j5 wrote:Well, there's this for starters:
Seems to cover most of the bases, though I haven't read it cover to cover yet.
eta: my earlier point still stands, though. It doesn't matter if it's choice or biology, why should freedom to marry whomever one chooses be restricted?
I also don't have time to read the paper in its entirety, but did go through the opening couple pages as well as the conclusions section. basic impressions:
1) Paper presents a theory, which as the authors note in their conclusions, may require several decades of subsequent study to confirm. Paper was published in 1987. It's now two and a half decades later, and we're still waiting for that scientific confirmation.
2) Even within the theory proposed by the authors, they do not go so far as to say that homosexuality is a genetic inborn trait. Rather, there are factors from birth (both genetic and environmental) which would give a strong preference towards one behavior or another, and even those can still be overcome post-birth. just confirms my previous comments re: alcoholism.
Here's the thing: as a scientist I honestly, truly, wish that these authors were right -- that there was a direct, verifiable and repeatable scientific cause for homosexual behavior -- because then we could address it as scientists. You see, there's a term for a genetic condition which prevents an organism from functioning in the way it was biologically intended (i.e. surviving, thriving, and propagating the species). It's called a genetic disease. Like cancer, or Alzheimer's, or any of the other numerous diseases out there, we could study it and try to find a cure for it.
Which leads us to the mess we're in today. Those promoting the homosexual lifestyle want special protection as if they had no choice about it, because the vast majority of American society (what is it, 38 of 50 states?) does not agree with the behavior. But at the same time, they don't want to prove that they have no choice in the matter, because doing so would be to admit that they have a genetic disease for which a cure could be found. It's the proverbial wanting to have their cake and eat it too.
So, back to your question... you ask why it matters who one does or doesn't marry? Well, once biology is out of the picture, marriage is a construct defined by society and religion, and, well, rather than commit the double-foul of discussing politics AND religion in one morning, I'll just leave it at that.