In my recent column, I commented on the American Psychological Association having changed their literature regarding homosexuality to say the following:

What causes a person to have a particular sexual orientation?

There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay, or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social, and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.

I received an email from a reader who was curious about the quote, given that they found the APA to say something seemingly different:

"Is sexual orientation a choice?"

 

No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight. For most people, sexual orientation emerges in early adolescence without any prior sexual experience. Although we can choose whether to act on our feelings, psychologists do not consider sexual orientation to be a conscious choice that can be voluntarily changed. (emphasis added)

That there seems to be a contradiction (i.e., "no findings.permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation" is genetic vs. "No, human beings cannot choose to be either gay or straight.") should come as no surprise.

The APA, like many of its fellow "scientific" brethren have chucked science in the name of political correctness and the left's pseudo-tolerance crusade.  As a result, they are bound to contradict themselves and make asinine statements from time to time that are embarrassing.

Obviously, the mere presence of ex-homosexuals destroys the idea that sexual orientation cannot be changed.  The APA knows that.  But since they care about an agenda more than science, they marginalize and demonize those who have made the conscious decision to walk away from shameful lusts and temptations of the flesh (so much for "tolerance," huh?).

Far more could be said to debunk the agenda-driven literature of the APA that has destroyed their credibility.  So why did I cite them in my column? 

Simple: if even the APA - a group so obviously committed to normalizing sexually deviant behavior - is forced to acknowledge the non-existence of a genetic cause, that's about as strong a confirmation as you can find to prove there's no science to back up the claim.