Home     Writers     Op/Ed     Book Reviews     News     Bookstore     Photoshops     Submit     Search     Contact Us     Advertise  
  You are here: 

Fri

15

Dec

2006

Satanic Soy and Shrinking Penises
Friday, 15 December 2006 02:43
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D.

According to James Rutz, chairman of Megashift Ministries and founder-chairman of Open Church Ministries, A devil food is turning our kids into homosexuals.” It seems Satan is lurking in… soy.

Mr. Rutz claims that “Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality. That’s why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today’s rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products.”

After you stop laughing, examine Mr. Rutz’s preposterous – not to mention totally unsupported – claims.

“Soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality.” How does one even begin to respond to such nonsense? Since soy products such as tofu – which Mr. Rutz says must be completely avoided – have been traditional parts of the Chinese and other Eastern diets for over 2000 years, shouldn’t China be a totally homosexual nation by now? Similarly, since tofu is a staple in Buddhists’ vegetarian diets, shouldn’t all Buddhists be gay?

As for Mr. Rutz’s claim that soy “commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis,” one has to wonder how he came to that conclusion. Has he been conducting a longitudinal study? Has he been hands-on measuring the penises of men who got soy milk as infants or who eat tofu?

The second sentence makes as little sense as the first: “That’s why most of the medical (not socio-spiritual) blame for today’s rise in homosexuality must fall upon the rise in soy formula and other soy products.”
Has there been “a rise in homosexuality”? If so, Mr. Rutz seems to be the only one who knows about it. What there has been is a rise in the number of people who refuse to live their lives “in the closet.” Most leave the closet willingly, but some – such as antigay evangelicals Ted Haggard and Paul Barnes – need a little push.

Mr. Rutz wants – indeed needs – something to “blame” for homosexuality. How ironic that one who claims to be preaching “God’s truth” can’t find it within himself to accept “God’s plan” as evidenced throughout human history.

Homosexuals have existed in all cultures and in all times, even before soy milk and tofu were invented or consumed. From prehistoric rock paintings left by the San people in modern day Zimbabwe, to ancient Greece and Rome and the “homosexual” Christian saints of the Middle Ages who left a considerable body of love poetry dedicated to their partners:

He was the refuge of my spirit, the sweet solace of my griefs, whose heart of love received me when fatigued by labors, whose counsel refreshed me when plunged in sadness and grief... What more is there, then, that I can say? Was it not a foretaste of blessedness thus to love and thus to be loved?

– Saint Aelred, from his eulogy for his lover Simon


...to Native American berdache who were venerated for their “two-spirit” nature, homosexuals have always been present. One would naturally conclude, therefore, that homosexuality is part of “God’s plan” and the specific nature the Divine ordained for some individuals.

Blind to history, Rutz continued his apologia by claiming that women who give soy milk to their babies are turning them into future homosexuals because of the estrogen content of soy. He proclaimed that “most babies are bottle-fed during some part of their infancy, and one-fourth of them are getting soy milk!” If one-fourth get soy milk, using Rutz’s “reasoning” shouldn’t one-fourth of the population be gay?

Not surprisingly, Mr. Rutz offered no studies to support his “medical” claims about the effects of soy on human sexuality and men’s penis size. Could that be because there aren’t any?

Reality check. A part of the gay community as well as an ever-increasing part of the straight community are vegetarian or vegan, which means they consume a lot of soy products including the dreaded tofu.

Common sense. If, as Mr. Rutz claimed, soy “commonly” leads to a decrease in penis size, don’t you think the diligently voyeuristic media would have picked up on the worldwide stampede of men seeking medical help for their shriveling penises?

Undaunted by reality and common sense, Mr. Rutz continued his argument providing a telling look at its motives:

Homosexuals often argue that their homosexuality is inborn because “I can’t remember a time when I wasn't homosexual.” No, homosexuality is always deviant. But now many of them can truthfully say that they can't remember a time when excess estrogen wasn’t influencing them. [italics added]

This sounds a lot like what the defenders of slavery and segregation once said: doesn’t matter if they were “born that way,” they’re still inferior and, therefore, “deviant.” Rutz should have a look at “When religion loses its credibility,” a USA Today article by Christian writer Oliver Thomas:

What if Christian leaders are wrong about homosexuality? I suppose, much as a newspaper maintains its credibility by setting the record straight, church leaders would need to do the same:

Correction: Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God's followers.


Christianity is in danger of squandering its moral authority by continuing its pattern of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the face of mounting scientific evidence that sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with choice. To the contrary, whether sexual orientation arises as a result of the mother’s hormones or the child’s brain structure or DNA, it is almost certainly an accident of birth. The point is this: Without choice, there can be no moral culpability. [link added]

What there is, however, are self-serving “moralists” who concoct new, ever more bizarre ways to demean and degrade their fellow human beings while hiding behind “religion” and scare tactics like “soy is feminizing, and commonly leads to a decrease in the size of the penis, sexual confusion and homosexuality.”

