View Comments      Email Article       Printable Version

Published: March 20, 2007

Hey, Hey, Baby Gay! What Do You Do? What Do You Say?

Research "strongly suggests that sexual preference is biologically determined in animals, and possibly in humans.”

Do biological factors --- for instance, hormonal imbalances in utero --- tend to skew an unborn baby’s future sexual inclination? And if so, would it be ethical to correct those imbalances prenatally in order to encourage a normal heterosexual outcome?

Scientists at the U.S. Sheep Experiment Station in Oregon are researching the cause, and (some have claimed) the cure of abnormal sexual orientation in rams; and the Rev. R. Albert Mohler Jr., president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Kentucky, theorizes that if similar factors apply to humans, prenatal treatment to normalize intrauterine hormone levels would be justified to ensure a child’s healthy development.

The scientists, however, though they have examined whether a sheep's sexuality can be altered through various treatments (for instance, by altering hormones to make "straight" sheep "gay"), have said that their research has nothing to do with seeking a cure for homosexuality. And, what's more, they have not even been successful in altering a sheep's sexuality.

The Rev. Joseph Fessio, founder of Ignatius Press in San Francisco and currently chancellor of Ave Maria University in Florida, agrees. "Same-sex activity is considered disordered," Fessio said. "If there are ways of detecting diseases or disorders of children in the womb, and a way of treating them that respected the dignity of the child and mother, it would be a wonderful advancement of science."

Such musings have kicked up controversy on both sides of the ethical divide. Some fundamentalists are convinced that even a homosexual "tendency" is a deliberate sinful choice uninfluenced by biological factors. Some homosexual activists insist that it would be “cultural genocide” to try to correct a baby’s sexual predisposition. And People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, without taking a stand on humans, argues straight out that rams have a right to be gay.

It’s all theoretical, because so far no “gay gene” has been found; and no one is even close to a consensus about the ways in which hormonal and environmental facts may influence human gender identity and sexual orientation.

Nevertheless, Charles Roselli, the Oregon sheep project's lead scientist, found that a crucial part of homosexual rams’ brains --- the "sexually dimorphic nucleus" --- looks more like a ewe's than like a straight ram's. Roselli says that his research "strongly suggests that sexual preference is biologically determined in animals, and possibly in humans.”

At one time, homosexual activists eagerly sought evidence that sexual orientation is inborn. If same-sex attraction is innate, they claimed, acting on this attraction is not morally objectionable. But now some activists fear that if a homosexual tendency is diagnosable before birth, parents could eliminate homosexual offspring either by aborting babies who carry a “gay” biological marker or by genetically manipulating the embryo.

The Catholic Church teaches that abortion, embryo "selection," or genetic manipulation would be gravely morally wrong under any circumstances. But if there were a genuinely therapeutic treatment --- say, a hormone patch on the pregnant mother's abdomen --- which would promote the baby's normal sexual development, Catholic ethicists would agree with Baptist Mohler that this is acceptable as, for instance, prenatal blood transfusions, which have become common in the past 20 years.

"All babies --- all of them --- need acceptance, love and care," insists Mohler. "If 'care' involves a cure of an unhealthy prenatal condition, how can you see that as anything but a blessing?"

© California Catholic Daily 2007. All Rights Reserved.