Out of curiosity (and OT slightly)

I usually try not to get bogged down in blogospheric cross-talk, but the quibbler in me can’t resist this one. In response to my remarks about Kirk Talley’s personal testimony, the Gospel Commentary bravehost blogger wrote this:

In the 20 years of my career I have dealt with many homosexuals. Whether they were male or female their sexual preference manifested itself from lack of male role models during childhood, lack of female role models during childhood, childhood sexual abuse, witnessing long term abusive behavior as a child, or other abnormal circumstances. Kirk’s letter only shows a normal childhood. Therefore, I believe there was something left out. I’m not asking for the full story from Kirk.

Nevermind it’s probably worth knowing what kind of career we’re talking about here (twenty years as, say, a longshoreman would probably make for substantionally different interactions with gay people than, say, being a social worker). Instead, let’s play el abogado del Diablo with the bravehost blogger for a moment and ask: isn’t it at least possible that bravehost’s assumptions - and not some mysterious missing ingredient in Talley’s testimony - may be the reason why reality isn’t lining up with the bravehost’s ideas about the origins of homosexuality?

Email this Post

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared. Required fields are marked * Please note: Comment moderation is enabled and may delay your comment. There is no need to resubmit your comment.

*

*