Orson Scott Card: Science on gays falls short

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Kevin
    Aug. 10, 2008 9:45 a.m.

    I'm a homosexual. I'll always speak to the dignity of homosexual people and their equal rights, but I'd love to be heterosexual. Now in my 40's, it's painful not have any kids.

    But I'll reveal a not-so-altruistic ambition of the author. If his main gripe with homosexuals is that they are not sexually productive, I'll ask him to consider what proportion of heterosexuals are not sexually productive. Is it 5%, 3%, 1%? I don't know, myself. But I would bet it's close to the fraction of the population that is homosexual, maybe much larger.

    So concentrate on those people instead. Wouldn't it be easier to convince a heterosexual to have a kid than to launch a crusade to correct a neurological disorder we really know little about?

    I know a lot of homosexuals (men and women alike) who have had children. I know a lot of heterosexuals who have had none, by choice. At the 3% or less level, in my opinion, nature doesn't care. The sexual algorithm of reproduction is working extremely well.

    Note to DN: There's something wrong with the web version of this article. It's all chopped up into several pages.