Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Spike89

(1,569 posts)
24. A trap and the right's framing of the issue
Thu Feb 23, 2012, 03:33 PM
Feb 2012

Discussion about whether there are biological markers, indicators, or "causes" for sexual preferences are interesting and important. However, they shouldn't be a factor in the political debate on rights because it simply doesn't matter if someone must or someone chooses--it isn't anyone's business.
The real danger in the argument (aside from the fact it will never be scientifically settled) is that it ultimately comes down to a devaluation of the element of choice, as if choosing something is less valid than being forced by biology. Of course, falling into the right's trap leads to a no-win place. If it is biological, they will advocate "fixing" the gayness through gene therapy, meds, surgery, whatever and then pushing for restrictions on those who "willfully" continue to be gay. If it turns out (as it will) that biology is only a portion of the equation, they've won again in that they can continue to condemn the "choice".
The choices people make on this subject are not right or wrong, they are simply human choices made for human reasons. We should be vigorously defending the right to make any choices we want in the area of sexuality.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I would think it is safeinOhio Feb 2012 #1
They'd probably explain it using words such as "Satan" RyanPsych Feb 2012 #4
YOUR logic is faulty. WingDinger Feb 2012 #2
According to *actual* neuroscientists RyanPsych Feb 2012 #3
Yeah, I know, I have that digit thingie. But am not gay. WingDinger Feb 2012 #5
Never in the article, or the linked studies do they content a 1:1 link RyanPsych Feb 2012 #9
So when did you choose to be straight? justiceischeap Feb 2012 #6
Best I can remember, I cant remember. WingDinger Feb 2012 #7
Because 2-year olds question their sexuality? RyanPsych Feb 2012 #8
No, they dont question their sexuality. WingDinger Feb 2012 #11
by comprehending the fact that human sexuality isn't binary RyanPsych Feb 2012 #12
That would not be CHOOSING, it would be UNCHOOSING, and that has been deemed bogus. WingDinger Feb 2012 #16
At this point- I'm just going to assume that you're a troll RyanPsych Feb 2012 #17
No, I am not a troll. I am pro gay marriage. I am pro whateverthehellyouchoose. WingDinger Feb 2012 #19
The Xianistas rail against gay rights because they say being gay is "a choice," stopbush Feb 2012 #10
I can answer that. WingDinger Feb 2012 #13
So the elderly, the infertile, and those who dont want children shouldn't get married? RyanPsych Feb 2012 #18
I believe that gay and lesbian parents canbe/are as good of parents. WingDinger Feb 2012 #20
you're making the unfortunate mistake of thinking that they need a rationale RyanPsych Feb 2012 #15
That wasn't "quick", but it is correct. HopeHoops Feb 2012 #14
Are you willing to base equal rights for gays on gayness being inborn? Or on the CON? WingDinger Feb 2012 #21
I just think everyone should be considered equal. It simplifies things. HopeHoops Feb 2012 #22
Excellent. WingDinger Feb 2012 #23
A trap and the right's framing of the issue Spike89 Feb 2012 #24
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Quick Scientific Facts Th...»Reply #24