Posted by
Sidney Allen Johnson on Saturday, May 30, 2009 7:44:57 PM
Scientists, not unlike journalists, are arrogant people. No, its not
because they are, as some would have you believe, smarter than the rest
of us. It really has more to do with their perceptions of their
reputations. Science, we are repeatedly told, is concerned with facts
and data and therefore it is supposedly immune to the sort of criticism
leveled at the likes of politicians and clergymen. Unfortunately,
scientists are, in fact, human and therefore susceptible to the same
biases and temptations that befall the rest of us. Is it then shocking
to find out that scientists would cast their “precious”
reputations before swine and bias their research in favor of a
particularly desired outcome, especially if by doing so they would gain
both fame and the financing needed to continue their pursuits? Of
course not.
The fact is, we have seen politics invaded by science all too often
lately. Or is it the other way around? Sometimes it can get really hard
to tell who is the whore and who is the customer. We have seen this a
lot lately in the political discourse over so-called man made global
warming. There are billions, perhaps trillions, of dollars at stake
over public policy that is being debated to combat what is essentially
a scientifically superficial fraud. The legislation now being
considered in congress is nothing more than a redistributionist scheme
to extract wealth from the private sector and place it in the control
of the government. More scientists are coming out every day against the
idea that any change in the climate is due to the actions of mankind
or, more importantly, that any action taken by mankind could or should
reverse it. Yet, experts who contest the concept of man-made global
warming are not even being allowed to bring their arguments into the
Democratically controlled congress’s debates on the issue. The
game is being rigged and a sympathetic media is going along with it.
There is still hope that this Cap and Trade swindle will be stifled by
congressmen from energy producing states acting in their own
self-interest. But who knows? In Obama’s world anything that
generates economy destroying debt is seen as the “collective
good.”
And how about the fiasco over embryonic stem cell research? We
recently watched as the current president excoriated the previous one
as being unfriendly to science because he failed to fund new lines of
embryonic stem cell research. This, in spite of the fact that embryonic
stem cell research has been a considerable failure compared to the
research being done with adult stem cells. This entire episode is
nothing more than a political sideshow in the continuing debate over
abortion and the definition of an embryo as human life. The politics
and the science is being intertwined into an unnecessary moral dilemma.
One that, from a purely scientific point of view, should be resolved
with the successes of adult stem cell research. But why put an end to a
good fight?
It should therefore come as no surprise to find out that the
politically motivated science of progressive social engineers has yet
again been derailed from its devious and deceptive tracks. This time it
is the myth that homosexuality is genetically inherited that is coming
unravelled. Yes, you read that correctly, one of the
progressive’s favorite lies is being scientifically destroyed.
And not a moment to soon.
Many people today believe that homosexuality is part of a
homosexual’s construction from the moment of conception. This
idea that homosexuality is both a genetic and permanent condition has
been promoted by both homosexual activists and a fawning media. One
example often promoted by the media is this from a brochure issued by
the American Psychological Association (APA) in 1998 that stated:
“There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that
biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a
significant role in a person’s sexuality.”
There is only one problem with that. It is not, and never has been,
true. The truth is that such statements are, and always have been, part
of a massive homosexual propaganda campaign designed to deceive the
public into accepting homosexual behavior as natural and normal. It was
neither, and many of us have said so all along. However, by taking
control of the debate and framing homosexuality as non-choosable and
inherited, it became possible to refer to anyone who opposes the
homosexual agenda as a bigot. A nice weapon to wield if you can get
away with it. Unfortunately the real science of genetic research was
always unwilling to go as far as the propaganda, as evidenced by this
from Science Magazine in 1994:
Time and time again, scientists have claimed that particular
genes or chromosomal regions are associated with behavioral traits,
only to withdraw their findings when they were not replicated.
“Unfortunately,” says Yale’s [Dr. Joel] Gelernter,
“it’s hard to come up with many” findings linking
specific genes to complex human behaviors that have been replicated.
“…All were announced with great fanfare; all were greeted
unskeptically in the popular press; all are now in disrepute.”
