There is no "gay gene"

The American Psychological Association has come out with a statement reporting what we all knew anyway: there is no gay gene. Genetics plays no role in a person's sexual orientation. Homosexuals are not 'born that way.'

A publication from the American Psychological Association includes an admission that there is no "gay" gene, according to a doctor who has written about the issue on the website of National Association for Research & Therapy of Homosexuality. NARTH deleted the following statement that was originally contained in their: There is considerable recent evidence to suggest that biology, including genetic or inborn hormonal factors, play a significant role in a person's sexuality" and instead have revised it to state the following, according to A. Dean Byrd, the past president of NARTH:

"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 there is no mention of the research that influenced this new position statement, it is clear that efforts to 'prove' that homosexuality is simply a biological fait accompli have failed," Byrd wrote. "The activist researchers themselves have reluctantly reached that conclusion. There is no gay gene. There is no simple biological pathway to homosexuality."

"Let the gays marry. What harm could it do?"

It could lead, and did lead, and is leading, to legislation such as the Hate Crimes Act (S909) otherwise known as the Pedophile Protection Act.

Political Pistachio asked:

"'But how does this bill protect pedophiles?' one may ask."

"Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, submitted that a simple sentence, an amendment, to H.R. 1913 in the House Judiciary Committee to read the following:"

"The term sexual orientation as used in this act or any amendments to this act does not include pedophilia."

"His suggestion was rejected."

"As the bill stands, if it passes for law, if you catch an adult in the act of raping a child, and use force to remove that person from the child, the pedophile can turn around and accuse you of assault, and claim it was a hate crime."

"Rep. Alcee Hastings, D-Fla., in response to the outcry by King, and others, stated that this bill will protect all 547 forms of sexual deviancy or "Paraphilias" listed by the APA."

We see that a special class of people have been created and worse, protected, from so-called "hate crimes" that barely or do not exist. As a matter of fact, FBI statistics consistently show that hate crimes are overwhelmingly about race, and secondly, religion. Crimes against gays for their sexual orientation are only third down the line, and in 2007 there were only 1265 incidents. 1265 incidents against a population, according to the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, of 23 million constituents strong.

The bill would create a special class of people, including people who exhibit "behaviours generally involve children or non-consenting partners, non-human objects, or the humiliation or suffering of a partner or oneself..."and then this bill enhances their protection in the justice system, even though no known studies show that hate crime against them is higher than any other class of people and is in fact, lower.

In response to Maine's affirmative vote for homosexual marriage, Pat Robertson said:

"ROBERTSON: Lee, we haven’t taken this to its ultimate conclusion. You got polygamy out there. How can we rule that polygamy is illegal when you say that homosexual marriage is legal. What is it about polygamy that’s different? Well, polygamy was outlawed because it was considered immoral according to biblical standards. But if we take biblical standards away in homosexuality, what about the other? And what about bestiality and ultimately what about child molestation and pedophilia? How can we criminalize these things and at the same time have constitutional amendments allowing same-sex marriage among homosexuals. You mark my words, this is just the beginning in a long downward slide in relation to all the things that we consider to be abhorrent."

He is right. It is abhorrent. In S909 we see the downward slide hastening to its inevitable conclusion ... judgment.

It is not too late. Those suffering in a sinful lifestyle whether it be sexual or other, can and must repent. Ask the Lord to forgive your transgressions and ask the Holy Spirit to give you strength to withstand these heinous temptations. Because if S909 passes and these specially created and protected class of people breathe a sigh of relief, thinking they are secure and protected forever, they are not. It is only for a whisper of time, and then they will face the Holy God and account to Him for their sins. There is no protection at the Judgment Seat.

Homosexual marriage is not a civil right issue

Ladyblog said: "When and why did the gay rights activists and their defenders decide that it was logical, valid, wise, effective, or constitutionally defensible to compare the social and civil ambitions of the gay community to the past sufferings and civil rights battles of the black man in America?"

"How do selected instances of social ostracism, job discrimination, and the restrictions of our marriage laws rise to the level of mass ethnic subjugation? When were the gays or their ancestors forcibly removed from their ancestral homes, enslaved, beaten, starved, sold, and then – once freed – discriminated against and segregated?"

"I do not see how the social difficulties of the gay man or woman come close to matching the history of slavery and racial discrimination. Gay men and women have never lived with anything like the “No Coloreds Allowed” lunch counters and water fountains, or segregated schools and communities of America’s past."

Maine Bishop Richard Malone wrote to all Maine Catholics this week: "To redefine marriage to include same-sex couples is to strip marriage of an essential component, namely the ability and obligation to procreate," the bishop said in the letter, read in all Maine diocese on Sunday. "To strip marriage of this essential component is to render marriage meaningless and open it up to endless revision and redefinition."

"If people believe the gay marriage cause has legitimacy, then by all means they should argue their case – but let’s agree that we can and should discuss rights issues without erroneously comparing the suffering of one group to the suffering of another."

Good words.