Rick Perry: “I may have the genetic coding that I’m inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way”

Posted by on Jun 12, 2014 at 8:03 am

Just a hunch, but Rick Perry probably shouldn’t be talking about homosexuality in San Francisco. Needless to say, this will be the biggest story for the left today and Perry will be trying to remove his foot from his mouth for weeks to come.

Texas Gov. Rick Perry, speaking in San Francisco on Wednesday night, said the U.S. would better serve its diverse population by letting the states handle many economic and social policies, a point he perhaps inadvertently drove home when he compared homosexuality to alcoholism.

Addressing the Commonwealth Club of California, Perry argued the federal government should give up much of its policy-making power, letting states chart their own courses on issues ranging from business subsidies to abortion. He joked about his frequent habit of luring California companies to Texas and called the competition between the two states healthy for both, as well as the nation.

But as Perry eyes another possible presidential run, some of his comments illustrated the wide gulf that exists between blue California and red Texas – and within the nation as a whole.

The Texas Republican Party this month adopted a platform supporting access to “reparative therapy” for gays and lesbians, a widely discredited process intended to change sexual orientation. In response to an audience question about it Wednesday night, Perry said he did not know whether the therapy worked.

Commonwealth Club interviewer Greg Dalton then asked him whether he believes homosexuality is a disorder.

“Whether or not you feel compelled to follow a particular lifestyle or not, you have the ability to decide not to do that,” Perry said. “I may have the genetic coding that I’m inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way.”

When in doubt just shut up.

Tags:

21 Responses to “Rick Perry: “I may have the genetic coding that I’m inclined to be an alcoholic, but I have the desire not to do that, and I look at the homosexual issue the same way””

  1. toby928© on 12/12/14 at 9:31 am

    Well, it was a disorder until enough homos joined the APA to vote to have it stricken from the DSM by a show of hands.

  2. crrr6 on 12/12/14 at 9:40 am

    Perry makes a good point. He shouldn’t have compared it to alcoholism, but even if he compared it to something less offensive like being born with ADD, the left would still be outraged. Why? Because they want you to think of homosexuality the same way you think of some people being born with blue eyes or brown skin – ie, not a genetic defect at all but completely normal and natural.

    As long as we accede to the left’s demand for how homosexuality may be discussed, we will never have an honest dialogue, which is exactly what they want.

  3. LLATPOH on 12/12/14 at 9:48 am

    It seems to me that the homosexuality platform doesn’t differ too much in terms of ‘why’ someone is gay than from the platform addressing ‘why’ some people are overweight.

    No one seems to be complaining about the “war on fat” that we are waging in America. It’s arguably a combination of genetics and lifestyle choices, just like the campaign for homosexuality.

    If Perry made the same argument, but only replaced the theme of ‘being homosexual’ with ‘being overweight,’ I would argue that the outcry would be significantly less. But, interestingly enough, the demographic of overweight constituents most likely outweighs (no pun intended) the homosexual ones by several orders of magnitude.

    To the point that Perry should just ‘shut up,’ I get it. But at the very least, he’s taking a stand on a position instead of just being silenced by the LGBT outrage mob. We need more of that to balance the scales, IMO.

  4. Lea on 12/12/14 at 9:58 am

    Every time republicans are asked about certain subjects they should just think ‘it’s a trap’ and close their mouths. Honestly.

    And I like Perry, generally, but geez.

  5. jr.ewing.78 on 12/12/14 at 10:00 am

    Maybe it wasn’t the best audience to make that argument to, but if the story is that he needs to just “shut up” because the media will distort his comments and make him look bad, or that a majority of Americans consider that kind of argument “hateful”, then the country has already been lost and he’s not going to win an election, anyway.

    Truth be told, homosexuality is exactly like alcoholism and obesity. There may be a genetic tendency towards it, but what makes a homosexual a homosexual is the behavior, not the genes. Whether society approves or disapproves of the behavior should be the question at hand, not whether the behavior is blameless due to genetics.

