wired.gifWired pursued the homosexual community’s response to points raised in my column yesterday:

Eschewing the eugenics question, Stanek seems more interested in another question posed by Mohler.

How can [feminists and political liberals who support a woman's right to choose] now complain if women decide to abort fetuses identified as homosexual?

Out of curiosity, I called the Equality Forum to ask their take on aborting a baby because he or she is gay. Communications officer Christopher Scoville said that the Equality Forum would not support the decision to abort a baby just because they’re gay, anymore than they would support aborting a baby because they are left handed….

ef.gifWhen asked if the Equality Forum had an official position on abortions of babies with congenital defects, Scoville demured, leaving that question to bioethicists. He said that the Equality Forum is a civil rights organization and therefore the question is “not in our purview.”
It will be interesting to see how various religious denominations weigh in. Some will suggest, as Mohler did, that altering a baby’s sexual orientation is a way to protect a child from sin. Others will argue that this is nothing more than eugenics and should be forbidden.
One thing’s certain: If such a prenatal test is found and women start aborting babies for being gay, pro-choice organizations supporting gay rights cannot argue against a woman’s right to abort a gay fetus. If they do, other groups will fight for the same protections for their members and the right to choose will be so limited that it might as well not exist.

Wired also quoted an earlier EF press release:

Fetal invasion to alter sexual orientation is reminiscent of the Nazis. It reflects a theocratic and Taliban-like plan that should frighten all Americans.

“Fetal invasion”? How quickly gays are being converted on the sanctity of life.