Homosexuality in the light of Science
The Supreme Court’s judgement reinstating article 377 that criminalize homosexuality had triggered outrage among LGBT groups and various sections of the society. The basis of this outrage has been largely derived from sympathy towards homosexuals and a demand for their right to choose a sexual partner. The ruling evidently divided the Indian society between religious groups supporting punitive laws and secular liberals calling for LGBT rights, while a centrist debate on the pros and cons of homosexuality based on scientific evidence, reason, its social impact and health effects was non-existent.
In this article, we attempt to examine homosexuality based on scientific studies.
Are people born gays or made gays?
Much of the current media sources assume the question is a solved scientific problem with all the evidence pointing toward a biological (probably genetic) basis for a homosexual orientation. In fact there is no scientific evidence to prove that one is homosexual or bisexual or even heterosexual by birth. The current thinking in the scientific community is that homosexuality is likely caused by a complex interaction of psychosocial, environmental and possible biological factors. And the two leading national psychiatric and psychological professional groups agree that, so far, there are no conclusive studies supporting any specific biological or genetic cause for homosexuality (“Fact Sheet on Gay Lesbian Bisexual Issues,” the American Psychiatric Association, May 2000; and “American Psychological Association Online: Answers to Your Questions/Topic – Sexuality/What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?,” http://www.apa.org/topics/sexuality/orientation.aspx?item=4) And since nobody is “born gay,” it’s clear that sexual orientation is, at its core, a matter of “how one defines oneself” – not a matter of biology or genes. Hence homosexuality is not by “Nature”. The matter of sexual orientation comes into picture during the time of adolescence. This is the time when the “nurture” comes into picture. The surroundings, the environment and the behavior of a particular adolescent play a pivotal role in this regard. It is the role of the parents to guide their children in the right direction.
Homosexuality and Behavioral Genetics
The reason sodomites are prone to a myriad of infections and an early death is because the lining of the rectum was made by God for one purpose only – to rid the body of waste.
The lining of the female sexual organ is tough, like the skin on our hands, so it can withstand the trauma of intercourse and even child bearing, but the lining of the anus is too delicate to withstand any trauma.
Anal intercourse, penile or otherwise, traumatizes the soft tissues of the rectal lining of male or female. As a consequence, the lining of the rectum is almost always traumatized to some degree by any act of anal intercourse. Even in the absence of major trauma, minor or microscopic tears/break in the rectal lining allow for immediate contamination and the entry of germs into the bloodstream.
Furthermore, comparable tears/breaks in the vagina are not only less frequent because of the relative toughness of the vaginal lining, but the environment of the vagina is vastly cleaner than that of the rectum. Indeed, we are designed with a nearly impenetrable barrier between the bloodstream and the extraordinarily toxic and infectious contents of the bowel.
Anal intercourse creates a breach in this barrier for the receptive partner, whether or not the insertive partner is wearing a condom.
In addition to the trauma of intercourse, semen can eat away at the intestinal lining. This allows a person to “infect themselves” as the bacteria from their feces enter the blood stream, resulting in various kinds of diseases.
List of few of the diseases common among the homosexuals are:
In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to homosexuality. None of the claims has been confirmedPreviously the homosexuals were using the term ‘sexual preference’, since the ‘preference’ to have sex with, can be changed, now they use the term ‘sexual orientation’. They argue that a person is sexually oriented towards one particular sex and that cannot be changed, as it is natural. For this reason the homosexuals, in an effort to gain acceptance, maintain that they deserve equal rights as sexual minorities like other minority groups – and should not be penalized for expressing their acts of homosexuality. The argument goes like this: “Just as a person cannot help being black, female, or Asian, I cannot help being homosexual. We were all born this way, and as such we should be treated equally.” However this argument fails to appeal the equality of the civil rights. As the law already protect everyone, including the male and female, white and black, homosexual or heterosexual. We should keep in mind that specific laws – which homosexuals feel deprived of – are same for all the citizens. This makes them feel as though ‘equal’ rights have been taken away from them. Skin color and other genetic traits can be traced through inheritance patterns and simple Mendelian genetics. Homosexuals are identified not by a trait or a gene, but rather by their actions. Without the action, they would be indistinguishable from all other people. If we were to assume momentarily that homosexuality was genetic, then the most one could conclude is that those individuals were not morally responsible for being homosexual. However, that does not mean that they are not morally responsible for homosexual actions! Merely having the gene would not force one to carry out the behavior. For instance, if scientists were able to document that a “rape gene” existed, we certainly would not blame an individual for possessing this gene, but neither would we allow him to act upon that rape disposition. Neil Risch – American human