You give Saletan too much credit. He asks, in a tone of disingenuous wonderment, if we would treat homosexuality in the same way as sickle cell anemia. As the top post in this thread shows with thorough lucidity, the comparison itself is absurd.

But this latest "Human Nature" is merely in keeping with Saletan's whole approach to homosexuality as a "problem" in genetics. Over the course of a recent series of articles he's made clear that medical technology will "undermine" the argument on behalf of gay rights; to claim that gayness is inherent will only lead to a determination to find a hormonal treatment for it.

His reasoning is utterly circular; instead of presenting an argument for why male homosexuality should be treated as a "problem" in the first place, he talks his way around a tautological circle according to which any thing that can be "medicated" is by definiton a problem, a defect, a "disease." Ruzylacm has done us all a favor in the face of Saletan's confused determinism by reminding us that any discussion of whether homosexuality is a thing to be eliminated is a priori ethical and ideolgical in nature.