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 8 of 37)
106. Hey, bananastand; rationalize all you want, but being "gay" is sick and a perversion. Richer, smarter and more enlightened? ROFLMAO! That sounds like the insecure fag on SNL who looked in the mirror and tried to build his own self-esteem.
The Truth at 12:17PM on Jun 29th 2007
107. You're going to use the research of Kinsey? That shows how sick you truly are. To use someone's research who tortured babies and young children sexually is beyond sick.
Amy at 1:20AM on Jun 29th 2007
108. There is no need to tear each other apart over this. "JUDGE NOT LEST YE BE JUDGED!" Does that sound familiar? It should. I am bisexual, and find nothing wrong with it. The only ones who seem to find fault are the Occidental religions: Jews, Christians, Muslims. I reject that path, and have rejected those three religions. You cannot force your ways upon those who reject you, nor on those who accept you. This is for everyone: CEASE YOUR HATRED, LEST IT COME BACK TO BITE YOU ON THE ASS!
Alaras at 1:42AM on Jun 29th 2007
109. #4 If you think that homesexuality is the main reason the roman empire fell you need to go back to history class. The empire was too large, the treasury was empty, military was filled with paid hessians that would leave for a better price, and terrible emperors.
Kita at 1:41AM on Jun 29th 2007
110. I agree with everything the author says. To be intellectually pedophilia argument is valid. The ancient Greeks were not just an openly gay society, they were an openly pedophiles. The same spectrum could be applied to pedophiles. In fact something that the internet has exposed is just how many pedophiles there are in this country. There is an organization dedicated to lobbying for pedophiles. They make a very similar argument, about letting people live, and all the harm comes from the social stigma not the act.
I reached this article off a link from the following http://news.aol.com/story/_a/nbc-sting-shakes-up-texas-town/20070628165309990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001 . I don’t consider myself homophobic, but I do see a slippery slope. I could go on about how two pedophiles could get married and start adopting children. I dont want to impede anyones right to happiness and legally I should not be allowed to. However, I also dont want to create a haven for pedophiles, like the Catholic priesthood became, because I am afraid of being labled intolerant.
Mojo at 1:51AM on Jun 29th 2007
111. this has been a good laugh, listening to all you people, in the western world, americans have the most hang ups when it comes to sex, the church teaches that if we even touch yourself you are going to hell, everything we do we are going to hell for and plus everything is against the bible.
THE ONLY TRUE THING YOUR'E GOING TO GO TO "HELL" FOR IS NOT BEING TRUE TO YOURSELF, AND IF YOU CAN'T BE TRUE TO YOURSELF, MAY I ASK HOW CAN YOU BE TRUE TO GOD AND THE CHRIST. AMERICANS NEEDS TO START THINKING FOR THEMSELFS INSTEAD BEING TOLD HOW TO BELIEVE BY SOME INSECURED BIGOT SITTING IN THE PULPIT.
TRUEANTIAMERICAN at 1:47AM on Jun 29th 2007
112. #6 OR cj, i HAVE JESUS in my life and I believe that God made homosexuals to test us. He wants to see if his children will treat others with kindness instead of hatred. If you have kids I feel sorry for them because they have a parent that goes against all that christianity teaches.
Kita at 1:49AM on Jun 29th 2007
113. Lets get a few things clear:
1. Bisexuality and homosexuality appears frequently in nature. Go tell a gay elelphant that he is a sinner and see what happens... :-)
2. Quoting Leviticus on anything is absurd. It also said you should stone your sister for certain crimes; should we all do was written there? The world has changed since the Bible was written, and that is why even the Bible now is far different from the original because of translations etc. The Catholics used to kill people who said this planet was not the center of the universe, who says religions cant and dont change?
3. Knowing Jesus obviously didnt work for "Pastor Ted" Haggard, the head of ALL evangelicals; he was doing it with a gay guy with the help of methamphetamine. All the while preaching to the faithful about "sin". Plenty more where that came from, I am sure. Ask that Paul Crouch guy on religious TV about the black man he was reported to have paid off not to talk about what they did together (see LA Times).
4. Its high time we accept that sexuality has a strong genetic component, and get used to it with no more judgments. The younger generation seems to be much more open about this, thank....yes, God!
David at 2:02AM on Jun 29th 2007
114. dr. suess wrote a lil' story about this very subject. it's about the star-bellied sneeches and the plain bellied sneeches. check it out. and all of you judgmental haters just shut the f&%$ up already. it's not very "christian" of you ya know.
christylcsw at 2:34AM on Jun 29th 2007
115. Strait vs Gay.
It sounds like a boxing match. It is an us vs them staitment. We are better, they are worse, no, WE are better and ThEY are worse. In fact the conflict is stemming from our identification with particular groups. We are a social animal and follow the belief structure of the groups we identify with. Somewhere along our lives we find a path, a train of thought and cling desparately to it. It may stem from any group; family, friends, religios organizations, etc. Few of us examine why we really follow our paths. Is it because we have taken the time to think things over for our selves and make an informed decision after experiencing things? In most cases no, there is far too much in this world for us to explore the lot of it in the very short period of our lifetimes. Because of that we accept (sometimes blindly) the teachings of "authorities". This blindness leads us to many sad acts, including war and dispicable, cruel acts dehumanising and crushing the souls of people based on ideological factors, political factors, religion, etc. We act like small kids on the playground cheering a fight because other people are even when it turns out to be our kid brother being beaten up. It's okay till we discover it's not. So yes, there are people out there with different sexual desires than yourself. They also have different desires for food and clothing and housing and entertainment. What makes someone like red and another blue? Genetics? Environment? Who knows. The question is do we let someone live and love who is not of our group, whatever that group is?
