Gay = Disabled?

In a column in yesterday's WaPo William Saletan writes about a study in Montana that shows that roughly 10 percent of rams prefer sex with other rams instead of ewes. In other words, naturally occurring gay sheep.

In the piece, titled "Brokeback Mutton" (ha ha, clever), Saletan comes to a conclusion I find dismaying. While it's affirming that (yet another) scientific study shows that homosexuality is biologically based, Saletan doesn't stop there. Quote of note:

Science will gradually convince us that sexual orientation is innate, more like skin color than character. Condemnation of homosexuality as a sin will subside, and we'll turn to two biological differences between race and sexual orientation: Homosexuality defies the aspiration to procreate with your mate, and it's easier to isolate and alter in embryonic development. We may come to view homosexuality as we do infertility -- as a disability. The rhetoric of "acceptance" will shift from liberals to conservatives. We'll inoculate our children against homosexuality out of love, not hate.

So this is what it comes to -- A "progressive" view of homosexuality that sees it as a disability to be eradicated.

But Saletan makes one miscalculation -- being gay doesn't render us homos incapable of having kids. The equipment works just fine. I have a biological child. The only thing that "disables" gays from having children are man-made social constructs. Those social constructs can and should be altered to embrace new understandings of human sexuality.