A recent column by News Editor Penny Weaver in the Mattoon Journal-Gazette includes both fortunate and unfortunate remarks that have intrigued me. Her remarks on concealed and carry remarks were interesting, the Rush Limbaugh remarks were not out of line, but the remarks on abortion and being gay missed the target with regard to morality.

Is it modern science’s obligation to tell us what is moral and what is not? To read the remarks made, one might think so. “Modern science has advanced far enough to tell us that life begins at conception. Abortion should not be legal.” It is true that science has demonstrated this, but is it up to man’s ability to ascertain it in the laboratory that determines the morality (or even legality)? A great many think so.
With regard to homosexuality, Ms. Weaver speaks where she has little to no knowledge.

Has modern science taught us that “Mother Nature” determines one’s sexuality? Where is this to be found? Since 2003 the Genome Project has failed to identify the “gay gene” (http://www.trueorigin.org/gaygene01.asp). As late as a 2010, there is an article that continues the uncertainty with regard to this (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/07/15/have-scientists-found-gay-gene/). It is true, it must be noted, that some in the scientific community thinks there is a genetic link, but that others dispute it loudly demonstrates there is room for scientific doubt.

If “Mother Nature” determines sexual orientation, then it is also the case that “Mother Nature” has also determined man’s destruction by this so-call “morality.” Homosexuals cannot, naturally speaking, reproduce. Ironic, isn’t it? Mother Nature will destroy man naturally! Who is this “Mother Nature”?

Ms. Weaver also demonstrates an unfortunate lack of familiarity with a significant document in our country’s heritage. “That separation of church and state thing is in the Constitution for a reason.” Perhaps she can tell us where this might be found.

It might be wise to simplify things, as we are exhorted by many to do, but it is also wise if we do so understanding the issues. In some areas, I don’t think Penny Weaver does.