Respect each other, understand that there are some things that you hate and others love and others will feel the same about you. The truth is we all are part of a still very immature mindset, our society acting like gangs of different sizes and views. We are not all individuals we have given up the privledge of thinking for our selves for the right to belong to a group and feel secure in our numbers, because being a group of one is TERRIFYING. We are insecure, scared and still in too many ways children. We need to grow up, behave like caring loving people and learn to think and be our own gangs of one, living in peace with each other.
If you read this, take this with you. All of you are wrong to someone else, and all of you right to yet another. But if you didn't give in and believe an athority and took the time to discover on your own what is real, what would it be?
Hugs and hope for you all.
Ursus at 2:14AM on Jun 29th 2007
116. Choosing who you are attracted to or choosing who you fall in love with, in my opinion is more biology and chemistry than choice. You could choose to go contrary to your chemical make up but I would think that would lead to confusion and unhappiness, not just for you but for the person you chose to be with.
I don't understand why people worry so much about the sin of homosexuality. It is not like it is the only sin out there.
People are people, they are who they are. We should practice Love for all mankind.
I think it is written in the Bible that Jesus said
Love one another as I have loved you.
Jesus was about Love.
Judge not lest you be judged. The same way you judge others you will be judged.
Lets leave the judging up to God. He knows our comings and our goings. He knows our hearts. I am a gay woman. I am in a monogomous committed relationship. I believe in God and I believe he loves me just as I am. If I am wrong in my belief, I will leave it up to God to be my judge.
Peace and Love
To All
MJ
Melanie at 3:44AM on Jun 29th 2007
117. I am a gay female and think it's funny that these religious nut balls are taking the time to read this article and actually taking time to argue with others about it tells me that OBVIOUSLY THEY HAVE THOUGHT ABOUT BEING ATTRACTED TO THE SAME SEX THEMSELVES...
Nikki D. at 4:00AM on Jun 29th 2007
118. What the writer really means when he says "...closer to our true nature..." is that once all societal standards are absolved, once we have driven from our midst that which provides the moral guidelines that allow for a decent people to coexist in some kind of disciplined manner, when we finally destroy our ability to decide between that which is wrong and that which is right, THEN, then we will be what we have always been since we started walking upright, just another animal. No advanced thinking that controls our primeval urges, nothing to stop us from acting out primitive behavior, no reason for us not to revisit the barbaric, uncivilized ways of our ancient ancestors. Perhaps the author believes a society with no moral boundries, free to express itself in whatever manner "feels right" at the moment is a better, more expressive society. He couldn't be more wrong. Harkening back to the days of sybaritic Roman orgies and unrestrained debauchery hardly sounds like a societal advancement to me.
Mike Thorneburg at 4:47AM on Jun 29th 2007
119. Nikki D: Your assertion is intellectually bankrupt. I don't have to be a rocket scientist to discuss space travel. I don't have to be a soldier to understand war or comment on it. Just because I'm interested in this issue doesn't mean I'm a latent homosexual. Really, how stupid is that? Is that just you being somewhat uncomfortable with who you really are and perhaps a bit guilty too? Sounds like it to me. Anyone who debates using words such as "obviously" probably doesn't understand the issues on the table or has come to the discussion with a closed mind, already having decided before one word is said that no position other than hers makes any sense. Nothing is "obvious" in a real debate, everything is suspect. Try imagining that a huge world exists outside of that small one in which you strive to exist and that, in this world, not everyone hates you simply because you are different. We just don't want you to hate us because we are not. And that is a fundamental truth, you ARE different and will always be so long as you are gay. I'm not a religious nutball, in fact, I'm atheist, but it's an undeniable fact that nature abhors homosexuality because it is in direct conflict with nature. Nothing in nature would survive if homosexuality were the norm. Life would stop. There would be no procreation. No new anything to carry on the species. That's just common sense and no matter how humans try to justify aberrant behavior, that's all homosexuality is, aberrant behavior. In the future, the genetic defect that causes homosexuality will be isolated and homosexuality will be eradicated. That IS the future, like it or not.
Mike Thorneburg at 4:53AM on Jun 29th 2007
120. This columnist is truly dangerous. First, he imposes his homosexuality on others by assuming we're all gay to one degree or another. We're not. Secondly, he celebrates humanity's hidden sexualities and proposes that society should be accepting of these, because they reflect our "natural sexual preferences." Well, incest and pedophilia are some people's natural sexual preferences. Should society accept these too? Religion is correct to teach that human nature has a dark side - because it does. Human sexuality also has a dark side. Without self-control, sexual impulses quickly become destructive, particularly for males. All of us should resist our nature when it is immoral or perverted.
Mike at 4:58AM on Jun 29th 2007