As usual Dinesh D'Souza is wrong. He sees the examples of the ancient Greeks and Romans practicing bisexuality as definitive proof that homosexuality is not innate. His theory is that since current Greeks and Romans don't practice rampant bisexuality (let's assume that's true for the moment being) and the ancient Greeks and Romans did, it must be a cultural thing. Not a genetic one.
What's funny about the Christian right argument is that they admit that they are powerless to stop feelings of homosexuality taking over if society opens up to it. What's going through their minds? Perhaps they're not so different from the ancient Greeks after all.
Of course, as Kinsey showed, the difference between homosexuality and heterosexuality is not a sharp divide (I used to take credit for this idea until I realized Professor Kinsey had written about this before I was even born). It's not a black or white, gay or straight issue. Everyone is somewhere along the gay-straight spectrum.
And the further society opens up to homosexuality as permissible, the more people feel comfortable coming out as bisexual, homosexual, omnisexual or whateversexual.
Let me give a quick and absurdly simplistic example. Let's assume 100 is completely gay and 0 is completely straight on our gay-straight continuum. A person who ranks a 95 on the gay scale is probably going to act out on those innate desires no matter what societal rules there are, even at the risk of being put to death in closed societies.
A person who is a 5 on that scale might never act on any trace bisexual desires he or she might have no matter what the societal norms are. But the more open a society is, the more you will start to draw in people who score an 85, 75, 65, 55, 45, 35, etc. on our fun little gay-straight line.
In a very closed society some one who is "80% gay" might never come out and in a very open society someone who is even "20% gay" might try it. These are gross simplifications, but you get the point. In fact, this is in some ways exactly what the culture warriors on the right have been warning about.
The Christian right (and the religious and cultural conservatives of a great many societies) have been worried about this for a long time. They are right. As society opens up, we will likely be more "gay." Or in reality, be closer to our true nature, wherever that might lie on the bisexuality continuum.
Where the cultural right is wrong is when they make a value judgment on that. Of course, there isn't anything wrong with that all. In fact, since it allows us to be closer to our "real" nature without societal judgments on our natural sexual preferences, there is something very right about it.
As it stands, our current culture doesn't yet appear to be fully comfortable with a truly and widely bisexual society. So, we inch toward progress or slouch toward
Though it must be noted that we have already achieved a great deal of openness on the female side of the equation. Ask around and see if you can find a woman under 25 who hasn't made out with one of their girlfriends.
My informal study on our show indicates about 80% of girls under 25 have at least tried a sexual experience with another woman (I concede that I am no Alfred Kinsey and my so-called evidence is wildly anecdotal, but ask for yourself and you'll see my numbers are shockingly accurate).
D'Souza uses history as his guide. It's ironic because his argument is ultimately against the tide of history and the inevitability of our genes. We know what the future holds, it is our past. The American people are right, our sexuality is innate. We just have to have the courage to own up to it.
Watch The Young Turks
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 37)
46. Repeat - Since both Uygur and D'souza mentioned the Greeks & Romans, this seems like a good time for a couple of jokes. I heard these two awhile ago, and they seem a good fit for this part of the blog.
Q1: How do they separate the men from the boys in Greece?
A1: With a crow-bar!
Q2: If Germany was attacking Italy from the rear, do you think Greece would help?
¡¡LOLOL!!
Ken Berg at 7:35PM on Jun 28th 2007
47. As a heterosexual male,I distinctly remember being attracted to girls as early as the first grade. I honestly believe many homosexuals are attracted to members of their own sex in much the same way. Homosexuality is not the same as bestiality, and pedophilia. Please! Let's at least be clear and concise about that. And the Bible in Leviticus also says things like how many animals to sacricice to God, etc. Do we still do that in our churches? I don't think so. Therefore, quoting the Bible on this issue is a bit iffy. This passage was written when the Israelites were in tribes or a tribe surrounded by other unfriendly tribes with different cultures, gods, etc. and who wanted to eliminate them totally. There was no room for homosexuality because reproduction in order to keep the Israelite tribes in EXISTENCE was of the utmost importance. Therefore, this admonition against homosexual behavior.
Shill at 7:42PM on Jun 28th 2007
48. I thought we were talking about ways of life - not licking ass holes???
Greg at 7:45PM on Jun 28th 2007
49. #39: Tom - dude: what? heterosexuals don't lick each others privates? Or maybe just YOU don't do that Tom. Feel sorry for you sex partner (s)..if you have had any, that is.
