The gay rights movement in recent decades has led, slowly but surely, to the gradual emancipation of homosexuals. In the more developed and democratic countries of the world, the estimated 10% of the population that are homosexual is no longer forced to hide behind closed doors, but may enjoy a fruitful ‘out’ life. Yet it is still glaringly obvious that our society is filled with those who are disillusioned with the increasing acceptance of homosexuality. They hate, and discriminate against homosexuals, for a variety of reasons.
Being the passionate rights activist that I am, I of course, on many grounds, oppose such baseless hatred. However, unlike many of them, who make their claims based on completely unfounded assertions, as I will show below; I will prove my belief today, to be one backed up both by our common sense and human empathy, as well as pure, solid logic.
The premise of the views I wish to express today is based on two fundamental beliefs, which I must declare here in full openness, so that you too may understand. Firstly: the belief that homosexuality is not a choice.
So many homophobes try to assume, whenever they belittle the gay population, that they have made a conscious lifestyle choice to become homosexual. I believe that they are wrong on two grounds. Firstly, it is very much an argumentum ad ignorantiam to say that they have made a choice simply because no one can prove that they have not. Homophobes, assuming their own heterosexuality, simply are unable to possess a homosexual and understand his psyche – just as we can never truly comprehend someone’s soul. But with the limitations of human anatomy, is it not sufficient for us to believe that homosexuality is not a choice when so many homosexuals say so themselves? Do we really need to see it to believe it? Secondly, it is absurd to think that when someone makes a conscious choice about their life, they would choose a path which would guarantee them hatred and prejudice from so many people. Surely a choice is meant to obtain the greatest happiness possible. If homosexuality was a choice, knowing that so many blind and ignorant fools would oppose their ‘chosen’ sexuality, why would 10% of the population be so stupid as to raise the ire of such large numbers of people? Common sense, my dear friends – I doubt anyone would be quite as asinine as that.
Secondly, I believe that homosexuality is born, not made. This is different from saying that homosexuality is not a choice, since there are those who contend that homosexuality is the cause of the environment in which children grow up, so while they do not make a choice, they are made into homosexuals, rather than born with the genetic codes that tell them they are homosexual. The reasons they give us include: a dominant father, a dominant mother, a weak father, a weak mother, and other reasons attributed to family and friends. I note with interest the contradictory reasons that are thrown up – indeed, when all environmental factors are considered to be causes of homosexuality, the conclusion is that NO environmental factors are. To throw even more cold water over this ridiculous assertion, science has proven to us that homosexuality is a genetic trait – it is inherited, just like your eye colour, your ability to roll your tongue, your hair quality (whether it is curly, wavy, or straight) and so on.
Homosexuality is not a choice. It is innate.
These two beliefs underpin all my further analyses today – and I urge those of you who already heartily disagree with my two stated beliefs above, not to continue to plough your way through this piece. Let us first look at some of the common reasons given for opposing homosexuality:
1. Homosexual sex is unnatural (and disgusting)
It goes without saying that for two gay men (the most common recipients for discrimination based on sexual orientation), they can only enjoy penetrative sexual relations either by oral sex or anal sex. The latter form of sexual enjoyment is one that has historically aroused much controversy. I find homophobes claiming this to be highly hypocritical – after all, there are many heterosexual men who enjoy anal sex themselves, with women. Yet their hate is singularly directed towards homosexual men. I will explain this below, but let me just point out here the obvious double standards employed. If a man and a woman can enjoy such a ‘disgusting’ sexual act, surely a man and a man, or a woman and a woman, surely have such a right to enjoy it as well. As for it being unnatural – when science has revealed homosexual sheep that mate exclusively with fellow males, it really does not add much weight to that particular argument. You could argue for it being unnatural because it does not lead to reproduction, but then neither does oral sex, yet teenagers – especially those in North America, no offence intended – enjoy a ‘quick blow’ so frequently that it almost seems likely a vast majority of the population take part in unnatural sex anyway.
