Of course, by Christian math, this means that there is one gay gene

A week after the fact, I find this open letter to "sharp-minded antihomo" Judy Paris. No idea who she is? Eh, neither do I. Doesn't matter.

Here's part of the open letter that I wanted to focus on, because it brings up one of Paris's "arguments":

I'd like to point something out, though. When you note that "[m]ost scientists agree that it is unlikely that there is a single 'gay gene'," you equate this observation with an absence of a genetic contribution to homosexuality.

Uh, yeah. About that...

On Sunday, the Tribune published a rebuttal by Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist and leading researcher in the study of sexual orientation and its origins. LeVay is clear in exposing the deliberately deceptive nature of [David Clarke] Pruden's opinion piece.

Employing a turn of phrase calculated to confuse any reader, Pruden writes that a recent genetic study from the University of Illinois "reported that there is no one gay gene." That's correct - it reported evidence for three! How does finding three "gay genes" rather than one show that the born-that-way theory of homosexuality has "no basis in science," as Pruden argues?