The Left Has A Monopoly On Being “Right” Part I: What is gay?

Its dizzying trying to think of the vast number of issues that the left of America supports where any disagreement or noncompliance means you are some kind of bigoted, sexist, close-minded, intolerant, or even a stupid person. Its impossible to unravel all the layers of arguments and accusations just to get to the root of each issue. Ironically it is that very tactic that has closed the minds of those on the left. Unbelief in their views disqualifies any possible counter argument that you might have, not because your argument isn’t valid but instead because you are (to them) one of the previously mentioned labels and are not worth arguing with anymore. When you disagree, you will be shouted down ignored, dismissed, called names, or even threatened.
It is one of the great wonders of our time that a culture so paranoid of government takeover “big-brother” is in-fact that which they fear. They are a group where dissenting expels you from not only their group but also worse, from consideration. Worse still, we see conservatives kowtowing to these paranoid and misguided perspectives of humanity and politics. And we allow this without an answer back. Partly because we have no answers we have only our intuition or conscience and we sit by hoping someone might be able to give an answer… For the next couple weeks I plan to write about most of these issues and ask honest questions… This entry is about homosexuality…
I have had my share of college courses with anthropology, biology and zoology professors, all of which refuse to even discuss that evolution might not be correct. In fact my Anthropology professor started every new semester with the same tired speech “…evolution is fact any discussion otherwise is a waste of time…” This man defined Evolution as “genetic change through time”… it is upon that definition and the current beliefs of evolution that I come to my first question.
Putting aside whether or not homosexuality is moral or immoral for this and any further discussion, how can there be any homosexuals in the modern era? If they cannot reproduce and are in fact a minority in any given population what reproductive vehicle does the homosexual gene use to insure its expression in future generations?
If we are to assume that all men have evolved from a common ancestor and all varieties of physically visible attributes were within that ancestor’s DNA, including a homosexual gene why is it that red heads are predicted to be extinct by the year 2060 due to the increasingly reducing likelihood of two red heads reproducing yet homosexuals are in every generation and have yet to reproduce ever? Maybe because the homosexual gene doesn’t exist… That or Evolution is mistaken in the process of how traits are handed down by those who reproduce most effectively so they intern subtly change each generation by way of excluding those creatures who reproduce least effectively.
Whether or not anyone takes that argument seriously I can’t say I really care. However I cannot deny that I have seen young children display behavior that is more like the opposite sex than their physically expressed sex. That fact isn’t evidence to qualify homosexuality as much as it just proves that people are dynamic creatures and have as many varieties in their behavior as they do in their appearance. Further it raises another question for me.
Are some of these children young homosexuals in the making because of some unrealized innate desire for same sex relations or are they instead inclined to homosexual behavior because society says their behavior differences are explained better through their unrealized need for same sex relationships? If homosexuality is natural and innate, I’d imagine evidence of innate homosexuality would in fact manifest an even number of male homosexuals and female homosexuals. Yet the two populations are vastly disproportioned in numbers. Homosexual behavior is far more accepted between two women than two men in our culture, yet there are far more homosexual men than women. Still, we need to draw a distinction between behavior and proclivity. Regardless, this (to me) proves homosexuality proclivity is neither innate nor curbed by society.
Could one’s libido or sex-drive (characteristics far more prevalent in males than females) be the catalyst of homosexuality? I do not think it is any coincidence that men in general have (by far) a stronger libido. How many men are in prison for sex crimes compared to women? How is it that this correlation would not suggest that homosexuality is less about genetics and more about psychology? And if it is psychology why would there be favoritism of homosexual psychology over other psychological dispositions in regards to changing societies understandings of traditions? That might always remain unanswered.
In 1973 through political pressure (by a vote) the A.P.A. (American Psychiatric Association) declared homosexuality to no longer be a mental disorder of normal sexual deviation. Homosexuality was removed from the DSM (The Diagnosis Statistical Manual or Mental Disorders). That vote, from a psychological standpoint affirmed homosexuality as “normal” and “natural”. From that event any inquiry of homosexuals psychological origins became an admission of bigotry and hate, ending all discussion.


My disclaimer. I do not condone or agree with any past treatment of homosexuals by psychologist or anyone else for that matter. I believe all homosexuals are just as human and deserving to rights as any heterosexual. However, marriage is not a right. I most definitely believe that any child no matter what age who displays homosexual behavior should get only love from his family. Still, none of this means that there are no questions about homosexuality.