RECENT  POSTS:  » NOM spends six figures on North Carolina's Hagan/Tillis US Senate race » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists'  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

03/13/2006

Go watch, don't Stahl: '60 Minutes' airs fantastic piece on nature vs. nurture

by Jeremy Hooper

Last night's "60 Minutes" had a fascinating piece on the nature of sexuality, analyzing pairs of twins in which one of the siblings is 'mosexual and the other is 'rosexual. The program doesn't provide any definitive proof that hormones and genetics are the likely explanation for homosexuality, but the case it makes for biological linkage is certainly a strong one:

Picture 1-112
(Click to watch)
*UPDATE: Malcontent now has the full clip.

Of course there will be those who think it unfair that the show did not present the "pro-family" side's position that homosexuality is a choice, and we'd almost guarantee that the 'mo foes will try and debunk CBS's journalistic ethics within the next few hours/days. We'll call them on their bull when that time comes; for now, let's just relish the fact that there are rational folks in this world who seem supportive of the notion that if it's a choice, then your humble scribe's zygote had very strong opinions about boobs.

Causes Of Sexual Orientation Still Unknown [CBS5.com]

**UPDATE: Though we still think the piece to be fascinating and good evidence that homosexuality is biological, the expert utilized, J. Michael Bailey, is quite the controversial figure.

More info: J. Michael Bailey [TS Road Map]
Bisexual study, New York Times article cause furor [PrideSource]

However, apart from Mr. Bailey's contribution, the segment does still speak to us as a positive contribution to those of us on the "nature" side of the debate. You be your own judge.

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails