Shayla: Isn’t it ok to say that people have a predisposition to homosexuality but that like any other predisposition (i.e. alcoholism), it should be resisted?

Meforshim:

I agree with your argument that each of us has predispositions to certain sins (whether genetically or environmentally derived). Some will be more likely to be tempted by homosexuality than others. Some will find it difficult to drink responsibly while others will find it difficult to even understand the attraction of alcohol. That’s not my argument.

What I mean when I say “you aren’t born gay” is that there is no scientific evidence that indicates a “gay” gene. Despite millions of dollars and hundreds of studies, no conclusive evidence has been found. In fact, the science indicates the opposite. It doesn’t run in families. Good studies on twins have repeatedly concluded that one twin becoming homosexual didn’t statistically increase the odds of the other taking the same route. It doesn’t even seem to particularly matter if your caretaker was gay, which would rule out even environmental issues. By all scientific evidence, homosexuality, like all other sins, is a choice.

You said: “To me it seems okay to say that a person is born with homosexual tendencies…It seems okay to admit these things and have God still be God.”

It would be okay to say that IF THERE WERE ANY SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE to back it up. To me it just like saying it’s okay if Jesus married and had kids. There are no moral, ethical or halakhic reasons why He couldn’t have done that and still been God. My objections to the idea that Jesus married and had kids are not based on a moral code. My objection is that there is no shred of evidence that He married. It’s not that its morally wrong…it’s just that it’s not historically accurate.

 Similarly, my objection to the idea of being born gay is not based on an idea that it would deny God or the Bible. My objection is that there is no evidence to support an idea that is universally used to defend homosexuality as a lifestyle.