Texas Monthly Senior Executive Editor Paul Burka wrote a thoughtful "conservative case" for gay marriage in the January issue. He makes some logical, fully digestable arguments, and he mentioned that he voted with the 60% majority of Austinites and Travis County (the solitary
island county atop a sea of ban proponents) voters against Proposition 2. There is one section of Burka's article, however, that contains an idea that by now should be moot:
Then there are the issues that can't be legislated. Is sexual preference genetic or a choice? This question matters because most proponents of gay marriage argue that sexual preference is genetically determined, while opponents disagree. The scientific evidence for the existence of a gay (male) gene is inconclusive. Here I hedge again; I believe that it's both genetic and a choice, that inclination and influence are two ends of a continuum [...] This is a real concern for parents who believe that sexual preference is a matter of choice and that their kids' choice can be influenced by such displays [of public affection].
Paul Burka, Texas Monthly
V. 34 Issue 1 January 2006
Even if homosexuality was a choice, it wouldn't and shouldn't matter. If sexuality was a decision consciously and deliberately made, it would be a decision harming no one. Parents' fear is a selfish one: that their child being gay would destroy a master plan that includes white weddings, grandkids, and suburban white-picket-fence bliss.
