Comments

  1. oncemorewithfeeling says

    This whole inquisition is straight out of the Middle Ages. One lunatic idiot Republican crazy after another, sounding completely, totally and utterly insane. Of course, why should Hawaii be any different from the rest of the country?

  2. Jon says

    McDermott is a pig. His contempt for a far superior intellect was funny to watch, though. Bob made a huge fool of himself and I hope he’s trounced in his next election. Mouth-breathing superstitious imbecile.

  3. Gregory In Seattle says

    “Wingnut McDermott then picks up the microphone and tries to challenge Hamer’s credentials, finally demanding an explanation for the ‘rampant homosexuality’ in the time of the Spartans, Roman Empire, and Alexander the Great.”

    In Sparta, soldiers were not allowed to get married until after they had completed military training. Homosexuality was permitted for men and women, but never particularly encourage.

    During the Republic and early Empire, male homosexuality was permitted, but only when the receptive partner was a slave or servant. Male homosexuality between social equals was considered a scandal. Homosexual acts between men was illegal by 250. Female homosexuality was not, to my knowledge, acknowledged in any way by the Romans.

    As for Alexander the Great, there is more evidence supporting that he was bisexual. Aside from which, one person does not make for a social trend in “rampant homosexuality.”

  4. Mike8787 says

    He’s digging his own grave. The real answer to his question is that, given that homosexual behavior was not looked down upon at that time, more people admitted they were gay (as the man testifying tried to say).

    What that means is not that something changed genetically, but that homosexuality is in fact more pervasive today than it appears. Millions of men who would’ve identified as bisexual or gay in Ancient Rome will never do so today, due to homophobia and anti-gay animus.

    In result, these ancient cultures show that laws like the Hawaiian marriage bill are even more important, because they will help greater numbers of the population than projected, and could even go a long way to helping these closeted men and women open up and identify publicly as how they feel.

  5. TampaZeke says

    The idiot McDermott is trying to get social science/anthropology answers from modern molecular science. It’s like trying to explain why ancients tried to cast demons out of epileptics when we know MOST of us know that epilepsy is most often a genetic/biological condition or brought on by brain damage from disease or trauma and not a result of demon possession. Of course some of those who believe that homosexuality is evil still believe that epilepsy is caused by demons.

  6. edmcan says

    What I can’t get over is how resentful the elected officials are to someone of obvious intellect. I don’t think anything he said was offensive in anyway. Both of them mentioned that they did not have a ‘Harvard’ education, though. Hearing the way both men ask questions, it’s obvious to all that they are undereducated and intent on proving their superiority as ‘elected officials, who are in charge’. God, I feel sorry for Hawaiians.

  7. simon says

    Of course more visible doesn’t mean it is prevalent. As Gregory said, Philip the Arab (244-249 AD) banned male prostitution and rumored to be a closet Christian. Under the Christian empire, homosexual acts were punishable by burning. Bob McDermott’s objection probably not due to genetics but some voice in his head. He just pretended to be rational,

  8. HadenoughBS says

    My younger gay brother and I were participants in one of Dr. Hamer’s “gay gene” sibling studies at the NIH in the early 1990s. It was a really interesting experience to be interviewed by Dr. Hamer during this process. It was quite evident to me that he was a most learned professional in his field.

    On the other hand, it’s indeed cringe-worthy seeing GOPer homophobe McDermott try to challenge Dr. Hamer’s credentials. That NOMbie is a typical bigoted idiot who believes whatever BS he pulls out of his unintelligent ass!

    Yet, Dr. Hamer held his own quite well. Bravo, sir, bravo.

  9. TomTallis says

    The Hawaii hearings are undoubtedly the greatest display of the cray-cray in the history of the world. The video should be worth its weight in gold in discrediting the Christian hate machine.

  10. spg says

    ​Bob’s Idiocy and it’s like, is always greeted with a standing ovation until it’s the only one left frothing in an empty auditorium. It’s the blessing of this country that everyone has a voice, it’s the wisdom and experience of our humanity that grants the freedom to ignore it and move on.

  11. Bill says

    @Gregory In Seattle: in ancient Rome, the taboo was not against male homosexuality but in sexual roles not following social standing. If you were at the top strata of Roman society, you could not be a bottom.

    In addition, slandering political opponents was the norm, which makes some of the historical evidence misleading. There are, for example, claims the Julius Caesar was gay or bisexual, but what he was actually accused of was being a bottom. Early in his career, he was sent to Bithynia for some diplomatic function and stayed longer than anticipated. Caesar’s enemies suggested that he stayed that long because he was Nicomedes lover (Nicomedes was the king of Bithynia) – i.e., Caesar was a bottom. People who disliked Caesar would refer to him as the queen of Bithynia. Whether that claim is true or not is hard to determine because there was so much lying going on. We do know that Caesar denied it.

    Regardless, with all the lying, the Republicans would feel right at home.

  12. Gregory in Seattle says

    @Michael – I thought I was pretty clear that evidence supports Alexander being bisexual rather than gay. My apologies if that wasn’t evident.

    @Bill – As I said, male homosexuality between social equals was considered scandalous. And around the middle of the 3rd century, as the Empire began to contract under the onslaught of the barbarians, Roman society started to become more conservative and less flexible. Provincial governors began to pass laws making male homosexuality a crime, with penalties including fines or public punishment such as flogging. By the middle of the 4th century, as Christianity was becoming the dominant religion of the Empire, this process accelerated. Even the attempted reforms by Emperor Julian, who became sole Augustus in 361 CE, kept those laws in place.

  13. Bill says

    @Gregory in Seattle: the problem with your explanation is that sex between a higher and lower status individual (e.g., an upper class Roman male and a male slave) was acceptable only if the the upper class male was the active partner, not the passive one. It’s a bit complicated – the Romans did not even have a word that could be translated as “homosexuality” because of the emphasis on active versus passive roles.

    BTW, at least one historian thinks that the Christians’ claims about the Romans were exaggerated, particularly the level of persecution.

  14. Austin says

    I love how he was like “I’m asking the questions!” Yet, the doctor was merely answering the questions and not asking any of his own. It reminds me of push polling, the question has become the answer, the accusation is the testimony.

  15. RexT says

    Dean Hamer, Thank You. Apparently, the Aloha legislature is debating the matter our sexual orientation as human beings vs a chosen sexual ‘behavior.’ Odd, this question being considered as relative to the legislative question before them, Marriage Equality. There are millions of LGBT human beings who give testimony every single day about who we are, no longer in the shadows, equal in every way to others. Living out of a religious conversation which requires condemnation of others, closing your mind to the diversity of life, does not make your life superior. The words ‘homosexual behavior’ are the heart of religious persecution.

  16. Mark says

    American anti-intellectualism is so gross. The logic is “if you can’t break it down into and incredibly simplistic sound byte it must be untrue or not legitimate.”

    Not everything is simple, and sometimes it’s up to you to attempt to stretch your brain cell rather than have someone dumb it down for you.

  17. Bill says

    @Austin: for some strange reason, the comment I posted yesterday was deleted. In fact, the doctor did ask a question – he asked for the citations that the politician claimed he had in his office.

    That’s a legitimate question – how do you say what is wrong with some alleged citations when you have no idea what they actually are or even if they actually exist.

    My guess is that the “citations to peer reviewed articles” the right-wing nut talked about were to articles he never read and that were summarized by another right-wing nut who got it all wrong.

  18. Jerry6 says

    I have come to the conclusion that the only reason so many ignorant persons are elected to Political Office is that the general population in these persons’ States are equally ignorant.

Leave A Reply