A reader writes:

Burroway says: "Of course, many on the religious right would still condemn all abortions regardless of the reason. But for them, finding a medical “cure” for homosexuality would be perfectly acceptable."

Although I don't doubt that the religious right would be quite alright with the eradication of homosexuality, I think that a biologically based "cure" would create a bit of a conundrum for them. After all, their opposition to homosexuality, at least ostensibly, stems from the fact that they see it as a sin. But if there is a biological basis for homosexuality, then one cannot say that homosexuality has been chosen. And if you don't have a choice about sexual orientation, then homosexuality cannot be considered a sin. One can't be held accountable for something they have no control over.

So the religious right would have to choose between their homophobia and the rationale for their homophobia. If you back the "cure", then you acknowledge that homosexuality is biological in nature and, therefore, not a sin. But if you choose to believe that homosexuality is chosen, and a sin, then a medical cure for homosexuality presents a legitimate challenge to that belief.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.