Experimental feature: Order Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate from the UK, Canada, Germany or France by clicking an appropriate flag below.

               

Some items available at Amazon.com are not available in all countries.

Binding: Paperback
Dewey Decimal Number: 261.835766
EAN: 9780830815678
ISBN: 0830815678
Label: InterVarsity Press
Manufacturer: InterVarsity Press
Number Of Items: 1
Book Pages: 189
Publication Date: 2000-12
Publisher: InterVarsity Press
Studio: InterVarsity Press

[] How prevalent is homosexuality? [] What causes it? [] Is it a psychopathology? [] Can it be changed?

Questions like these often accompany discussions of homosexual behavior. For answers we naturally look to scientific studies. But what does the scientific research actually show? More important, what place should this research have in shaping the church's response?

Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse help us face these issues squarely and honestly. In four central chapters they examine how scientific research has been used within church debates-in particular within Methodist, Presbyterian and Episcopal contexts. They then survey the most recent and best scientific research and sort out what it actually shows. Next they help us to interpret the research's relevance to the moral debate within the church. In a concluding chapter they make a strong case for a traditional Christian sexual ethic.

Church groups considering these complex issues will find helpful discussion questions at the end of each chapter. Essential reading for anyone involved in the church's debate over homosexual behavior.

"How grateful I am to Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse for this book. As one engaged now for over twenty-five years in the church's moral debate about homosexuality, it is refreshing to read the results of scientific research that elevates the level of discussion and dispels many rhetorical myths. This is an important read!" John Huffman, St. Andrew's Presbyterian Church, Newport Beach, California

"This is a brilliant book of common sense, reasoned analysis and biblical wisdom. A must-read for every Christian who wants more light than heat on what may be the watershed issue of Christ and culture in this generation." Timothy George, Beeson Divinity School of Samford University

"Both liberal and conservative Christians are ignorant about scientific studies of homosexuality. Furthermore, most do not understand the contributions and limits of scientific claims to theological-ethical reasoning about Christian morality. This new book by Jones and Yarhouse provides significant insights into both issues and will benefit greatly all sides to the contemporary debate." Don Browning, University of Chicago Divinity School

"Carefully written, impeccably researched, biblically attuned, sensitive and thought-provoking, this is a masterful treatment of a vitally important topic. The book is certain to have great relevance for counselors, church leaders, students, researchers and all who have an interest in the complex issues surrounding homosexuality." Gary R. Collins, author and psychologist

"Professors Stanton Jones and Mark Yarhouse have tackled a crucial question in the debate about homosexuality. Both highly qualified scientists and moral theologians, they have made a thorough study of the interaction of scientific research and theological ethics, and in an appropriately dispassionate way. To have serious science and serious moral theology undertaken in one volume is a major resource to all those engaged in the debate. . . . Churches and scientists will be grateful to the authors for this careful book." Timothy Bradshaw, Regent's Park College, Oxford

Customer Rating:
Review Summary: Excellent book!! Conviction does not equal bias or bigotry
Review: Jones & Yarhouse have provided sufficient evidence in exposing the sensational, headline-grabbing but flawed claims of pro-homosexual "research" for those willing to allow the evidence to examine their presuppositions or suppositions regarding the moral debate regarding the legitimacy of homosexual behavior as an alternative lifestyle.

In addition, J&Y do an excellent job of distinguishing between homosexuality (the belief that one is gay) versus homosexual behavior (the acting out based on one's conviction). Gay-ness is neither moral or immoral; whereas the acting out behavior is a moral or immoral issue, especially within the church's historical understanding according to the rules of orthodox hermeneutics.

Finally, J&Y provide a well-thought out model for how one may come to believe they are gay (the interactionist hypothesis).

This is a solidly researched and excellently written book on the subject of homosexuality from two top Christian psychologists. While they have their convictions (pro heterosexual marriage only), this does not of necessity make them biased, prejudiced, or bigoted in their discussion of the issues at hand. The charge that their beliefs makes them biased or bigoted is a biased and bigoted charge wholly without merit.

Buy this book and read it carefully. It will provide you insight into the issues at hand in Western society today, particularly within the church.

---

Customer Rating:
Review Summary: The Authors Bias in the Writing is Very Obvious
Review: The subtext of this work could possibly be retitled the "The Misuse of Scientific Research in the Churches Moral Debate". I think the only real value in reading this book is to get an idea of how far removed some Christian commentators are from the realities of life and what it really means to be homosexual in the 21st century.

