I was just writing earlier this week about the continued search for a “gay gene.” Researchers are desperate to find this gene so they can, they believe, legitimize and validate the homosexual lifestyle. They believe if such a gene is found it will pound the final nail in the coffin against any and all opposition to homosexuality.

I don’t personally believe that such a gene exists. The idea that there is something genetically different about homosexual people is strange. What do we do with ex-gay people? Are they living against biology by professing to no longer be homosexual? The whole thing seems to me to be an attempt at finding what LGBT activists believe would be an irrefutable argument supporting homosexuality in every facet of society.

Putting my personal opinion aside for a moment, an article connection homosexuality and abortion caught my attention.

Wesley J. Smith recently wrote an article which appeared at LifeNews.com about the discovery of a “gay gene” and abortion. Smith, using the recent study for a “gay gene,” linked the study with abortion to ponder:

“[I]f a test became available to determine such a propensity–as is currently available for sex or Down syndrome–should we permit abortion to eliminate babies likely to be gay from being born…?”

Hmmm, this seems like a conundrum. Abortion-rights activists are often just as supportive for LGBT rights, and vice-versa. So what happens if, by chance, a “gay gene” is discovered? Will abortion rights then support the right of any parent to abort a child believed to be destined for life as a homosexual? Will LGBT rights activists support abortion except in the case that the child could be born gay?

Presently these questions are little more than speculation. But the implication is practical and real-world.

Two groups of activists are likely to find themselves at a cross-roads; each unwilling to support the other. Abortion rights activists might end their support of LGBT rights at the abortion clinic door saying that people have the right to abort even babies determined to be destined for homosexuality. After all, if, as Planned Parenthood and NARAL currently believe, a person has the right to abort a baby with Down Syndrome, a handicap, a deformity, a child of the wrong sex, or any other reason. Why shouldn’t that person be allowed to abort based on sexual orientation?

Do we really have any moral ground to stand on as a society to protect the “homosexual destined” child if we are not willing to protect every other child? Can we call it “sexual orientation discrimination” to abort a baby that is biologically destined for homosexuality if we aren’t willing to use words like sex selective abortion or euthanasia?

It isn’t hard to imagine LGBT activists supporting abortion except in the case that a child is determined to be destined for homosexuality. After all, many currently believe that homosexuality is an inherent biological trait uncontrolled by a person. They use this as a basis for so-called anti-discrimination laws. They equate sexuality with race in order to justify redefining marriage. So it’s easy to conclude that if a test could prove an unborn child would be homosexual they would demand the strictest of protections for all such children.

No longer would “abortion on demand” be acceptable. Suddenly, abortion-in-nearly-every-case would be the new mantra. The asterisk would denote that abortion is acceptable in every case accept for a potentially homosexual child. In that case we must defend the “rights of the child” to be born or otherwise be guilty of “sexual orientation discrimination.”

It sounds laughable to speak of at this present moment. And yet what we are currently seeing in our society is just as laughable; perhaps pitiable is a better word.

Abortion rights activists speak of “women’s rights” while championing sex selective abortion – which predominantly kills women. They also pretend to be all about “pro-choice” until a woman chooses life. Then they mock and ridicule her. And men, well, men have no voice in this discussion because it is a “woman’s issue.” That is of course unless you are a “bro-choice” man that supports forced abortion on women. In that case you can speak up all you want. Such hypocrisy is not based in reality and yet the largest abortion merchant in the country, Planned Parenthood, supports these positions.

LGBT activists aren’t much better. The people screaming the loudest for “tolerance” are the least capable of giving it. They want the government out of their bedroom, unless they will legislate in favor of homosexuals; in that case the government can intrude all they want. They want to accept them but refuse to accept people that disagree with their lifestyle. They will sue anyone that “discriminates” against them in the workplace by not hiring them, or refusing to serve them. But they will cheer triumphantly if someone is fired for what they believe is the same “discrimination.”

No, I don’t believe a “gay gene” will ever be found. So I don’t believe a test to determine the destined sexual orientation of an unborn baby will ever be developed or needed. But what a quandary such a reality would pose.

Sadly, this is the logical outcome of a worldview that begins with self. If we are the determiners of truth in the world we can expect nothing less than hypocrisy and world that seems upside down.