Prominently featured on the front page of the Star Tribune's Sunday opinion page was an opinion piece entitled, "An unavoidable truth". It's a lengthy piece by a woman, Charlotte Sullivan, on her embracing lesbianism after 36 years of marriage to a man. After surveying the title and subtitle, which says people don't choose and can't change their sexual orientation, I expected a story on the latest research on homosexuality or an attempt at a well reasoned defense of homosexuality. Instead it was an emotive, angry rant against those awful religious conservatives, who in their defense of traditional marriage are destroying people.
She goes on to say, "I love homophobes, but I hate, hate, hate their lies."
What are the lies of this "cruel, discriminatory movement" and what is the basis for calling them lies? She merely asserts; there's no evidence to support her charges.
This type of story is part and parcel of much of what one hears from the pro-homosexual movement. It's how I feel. It's what I want. The facts can be cruel things but they can't be denied. Homosexuality is not the pathway to happiness and people can change.
First, there is evidence that people who engage in one vice are more likely to engage in others. This was suggested by a massive research study of 12,283 people by the federal government on people's drug use and sexual activity. Homosexual behavior generally accompanies higher use of illegal drugs, smoking and prostitution. Do all people who identify themselves as homosexual engage in these vices? Certainly not. But there's enough of an association to suggest that if a person engages in one vice, they're more likely to engage in others.
Second, people have changed their sexual orientation. Can all people change their sexual desires and attractions? No, but many do. A recent study points to evidence that people can change.
Ultimately, the issue here is behavior not desire. Whatever one believes about the chosen-ness of certain desires that's a separate issue from whether one has a choice on whether or not to act on and embrace those desires. Married men are tempted to lust after other women. Should they act on those desires? How about pornography use? Or what about individuals sexually attracted to minors, whether male or female? Should they act on those desires? Certainly not. Do they have a choice? I would argue, ultimately yes. Yet that's where the pro-homosexual argument breaks down. They suggest there is no choice. A person must act on those desires.
In fact, there's a movement afoot to deny people who want to leave homosexuality, even the opportunity to pursue change.
While the Star Tribune editorial board embraces homosexuality that doesn't mean the facts do.