Friday, April 01, 2005

Conservative Ideology Trumps Medical Facts Again

It looks like the administration is using "faith-based medical science" to come up with utterly non-scientifically supported conclusions to put on official government websites. By the way, this story doesn't include the actual website used, so I am going by the blurbs in the story, but assume they are accurate for now. Does anyone know where the actual site is? Apparently gay kids need to be given therapy, which is assuming that people have a choice in their orientation. There is absolutely no science anywhere to support that, that I have ever seen. Bush and other conservatives believe that people have a choice, not because there is any science behind it, but because it makes it easier for them to stomach their own views on the matter. Like being gay isn't difficult enough for a kid, then you tell them that they are somehow mentally broken. This "gay therapy" nonsense is really just therapy for ignorant parents.

Then there is the abstinence only issue. Do teenagers REALLY end up abstaining because they are not told about birth control? No, they don't, and in fact there is convincing evidence that it is harmful not to give them this information. I understand that many people would like the world to be a certain way, but in trying to make it that way, you are actually hurting kids. Don't sugarcoat information. Don't withhold information. Don't spread disinformation. Teach your kids the values that you want to teach them, but don't teach them lies. It just ruins your credibility as a parent when they find out your lies.

Yet more high-profile death, and not the Pope yet either. Well, maybe not high profile, but a somewhat famous guy anyway. Frank Perdue just died. "It takes a tough man to make a tender chicken." Well said, Frank. I had a Teocalli Thai Chicken Burrito for lunch.


Two Dogs said...

I think that you can probably guess my opinion on this, but here it is in a nutshell. I find it very hard to believe that sexuality is the only trait in our personality that is not learned. Everything that we as humans do is learned. To think that a sexual orientation is something that is not is naive at best and dishonest at worst.

By the way, at what point are you going to expose your moderate tendencies? So far all you have shown is very liberal opinions.

Erik Grow said...

If it were a learned tendency, it would have been absolutely patently obvious, because it would run in families. It does not. (No, most gays that live in San Francisco were not born there.) It also seems odd that essentially every single person that is gay knew it from a very early age. All that I have asked this (about five or six probably), all have told me the same thing, and there is no reason for them to lie, nor would they. They are all "out". There is even more to it than this, but certainly those facts alone are difficult to square with an environmental view. We are a product of more than just environment for sure.

As for the views on which I break from liberals, glad you asked. That will be the topic of a post in the near future. So far my topics are nothing that would make any Democrat flinch, so they are not uniquely liberal enough for me to wear the label. I will explain soon.

soundboyz said...


I also believe that a homosexual can be born predisposed to being gay. It is a scientific fact that people are born male , female and hermaphrodite. A female can be born with too much testosterone, thus leaving them with traits of a male and male like tendencies. A male can be born with too little testosterone and be predisposed to exhibit more feminine traits. This is science fact.

However, I do believe that enviornment can also play a role in the development of one's sexual orientation.But to say that all gays are disfunctional is unfounded rhetoric.

Two Dogs said...

I absolutely agree that not all gays are dysfunctional, however I must take issue with the acceptance of fact from such a small sampling to arrive at your opinions, Erik. I work in the field of architecture which seems to pull a large cross-section of homosexuals. I think that it has something to do with most are artists that want to actually earn a living.

To be sure, I want you to understand that the topic of sexual orientation is not one that I choose to debate openly, not from fear but from respect. It seems to be a private matter for most folks. Most normal people wouls never dream of walking down the street, swinging placards with disgusting sexual slogans on them. I take issue with the comment that there is one character trait that is more or less NOT learned. And to comment on the NO science anywhere to support the opposing view is misleading, as there is no science to support your opinion as well. The appearance of your argument is that homosexuality is just like measles, you have no choice in the determination, so it must be a disease.

Anyway, it is just common sense that if you expect something from your children, accept nothing less, then they will deliver. To allow any kind of behavior that is not in the best interest of the child, is bad parenting at best.

The article from CNN says that "virgins" have increased risk from other behaviors and then go on not to use virgins as the norm, but they use girls that are engaging in sex. Lies? Disinformation? Blatantly, but most people would recognize that for what it is, instead of using it to bolster a point that is not based in reality.

nicnerd said...

I have had this argument with Erik in person a million times. Do you not choose to engage in a sexual relationship with? Aside from rape, we all do. Gay people consciously choose a same sex partner. It is not a pre-determined trait from birth; it is a product of environment (upbringing and peer groups).

That said, I really don't care if gay people are around. I personally think that it is immoral, but that is my opinion. If they want to be gay, fine but no amount of protesting, legislation, etc. will make me think that their choice is correct. One thing I will never accept is gay marriage. Homosexuality is an abnormal choice and I could never accept it as legal, to do so implies that it is normal.

Erik Grow said...

They choose that because that is who they are attracted to! Don't you choose based on your attraction? Can you help that you are attracted to a certain type of woman? Do you know the reasons why you are attracted to cerain types? It's the exact same mechanism, and I'm not sure why it's so alien to you that it works the same way with gays. If gays actually choose to be attracted to the same sex, it's the biggest conspiracy of lies in the history of the world involving millions of gays who say that they did not choose what sex they were attracted to.

You don't have to change your beliefs. You should just have to stay out of their business, but you are very willing to stick your nose into it, even though this is a situation where there is no reason to care so much. I'm not sure how I feel on that law exactly, but I do know that the law won't effect you one iota. This is pretty much the definition of meddling, when you oppose something simply because you don't like that it exists, even though it does not effect you or yours at all. You are imposing your morals on people that don't share them, but the reverse is not happening if the law were passed since you would be unaffected.

nicnerd said...

I oppose it because it contradicts the will of the people. Some states have chosen, by a vote of their residents to not accept a gay marriage. However, the fact that some states do and the law conveys your marriage regardles of where it was performed, you are trumping the rights of that state and its people. We focus so much on the rights of minority groups, what about the rights of the majority.

There are issues in which I am clearly in the minority, I do not expect legistlation to "protect" my rights at the expense of liberty to another.

State rights, are state rights.