Scientists have discovered that switching a single gene in a female fruit fly will induce it to behave like a male, according to the International Herald Tribune. That seems to be a solid step down the path of establishing homosexuality as being a result of genetics. And that is not a good thing. I'm not saying it's a choice, either, nor that establishing it as a choice would be any better. Frankly, I don't care, and neither should anyone else. This is one of those damned-if-you-do-damned-if-you-don't situations. If homosexuality is proven to have a genetic cause, then social conservatives will argue it is a genetic defect. If it is proven to be a choice, then they will argue it is a depraved and degenerate practice. They can find arguments condemning it if it's caused by non-genetic biological factors, by environmental factors, or by cosmic rays and Cher. Now, I'm not saying that we should pay attention to what social conservatives think. In fact, I say quite the opposite. Arguing about whether the cause makes it acceptable is still wrong and still lets them dictate the agenda. It implicitly acknowledges that one's sexuality needs to be justified to unaffected, uninvolved parties. I say that it doesn't matter one bit where homosexuality comes from except for academic reasons. What matters is that homosexuality hurts nobody 1 and is nobody's business. Root causes are irrelevant. It just is, and that should be good enough for everybody.

¶ 1109 Posted at 10.26 AM ⇒ No Comments ( science! | interesting | politics )