(2 of 2)
As Roselli acknowledges in his papers, sexuality in humans is far more complex than in sheep. The whole notion that researchers studying farm animals could develop a "cure" for human homosexuality is a fantasy of the far left and the far right, which both value a gay-sheep "scandal" more than the messy reality that is Roselli's work.
But one could have a good argument about whether adorable little sheep should be killed for sex research. As a gay man, I tend to believe the more we know about the complex interplay of biology and environment that shapes sexuality, the less time we will spend nourishing Old Testament anachronisms about sex.
The more pressing question for me is, What would happen if research like Roselli's did lead to, as the Sunday Times imagined, "a 'straightening' procedure [such as] a hormone supplement for mothers-to-be, worn like a nicotine patch"? I hope scientists have better things to do, but would a Hetero Patch be so awful? It would allow bigoted women to get what they want--straight kids--and ensure that gay kids grow up with moms who, at the very least, didn't try to prevent their existence. Gay people seem to fear we would die out if such a device existed. But the elaborate combination of genes, hormones and psychology that produces same-sex attraction has persisted, against all odds, through the millenniums. Gays have survived Darwinian selection, Nazis, the dulling effects of Will & Grace. I don't think a little patch would ever keep some rams from wanting other rams.