Part 3
-2012
LGBTQ and Science
Before
moving to and delving into the depth of the biblical text, we might want to
look at what science has to say on the GLBT issue, primarily to clarify the position
(starting point) on which the following texts are based.
An
entire dissertation could be written on what science has to say about
homosexuality to date, and naturally this has already been done. The intent is not, in this brief, to provide a
full account of what science has learned about LGBTQ people, but rather to
provide an overview of what appears to be the view held by the scientific
communities regarding LGBTQ issues. This, of course, barely scratches the
surface of the endless amount of research conducted on these issues.
Homosexuality
is romantic and/or sexual attraction behavior between persons of the same sex.
Homosexuality is one of the three principal categories of sexual orientation
one finds on a continuous scale between homosexual and heterosexual orientation
(Wikipedia, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality). Most probably it
would be more accurate to talk about homosexuality, bisexuality and
heterosexuality to demonstrate that there is a varying measured degree, rather
than three homogeneous systems (Wink et al, 1999: 63).
The
primary debate has been between the liberal view that homosexuality is
something one is born with and the conservative view that it is a chosen
lifestyle. And each side has sought to obtain scientific evidence; the conservatives
have relied on psychology to demonstrate that gay behavior is conditioned by one’s
environment and upbringing, but to this end they have not been able to provide
any convincing evidence. Behavior scientists have, however, been able to
demonstrate that there are not any indications whatsoever that upbringing and
environment affect sexual orientation.
At
the other end of the scientific spectrum they have sought to demonstrate
(identify) a gay gene that determines one’s sexual orientation. However, here
again, no one can provide such evidence and have so far only been able to
demonstrate (confirm) that there is no such gene (Marin, 2009: 75F). What
science appears to demonstrate so far is that sexual orientation is determined
prenatally, i.e., before birth and it's not a conscious choice one makes.
Obviously
this does not preclude/mean that there are people who choose a sexuality
opposite what one is born with: there are both homosexuals and heterosexuals
inside and outside the church who choose to live opposite their sexual
orientation. Whether this is a healthy decision/choice is another issue, and
one that will be discussed later in this blog series.
11 comments:
My understanding is that while scientists have not discovered a "gay" gene, they have found that the brains of gays and lesbians are hardwired differently- and this happens before birth. While not genetic, it is biological. Somewhere in mid- pregnancy, during bursts of hormones, which affect the brain's development, different things happen. In comparing the brains (through MRI imaging) of straight men and gay men and straight women and lesbians- there are marked differences. In cognitive testing in language development and reaction to certain stimulii, it seems that the brains of gay men develop similarly to the brains of straight women (and as well the brains of lesbian women are more similar to that of straight men). This is not caused by environmental factors after birth or by choice- the brains are different- this occurs in utero- in other words the brain has developed differently before birth. Scientists have also discovered that there is a higher chance of a male being gay, the greater number of male offspring his mother has had before him. It is suggested that with each successive pregnancy, a woman's body reacts to and limits the amount of testosterone passed on to male offspring. Again, lots of food for thought.
Tina Paddock
Former
Canada and Bermuda
amen, amen, amen, thank you patrik for putting into perspective where science sits with regard to the hetrosexual, homosexual or bisexual understanding.
max walters
former
australian eastern
There is the culprit some would say.Testosterone.Now should there be experimentation and scientific research on the subject all the more? Then there would be some that would say leave it alone,God made certain people that way. One thing is sure. God does permit people to be born with certain characteristics. Sometimes there are chemical imbalances or biological defects that we are born with. No one can be blamed for that but only be stewards of what we have.
USA Former
I appreciate the research and the open minded way this article is written. Thanks Sven for the translation.
I do not believe science or psychology are ever going to give an answer to this question - and to me, it doesn't matter. What science and psychology (particularly psychology) will demonstrate is what interactions produce healthy outcomes. For example - a child who is gay, being raised in a conservative environment, being taught conservative values, will usually grow up with a lot of psychological issues that need to be worked through - may often be suicidal etc. This is not healthy. Children raised by same sex parents generally tend to be more accepting, tolerant etc, AND NOT any more likely to be gay than those raised in a heterosexual environment etc. Psychology also shows us that so called 'reparitive therapies' do not work. There is NO recorded case of anyone undergoing such therapy through any means who has changed their sexuality - and those that have attempted to do so have ALL come out with psychological issues, many of whom are suicidal, and those that pursue heterosexual marriage either live in chronic severe depression or live double lives - visiting sex on premises venues - putting the lives of their wives at risk. This is not healthy.