    Just like you can’t “cure” alcoholics, I don’t think you can “cure” homosexuals. But we don’t fetishize or glorify alcoholics and we shouldn’t do so for gays, either. We ask alcoholics to abstain and not to engage in destructive public behavior, which is exactly how we should treat homosexuals.

  6. PZ on 12/12/14 at 10:09 am

    What exactly is wrong with what Perry said? That’s actually a concession that homosexual inclinations are possibly genetic in nature. He’s then saying that the genetic predisposition doesn’t mean that you should engage in the behavior.

  7. edj on 12/12/14 at 10:15 am

    The truth is that elites in our country would be against reparative therapy even if they believed it worked — and maybe especially if they believed it worked.

  8. Cari on 12/12/14 at 10:47 am

    I agree with Rick Perry on this.

    Somehow our society has come to the conclusion that because someone has a “desire”, it’s an automatic green light to act on it.

    As a married woman, if I have a “desire” for another married man, should I get a green light to act out that desire?

    If I’m born with a temper and I have a “desire” to beat up a co-worker, should I get a green light to act on it?

    If I have a genetic coding that makes me sexually attracted to children, do I have society’s blessing to act out that “desire?”

    To all of these, NO! Not all “desires” should be acted out, including the desire to have sex with someone of your own sex, in my opinion. Self-control is what separates society from the jungle.

  9. Tuerqas on 12/12/14 at 11:39 am

    Excellent commentary here. Based on what is popular on TV these days (libs are excellent watchers) you should add the genes that predispose psychopaths towards killing. It is ‘proven science’ too and all the poor psychotic killers have to curb their desires or go to jail. If genetics is the panacea answer then how is that fair? Some guy gets to have sex with any other guy they want because of genes, but I can’t kill anyone I want when I have the same genetic anomalies?

  10. WTP on 12/12/14 at 12:51 pm

    These analogies are so tiresome. In oh so many ways. If an alcoholic drinks he is likely to do damage to others. Either his family or if behind the wheel of a car, others. Heavy drinking does damage. Engaging in sexual activity does no harm to anyone whether done between consenting adults of the same sex or different sexes. The usual canards in regard to promiscuity, STD’s, etc. apply equally, regardless of orientation. A more appropriate analogy would be to equate homosexuality with any form of alcohol use.

    I am quite confident I could get filthy stinking rich if there was a way to wager every time conservatives or more generally th GOP gets some traction with the general public (i.e. Bergdahl, Cantor-tossing) some GOP pol will remind them that despite the GOP rhetoric of leaving people alone, they want to stick their noses in your personal business.

  11. Jimmy John John on 12/12/14 at 6:11 pm

    I don’t think anyone here is advocating that gays should be flushed out and forced into mental hospitals. Nor should alcoholics. If you’re into that stuff, drinking or buggery or whatever, then you should be able to do it in your home all you want and be left alone.

    But that doesn’t mean the rest of society should approve, or even worse, be forced to approve, which ultimately is what the whole gay “marriage” thing is about.

  12. Theo Moore on 13/13/14 at 12:03 am

    I have a deep seated desire to hang senators from New York. If you do not agree with me and aid me in my completely normal desires you are a h8ting bigot and should be put down like people spreading venereal diseases.

  13. Blacque Jacques Shellacque on 13/13/14 at 2:53 am

    Why is Perry even here in California, and a place like San Francisco even? Regardless of what happens, California’s electoral votes won’t be going to a Republican anytime soon. He’s better off poaching businesses instead of campaigning for a more conservative approach to government, because in this state, especially in the blue metro areas, it will fall on deaf ears.

  14. Taco Shack on 13/13/14 at 9:46 am

    “Just a hunch, but Rick Perry probably shouldn’t be talking about homosexuality in San Francisco.

    When in doubt just shut up.”

    Yes, because ceeding control of the narative has worked out so well for us thus far.