Early in the work, the authors state their position. Quoting from Chapter 1 page 11 `We believe in being clear about our assumptions and presuppositions, so we confess that we are defending the historic understanding of the church, grounded on the Bibles teaching, that homosexuality is immoral. Let us give away our punch line at the very start: We will show, persuasively we hope, that while science provides us with many interesting and useful perspectives on sexual orientation and behaviour, the best science of this day fails to persuade the thoughtful Christian to change his or her moral stance. Science has nothing to offer that would even remotely constitute persuasive evidence that would compel us to deviate from the historic Christian judgement that full homosexual intimacy, homosexual behaviour is immoral.'

This book is written for a conservative Christian audience who still have not worked out that a homosexual orientation, as such, does not automatically determine a person's morality any more than heterosexuality does. Morality is a choice but sexual orientation isn't. To falsely judge a group within society because they are attracted to the same sex and not the opposite by calling that entire group immoral is not only irresponsible but also in conflict with the teachings of Jesus Christ himself.

Chapter 2 is titled `How Prevalent is Homosexuality?' This seems a strange place to start the argument but not unusual. It has probably been some time now since Queer sociologists and commentators have used Kinsey's figure of approximately 10% of people being homosexual in their orientation but by introducing this question first, it serves two purposes for the authors. Firstly, it gives the impression that we have been deceiving people about our real numbers and secondly by reducing the numbers any requests for equality are not as important as we make out. After all, 2-4% of the population - are they all that important one could conclude. The table on pages 42-43 of 11 different studies in this area does not really prove their point but actually demonstrates how difficult it is to get a definitive number. My feeling is that we will never have an accurate figure until all stigma attached to homosexuality within our society is removed. In the meantime people who experience fluidity in their sexual orientation and heterosexuals who have same sex experiences sometimes get thrown into the mix.

When referring to scientific research the authors frequently quote from studies done in the 60's, 70's and mid 80's. Even research from the 1950's is citied. Whilst this research may have been valuable at the time, my impression is that it is now considered dated by most professionals without a bias. Possible causes of homosexuality according to the authors are strong mother/weak father, early sexual experiences with someone of the same sex, sexual abuse and new one for me I hadn't heard of, that the `exotic becomes erotic'. This theory proposes that we eroticise over the gender we are not connected with. So `normal' males will eventually eroticise over girls but homosexual men eroticise over men because they feel distant and unconnected with other males. An interesting theory perhaps but lacks credibility in the light of those who have only known attraction to the same sex from very early childhood.

When dealing with the various biological theories, the authors point to flaws in the research methodology and the exceptions rather than being able to identify what the research is actually saying to us. That is, there are prenatal factors such as genetic and hormonal influences that increase the likelihood, but do not guarantee, a person will be same sex attracted.

I think Chapter 4 `Is Homosexuality a Psychopathology' is the most offensive. To quote from page 94 of that chapter. `The short answer to the question `Is Homosexuality a Psychopathology' is no, if a person were to mean that the answer can be found by a quick look through the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of mental Disorders; Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) of the American Psychiatric Association. Homosexuality is not listed as a formal mental disorder in the DSM-IV, and hence is not a `mental illness'. But as we will see in this chapter, answering the question `Is Homosexuality a Psychopathology' is much more complicated than simply checking a manual.' The authors go on to expand on research done on the mental health of gay men and lesbians. This is where the writing becomes incredibly biased and using statements like `the hospitalisation rate for homosexuals is 450% higher that the general population'.... `suggesting over 300% increases in incidence of serious personal distress amongst lesbians'...and `the elevated rates of depression, substance abuse and suicide challenge the adaptiveness of homosexuality' reflect the authors very negative impression of gays and lesbians. What is not introduced in this chapter are the possible causes of any mental health issues like rejection by family, societal norms of conformity, religious dissonance and even persecution.

There are large amounts of material from the book that demonstrates it has been written with a strong bias and not relevant to the more informed academic or mental health professional. For example, in the summary of the chapter `Can Homosexuality be Changed?' it says, `the research of sexual orientation is intensely debated today. Most of the research was conducted and published between the 1950's and the 1970'[s, with an average positive outcome of approximately 30%.' As this work was written in 2000 Spitzer's recent conclusion that changes to one's sexual orientation "are probably quite rare, even for highly motivated homosexuals". It has been estimated that reparative therapists have a cure rate of 0.02% which means a failure rate of 99.98%.

