Gay Marriage | Minnesota | News

Minnesota GOP Lawmaker to Media: Gays Who Tell You They're 'Born That Way' are Lying - VIDEO


Minnesota State Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen, R-Glencoe appeared at a press conference yesterday in response to the introduction of a marriage equality bill (which has bipartisan support), and Gruenhagen intended to put the fear of God in the media.

Said Gruenhagen:

"We're talking about gay marriage. We're not talking about an immutable characteristic like the color of your skin. The human genomap was completed in 2003. There is no gay gene. Okay? So the concept that you're 'born that way' and it's an immutable characteristic is an unscientific LIE. Okay? The human genomap has been completed. I urge you, as the news media, to give both sides a fair and open hearing on this debate because it has tremendous ramifications not only for our society but for our children in general."


The Uptake notes: "The latest research into a "gay gene" contradicts what Gruenhagen said. Research is focused on epigenetics, throwaway DNA that triggers hormone production in fetuses. Although scientists haven't found a "gay gene," they haven't found a straight one either. This isn't the first time Gruenhagen has made up facts. A few years ago, he claimed alcoholism and drug addiction is not a disease despite a consensus of medical opinion and evidence showing a physiological dependence."

(via good as you)

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Gruenhagen is a bloody idiot, but it's clear that "The Uptake" has no idea what it's talking about, either. Their definition of epigenetics is COMPLETELY wrong.

    Posted by: Rich F. | Feb 28, 2013 9:27:09 AM

  2. However, there is apparently a gene for stupid.

    Posted by: Dan Mc | Feb 28, 2013 9:27:30 AM

  3. His backup group is soooo sad!

    Posted by: Dastius Krazitauc | Feb 28, 2013 9:39:31 AM

  4. And what about the amygdala?
    I'm quite sure more informed Towleroadians (roaders? Let's call them Andy followers) will be able to tell us more about those findings, and the advances in Clinical Neurosciences that have been made in the past decade...

    Posted by: Maguitac | Feb 28, 2013 9:40:26 AM

  5. Why is a genetic connection required for equal rights? There is no Christian gene and we still protect their rights.

    Posted by: David | Feb 28, 2013 9:41:01 AM

  6. 1) Mapping the genome doesn't tell you what every gene is for.

    2) There's more to biological development than genes. There are hormones, epigenes, and a host of other intricate chemical processes.

    3) Immutable traits can be acquired experientially.

    4) Epigenes don't trigger "hormone production". They affect how genes are expressed, which could do almost anything.

    Posted by: Kyle | Feb 28, 2013 9:44:05 AM

  7. Oh, well...Gruenhagen has spoken. We know everything there is to know about the human genome. Case closed. Nothing further needs studying. So sayeth the all-knowing Insurance Salesman.

    Posted by: AggieCowboy | Feb 28, 2013 9:44:16 AM

  8. What is an unscientific lie? Are there scientific lies? Is he telling one?

    Posted by: Mitch | Feb 28, 2013 9:44:26 AM

  9. Not only listening to, but just LOOKING at these people you can tell that they have some very deep, deep ,deep dark issues. Not being mean.....but issues like possibly being sexually assaulted as a child. Sometimes I feel sorry for the likes of them.

    Posted by: Stephen | Feb 28, 2013 9:44:27 AM

  10. But he's not a heterosexual. By saying that it's not "an immutable characteristic" and implying that sexual orientation is a choice, he's admitted to his own bisexuality, and should be referred to as "Openly bisexual State Rep Gregg Gruenhagen" from now on. Props to his newfound honesty!

    Posted by: dekkoparsnip | Feb 28, 2013 9:46:38 AM

  11. My Auntie Epigene marches in every Pride parade.

    Posted by: Steve Scarborough | Feb 28, 2013 9:47:14 AM

  12. We need to move on from "born this way." There are good intentions behind it but it's a dead end and is not true.

    It's far less dangerous, however, than the absurd idea that "straight" people exist as something more than just a cultural group.

    Posted by: Matt | Feb 28, 2013 9:47:32 AM

  13. Yes, Stephen, I've previously posted my theory that most professional homophobes are either closet cases (the majority) or were "touched by a non-angel" as a child! And stupidly equate that with homosexuality. A small remaining % are full on sociopaths, who, like Hitler, just need to find someone - preferably a lot of someones - to hate. And for whom gays seem like an easy scapegoat.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Feb 28, 2013 9:49:48 AM

  14. And cue the gay sex scandal in 5,4,3,2..........

    Posted by: CB | Feb 28, 2013 9:50:59 AM

  15. I think it is so cute when these Bronze Agers try to utilize science in an argument.

    Posted by: PLAINTOM | Feb 28, 2013 9:57:01 AM

  16. Matt, in what way is it not true? Please explain. 90% of gay men I know believe they were born that way. Please read to us from the memo we missed. When I was picked out a shirt to wear to my first day of 3rd grade, did I inadvertently pick out a sexuality? Did my parents sprinkle me with fairy dust because that wanted one gay son?

    Or am I "making a choice" not to marry a beard and hold my nose while f--king her? Please, explain to me these life choices I've somehow managed to overlook.

    Not "true for you" doesn't mean that holds for the rest of us. So don't speak for us. I do think in a VERY limited # of cases, the right wing fascist's view that we _were_ "touched by a non-angel" and enjoyed it probably is true. Not for me. No abuse story here.

    Posted by: EchtKultig | Feb 28, 2013 9:58:25 AM

  17. He doesn't know what he is talking about. The human genome map is complete but scientists still don't know in general which gene is connected to which characteristic of a human being. There were a few genes here and there which were known to be connected to certain disease like cystic fibrosis. There are still a lot to be done.

    Posted by: simon | Feb 28, 2013 10:03:03 AM

  18. Even if there is no "straight gene", does it mean there is something wrong with straight people?

    Posted by: simon | Feb 28, 2013 10:12:16 AM

  19. The drag queen behind him does a fantastic pouty corporate lawyer.

    Posted by: BobN | Feb 28, 2013 10:12:28 AM

  20. What a moron. But then you already pointed out that he was Republican; sorry for being redundant.

    Posted by: melvin | Feb 28, 2013 10:24:21 AM

  21. What a moron. But then you already pointed out that he was Republican; sorry for being redundant.

    Posted by: melvin | Feb 28, 2013 10:24:22 AM

  22. OK? Um, ok.

    Posted by: MARCUS BACHMANN | Feb 28, 2013 10:26:33 AM

  23. Huh...I didn't know he was a scientist

    Posted by: Will | Feb 28, 2013 10:55:44 AM

  24. yesterday, shirley mcclaine. today's idiot celebrity look alike is fred willard.

    Posted by: oc | Feb 28, 2013 10:57:49 AM

  25. @ Simon: The "no gay gene" argument is based on the prejudice that homosexuality is a disorder while heterosexuality is healthy. The fact that neither a gay gene nor a straight gene have been found says, quite simply, that sexual orientation is a highly complex event. The complexity results in the majority being straight, with some kinks, and a minority being homosexual. There's some "bleed through" in both directions and we sometimes call those individuals "bisexual." To answer your question directly: there is nothing wrong with heterosexuality or with homosexuality, they are simply more or less common expressions of sexuality. They endure because, somehow, the species benefits from them.

    Posted by: Chuck Mielke | Feb 28, 2013 11:00:49 AM

Post a comment


« «NYC's Tweets, Visualized by Language: MAP« «