geneticist and professor at the University of California and his coworkers admitted: “There is little disagreement that male homosexual orientation is not a Mendelian trait. In fact, a priori, one would expect the role of a major gene in male homosexual orientation to be limited because of the strong selective pressures against such a gene. It is unlikely that a major gene underlying such a common trait could persist over time without an extraordinary counterbalancing mechanism” (1993, 262:2064). Evan S. Balaban – a neurobiologist at the Neurosciences Institute in San Diego, noted that “the search for the biological underpinnings of complex human traits has a sorry history of late. In recent years, researchers and the media have proclaimed the “discovery” of genes linked to alcoholism and mental illness as well as to homosexuality. None of the claims has been confirmed” (as quoted in Horgan, 1995). Charles Mann – an American Journalist who specializes in scientific topics agreed, stating: “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” (1994, 264:1687). It appears that the gay gene will be added to this category of unreplicated claims. Society has largely deemed homosexual actions to be immoral and, in many instances, illegal. Since no scientific study has firmly established an underlying genetic cause for homosexuality, arguments suggesting “equal rights” clearly seem insufficient. Homosexual Behavior in Animals
If seemingly “homosexual” acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature.Heterosexuals opposed to homosexual behavior have wrongly argued that homosexual behavior is unfound in animals, this argument does not hold good as there are many findings which point to homosexual behavior in animals. And this point is often raised by Gay right activists to prove that homosexual behavior is natural. This argument from both sides is unsustainable and does not hold good in any matter. Firstly, it is unreasonable to compare civilized human behavior with that of the dumb animals. A normal human wouldn’t justify replicating a number of behavioral traits found in animals. If seemingly “homosexual” acts among animals are in accordance with animal nature, then parental killing of offspring and intra-species devouring are also in accordance with animal nature. Bringing man into the equation complicates things further. Are we to conclude that filicide and cannibalism are according to human nature? On the contrary, homosexual behavior in animals cannot be termed as “Homosexual Instincts”, whereas “filicide” and “cannibalism” are exceptions to normal animal behavior. Animals also indulge in cross species sex. The same argument could be used to justify bestiality (Sexual relations between a human and an animal). A number of facts and evidences suggest that homosexuality is not a normal behavior. By nature living beings are designed in a fashion to procreate. But by rebelling against the design of nature we tend to harm nature itself by not becoming a part of procreation. Homosexuality and Health Risk With homosexuality definitely there comes health risk. The health risks so severe that it will take your sleep away even if you hear about those diseases. The Center for Disease Control warns that men who have sex with men can result in rapid, extensive transmission of sexually transmitted diseases. “Syphilis cases increased steadily from late 1997 to mid-1998, appeared to stabilize in the second half of 1998, then increased during January-June 1999 (Figure 1 below). The proportion of cases in MSM (Men who have Sex with Men) increased from 21% (four of 19) in 1997 to 85% (75 of 88) in 1998 and 1999 (pless than 0.01). Among 79 MSM, the median age was 35 years (range: 19-56 years) and 70% were aged greater than 30 years. Primary, secondary, and early latent infection accounted for 23%, 61%, and 16% of cases in MSM, respectively; these proportions did not differ significantly from 1997 to 1999. Among the 79 MSM with early latent syphilis in 1997 through June 1999, 48 (72%) of 67 had human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection and two others were HIV seropositive near the time syphilis was diagnosed.” (Center for Disease Control)
The reason sodomites are prone to a myriad of infections and an early death is because the lining of the rectum was made by God for one purpose only – to rid the body of waste.
The lining of the female sexual organ is tough, like the skin on our hands, so it can withstand the trauma of intercourse and even child bearing, but the lining of the anus is too delicate to withstand any trauma.
Anal intercourse, penile or otherwise, traumatizes the soft tissues of the rectal lining of male or female. As a consequence, the lining of the rectum is almost always traumatized to some degree by any act of anal intercourse. Even in the absence of major trauma, minor or microscopic tears/break in the rectal lining allow for immediate contamination and the entry of germs into the bloodstream.
Furthermore, comparable tears/breaks in the vagina are not only less frequent because of the relative toughness of the vaginal lining, but the environment of the vagina is vastly cleaner than that of the rectum. Indeed, we are designed with a nearly impenetrable barrier between the bloodstream and the extraordinarily toxic and infectious contents of the bowel.
Anal intercourse creates a breach in this barrier for the receptive partner, whether or not the insertive partner is wearing a condom.
In addition to the trauma of intercourse, semen can eat away at the intestinal lining. This allows a person to “infect themselves” as the bacteria from their feces enter the blood stream, resulting in various kinds of diseases.
List of few of the diseases common among the homosexuals are:
- Human Papillomavirus (HPV)
- Hepatitis
- Gonorrhea
- Syphilis
- Gay Bowel Syndrome (GBS)
- HIV/AIDS
- Anal Cancer
Photos