In the final chapter `Toward a Christian Sexual Ethic' it says, 'To summarize, the essential claim in the discussions about the prevalence is that the high prevalence of homosexuality , claimed to be 10% or more of the general population, demands revision of our traditional ethic. The best studies, however suggest a prevalence of between 2 and 3%. More importantly, prevalence has no claim on ethic, since Christians commonly believe that some sinful life patterns are very common such as pride while some are rare like bestiality'. And on the following page we read, `Even if the homosexual condition of desiring intimacy and sexual union with a person of the same gender is caused in it's entirety by causal factors outside the personal control of the person, that does not constitute moral affirmation of acting on those desires. If it did, the pedophile who desires sex with children, the alcoholic who desires the pursuit of drunkenness, and the person with Antisocial Personality Disorder who desires the thrill of victimization and pain infliction would all have a equal case for moral approval of their exploits' (my emphasis.) One wonders what the authors solution might be for the `homosexual condition' if we are equated with paedophiles, alcoholics and anti-social behaviour and later put in the same basket with schizophrenia, panic attacks, witchcraft and greed.

As a gay man from a strong religious background, reading through this book, I often found myself asking the question, `Who are you talking about. I'm not sick, I know I certainly didn't choose to be gay, I wasn't sexually abused, my first sexual experiences were with guys because that is the only attraction I had and my homosexuality is not a problem to me'. I have to conclude that the authors are like many people in conservative religious circles who because of their negative view of homosexuality they are locked away in world that conveniently separates them from us and they actually don't know any well adjusted gay or lesbian people personally. The only homosexual people they have contact with are those in their churches who are tormented by the dissonance created by an outdated religious worldview. The rest of us are living normal lives and making a valuable contribution to society.

Anthony Venn-Brown
Author of "A Life of Unlearning - a journey to find the truth"

---

Customer Rating:
Review Summary: A failure to deal with science
Review: Stanton L. Jones and Mark A Yarhouse's book Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate will fail to convince anyone that is not already of the same opinion as the authors. With all good intentions the scientific evidence reviewed is such that supports their own view and lacking in that which is contradictory.

Attacks on Kinsey's research are nothing new, but the continued flaws of those attacks should be pointed out. Treating Kinsey as if he were attempting to look more at prevalence than variance is one way in which the authors attempt to discredit the research. Mentioning that his original background was in entomology rather than human sexuality is another. The problem is that these are not flaws in Kinsey's research, rather they are a scientist focusing on one aspect and presuming that more research will be done on other aspects.

The attack on Kinsey's research for going after a variety of sources becomes more glaring when the sources Yarhouse and Jones approve of have such limitations in number. The authors, themselves, make many of the mistakes for which they criticize others. This book is neither balanced nor fair. It ignores the main thrust of scientific research - for example, I could not find one reference to the Journal of Homosexuality - in favor of side groups that have been discredited - such as members of NARTH.

The book looks good with a multitude of footnotes, but fails to provide such normal resources such as a bibliography, list of sources cited and more. It's an attempt to look profound and achieves banality.

---

Customer Rating:
Review Summary: Wonderful and Timely
Review: This book is a must read for all psychiatry shcools

---

Customer Rating:
Review Summary: A well-written, balanced book
Review: This book deserves to rank higher on Amazon.com's sales list. It seems very difficult to find a book that deals with this subject fairly, since this subject is so politically charged. But this book does a very good job of laying out the most current scientific research. People who should read it may not because they may assume that it's coming from a traditional religious perspective. Ultimately, it is. But the authors lay the scientific research out fairly and draw rational conclusions from it. It's hard to see how anybody could be offended by this book, no matter what side of the fence they happen to be on.Much of the material overlaps with Thomas Schmidt's "Straight and Narrow" (published five years earlier by the same publisher, Intervarsity Press). But Schmidt's book was more overtly critical of homosexuality, whereas this book is somewhat less personal and more clinical. The authors seem to take some pains not to offend. But the book does show (as Schmidt does) that the media coverage of this subject tends to really oversimplify (and, to a degree, whitewash) a very complex subject.

---

---