Liberal Letter (USA Today, Wednesday, June 9, 2010):
Homosexuality is found in nature
. . . . . I was appalled that USA TODAY would publish a letter from a reader who claims homosexuality is a choice even when science has shown that this is not true (Homosexuality immoral, Friday). The reader also claims that farm animals are heterosexual by nature. Scientific studies have confirmed that more than 1,500 species studied from primates to worms show homosexual behavior.
. . . . . Do you print letters just because they are controversial or because they have some value? I think your readers, both straight and gay, deserve an apology.
Marilyn Himmel: Miami
No Choice in Homosexuality
. . . . . The homosexual community would like to believe that their behavior is given, a genetic inheritance which frees them from responsibility for any choice in the matter. Marilyn Himmel’s letter to the editor (USA Today June 9, 2010) states that science has established the genetic link (?). Without identifying such a link, she argues that homosexual behavior exists in 1,500 species from primates to worms (i.e. If it exists in nature, it is not a choice in humans). Accepting this moral equivalence argument, it follows that cannibalism is also widespread in nature. This would clearly justify eating each other, yet it occurs in only the most remote of human cultures. It is precisely the development of human cultures through choice that sets man apart from the other 1499 species. If homosexuals wish to remain outside of the human culture (with the worms), is this, too, a given, or is it a choice?
. . . . . An absence of choice in human affairs is reminiscent of Flip Wilson’s “The Devil Made Me Do It” years back, a clear excuse to avoid personal responsibility. Of interest is Ms. Himmel’s reference to science as her excuse, with one reference covering 1500 species from primates to worms with homosexual behavior. The scientific articles and journal references which establish this case should provide fascinating reading. From these many sources, one of every conceivable behavioral quirk occurs somewhere within nature’s millions of species, which can be used to justify any human behavior. This reasoning, in essence, makes all humans equivalent with that of all species, and eliminates choice as a human capability. Cannibalism is simply a clear indication that following such reasoning leads in the wrong direction.
. . . . . Human behavior is scientifically within a slippery domain at best, and scarcely lends itself to proof of anything. The assertion that select choices are outside the realm of human behavior must open the possibility that choice, itself, is also a delusion, and man has no free will to make choices of any kind. This is clearly nonsense. We are all capable of making many reasoned and emotion-based choices every day. Such choices are not all what one might wish.
. . . . . An argument might even be made that homosexual behavior, which runs counter to most cultures, involves a more deliberate choice than, say, heterosexuality, the easy road to cultural conformity. Scientifically, the argument being made is that homosexuality is of the same class as being left-handed, a non-choice, in a right-handed world. Until such compelling evidence is presented for homosexuals, choice must remain a major contributor to this particular life style.
. . . . . Exactly why heterosexuals, or anybody else, should receive an apology from USA Today is a complete mystery, except in the context of human behavior (wild assertions).