On Sept. 28, Truth Wins Out protested a Baptist Press article by ex-gay activist and longtime Exodus member Bob Stith. While mourning the sexual honesty of Christian contemporary singer Ray Boltz, the article unnecessarily and falsely quoted Human Genome Project former director Francis Collins as saying:
Homosexuality is not hardwired. There is no gay gene. We mapped the human genome. We now know there is no genetic cause for homosexuality.
Collins never said that; ex-gay political activist Greg Quinlan did. Good As You made the same observation.
Collins had said almost the opposite: He told Ex-Gay Watch:
The evidence we have at present strongly supports the proposition that there are hereditary factors in male homosexuality — the observation that an identical twin of a male homosexual has approximately a 20% likelihood of also being gay points to this conclusion, since that is 10 times the population incidence. But the fact that the answer is not 100% also suggests that other factors besides DNA must be involved. That certainly doesn’t imply, however, that those other undefined factors are inherently alterable.
Collins added:
No one has yet identified an actual gene that contributes to the hereditary component (the reports about a gene on the X chromosome from the 1990s have not held up), but it is likely that such genes will be found in the next few years.
Ten days later, Baptist Press finally changed the wording of the article — without acknowledging to readers the nature of the falsehoods that had previously been conveyed, without apparent effort to correct syndicated copies of the article that were circulated around the Internet, without apology to Dr. Collins, and — most importantly — without apparent reforms necessary to prevent future errors.
The only hint of the two-week deception appears at the top the article with this brief note:
REVISED: October 8, 2008 to reflect more accurate wording from “The Language of God” by Dr. Francis Collins.
Stith’s article now accurately conveys what Collins said — but the damage has already been done among readers who walked away from the article (and more than a dozen syndicated copies) believing that a leading geneticist had declared homosexuality a purely environmental choice.
Thus far, it seems Stith might walk away from the damage with nothing more than a quiet admission of fault to one web site, Ex-Gay Watch, which his regular audience never reads. Meanwhile, Quinlan has not acknowledged any deception whatsoever. We have asked Stith for assurances of complete remedial action; he has declined to respond.
Stith’s peers say that he is a man of good character; at one time I believed that, but I became very doubtful 10 days ago and now I am nearly convinced otherwise. True accountability, transparency, and penitence require more effort and integrity than I’m seeing, at present, from a prominent Exodus speaker and policy wonk for the Southern Baptist Convention.
[...] some are unhappy that more was not done, one should not forget that this is progress. Those who have linked to the [...]
I think it would be a much more powerful stance for the LGBT community to say my sexuality is a choice and my choice and I have right to chose rather than to surrender our authority to science. This is precisely what Michel Focault advocated. It would perhaps begin to end a rather ludicrous debate. We will never know for sure what human nature is because if there is a human nature it will always be woven with what we call culture. Just be gay if you want to be.
Matthew, your request — that the entire gay population of the world unite in a global statement that Matthew So-and-So’s sexuality is a choice — makes little sense.
A quarter-billion same-sex-attracted people do not know you. I do not know you. And there is no agreement among sexual minorities on ANY topic, so why would there be agreement regarding the sexual choices of Matthew So-and-So?
Personally, I’m confident that your sexual behavior is a choice. Everyone’s behavior is a choice. If you’re bisexual, then congratulations, you can choose to behave with either or both genders without lying to them — or your family and friends — about the attraction.
I don’t recall any prominent gay person ever suggesting that people surrender their will, authority, or self-determination to “science.” Many people do suggest that ex-gays be sexually honest about their predominant state of attraction, and not claim falsely to be heterosexual when one’s attractions are not primarily heterosexual.
As for your last suggestion, it is with regret that I do not see the leaders of Exodus allowing people to live-and-let-live. The ex-gay political leadership’s denial of self-determination to others is a key reason why the movement is so unpopular.
I am always amazed at the dishonesty on both sides of this debate, you are all dishonest and use your own stories to make a case, from the hardest gay activist to the most rabid evangelical you are not honest but defend a position on both sides that has no real defense, can we not rather throw ourselves on the grace and mercy of God
BS Bruce, show where our side has been dishonest. And no, we cannot throw ourselves on the grace and mercy of an imaginary being.
Bruce, I don’t get you. Could you be more explicit, please?
Bruce, I think we’re all waiting for specific examples. It’s easy to say “both sides are dishonest” but you need to back it up or it just seems like you’re a troll.