I am not as well read as I thought, because I didn’t learn about the gay sheep controversy until last week. That’s a pretty good trick to seriously offend the gay lobby and PETA at the same time.
Isn’t it a logical thing for a breeder to want to maximize the amount of rams who want to help make more sheep? He doesn’t need a bunch of Panda-like slackers who won’t sacrifice their wills for the good of the team. If the orientation is unchangeable, then the critics should just laugh at the time and the money the researchers are wasting trying to prove the impossible.
The “x% of animals are gay” is a common pro-gay argument but also one of the worst I’ve heard. For one thing, those tests typically show that environmental factors influence the % (e.g., mice in overcrowded conditions). Also, male dogs, for example, may try to have sex with female dogs, male dogs, human legs, coffee tables, etc., but that doesn’t make all of those activities natural. And even if they did, natural does not equal moral.
As pointed out previously, the critics are missing the bigger issue: If gay genetic factors are real and ultimately identified in utero then they won’t be able to stop the stampede of abortions that will take place (I am on record for saying those abortions would be immoral, by the way).
Side note: I have a suspicion that the PETA folks, by and large, are pro-choice. Somebody correct me if I’m wrong. Consider the irony that animals about to be slaughtered have laws to minimize their pain while the unborn do not. Where is their outrage over that?
So homosexual orientation is fixed and unchangeable and does not require counseling, but Isaiah Washington’s “homophobia” is changeable and does require counseling? Shouldn’t he be a protected class as well? No, I’m not condoning what he said. That was stupid on at least two levels. I’m just pointing out the foolishness of the hysteria over a very poor word choice and the dogmatic labeling of some traits as inherent and others as changeable.
News flash: When someone is in a bitter argument and they want to say something hateful towards their opponent, they sometimes search their vocabulary for a mean-spirited term such as the “N-word” or “F-word” (No, not that one, the one used as a pejorative towards gay people) or the “FC-word” (Fundamentalist_Christian. Eek!). That doesn’t necessarily mean they have deep seated racial issues,”homophobia” or “Christophobia.” It does mean they have a limited vocabulary and poor self control.
Of course I am against attacking gay people with words or with deeds. I would always defend a gay person who is being harassed. If anything, I am guilty of reverse discrimination for treating them more nicely than heterosexuals.
And how about all the Christian-bashing that goes on in public and the media? Do these critics need counseling? OK, they probably do, but I’m not going to be shrill and demand it as a condition of their employment or freedom.
Final note on PETA: Weber Grills had a fabulous commercial written up in Forbes years ago. Ironically, they took it off the air because PETA-types complained. I’m not sure why they cared what the animal rights activists thought, as those folks aren’t exactly your target market for barbeque grills.
The commercial had several serene scenes of sheep, pigs and cows with a peaceful voice-over noting pleasant things about each animal. The last scene just showed a Weber grill. The tag-line? Farm animals: Let’s eat ’em!