Keyword
in
Collection
Date
to
Houston Voice, No. 844, December 27, 1996
File 026
Citation
MLA
APA
Chicago/Turabian
Houston Voice, No. 844, December 27, 1996 - File 026. 1996-12-27. University of Houston Libraries. University of Houston Digital Library. Web. December 2, 2020. https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/915/show/907.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

(1996-12-27). Houston Voice, No. 844, December 27, 1996 - File 026. Montrose Voice. University of Houston Libraries. Retrieved from https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/915/show/907

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

Houston Voice, No. 844, December 27, 1996 - File 026, 1996-12-27, Montrose Voice, University of Houston Libraries, accessed December 2, 2020, https://digital.lib.uh.edu/collection/montrose/item/915/show/907.

Disclaimer: This is a general citation for reference purposes. Please consult the most recent edition of your style manual for the proper formatting of the type of source you are citing. If the date given in the citation does not match the date on the digital item, use the more accurate date below the digital item.

URL
Embed Image
Compound Item Description
Title Houston Voice, No. 844, December 27, 1996
Publisher Window Media
Date December 27, 1996
Language English
Subject
  • LGBTQ community
  • LGBTQ people
  • Gay liberation movement
Place
  • Houston, Texas
Genre
  • newspapers
Type
  • Text
Identifier OCLC: 31485329
Collection
  • University of Houston Libraries Special Collections
  • LGBT Research Collection
  • Montrose Voice
Rights In Copyright
Note This item was digitized from materials loaned by the Gulf Coast Archive and Museum (GCAM).
Item Description
Title File 026
Transcript Gay Gene Continues... (Continued from page 20) The conservative case for the gay gene will strike many as too pragmatic, somewhat equivalent to the case for pro- choice Republicanism. I admit the parallel. I am a Colin Powell Republican and a gay person who is an ardent assimilation i s t. I am an assimilat- ionist in part because I look at a homosexual orientation as a biological roll of the dice that has all the political importance of left-handedness, i.e., none at all. For this reason, like the lawyer who wrote me, I too would not be opposed to considering genetic surgery. Some conservatives may find accepting the gay gene as repugnant as accepting choice on abortion. But there is one glaring difference between them. The key question about abortion is, "When does human life begin?"—and answering it means defining the term "human life." For most pro-lifers, humanity has some-thing to do with the soul, and the existence of the soul is not determinable by science. But the question about homosexuality and volition—whether one chooses to be gay—is subject to empirical verification. And among researchers. this question is considered answered. Which means that supporting Position 1 or 2 —lifestyle or disease—will soon be as politically successful for the Republican party as supporting crea- tionism. And for those who find intolerable ■.■ven lhe short-term gain that liberalism would get from a conservative conversion to the idea of a biological homosexual orientation, 1 would remind Ihem thai there is a way oui—Ihe final element of the conservative case lot ihu gay gene. From the perspective of those who seek total proscription of homosexuality, it is certainly imperfect, bui it is at the same time a way for conservatives to stop shrinking from science and accept the gay gene while nullifying ils pro-gay political impact. It is the most obvious piece in ilie debate: religion. Jeffrey Marsh, a physicist and orthodox Jew, reviewed my book for THE WEEKLY STANDARD (August 5, 1996) and made two conclusive statements. The first was scientific: The research has demonstrated the biological nature of homosexuality. The second was religious and moral: This doesn't matter. "The Bible," wrote Marsh, "does not forbid homosexual activity emphasis mine because it is 'unnatural,' but because it is on a long list of prohibited sexual relationships. " Many Biblically proscribed traits. Marsh noted, have quite natural biological components, from greed to adultery, theft to murder. But to religion, biology is immaterial. It is unnecessary for religion to pronounce on moleeular genetics not merely because (as in the case of Pat Robertson) it usually gets molecular genetics wrong, but because genetics are irrelevant to religion. For religion speaks wiib absolute authority on the morality of the myriad traits that genes and molecules create, including human sexual orientation. Naturally, liberals and those who are pro-gay will combat this religious position with two arguments. The first: •The religious position—to lake a specific example, the Catholic position that homosexuality is an "intrin- sic disorder—is