Morality is simply the attitude we adopt towards people we personally dislike.

– Oscar Wilde

 

Our society gives wide berth to obvious pathology when it is covered by religious language.

– The Right Reverend John Shelby Spon

More from this author:
From Liberating Spirituality to Oppressive Dogma: The Politics of Religion (18908 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Spirituality is intrapersonal. It’s a liberating and uplifting awareness. It nurtures personal growth. It inspires...
Herding the Sheeple, Voting on Justice (19973 Hits)
by Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. “Let’s vote on it.” To most people that sounds like the ideal way to solve any issue. But it can also...
What’s in a Word: Wal-Mart and the New Jersey Supreme Court (14100 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Hitler’s National Socialist German Workers Party used the Bible and their perversion of Christianity...
Rev. Ted Haggard: “A deceiver and a liar,” exposed (16271 Hits)
By Mel Sheesholtz Ph.D. Once again a self-appointed spokesman for “God” and the leader of a politically active (and lucrative) faith-based...
“Times they are a-changin’…” (9082 Hits)
By Mel Seesholtz, Ph.D. Pennsylvania Republican senator Rick Santorum – Golden Boy of the Christian Right, rabid homophobe, and Bush...
Related Articles:
Bush's Incredible Shrinking "Coalition" (4433 Hits)
by Dave Lindorff Bush’s “Coalition of the Willing,” that motley crew of cajoled and pressured mostly minor nations that provided token...
What Is Spiritually Wrong With America: Shrinking From the Necessary Battle (2708 Hits)
by Andrew Bard Schmookler What is spiritually wrong with America, that the American system could not protect itself better against these...
The Incredible Shrinking Davos Man (3763 Hits)
by Tony Karon Last week’s annual Davos meeting of the World Economic Forum was conspicuous by how little it seemed to matter to anyone — the...


Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
Trackback(0)
Comments (1)add comment

funderfulf said:

0
Questions?
I'm not one to pick a single point as the cause of all the worlds problems, such as saying soy causes homosexuality. However, one must wonder. At my age (45), I remember as a kid the occasional girl who would develope early (like 12, 13 or 14), and remember them to this day because they where probably the subject of many of my prepubescent fantasies. But girls like that where one in a thousand. They would be remembered for years after and talked about by other boys, "How about that Jill Koleche, who graduated two years ago. When I was in 7th grade, I would walk all the way to the 9th grade hallways in between classes just for the chance to maybe see her" and so on.
Now, when I go to pick up my kids at school (the oldest is 11 years old) and I see girls running around with mature bodies. I mean like chests that would make a pornstar envious. And it's not one in a thousand, it's like every third one. I see girls in the in the third grade who are running about in fully developed bodies, at least in feminine characteristics if not in height. At the Junir high it's even worse. Almost every last one of the girls in the 7th grade is a fully developed women physically, at age 12 or younger.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not a pedophile or anything like that, but the simple fact of the matter is that girls were not that far developed, with the very rare exception, when I was in school, not by a long shot. Girls in 7th and 8th grade today look like High School Senior or older from when I was growing up.
Now the sick guy might say "Whoo-hoo, thats great, keep it going" but if there is something in our nations food supply that is affecting the nations female children in this manner, whether it's soy beans or whatever hormones that they pump into cows to produce more milk or into chickens to get more breast meat, one must ask how is this effecting the development our male children? I question whether something that so effects the female children so drastically would not effect the male children as well. And if it is, one must ask what impacts is it having on the male children.
Even if all of the physiological effects are isolated to the female children, how does it impact the psychological development of the male children to be going to school with girls that have bodies that could have been drawn from the pages of some dirty magazine, dressed like Brittany Spears, and with hormonaly driven desires of someone 5-10 years or more developmentally their seniors?
In summary, my questions are, what is it about the present diet in our nation that is causing female children to develope so early? How are these chemicals effecting our sons? Is this good for positive interractions between the genders of the same age and the development positive relationships? Is the early maturation of our daughters a healthy phenomena, physically and psychologically, for the long run? And finally, how are these changes impacting our society?
I do not believe that soy and soy by-products are the sole culprit, but it may have some impact. Soy has long been a contentious foodstuff, as far back as the 50's when some initial studies showed concern about it's high level of plant produced estrogen. But if soy is not a contributing factor, what is causing the premature aging of our daughters?
 
December 16, 2006
Votes: +0

Write comment
smaller | bigger

busy
 

adsense

Top