Being born gay is like being born into a race

by Matt Slick

The idea that a person is born gay has not been demonstrated to be true.  See Homosexuals are born that way. Therefore it is natural and good for a response that claim using MZ twins as test examples that do not support the homosexual's claim that they are born that way.

Nevertheless, it is a common error made by those in the pro-homosexual movement to equate race with "sexual orientation." They claim they are born with the orientation the same as a person is born into a race.  This is a category mistake.  A category mistake is attributing the property of one thing to something else that does not have that property.  For example, to say "Blue sleeps faster than Wednesday" is to confuse an attribute of color with speed and compare it to a name. 

Race is, without a doubt, determined by genetic information. It is not the same with homosexuality (see link to article above). Homosexuality deals with preferential attraction and its resultant behavior.  Race does not. Race has to do with skin color and various associated physical characteristics. Homosexuality deals with an attitude (attraction), not a physical characteristic (skin color).  A preference is not the same thing as a physical characteristic.  Furthermore, behaviors can be changed and there are many homosexuals who have given up their homosexuality. But, the same claim cannot be made for race.  Therefore, it's a category mistake to equate sexual attraction with a physical characteristic such as race.

Furthermore, HomoSEXuality is a behavior---an action.  It is not the same thing as a genetic condition such as skin color, height, or gender.  Homosexual intercourse is a behavior and is, therefore, something people choose to do.  That is, a person chooses to pick up a cup, to drive a car, to eat, to shower, to kiss, to embrace, etc.  Actions are what people choose to do -- whether or not they have a tendency.  On the other hand, being born in black or white skin is not a choice and is not a behavior.

If a person were born with a tendency to lie, and he were to succumb to that tendency, is he then not morally responsible for his actions because he claims to have been "born" with the orientation to lie? Of course not. Who would use such a faulty line of logic?  Well, homosexuals would.  They want to excuse their particular behavior because they are "born that way". It's their orientation. But such a justification is a slippery slope.  What would they say about those who are born with the orientation to be attracted to young children, or animals, or corpses, or to their own brothers, or sisters, etc.?  If being "born that way" implies that it is morally acceptable along with the actions generated from that orientation, then what would they say about other "sexual orientations"?  Does homosexuality get a pass and it alone is free from serious examination and moral critique?  We call that special pleading.

See Related Articles


See the article




CARM ison