To the editor:

It never ceases to amaze me how misinformed the letters of Tim Kelly truly are.

His latest letter to the editor makes a series of demonstrably false claims and implications about the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and ally community.

Almost everyone is ashamed of those who make death threats, against Dr. Laura or anyone else. I cannot deny that there are a very few isolated Fred Phelps-like haters on the side of the LGBT community, but his implication that the LGBTA community in general is somehow in favor of killing Laura Schlessinger is inane at best.

Kelly asks why we do not campaign to raise “all” sexual orientations to protected classes. In fact, most campaigns to include protections for LGBT individuals already do exactly that. They add language such as “regardless of sexual orientation” that is NOT specific to homosexuals. This is same logic by which “regardless of gender” protects men as well as women.

Kelly goes on to equate homosexuality with pedophilia, necrophilia and other “unsafe” practices. Aside from being offensive, this is just nonsense. What is it exactly that Kelly imagines LGBTs do that is much different than straight couples?

Is kissing, for example, suddenly more hazardous because the person doing it to you is the same gender as you?

We can all list a variety of unsafe sexual acts. But they are that way regardless of with whom you do them. Promiscuity, hardly a vice limited to the LGBTs, is a major factor in the spread of STDs. Worldwide, HIV infection is predominantly heterosexually transmitted.

Kelly states flatly that there is no scientific proof of homosexuality being of genetic origin because “none of the studies reported by the Daily or other press outlets has survived the critical scrutiny of peer review.”

If that is to be the standard, it took me a grand total of about 60 seconds to find a paper claiming to find just such a genetic link published in Science. (Science is one of the most prestigious journals in the scientific community and publications are rigorously peer-reviewed.) While it is certainly true that the issue is far from settled, it is my impression that most researchers believe there is at least a strong genetic component to sexual orientation.

Furthermore, why should the burden of proof not be stated the other way?

To date, there is no scientific proof of homosexuality being a matter of choice. Most LGBTs will tell you that it is the people who “successfully” traverse “conversion therapy” who are making a “choice” about the gender of their sexual partners, not those who are true to themselves in their LGBT lives.

Finally, I quote Kelly, “No religious faith in the world condones homosexual behaviors.” Again, this is simply false, but I quote only a single counterexample.

The Central Conference of American Rabbis recently specifically approved letting their members preside at same sex commitment ceremonies (AP, March 30, 2000).

Perhaps all of us should be more careful when throwing around absolute statements.

William Jenks

Associate professor

Chemistry