David Steffen at 7:45PM on Jun 28th 2007
50. "And until the invention of condoms, homosexuality was incredible dangerous to one's health." (#6) Come on Chris, sexually transmitted diseases ONLY affect gays? Today, women account for more than one quarter of all new HIV/AIDS diagnoses. (CDC)
I'm too am concerned about adultery. I was so very upset when the Reverend Jim Baker, Reverend Jimmy Swaggert and more recently the Reverend Ted Haggard (the leader of the National Association of Evangelicals) broke their vows of marriage. Of course, after three weeks intensive counseling Haggard has been "healed" of his homosexuality and methamphetimine addiction. Praise Jesus!
I'm glad that the thrice divorced Rush Limbaugh fights to maintain the santity of marriage.
So thank God the Christians are here to keep us from falling into sin. Thanks Chris for your loving reminder of Christ's love.
Steve at 7:52PM on Jun 28th 2007
51. It is pathetic to read the "bible thumpers" using that book for rationalizing what are really their own prejudices. They just cannot get several things through their brainwashed minds. The first is that not everyone believes that "the Bible" is necessarily the "word of God." They have been "told" that it is, so they believe it. I find such servile minds exceedingly reprehensible, and unworthy of any thinking human being. They don't even look at their own book to find out that they are forbidden to engage in condemnation. I know it is hard for them to get through the shell in which their "minds" are encapsulated, but unless either they or their leaders are "gods", they have no more right to condemn anyone.
Wish that they could only come to the realization that their supposed "leaders" care not a whit about religion. All they are doing is "using" religion to control others and gain dominion over others. That so many of their "followers" so blindly follow reminds me of the servility of the German mind that allowed Hitler to come to power in Germany.
Dare to think for yourself people, or someone else will do your thinking for you. You have been given one. Try using it. Thinking may be harder but "blind belief" reflects nothing but people who want to be told what to do, what to believe, and even what to think. That is not a human being, it is a robot. That is true even if it comes in human form.
RLaitres at 8:06PM on Jun 28th 2007
52. Well, this is the best I have seen from Uygur. Reason. Not so much emotion.
I agree with everyone being a little bit or a lot gay even though I would come from a more Christian perspective. Yes, you may now realize that their is a but coming. We still have a choice. Here we go.
Gay => bad
bad => sin
sin => curable
curable => good
Though I aint no math major I would say that gay is therefore curable and curable leads to good. No those things arent smileys. Arrows.
So we all have sin in us. We all have gay in us and every other bad thing. But they are controllable, to a point, unless we absolutely let them rule us. Even then though, they can still be stopped.
Michelle at 7:55PM on Jun 28th 2007
53. I think that one of our biggest problems in society today is that christians are spending all of our time talking about homosexuallity than anything else. Now everytime you say the word "christian" people hear the word "hateful". Why not just let people make there own choices and have enough respect to not be so confrontational about something that is none of your buiseness in the first place. take the plank out of your own eye before you take the speck out of another. put your faith to good. feed the homeless, help the elderly,
call for peace on earth, and show people what God's love looks like. Amen
melodie at 8:00PM on Jun 28th 2007
54. I am a bisexual man and had a near death experience many years ago. When I was standing before God, it wasnt about what religion you are or if you were Bi, gay or str8. It was about love and how we treat each other and the relationships we form with one another as well as our own decisions on this earth and nothing else mattered. So, all I can say is don't let society's impression of what your life should be, think, and act like, poison you. Be open minded and just live, & love each other. And in the end it is that that you will be judged on I firmly believe.
Brian at 8:04PM on Jun 28th 2007
55. We are not ALL gay to some degree - I am 100% heterosexual. Most people I know are 100% one sexual preference or the other, very few mixed.
San Antonio Cheryl at 8:12PM on Jun 28th 2007
56. I don't think anyone is equating homosexuality with pedophilia. I think the point is that once you say that it isn't wrong, it's just a "preference", you leave the door wide open. Pedophiles will claim they can't help themselves, it's natural, it's a preference. They actually already do believe that, among themselves. Eventually they will claim they are victims of close-minded bigots who can't see that there's nothing wrong with their mindset.
You actually can't have it both ways. You can either believe that certain sexual inclinations are wrong, or you can believe that they are all right. You cannot get angry about people who "judge" homosexuals and then pass judgement yourselves on bestiality, or pedophilia, or incest, or necrophilia, or whatever else.
