I mentioned this a number of times, and the media that covers the religious right should especially take note. The religious right lies. A lot. You can't trust any "fact" they give you, as more often than not, it will be a fact ripped out of context to the point where if you read the context, the "fact" usually proves the exact opposite of what they're claiming. I found this when I was helping Senator Kennedy's office on gay issues back in 1993 and 94. I went through every document I could get my hands on that a particularly well known RR group had produced about gays. I then got the original sources for all of their footnotes. Of some 60 or so footnotes per document, I recall, very few were what any English teacher would consider "real" footnotes. It was rather astounding. Citing court cases to prove their point, and not telling you that they were citing the dissent - in other words, the court ruled for us, not them. Quite literally, there were documents in which not a single footnote was real. Anyway, read the blog post below, it's another prime example of how they operate. Liars to the core of their cold un-Christian hearts.
from Southern Beale blog:
Lost In Homophobic Translation
The ironically-named columnist Charlie Butts of OneNewsNow (the American Family Assn.'s "news" division) is leading a parade of wingnuts crowing over a statement on sexual orientation from the American Psychological Assn. This is supposedly “scientific proof” that there is no gay gene:
The attempt to prove that homosexuality is determined biologically has been dealt a knockout punch. An American Psychological Association publication includes an admission that there's no homosexual "gene" -- meaning it's not likely that homosexuals are born that way.
For decades, the APA has not considered homosexuality a psychological disorder, while other professionals in the field consider it to be a "gender-identity" problem. But the new statement, which appears in a brochure called "Answers to Your Questions for a Better Understanding of Sexual Orientation & Homosexuality," states the following:
"There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles...."
This story has been picked up at WingNut Daily and conservative blogs as proof that gays don’t deserve to get married or even exist because if sexual orientation is a “choice” not, you know, something you have no control over, then we don’t have to protect GLBT folks with hate crime laws and stuff, and obviously they are just that way because everyone loves a great queer party.
Or something.
So smelling the aroma of bullshit wafting my way, I headed over the APA to read this supposed new statement for myself. Tell me if you notice anything missing:
There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors. Many think that nature and nurture both play complex roles; most people experience little or no sense of choice about their sexual orientation.
Again, did anyone notice anything missing from Butts’ quote?
That's some "knockout punch," all right.
No comments:
Post a Comment