In discussing same-sex attraction, and by extension, so-called same-sex “marriage,” from a Catholic perspective, we begin by clearly understanding what the Church teaches. We have this in the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

As I wrote in my last column, one of the first things mentioned in the catechism (paragraph 2357) is the fact that same-sex attraction takes different forms and remains largely a mystery as to its cause or origin. Such candor is not typically found in popular and political culture.

Rather, many assert that same-sex attraction is genetic, that people are simply born with it — as though this were a proven fact. A recent Gallup poll (May 20) indicated that 51 percent of Americans believe this.

A common argument then goes like this: “It is unfair to expect someone not to act on an attraction they were born with and which seems natural to them. Heterosexual people get to act on their attraction and get married. Therefore, why shouldn’t someone be able to marry the person he or she is attracted to, the person he or she chose, just because that person is the same sex?” Such reasoning is prevalent, but we must examine it closer.

Before we accept that same-sex attraction is “genetic” we first must ask, “do we know that?” If we say “yes” to that question then we must ask another one: “how do we know that?” Interestingly, there have been at least eight major studies conducted trying to determine if there is a genetic cause or component to same-sex attraction. Typically, these studies have focused on identical twins (since identical twins share the same genetic code).

One would expect that if same-sex attraction was genetic, then people who had the same genes would display the same attraction. Instead, what the studies tend to demonstrate consistently is that the incidence of identical twins both displaying same-sex attraction is rather low (percentages vary from study to study, but typically hover in the 10-20 percent range).

This poses a problem for those who believe that same-sex attraction is proven to be genetic, and make their argument for “same-sex marriage” largely on that basis. The evidence thus far would seem to indicate that there is more to it than a simple genetic explanation.

Of course, the genetic theory is only one. Others focus on hormone levels or environmental factors or parenting or some combination of these. All of them though tend to focus on those who classify the attraction as something they’ve long noticed in themselves. Not all examples of same-sex attraction or activity necessarily fall into that category.

One would also have to recognize examples of same-sex attraction which seem to be situational, or born from curiosity or traumatic experiences. In other words, there may be several possible explanations as to why a given person feels sexually attracted to a person of the same sex, instead of just one reason.

The easy answers that some assume exist, may not be so easy to come by. Therefore the Church’s position seems to be extremely reasonable: There remains a mystery — we simply do not understand everything, much less the origin, of all same-sex attractions.

But suppose we did. Would it mean the Church would change her moral teaching on homosexual behavior? The answer is no.

Understanding the cause of an attraction is very different than giving approval to the behavior indicated by that attraction. The fact that I “understand” the cause of an attraction does not justify its pursuit or make it OK.

If, for example, I understand why I’m attracted to someone else’s spouse, it is not therefore OK to be unfaithful simply because “I can’t help that I’m attracted to them.”

The strength or cause of attraction does not dictate the morality of pursuing it. We all have things which we may be attracted to but which we refuse to pursue because doing so would be wrong. We must look deeper to understand the morality involved.