As for the Greeks and the Romans, they did not necessarily practice homosexuality out of their natural preferences but out of custom and duty. Spartan soldiers, for example, "adopted" younger recruits (some very, very young, as in prepubescent) and had sex with them to form strong psychological bonds and to promote loyalty. Then later in life, they were expected to marry women. The thought of having sex with a woman was so foreign to them by this time that the women had to shave their heads and wear boy's clothing to make the switch more palatable. Sexual orientation can be conditioned, and the first sexual encounter that a person has can shape his (or her) sexuality forever, especially if they are "questioning".
This doesn't mean Christians should hate gay people, or refuse to associate with them. You can love someone that you belive is engaged in a sinful lifestyle. You can be kind and compassionate and see all the good, without condoning what they do. No-one is above temptation, and homosexuality is not any worse a sin than all the others, most of which Christians have been guilty of at one time or another. But Christians do have the right to believe that homosexuality is wrong, just as everybody else has the right to their beliefs. And, as we know, this is a country where we are not supposed to be persecuted for our beliefs, and last I checked, freedom of speech applies to Christians as well as rap artists who openly denigrate women and people who support pornography and call any objection censorship.
jessmarroyo at 8:05PM on Jun 28th 2007
57. I forgot to add my comments regarding Paul and the Bible. Paul first:
1. Although many folks follow his teachings, Paul initially was in error. In 1 Cor. (which is actually his 2nd letter to the Corinthians, the first being destroyed by the early Church council), he reiterated to those there that they should judge and condemn those among them who committed certain "sins." This only exacerbated an already HUGE problem, however, both for the congregation and the Apostles, for THEY had been taught by Christ NOT to judge. As a result, there was huge division in the congregation ... (AND a separation between Paul and the 12 apostles that lasted 14 years!)
Shortly during this period, however, Paul got the point and so wrote his 3rd letter (2nd Cor.) rescinding his direction regarding judging a certain man who had slept with his father's wife and saying that if the congregation forgave such man, he did, too. And he later admonished the Roman congregation NOT to judge! (Although it appears in the Bible canon BEFORE the letters to the Corinthians, Paul actually wrote his letter to the Romans AFTER!).
Why the change? Paul had been trained as a Pharisee (i.e., a religious leader who was educated in the "Law" - the Old Testament/Covenant). You could see this training in his early years when he went around delivering up christians to be killed on behalf of priests and his fellow Pharisees. So, although Christ
"called" him (and did so NOT because Paul was such a "spiritual" person as many believe and teach, but because Paul was guilty of the blood of those he had delivered up and had to become a SLAVE to Christ to pay for such blood!) Paul still had a lot to LEARN, as his "discipline" was PROGRESSIVE, as it is for ALL who are called by Christ (please note,"disciple" is one who is "discipline"... or TRAINED.. by another. John the Baptist had "disciples.")
My point? Paul initially taught judgment and condemnation, but later changed from that. Unfortunately, those who follow Paul... vs. following ONLY the Christ... don't often "see" that.
As for the Bible, it is not "inspired," at least, not entirely. Only "scripture" is "inspired" (meaning, the writer was "inspired"... or IN THE SPIRIT... when he wrote it and thus was TOLD to write)... and only "Moses," the Psalms, the Prophets and the Revelation were inspired, with the writers being told to write... and, thus, "scripture." Christ confirmed this when he appeared to his disciples after his death and TOLD them what "scripture" was.
The other books are histories, chronologies, records, etc. With the exception of John's Gospel, NONE of the others were inspired. Luke and the Acts, particularly, are not inspired. Luke STATES who commissioned him (Theophilus, not God) and who gave him the information (people who were eyewitnesses, not God).
Why don't most "christians" know this? Because... they rely on what others TELL them the Bible is/says... rather than (1) reading it for themselves and/or (2) relying on holy spirit (vs. imperfect humans who don't know what's what themselves) to tell them what it says/means.
Again, wake up, folks! There is only one Truth and it is only he that can "TRULY set you free."
John 8:32; 14:6; 8:36.
Again, peace to you!
ShelbyJ at 7:23PM on Jun 30th 2007
58. Just be yourself.
Do what you want.
Be happy.
ED at 8:19PM on Jun 28th 2007
59. The interesting thing not mentioned? Since gays are so liberal and trying to legitimize the behavior they desire to say it is genetic. The haven't taken into account how many parents would abort their unborns if they find genetic flaws like homosexuality. Hence they have stopped arguing that strategy The liberal gays will abort themselves out of existence. Another way to look at intelligent design. How marvelous.
Wayne at 8:29PM on Jun 28th 2007
60. Shelbyj, you are awesome.
Phoenix at 8:37PM on Jun 28th 2007