If the conservative view were right, one would expect most to be living a more positive life - not becoming more damaged and damaging more people - but there is not even a single known example that supports the conservative view in the entire world in the history of the movement.
For me, sexuality is determined by the spirit God places in a person. In other words, I firmly believe that God creates people either gay or straight, or anything in between, and considers it beautiful. There is no scientific or psychological proof one way or the other because it is not a scientific or psychological issue - it is determined by how God created you to be 'in your inmost being' as Psalm 139:13-14 says '13 For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb.
14 I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well.'
Just my thoughts
Yours in Christ
Graeme Randall
Former Australian East - in London
It does make you wonder why certain individuals struggle with their lives and have inner battles (drugs,sex,desires). God permits many faults and deformities but the human spirit can still be beautiful. Psalm 139:13 can be a positive verse and yet some are born with disease and physical deformities that I would not call (verse14)wonderfully made. There will be the resurrected body one day but many will suffer in this life where sin abounds,which is the end result of deformity and disease whether directly or indirectly and spiritually.
USA Former
Wow, can I just say, I love the tone and the respect in these comments. This fills me with hope and joy!
The post is written openly to give weight to the fact that we have no definitive answer to this conundrum but I agree that if God is intimately involved in the creation of each human in the womb then God is creating our sexuality as part of the package.
We will come back to this very discussion in part 8 where we discuss different practical approaches and viewpoints for the corps.
Forgot to subscribe to the comments (sorry for double posting)
Thanks, Sven and Lt. I had no idea that the issue had even been discussed by the Army. I'm thankful for a forum where all views can be heard without the ranting and flaming that I've seen elsewhere.
Two points:
Graeme,
There may very well be something to your "spirit" view since I understand that among many American Indian tribes there was a word for children who exhibited traits different from that which would be considered either purely masculine behavior for boys and/or feminine behavior for girls. They were known as "berdache" or the "two spirited" people. In those societies unlike in Western Culture the "two spirited" people were revered as specially blessed and were generally trained to be the spiritual leaders of the various tribes.
Lt. Olterman,
If your premise is that there is no hard proof of a genetic component to homosexuality then you are correct. However, "proof" and "evidence" are two different things. (maybe it got mixed up in the translation?)
Studies were done in the 1990s showing that among identical male twins where one twin was gay there was a 51% chance that the other twin was also gay. It wasn't as high for fraternal twins as it was for identical twins but it was still higher than amongst brothers.
It is interesting that when the study first came out the religious right in America including Jerry Falwell, D. James Kennedy and James Dobson among others(Dobson probably knew better but let his radio guests say whatever they wanted to) lambasted it by claiming that if there was a genetic basis to homosexuality than identical twins should've been gay or straight 100% the time. What they did not realise was that in 1992 it was discovered that what makes identical twins is a throw off gene. They are genetically closer than siblings but they are NOT clones! Identical twins are genetically identical in many areas but not in all areas and what they are and are not identical in varies from set to set. The 51% statistic is actually very strong "evidence" that something may also be going on genetically! Yet as Tina Paddock points out at this point scientists prefer to use the term biological and pre-natal as no gay gene marker has been discovered to date.
Note also that unless something very recently has come down the pike the great concentration of research has dealt mainly with males! Very little research has been done on females. Right off the bat that should put some red flags up about whom and what people are really concerned about----male homosexuality!
No doubt patriarchy plays an important part in all of this. In patriarchy it is perceived that gay males go from being the # 1 gender of power to the # 2 gender of no or very little power. There is no respect for and in fact a repulsion in that whereas what females do isn't even considered that important in the first place. Where females exhibit more masculine traits whether they're lesbian or not they're actually admired and rewarded for it! (think Evangeline Booth.)
Daryl Lach
USA Central
"You Must Go Home by the Way of the Cross, To Stand with Jesus in the Morning!"
Daryl Thank you for sharing the info about twins, I had missed that. I think that the preoccupation with male homosexuality is due to the fact that it subverts societal structure later posts in this series will touch on that.
To answer the anonymous post. This conversation has been had and rehashed over and over again in the Salvation Army (at least in the Swedish territory) I think this is due to the broad theological spectrum within the army. I do think we are in a unique position to have this conversation right now due to a convergence of circumstances including the Swedish government passing laws allowing same sex marriages, the TV documentary hanging out the SA as homophobic, a new cadre of young officers pushing the agenda and a major shift leadership and structures throughout the army nationwide.
Post a Comment