    Illegal alien ->illegal immigrant->undocumented immigrant-> future Americans.

  15. LLATPOH on 13/13/14 at 10:29 am

    Have to disagree with WTP on sexual activity not being harmful to those around you. Of course, like *any* form of activity, it can be extremely harmful if done in an improper manner.

    I have seen families torn apart due to sexual activity of “two consenting adults.” Years of counseling and professional help later, *maybe* the family will survive, and the kids *may* be able to lead normal lives afterward.

    While my experiences in this area are purely from an anecdotal standpoint, I think you’d find that there are a LOT of people that have seen the terrible effects of sex “between two consenting adults,” and would completely disagree with your claim that it “does no harm to anyone.”

    I do agree that this can apply to any orientation though; I just wouldn’t go so far as to call it a canard, or tiresome. The truth is only usually tiresome to those who refuse to accept it.

    However – I do find it interesting that, while you seem to tire of the anecdotes, you quickly employ the general “GOP wants to control everyone” bit. Looking at what the ACA does to any semblance of privacy of the person from the federal government (as just one example), and the fact that not a single GOP rep voted for it, you may wish to review your premises. I don’t think you’d make much on your wager.

    Regards

  16. -_- on 13/13/14 at 2:36 pm

    I’d like to point out that I don’t see why sex between two consensual adults (who are not cheating on & thus harming other adults) is anyone’s business, no matter what genders are involved.

    If creating a family unit is a “good” thing, then creating families that stay together should be the focus, people who love each other. Getting rid of the ridiculously high divorce rate should be far more important.

    No matter how much you do or do not like other people’s lifestyles, you can’t choose who you love. The only families I’ve seen destroyed by consensual sex between non-cheating adults who care for each other, were when someone spent years trying to be someone they were not, especially when the pretense involved being gay.

    Matching plumbing doesn’t hurt anyone not directly involved, no matter how much you may disapprove of it.
    In the USA, everyone is supposed to have equal rights.
    Either we can all get married, or no one can.

  17. Liberty & Justice For All on 13/13/14 at 2:37 pm

    I’d like to point out that I don’t see why sex between two consensual adults (who are not cheating on & thus harming other adults) is anyone’s business, no matter what genders are involved.

    If creating a family unit is a “good” thing, then creating families that stay together should be the focus, people who love each other. Getting rid of the ridiculously high divorce rate should be far more important.

    No matter how much you do or do not like other people’s lifestyles, you can’t choose who you love. The only families I’ve seen destroyed by consensual sex between non-cheating adults who care for each other, were when someone spent years trying to be someone they were not, especially when the pretense involved being gay.

    Matching plumbing doesn’t hurt anyone not directly involved, no matter how much you may disapprove of it.
    In the USA, everyone is supposed to have equal rights.
    Either we can all get married, or no one can.

  18. wtp on 13/13/14 at 4:08 pm

    LLATPOH ,
    When I said “The usual canards in regard to promiscuity, STD’s, etc. apply equally, regardless of orientation”. Perhaps canards was the wrong word but i thought it made sense in context. Obviously, promiscuity and STD’s etc. are bad. But they are bad whether the two people are of same or different sexes. That was my point.

  19. LLATPOH on 14/14/14 at 12:45 am

    WTP, I may have misread your initial post, or misplaced your intended context. Sorry if I did that.

    I think you’re right on point that the obvious negatives are preference-agnostic. No argument from me on that one.

    However my main point is simply that there are many non-sexual preferences and choices that are aggressively railed against by the government, with no pushback from the general public. The ‘war on fat’ is one of them.

    Why is there such a backlash for those who simply don’t support marriage between all sexes, but shaming overweight people – who are arguably similar examples of both genetics and choice – is ok? Just seems like a double standard to me, and if equality is the goal, we should ensure that with all choices. The problem becomes ‘where do you draw the line?’