In other words, it is not as simple as the journalists and activists
implied. They had a result they desired and proceeded to look for some
science to back it up. In the meantime they were willing to stretch the
inconclusive results into unsubstantiated data that would support their
desired conclusion. That conclusion being that homosexuals are born and
not the product of any “environmental” influences. How
damning it is then that the APA, after years of research deliberately
looking for this mythical “gay gene,” would be forced to
change their statement on homosexuality to this:
“There is no consensus among scientists about the exact
reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or
lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible
genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on
sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to
conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor
or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles.
…”
Although they declined to reveal the particulars of the research that
made them change their position it is resoundingly clear that all
efforts to prove that homosexuality is biologically and genetically
transmitted have failed. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GAY GENE!
The MAJORITY of scientists now believe that homosexuality is
attributable to a combination of psychological, social and biological
factors, as the following statements on the matter can attest:
“Many scientists share the view that sexual orientation is
shaped for most people at an early age through complex interactions of
biological, psychological and social factors.” -American Psychological Association
“At this point, the most widely held opinion [on causation of homosexuality is that multiple factors play a role.” -Simon LeVay, “Gay Brain” researcher
“Any human behavior is going to be the result of complex
intermingling of genetics and environment. It would be astonishing if
it were not true for homosexuality.” -Dennis McFadden, University Of Texas neuroscientist
“I know of no one in the field who argues that
homosexuality can be explained without reference to environmental
factors.” -Steven Goldgerg, Sociologist
“If homosexuality was caused by genetic mechanisms, their
children would be more likely to choose same-sex interaction. But they
aren’t more likely, so therefore it can’t be
genetic.” - Douglas Abbott, University of Nebraska
All of this information is documented by The National Association
for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH). NARTH also has this
to say about a term often used by proponents of homosexuality:
“homophobia”:
“The term ‘homophobia’ is often used
inaccurately to describe any person who objects to homosexual behavior
on either moral, psychological or medical grounds. Technically,
however, the term actually denotes a person who has a phobia – or
irrational fear – of homosexuality. Principled disagreement,
therefore, cannot be labeled ‘homophobia.’”
Homosexuality makes for strange bedfellows. The Local Law
Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009 would provide special
protections to homosexuals but leave Christian ministers open to
prosecution should their teachings be linked to any subsequent offense,
by anyone, against a homosexual. However, if we take this new Hate
Crimes legislation to its natural conclusion, could not scientists who
argue that homosexuality is not an inborn trait be considered guilty of
violating the Hate Crimes legislation also? Homosexuals consider ANY
criticism of them as hate speech so certainly if they decry the words
of God from the Bible they must assuredly decry the words of scientists
who fail to support their agenda. Something to consider as well is why
we should allow such legislation to pass at all as it clearly is aimed
at protecting behavior and not people. Perverse and un-natural behavior
at that!
According to a recent survey by the Pew Research Center For People
and the Press, attitudes about homosexuals have changed significantly
over the last 22 years. This is especially true among people who
consider themselves to be religious. There is a trend toward more
tolerance towards homosexuals and the idea of homosexual marriage. This
can be entirely attributed to the homosexual activists and their use of
propaganda to deceive the public into viewing their
“plight” as a civil rights issue. It is not. Their entire
campaign has been built on deliberately misleading, and at times,
entirely fabricated science. These lies are now being exposed. There is
nothing virtuous about tolerating, supporting or endorsing homosexuals
or homosexual behavior. If you are one of those who were led to believe
that homosexuals are born that way, then you are a victim of this
deceptive propaganda machine. Be a victim no more.
All of this has to be devastating to homosexual advocates, and it
would be, if the media would report any of it. Like the also less that
scientifically valid theory of Evolution, some science is too
politically important to allow the facts to interfere with the agenda.
The theory of evolution is nothing more than a cog in the progressive
religion of “multiculturalism” that is used to justify
every social engineering scheme the socialist left favors. Genetic
homosexuality, by contrast, is considered to be a poison to the only
religion that can compete with theirs…Christianity. And to think
these are the people who argue that they favor science over
religion…