Skip to main content

View Diary: Genetics and Sexual Orientation: It's Complicated (21 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  But this isn't an epigenetic theory (4+ / 0-)

    it's an attempt to resuscitate Hammer's genetic theory that hasn't stood up in subsequent research done by people with no axe to grind.

    Bailey has suggested that genetic markers for homosexuality should be used by parents to screen for homosexuality in fetuses -- so that they can be aborted if positive for a gay biomarker. His goal is eugenics, and the elimination of gays as a disease.

    As Gary Barlow reported on May 4, 2005 in the Chicago Free Press [5]:

    "I think the controversy has mostly been due to misunderstanding of the article," Bailey said, referring to his paper on genetic selection. "Nothing we wrote has any negative implications for gay people."

    Stating that he doesn't believe "homosexuality is morally inferior," Bailey said, "My argument here is in no way anti-homosexual but rather pro-parental liberty."

    Bailey went on to argue that if it become possible to use genetic selection technology to make it more likely for parents to bear heterosexual offspring, such choices would be "morally neutral."

    "To avoid having homosexual children does no harm to anyone," he said. "It is quite hard to see how being heterosexual causes any harm to the child."

    Bailey stated that even if parents chose to avoid having gay children for "a bad motive," such as anti-gay prejudice, "Is a bad motive enough to render that action morally wrong?"


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site