    To your point (and Liberty’s as well) about ‘no harm’ as far as same-sex relationships go, I again argue that it can, and does, have very serious effects on those around the ‘consenting adults.’ I’ve known one couple – and read about some more – that have suffered through finding out that their child committed suicide because of their choices.

    Could there have been other issues in these cases? Sure. Do some people commit suicide for other reasons than their parents being of the same sex? Most definitely. But given my experiences alone, I do not have the luxury of thinking that sex between two consenting adults is completely without effect to those around them. Just one such case of any psychological effect to a child – whether resulting in suicide or not – is enough to refute a ‘no harm done’ stance.

    Hope you have a good weekend!

  20. Tuerqas on 16/16/14 at 11:26 am

    WTP, believe me the tiresome disappointment cuts both ways. Someone passed over it, but the memes of both parties are so old and untruthful, it is still a wonder to me that anyone can stomach them, much less vote for them. However, let’s focus on your statement for a moment.

    The GOP sticks its nose in your business. I am not going to put words in your mouth and say you are inferring that Dems don’t, but I am going to make a quick list:
    SAME SEX UNIONS
    Republicans:
    They don’t want same sex unions defined as marriage and made legal through creative definition. National polls pretty strongly favor legalizing same sex unions, which done in this fashion, would not open up churches to lawsuits. Now fringe elements may want same sex intercourse to be illegal, and they would be ‘in your business’, but I haven’t heard of any records of any serious legislation like this pushed by Republicans in at least a decade.
    Conclusion: To say Republicans want to be ‘in your bedroom’ is the tired meme today.
    Democrats:
    They want to force the sacred rite known as marriage to be redefined to include anti-religious uses. Now, perhaps only fringe elements of the Democratic party have the specific agenda of weakening the church, a relative Rep stronghold. Unfortunately, the Dem party is run by fringe elements.
    Conclusion: Dems want to take religion out of the home and out of life. They are in EVERY room.
    ABORTION
    Republicans:
    They want people to take responsibility if a child is conceived. Fringe elements believe that contraception is wrong, but again, serious legislation of this sort has not being proposed for a decade or more. Reps will say killing the child is a serious violation of rights and are willing to invade the mother’s rights to protect rights of the child.
    Democrats:
    They want everyone to have sex free of obligation at all times. They believe a child is not a child at all until it has been born up to 3 days. Forcing a woman to be the bearer (literally) of that responsibility is a serious violation of rights.
    Single conclusion: Until the country can agree on a specific point of ‘life’ during a pregnancy or birth, the entire point is moot and used purely as an election platform. Both seriously impinge upon human rights.
    PRIVACY RIGHTS
    Can either side seriously say that they are interested in protecting privacy. Yes, Obama was caught using the already set up resources available for spying on its citizenry, but he was not the only President responsible for setting up that network. Nixon was caught too, the only difference is that back then both sides were interested in prosecution, now Obama could not be impeached for murdering an entire town. Dems would say ‘What difference does it make?’
    Should I go on? My first comment comparison was a joke purely based on the ridiculous hypocrisy that liberals have on ‘diseases’. Whatever they want to be called an illness is an illness and if they want a genetic abnormality to be normal, it is normal and their followers are rabid believers as strong as any religious fanatic. The majority of conservatives would prefer to have psychopaths who act out on their genetic malfunctions put to death. The majority of liberals believe the research indicating that psychopathic killers are genetically linked, just like homosexuality, but paradoxically they believe that gays cannot and should not ‘be cured’, but they can reform/cure psychopaths. Now, why is that?

  21. Google on 17/17/14 at 11:52 pm

    Adsense is actually a really great program for those who maintain blogs,
    as blogs get updated all the time and the Adsense possibilities
    are almost limitless. Based on their experience, they could know how
    much is required before going into details. * Page SEO:
    Your page is optimized by various means which include, choosing the right keywords, placing
    them right, adding anchor text linking, adding call to
    action in various places on the page.