Why Was Question http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?Qid=20090218123513AAUhOHi Deleted?
In the above question, an individual had asked why feminists oppose government health care dollars for treating a birth defect like homosexuality but support government health care dollars for treating a birth defect like cleft lip.
The questioner was barraged by accusations of being a bigot. The questioner may or may not have been a bigot; I don’t know. What I do know is that civility and reason go a lot further in discussions than accusations and censorship.
With that conviction, I’d like to offer a reasoned response: first to the questioner, and then to the respondents:
To the questioner: not every feminist opposes treating homosexuality. Feminists, gender egalitarians, and gender complementarians are are capable of rational argument.
Second, it’s quite rational to favor government sponsorship of treatment for cleft lip and palate, yet not for homosexuality, given the current state of research. It’s quite common—and rational—to advocate for proven treatments, while not advocating for treatments that require years more research.
We know how to treat cleft lip and palate. We’ve known how for years. Treatments for homosexuality—from low-dose naltrexone if a mother experiences stress early in pregnancy to hormone patches to counteract a mother’s drug use later in pregnancy—are still being investigated.
To the respondents: It’s important to be civil in our answers, especially when we disagree. The person asking this question might have been privy to some research you hadn’t yet read, like http://www.springerlink.com/content/m0h616lg5r1n2527/ ; http://www.jstor.org/pss/3812874 ; or http://www.springerlink.com/index/R4W5308773437365.pdf . There’s no reason to think I, or the questioner, either likes or dislikes people with same-sex attractions—or struggles with repressed feelings—as some of the accusations implied.
It’s important to realize: even if we have a biological drive to act in a particular way, we don’t have to embrace it. Being horny doesn’t mean we “need” sex. Wanting strong drink doesn’t mean we “need” alcohol. Being attracted to someone of the same sex doesn’t mean someone “needs” to embrace the identity of homosexual.
Not everyone wants to embrace what they feel a biological drive to do. I know people who have struggled with alcoholism. I know people who have embraced their love of strong drink. I know people who have struggled with same-sex attraction. I know people who have embraced their love of those of the same sex.
The more we know about the biological and social processes that govern human stress-response, pleasure, and sexual expression, the more choices people (including parents) will have.
You can read http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=891 for more perspective.
So…
Any ideas why the original question was deleted?
Any thoughts on this response?