messing around in the womb for this. :eyes:


Fundamentalism is a plague upon humanity.

[kestrel91316]

28. Ok, so here's the deal:

1) Fetus is shown to have inherited tendency to be gay.
2) Mother submits to fetal surgery to temporarily remove fetus from the womb for anti-gay therapy.
3) Fetus is put through ten or so weeks of intensive prayer sessions and therapy to make it not be gay anymore, and maybe be a good little fundie in the process.
4) Fetus is reimplanted in mother's womb and develops the rest of the way and is born.
5) Child grows up into a happy, straight little Christofascist. They all live happily ever after.

Have I got that right?

[leQ]

61. i'd say you hit the nail on the head. (eom)

[Betty]

30. deep in their dark, evil hearts

I would bet that more than a few fundies could get behind abortion in these cases. Since they think gay people are an abomination, they probably would see nothing wrong with aborting fetuses (IF somehow they could detect which ones are in fact going to be gay) since there IS no treatment for their "disease". Like all fanatics, they would like nothing better than to "cleanse" the population.

[yardwork]

33. That's one of the most evil things I've ever heard

[progressoid]

39. WHAT??? You mean the power of prayer can't fix it?

Jeepers. How can this be?

[Canuckistanian]

40. So, science is now "biblically justified"?

Funny, I thought science was just an excuse to destroy faith.

[nealmhughes]

44. The thing that "causes" men to be gay is being sexually attracted to other men.

Period.

[yellowcanine]

48. He looks as if he would have sweaty palms. And I would wonder where his hand had been last and

whether he had washed it after. Ew.

[DuaneBidoux]

54. After a while science manages to break ALL prejudice down-with time.

It has happened over and over and will happen again--this is what the right wing fears so much. It is a crack in the dike. A dike that will inevitably break.

As for his assertion that it is still a sin even if biologically based--that too will break with time. We still (in my humble and admitedly straight opinion) should acknowledge the movement (I know I will piss some gays folks off with this attitude). I have learned this is a sensitive opinion coming from a straight person and I respect these opinioins (which is why I will no longer post on the GLBT forum). But sudden and total conversions to enlightened thinking is just almost impossible. Enlightenment doesn't come as salvation. It comes from slow steady accumulation of knowledge and culture.

I did not lose my own homophobia, racism, and parochial attitudes by waking up one morning and understanding the errors of my ways--I understood it through long, arduous, intense reading, travel, education and inculturation in an educated mileau. Very gradually I realized that everything I had been taught in Kansas was bullshit. It would have been nice if it had been a sudden shattering lightning bolt of enlightenment.

We are seeing, now, the beginning of this process for some elements of the right wing (remember how long it took them (and how they still are) to accept equality of different races.

[TankLV]

63. the RW only "accept" the different races PUBLICLY - for APPEARANCES

to further their POLITICAL ENDS. At the core, they have never changed their "beliefs".

They only tolerate "those people" as long as the RW remain in control, and "those people" support their causes.

As proof, just look at how many time the RW "slip up" and use the "n" word in private or even in public. It's just not publicly acceptable to still espouse certain views any longer - for the time being. Gays are the only acceptable group left to villify.

As soon as "those people" - for they will always be thought of as "those people" by the RW - wander in the least from support these RW asshole, they are villified and dropped like a lead balloon...

[DuaneBidoux]

68. Not always true--I have met some very fair minded conservatives (wrong, but fair minded)

Mind you that it may well not be the majority but one thing being a liberal has taught me is that broad sweeping generalizations are rarely (though not necessarily) true.

[VegasWolf]

56. Christian pastor says take your pill 6 times a day, exactly 4 hours apart, and for God's sake

don't forget to take your pill or you will roast in Hell forever!!!

[leQ]

59. how in hell's name are you going to be able to tell whether a baby is gay or not?

these ministers spouting off such senseless remarks alongside some very sensible remarks (i.e., being born gay). it's like talking out both sides of his mouth. or maybe that he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about.

[Seldona]

67. "I like boobies!"

Bart: Smithers? I thought you were... ugh... you know!
Smithers: Not as long as I take these injections!

Smithers: I like boobies!
The Simpsons

These guys would probably pass legislation to make insurance pay for it if they could. The whole thing makes me sick.

*edited for spelling

[Zhade]

69. Ah, just like a Nazi. How quaint.

NT!