SorryAboutLeroy.com

sorryaboutleroy@charter.net

Five misconceptions in the gay-rights debate.

As passionate as those involved in the debate about gay rights seem to be, few of them seem to have any idea of what they are talking about. Like angry drunks in a quarrel, the members of the opposing sides trade meaningless arguments for other meaningless arguments, without regard for the fact that they all look like jackasses. Of course, there are valid arguments from both sides, but neither side is free of intellectual fallacy and simple ignorance. That’s why I have compiled this list of misconceptions regarding the debate over gay rights and related issues. Read on to see which one of your opinions is wrong!

 

1.    The gay-rights movement is the modern equivalent of the civil-rights movement for blacks. No, it isn’t. Blacks were denied basic civil rights, like suffrage and recognition as human beings. Gay people are not shunned in American society; corporations and organizations jump through hoops like compliant seals trying to mollify gay people. Most calendars recognize Gay Pride Month. Now can you imagine, if in the 1950’s blacks had had such a month in their honor, that any calendars would have acknowledged their special month? Unless you’re high, you cannot, because black people would have never gotten such recognition when they were persecuted as gays claim to be now. I am not contending that gay people never experience discrimination based on their sexuality; but such discrimination is usually by people they know personally, like disapproving parents or judgmental classmates. Anti-gay discrimination is not a societal problem as anti-black discrimination once was. Many people object to homosexuality, but this is not the same as objecting to people that happen to be homosexual. More on that later.

2.    Homosexuality is voluntary. Based on conversations I have had with people that take the conservative side on this issue, I have gathered that the word homosexuality, in the view of most conservative Christians, denotes behavior, not inclination. On this basis, they assert that homosexuality is a matter of choice for every individual. Indeed, as the word homosexuality is used to identify a kind of behavior, homosexuality is voluntary. But this is a poor use of that word. Homosexuality is obviously not just a matter of behavior, but also of a kind of inclination or predisposition that leads to the kind of behavior we’re talking about. Now, I could blather on about whether I think homosexuality is genetic, but I don’t want to get bored. Besides, I can resolve the important issue – whether homosexuality is simply a kind of behavior or is actually based on involuntary characteristics – with a mere video clip.

I win.

3.    Gay parents are just as good as regular parents. Wrong. As science and logic have definitively proven, two moms or two dads are not as good as a mom and a dad; neither is a single mom, a single dad, an uncle, a grandma, or whatever as good as a mom and a dad. A MOM AND A DAD IS SUPERIOR TO ANY OTHER PARENTING ARRANGEMENT.

4.     Gays shouldn’t be allowed in the military! Waah! This is such a weird and unfounded convention in the United States. I am not saying that the military’s top priority ought to be the repeal of the “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy – they have bigger fish to fry, like terrorists (no, literally, fry them) – but, in principle, this policy is ludicrous. The common right-wing argument against having gays in the military is that their presence would undermine the moral values of the many servicemen that object to homosexuality, and would thereby damage troop morale. I am sorry, my dear conservative brethren, but if our military is composed of oversensitive bigots that cannot manage to work alongside people with whose lifestyle they have a problem, then I suggest that we recruit people that are more mature. (Incidentally, I am not saying that people that oppose homosexuality are bigots. I, for example, think homosexuality is abnormal and immoral, but I do not oppose homosexuals more than I oppose anybody else and I would not object if I had to work with a gay person. Disapproval of, or even contempt for behavior associated with something like homosexuality is not, in my opinion, bigotry. Bigotry is intolerance or contempt for fellow human beings. In some situations, like those involving murderers or child-molesters or other people whose proclivities harm non-consenting people, such intolerance is justified. But in situations involving ordinary gay people that are not doing gay things with anybody but their fellow, consenting gays in the privacy of their own, gay homes, I do not think such intolerance is justified. Accordingly, I think that any soldier that refuses to serve alongside a gay soldier is a bigot, or at least misguided – not because they oppose homosexuality, but because they are discriminating against a human being on the basis of a single characteristic, and one which, I might add, does not directly harm anybody. Now, may I step outside these parentheses?)

5.    Conservative Christians hate gay people. This complaint underscores a fundamental ignorance of Christianity. Indeed, anybody that is vaguely familiar with the basic principles of the religion knows that one of these principles is that mankind – this includes homosexuals, heterosexuals, and everybody else – is inherently sinful. Regardless of the validity of the Christian view of sex, Christians are consistently opposed to sexual immorality – as which, according to the Bible, homosexuality qualifies – of any sort. You would not notice unless you took a moment from incessantly thinking about yourselves, gay-rights people, but Christians object to premarital sex among heterosexuals with just as much fervor as they object to homosexual sex. Therefore, the notion that Christians are picking on, or “hate” gay people is wrong.

 

There you have it – the five biggest misconceptions in the gay-rights debate. Next time somebody trots out one of those cliches about how "gay rights is the new civil rights" or "gays shouldn't be allowed to serve in the military," kindly refer them to this article and then punch them in the jaw for being such an ignorant fool. They'll thank you later, or won't, but either way my website will have been promoted.

 

-Leroy

Sorry about that!

-David

Got any gripes?  Hit me with 'em at:

sorryaboutleroy@charter.net

(I might even hit you back.)