(First Things) Stanton Jones—Same-Sex Science

Posted by Kendall Harmon

To avoid misunderstanding the phenomenon of homosexuality, we must grapple with the Achilles heel of research into the homosexual condition: the issue of sample representativeness. To make general characterizations such as “homosexuals are as emotionally healthy as heterosexuals,” scientists must have sampled representative members of the broader group. But representative samples of homosexual persons are difficult to gather, first, because homosexuality is a statistically uncommon phenomenon.

A recent research synthesis by Gary Gates of the Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA Law School dedicated to sexual-orientation law and public policy, suggests that among adults in the United States, Canada, and Europe, 1.8 percent are bisexual men and women, 1.1 percent are gay men, and 0.6 percent are lesbians. This infrequency makes it hard to find participants for research studies, leading researchers to study easy-to-access groups of persons (such as visible participants in advocacy groups) who may not be representative of the broader homosexual population. Add to this the difficulty of defining homosexuality, of establishing boundaries of what constitutes homosexuality (with individuals coming in and out of the closet, and also shifting in their experience of same-sex identity and attraction), and of the shifting perceptions of the social desirability of embracing the identity label of gay or lesbian, and the difficulty of knowing when one is studying a truly representative sample of homosexual persons becomes clear.

Read it all.

Filed under: * Culture-WatchHistoryPhilosophyPsychologyReligion & CultureScience & TechnologySexuality* International News & CommentaryAmerica/U.S.A.* TheologyAnthropologyEthics / Moral Theology

6 Comments
Posted January 26, 2012 at 2:59 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Tomb01 wrote:

Interesting….  I’ve never been able to understand how those ‘scientific’ people could define homosexuality as ‘genetic’ or inherited, and also believe in evolution.  After all, homosexuality is inherently a non-reproducing behavior, and by that definition cannot be in the gene pool….

January 26, 8:12 pm | [comment link]
2. AnglicanFirst wrote:

“A recent research synthesis by Gary Gates of the Williams Institute, a think tank at UCLA Law School dedicated to sexual-orientation law and public policy, suggests that among adults in the United States, Canada, and Europe, 1.8 percent are bisexual men and women, 1.1 percent are gay men, and 0.6 percent are lesbians. This infrequency makes it hard to find participants for research studies,....”

Politically one would assume that the UCLA Law School is either a neutral entity or tending towards GLBT advocacy given the politics of California.

Also if one adds up the percentages 1.8 + 1.1 + .6,  the total is 3.5 per cent. 

And then if one asssumes that only one-half of of that percentage are GLBT political activists or their supporters, then we are faced with a 1.75 per cent of the general population that has presumed to assume great political clout.  And to put the arguments of their cause above and beyond all other arguments.

And if the GLBT population within ECUSA is only 1.75 per cent, then it follows that this small percentage that has not proven its argument(s) has done great damage to Anglicanism.

January 26, 8:59 pm | [comment link]
3. Br. Michael wrote:

Interesting.  So how can such a small percentage be destroying Western Civilization and doing so much damage to religious freedom?  Yet they are.

And a 1 states:  They simply cannot reproduce.

January 26, 9:38 pm | [comment link]
4. paradoxymoron wrote:

vicki did

January 27, 1:25 am | [comment link]
5. Br. Michael wrote:

4, not as same sex couples they can’t.

January 27, 6:41 am | [comment link]
6. New Reformation Advocate wrote:

Let me put in a plug for Dr. Stan Jones, whom I know casually.  He attends the same Anglican (AMiA) church that my two children do in Wheaton, IL, so I chat with him from time to time when visiting there.  Dr. Jones is the Provost at Wheaton College, and the former head of the Psych department there.  He is the real deal, an honest scientist as well as a fully committed orthodox Christian.

The pioneering research that Dr. Jones has done on ex-gays and the long-term effects of ministry attempts to help people escape from unwanted same-sex attractions and behavior is impeccably done, yet has mostly only brought him abuse and harsh, undeserved criticism within both academic and professional circles in the mental health field, just because it’s so politically incorrect and highly charged.  The detailed, longitudinal study that Dr. Jones has done with the help of his former doctoral student Mark Yarhouse (now on the faculty at Regent University in Virginia Beach) has proven, beyond any reasonable doubt, that over 20% of those ministered to and tracked in their long-range study have successfully overcome their unwanted same-sex behavior.  They are truly “ex-gays.”  Now is 23% anywhere near 100% success?  Sadly, no.  But by following how these ex-gays have fared over the course of many years, Jones and Yarhouse have rendered us all a very important service.

As our 2nd US president, John Adams, said while still a trial lawyer, “Facts are stubborn things.”  And the FACT is that some people who formerly struggled unsuccessfully with SSA (Same Sex Attraction) have been gloriously and permanently set free.  Thanks be to God.

David Handy+
Admirer of Stan Jones and a Wheaton alumnus

January 31, 4:42 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.




Next entry (above): Pope Benedict XVI’s Address to Conclude the Week of Prayer for Christian Unity

Previous entry (below): (USA Today) Henry G. Brinton—Why U.S. politics devolves into good vs. evil

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)