Mario Khurram’s well-written guest column “State of being” (April 21) presented several interesting claims as well as a few fallacious arguments about homosexuality. According to Khurram, one cannot draw an analogy between homosexuality and race or gender because one is a behavior and the others are innate properties. He states, “Homosexuality, or even heterosexuality, is never brought to fruition until practiced.” Thus, according to Khurram, I couldn’t say I was a straight male until I kissed a girl at the tender age of 15. Until then, my sexual orientation was ambiguous. Doesn’t this strike anyone else as an odd conclusion? Why should we accept Khurram’s definition of human sexuality?
The fundamental problem with Khurram’s nitpicky semantics is it does nothing to further the argument about the legitimacy of equal rights for gays. Even if one could argue homosexuality is not inborn, it does not logically follow that one should be judged negatively because of one’s sexual orientation. In order to justify his narrow-minded opinion, Khurram resorts to fallacious arguments.
The error in his argument comes when he states, “It must be noted that the outward signs of heterosexual behavior are sanctioned by our society because there is a logical and natural basis for that behavior.” Thus, according to Khurram, because male and female genitalia complement one another and because the fertilization of an egg occurs by a sperm cell, heterosexual behavior is sanctioned and homosexual behavior is not. Apparently, Khurram’s cell, molecular biology and genetics major doesn’t prevent him from developing an invalid argument.
You cannot draw a prescriptive claim from an empirical fact. In order to make the leap of logic from, “This is how biology works,” an empirical claim, to the conclusion, “This is how things should be,” there needs to be an additional premise to the argument. To prove homosexual behavior is wrong based on the facts of biology, Khurram needs to prove acting in accordance with natural biology is always right and acting against natural biology is always wrong.
If Khurram can prove those claims to be universally true, I will cease to wear my glasses, drive my car, fly in airplanes, watch television and take medicine prescribed by doctors, and I will never pay for food with paper money again because all these things are not “natural” by any means.
You cannot prove the statement, “Killing is wrong,” true by studying science. These kind of moral absolute statements must be justified by facts about the consequences of actions, such as killing, and comparing these consequences to what the whole population agrees to value. Like other religious individuals, Khurram, a Catholic, is free to have an opinion regarding the ethics surrounding the rights of homosexuals, pregnant women and other social topics, but a serious debate requires more than the introduction of religious mandates from God. We don’t all hold the same religious views; if I believe my god is more right than your god, it’s just a matter of faith. If lawmakers had to spend their time arguing about the true meaning of the Bible/ Koran/ Torah/ Bhagavad-Gita, and how these texts would rule on homosexuality or stem cells, then our government would be even more inefficient, if that is at all possible. Thus, it only makes sense that certain politicians shy away from religious rhetoric when it comes to matters of public policy.
The moral absolutes people so strongly hold on to cannot be found in nature. It takes human imagination to concoct notions of moral virtue or vice, and this is where religion usually steps in.
Unfortunately, the common error of using science to argue unsubstantiated claims has been used time and time again to justify bigotry and hatred. I can only hope people will not always blindly follow the moral prescriptions of religious figures, but, instead, attempt to think in terms of real-life consequences. It seems that maybe intellectual laziness and the unwillingness to critically evaluate the opinions of people in authority is doing the most harm to our society.
Rodolfo Zamora is a senior cell, molecular biology and genetics and philosophy major. He can be reached at rzamora@umd.edu.
