Why are some people so quick to latch on to bold claims about the biological origins of homosexuality? I think it's because they believe that we need to show that we're born gay in order to establish that our sexuality is a deep, important and relatively fixed part of who we are.
My name is Domenick, and I have an unhealthy sexual addiction. Wow, that was hard to say, but after Minnesota State Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen helped me see the light, I thought it was probably best for me to shove myself back in the closet and seek help here at Homosexuals Anonymous.
While science by itself cannot overcome the deep underlying causes of anti-LGBT prejuidice and discrimination, it can help to combat the myths and old wives tales that underlie so much of homophobia. Thats why it's important to distinguish what is science and what is science fiction.
Ever since The Science of Desire by Dean Hamer (1993), the scientific world and gays and lesbians around the world have been plagued by the idea of a single gene controlling human sexual orientation. The specter of de-gaying by gene therapy has haunted us ever since.
It is an interesting exercise to look at how genetic contributions of homosexuality may have been preserved and passed down by our ancestors. Dr. Richard Dawkins' take on the evolution of the "gay gene" is fascinating, elegant, and quite clever.
Anti-gay activists, including the Bachmanns, have spent enormous energy and resources doing everything they can to obfuscate the data, confuse the debate, and put scientists such as myself on the defensive.
Even without a causal link established between homosexuality and population management, the obvious reduction in population growth attributable to homosexuality by itself indubitably works to preserve the species.