empirically incorrect " The immediate and dispositive religious counter-response: Wlii> cares'" First, religion is not subject to empirical verification. And the Biblical prohibition is on homosexual behavior, nol homosexual orientation. In thc same vein, there are very good reasons to believe that criminality has a genetic component, and proof of that would not invalidate legal proscriptions against criminal behavior. The second liberal response: "The First Amendment separates church from state." The religious counter- response: Like a principled opposition to abortion, the religious opposition to homosexuality rests on a moral stance that is translated into individual positions on policy. Science presents information, but judgment and values and morality must be applied to that information. Ultimately, a moral opposition to homosexuality is above debate, just as it is above bioassay and data set. A moral opposition to homosexuality will not prevent the short-term loss that an acknowledgment of the gay gene will cause, but it is lhe best response to it. Science produces the ability to understand the mechanical functioning of genes, but it does not change the moral nature of the traits they produce. Which is why, after the announcement of the gay gene's discovery, Immanue! Jakobovits. the former chief rabbi of Britain (and reputedly Margaret Thatcher's favorite religious leader), slated to the conservative Daily Mail: "Homosexuality is a disability, and if people wish to have it eliminated before they have children ... I do not see any moral objections to using genetic engineering to limit this particular trend." Marsh, the physicist, f r a m e d the rabbi's idea more broadly and more trenchantly: "Fulfillment of ihe human potential for holiness depends on a continual struggle to overcome many perfectly natural human inclinations. By showing man how those natural inclinations work, science can help him in that struggle." The science will show what it will show. And if it shows how biological traits such as homosexuality work, then this simply means lhat we can reply in the affirmative to someone like the lawyer who wrote me: "Do you know of any research institutions that arc currently studying the possibility ()t' converting homosexual men to heterosexuality? I would be very interested in making such a change. I am gay, and for personal reasons would like not to be. ..." * What's the study worth? The certainty of genetic studies is determined by their "significance," or "p value," ■ 05 being the minimum needed for scientific acceptance. If a study gets .05. it has statistically only a 5 percent chance of being wrong. So a .03 would he better, having only a 3 percent chance of being a false finding, and a .01 would be better still. What was the "p value" of the NIH study? ,0000 1. ** To be more precise, homosexuality in males. GAY-1 and STRAIGHT-1 probably affect only men. Research consistently reveals a clear male/ female discrepancy; there are about twice as many homosexual men (around 6 per 100) as homosexual women (around 3 per 100), and sexual orientation in women, researchers believe. may involve completely unrelated genes. f Chandler Burr, a writer living in Washington, D.C, is the author of A Separate Creation: The Search for the Biological Origins of Sexual Orientation (Hyperion). The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Houston Voice or its staff. ) Reprinted by permission of The Weekly Standard Phillip, Thank You for the wonderful party. We really enjoyed it! RAY IS OK Vote for Ray Hill If you want Adult Freedom! Only jealous old hags & hen-pecked husbands would be against sexy dressed, sexy looking people & adult entertainment. And if you just mention short shorts or if some sexy panties re showing that really pisses these troublemakers off. many say it's filth. But to the others it's pleasure. Get A Life! Get A Sex Life* Happy Holidays & God Bless you good people And may God even bless the selfish no good phonies too with goodness. TV JANET/MIKE the DYKE What A Whore! ,CRAD DUREN, MD. 1213 Hermann Dr, Suite 430, (713) 5200653 Internal medical practice offering discreet confidential care to the community, including HIV/AIDS diagnostics & theraputics HEALTHCARE FROM THE HEART Anonymous Testing Sr Counseling Major Credit & ftrsonal Checks Accepted Insurance with Qualification Mc&K ZDOOOCC We Need Volunteers for a Research Study! ► TOPICAL GEL ► ALL PATIENTS RECEIVE STUDY DRUG ► NO COST TO PATIENT ► PARKING IS PAID . ► IF YOU BENEFIT, TREATMENT MAY CONTINUE CALL U.T. Dermatology Research Center Record, listen & respond to ads 892-5566 FREE Code 2331 Just SI.M.'i! Il f*< minute lot (dlairi optional features internet: http://www.Mcva.c-MR/cav.kai I aouits onii! movo uedu. mc. tk*$ not Diesae-en <Men j -non* mwttoQs. MO-US tS*W HOUSTON VOICE / DECEMBER 27, 1996 25
File Name uhlib_31485329_n844_025.jpg