2. The Bible says it’s wrong!
Religion – how great its influence can be, and how much is everything related to it! ‘No man is to have sexual relations with another man; God hates that,’ it is written in Leviticus. If we take the Old Testament by its every word though, we would have to accept as rightful Sarai actually telling Abram to sleep with her slave, Hagar, and then chasing her from the house when she got pregnant. We would also have a people marching into foreign, occupied lands, burn down their cities and destroy everything though they were entirely unprovoked. I do not undermine the Christian faith in any way, but the Bible is not law. Its literal interpretation is not the Christian faith – rather, it is the reinforcement of the values that are dear in any faith, the main gist, message and corollary of the whole text that is meaningful. The same goes for any other religious text. Do not oppose anything – such as homosexuality – based solely on your faith, but try to analyze, to understand, and to learn more, before making an informed judgement.
3. Homosexuality…next we’ll have bestiality, paedophilia and incest running rampant
This is one of the most common, yet most skewed arguments I have ever heard against homosexuality – the legendary slippery-slope of disappearing moral values. How homosexuality would ever lead to bestiality, to paedophilia and then to incest I simply do not understand. This reflects nothing except the obvious misunderstandings and misconceptions many people have about homosexuals. How does being attracted to someone of your own sex mean that you are attracted to animals, or to children, or to someone in your own family? I do not think this point really needs more condemnation. It falls of its own accord, and is a joke of an argument.
When it comes to gay marriage, then, the wild reasons we hear about why it simply cannot be implemented can be truly mind-boggling. Ignorance, stupidity, foolishness are laced into these arguments, and it does make for much laughing:
1. The population would decrease.
I could not believe it, but in a debate training session I organized, this was a reason someone gave against gay marriage. This is unreasonable for two reasons. Firstly, let us think why the population would decrease. It would not, because homosexuals, if they are intent on pursuing a homosexual life, would not marry and would not have children anyway. Gay marriage does not change that. Those who force them into unhappy marriages are not in the majority. The population is not impacted significantly. Secondly, what if the population does decrease? It is not about the quantity of life that is important, but the quality. Having 10% of the population being upset and discontented, just because of their sexual orientation, simply cannot be justified by having thousands more to feed and clothe.
2. Their adopted ‘children’ would lack a female/male influence.
The classic argument against gay adoptions – that male gay couples would raise children that do not have a female figure in their lives to, somehow, mollify them and soften them, and the opposite for lesbian couples. I find this intriguing that the same standard does not apply to bachelors or spinsters adopting children because they have not been married – surely an adopted child in such a case would not have the influence of one of another gender either? Besides, many children even live with a single parent, either because of divorce or the untimely passing of a parent, but no one ever bars them from living with their only parent. It is absurd to adopt such differing standards – in fact, I would call it blatant discrimination.
3. It would undermine the sanctity of marriage.
Homosexuals being allowed to marry, it has been claimed, would lead to the entire sacred institution of marriage to lose all sanctity and respectability. I deplore, however, how allowing two men or two women that you do not know to marry would cause your own marriage to fall apart. Surely they would not affect your everyday life? Surely their being happy would not decrease your own happiness? It is unfair, unjust, and unreasonable to think that two homosexuals marrying would lead to, in any way, the demise of an unrelated heterosexual marriage.
After showing, hopefully logically, that the arguments against homosexuality and gay marriage are so unfounded and unreasonable, I would like to point out the REAL reason that people oppose homosexuality is actually because they are different. They naturally oppose a minority group because it is easy to oppress them, and it is easy to find allies who support you. The homosexual demographic is an easy target because of its relative smaller proportion in any population. History is filled with examples of minority groups being targeted because they are different. Afro-Americans were looked down on because of their skin colour. The natives of South America were all but exterminated by the invading Spaniards because they were so utterly different. Likewise, the stigma attached to homosexuals is unfair, but the world could not care less. Homophobia is really ill-conceived misunderstanding and perhaps fear, and I believe Voltaire’s quote summarizes it nicely: ‘Prejudice is opinion without judgement.’
We live in a society that prides itself on upholding human rights. We have a nerve to call ourselves that if we cannot even stop prejudice, cruel, unrelenting, wanton discrimination against a vulnerable minority group in our society. The rationale behind homophobia is fear and misunderstanding of people who are different. I stand for the rights of all human beings, regardless of age, origin, race, skin colour, or sexual orientation. I cherish this belief greatly, and hope that you will, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment