It is frustrating to see these seemingly plausible but fallacious arguments that Mr. Kinsel and others present and expect to be accepted at face value.

In Mr. Kinsel's response, he uses the twin studies to argue that there must be no genetic component to homosexuality stating "if individuals were born homosexual this rate would have to be 100 percent." However, he leaves out an important part of these studies which clearly indicates a strong genetic component to homosexuality. Identical twins show a 52 percent likelihood that if one brother is gay, both brothers will be gay. For fraternal twins the percentage likelihood drops to 22 percent and the likelihood in non-related (adopted) siblings drops to 11 percent. This is a highly significant statistical indicator toward a genetic component of homosexuality. Of course, Mr. Nielsen never claimed that homosexuality was determined exclusively by genetics, although Mr. Kinsel artfully shifted his argument as if Mr. Nielsen had argued genetics only.

Of course, the majority of the scientific community agrees that homosexuality is a complex phenomenon which likely involves a combination of genetics and environment (both pre- and post-natal). It certainly is not a "choice" and the few independent, scientific studies performed on homosexuals attempting to "re-orient" themselves to heterosexuality show dismal success rates.

Mr. Kinsel continued by using more fear-based arguments when claiming that same-sex marriage has somehow caused the decline of marriage and the decrease in the birthrate of children in countries in Europe who legalized same-sex unions. In fact, the evidence is quite clear that declines in heterosexual marriage and child birth rates began long before gay unions were legalized in these countries and, in fact, continues at the same rate as before. In effect, the straight population has been quite successful at "destroying" the institution of marriage with little or no impact from the married gay community.

In his op-ed piece, Mr. Nielsen asked, "how could the union of two committed and loving people negatively affect my marriage?" I have yet to see a non-sophistry based argument, article or independent study that explains the harm that legalized gay unions would do to our society. The best reference for me are the societies in Massachusetts, Canada, and much of Europe that seem to be continuing very well and show no signs of collapse after gay marriage was legalized.

I hope that readers remember to read articles about this subject carefully, never accepting emotionally based, fallacious arguments at face value.

---

Fred Schade is the vice president of engineering for a company on the Wasatch Front.