Bob Schieffer was not the first person to ask the contentious question concerning

the origins of homosexual feelings. Such questions are frequently asked by

pollsters, researchers and people at the water cooler.

The thorny issue arising in a presidential debate, however, was surprising.

And it was enlightening to learn how the two candidates think about one of

today's most lively social issues, even if they could have given a better

answer.

The gay political group, the Human Rights Campaign, immediately supported

Senator Kerry's answer that seemed designed to say in effect, "Bob,

come on, everybody knows being homosexual is not a choice!"

The lobbying group waxed indignant about the President's candid response

of "I don't know." According to their news release, the President "...

put politics ahead of the science that being gay is not a choice."

What about that charge of putting politics before science? Did either of

the candidates get the right answer?

Although it was refreshing to hear the issue questioned, the truth is it

is unlikely that anyone could do justice to the complexities involved in

the time allowed.

The professor in me immediately began to think of how I would answer the

question. I soon realized that the nuances and problems of definition would

have taken me into my closing statement.

The question: "Is homosexuality a choice?" seems simple enough,

but it is cunningly complicated. The two nouns in the query require further

reflection.

What do we mean by homosexuality? What do we mean by choice?

sex? Or are we referring to a person who has adopted a gay or lesbian personal

identity? Or both?

Some people experience same-sex attractions to varying degrees but choose

not to act on them or to identify themselves as homosexual.

For them, the feelings of attraction may not seem like a choice but pursuing

same sex relationships or adopting a homosexual identity would be a conscious

choice that they reject.

Choice is also a word that requires clarification. This part of the question

is usually code for a related question: "Can a person change his feelings

or are they such an innate part of a homosexual's makeup that any choice

concerning them is impossible?"

For those who have experienced change in their sexual feelings from gay

to straight, often known as ex-gays, the concept of choice is especially

important.

In my research, many ex-gays say they did not choose to initially experience

attractions to their own gender but at some point in their lives, they made

a conscious choice to pursue change in not only how they perceive themselves

but in their affections and attractions.

Some people very consciously pursue same-sex relationships. In a 1997 article

titled, "Is sexual orientation a matter of choice?" Susan Rosenbluth

found that 58 percent of women surveyed who were at the time in lesbian relationships

chose to pursue a same-sex relationship for a variety of reasons beyond sexual

attraction.

In other words, many women prefer women for partners and experience that

preference as a choice they make.

So for some people, homosexual feelings may not be a choice, and for some,

cultivating these feelings to be in a preferred same-sex relationship may

be a choice.

For many, pursuing a gay or lesbian identity is indeed a choice, whereas

for others it seems like a natural progression from awareness of same-sex

feelings.

Where Senator Kerry ran aground was in assuming that the feeling of choice

is a reliable indicator of the source of feelings.

He assumed, as do many in my profession and the Human Rights Campaign, that

a perception of naturalness means that feelings are inborn, hard-wired or

perhaps even God-given.

Many human affections including food and activity preferences seem quite

natural but are almost certainly acquired, albeit imperceptibly.

While the inborn theory may seem reasonable at first look, the research

into sexual attraction implicates many more factors beyond genetics and is

actually quite suspect.

For instance, in 2002, the Nuffield Council on Bioethics report concerning

genes and behavior concluded: "There are numerous problems with genetic

and other biological research into sexual orientation which mean that any

reported findings must be viewed with caution."

Now class, in reflecting over the answer to Bob Schieffer's question,

which of the candidates seemed to be viewing the issue with a more informed

sense of caution?

But what could the candidates have said? Here's one possible response:

"Bob, we know four things for certain. First, we know that genetic

research has not found a gay gene even though same-sex attractions feel quite

natural for a small percentage of the population.

"Second, research has shown that some people do regard their homosexuality

as a choice.

"Third, research demonstrates that some people have made the choice

to leave homosexuality.

"Finally, we all have a choice to live in accord with our deeply held

personal values and religious beliefs no matter what research eventually

tells us about sexual orientation."

Next question.

[Warren Throckmorton, Ph.D., is an associate professor of psychology and

director of college counseling at Grove City (Penn.) College. He is also

the producer of "I Do Exist," a documentary about sexual orientation

change (www.idoexist.net). He can be reached at [email protected].]