Gay Rights Part 1

Big topic.

I never had issues with homosexuality. I remember none of my family really spoke about it while I was growing up. I guess I learned about it from shows like Will and Grace, Queer Eye -I miss that show, Ellen The Generous, Kathy Griffin, America's Next Top Model, Project Runway and Lance Bass. Most of those influences were during my later teen years. (I Heart Mondo)

I remember being in high school with my Christian friends and them making comments about Clay Aiken who I had seen in concert. I didn't really think Clay was gay, but then again I didn't really care either way. My friend Katie did though. 

One day she actually pointed out a boy to me and said, "I heard he's gay". In my head I was like, Awesome, I've always wanted a gay best friend! So I said, "Cool." Katie was like, "Ewww, no it's gross. Two boys kissing?" I was like, "Well if they don't mind it and I don't have to watch them kissing then why should I care?" She was like, "No it's just gross". She also mentioned not liking the show Will and Grace for the same reason.

I didn't hear much about gays for a while until the whole Prop 8 situation came around. It pissed me off. Gays seemed like a group everyone had issues with and I didn't know why, except that it was written in the Bible somewhere that homosexuality was a bad thing. But no one I knew ever cited the Bible, they just said gays were "gross" or "wrong".

I actually came up with a long list of practical reasons why gays should be allowed to marry. Things like:  

"A man who murdered 14 people and raped 7 women -one of whom was a 72 year old- got married when a "fan" of his said she wanted conjugal visits with him in prison. They were legally wedded."

And yet I never hear anything about murderers being allowed to marry ruining the "sanctity of marriage". Or how about: 

"A 21 year old woman marries a rich 60 year old -he for sex and she for money."

"Two people who get drunk in Vegas one night think, What the hell? and get hitched." 

But then religious folk would call these: abuses of the system. They say homosexuality is another type of abuse. And yet if you were to say, "Well then why don't you protest these other forms of marriages or find some way to prevent them like you do gay marriage?" Then their argument runs into a wall: "Well you can't really pick and choose who can and can't get married because you don't know which marriages are genuine or not. God knows which souls truly belong together. So since they're not Gay marriages -which are easier to distinguish since homosexuality is one of those abuses and can be more easily prevented -let's not judge the heterosexual ones."

I couldn't quite find solid logical ground to stand on to show what I instinctually knew was right. It wasn't until early last year I found that clear line of reasoning to support my understanding. Now I honestly don't have to worry about it.

There are 5 kinds of people when it comes to relating to the topic of gay rights.

Group1: These are people who say there's nothing wrong with gays. They are either gay themselves, have friends who are gay, or have no connection to gays but still believe gays should be allowed to live their lives in peace because they don't lack empathy. They will usually list Compassion and Love as the basis for most of their reasoning, as well as some of the ones I listed above.In other words: Hearts in the Right Place, but Minds Can't be Found.

Group2: These are people who are "on the fence" about it. They would prefer to be neutral and not take a side or get involved in the debate because they really don't care either way. It's "not our concern". 

These people -because of their lack of a stance- can also be easily swayed by others to take a side. For instance, if someone didn't really care about whether a tree was taken down or not on their street and someone came along in favor of the tree being taken down, they could say, "But it will interfere with the power lines and if a branch takes one down you could lose your electricity". Whether this statement is or isn't verified by actual facts or would only be a temporary inconvenience for the person doesn't matter. Most of Group2 people will choose to tear down the tree rather than risk anything that may come to cost them in some way. "When you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything".

Group3: These are ignorant bigots. Pay them no heed. These are the folks who if they were raised in the 1960s would says that it is unnatural and wrong for a black man to marry a white woman. They have sort of been "brain washed" in some ways and their views don't count for much because they aren't founded in compassion or logic -just moronic notions arising from opinion rather than an educated position. They are a dying breed of thought. Time will wash their social presence away.

Group4: These are people who take a religious stance on the topic. They are usually Christian, and will quote the Bible or at least refer to it in their arguments. They will say things like, "I don't have a problem with gay people, but the Bible says there is something wrong with homosexuality and gays will go to Hell. (Also Jesus loves everyone and anyone can be saved through Him)". They will say this like a fact. That is "out of our hands". They may not know the reasons why being gay is immoral, but they will state it as a common understanding they have. They don't hate gays, but they do believe they will go to Hell. Some may even be sympathetic about it.

Group5: These are the oppressors. These are cruel people who enjoy the concept that gays will suffer. They hate. Period. There are some among this group who could beat a person for being gay, torture a person for being gay, or end the life of a person for being gay -NOT because the person is actually gay, but because they are violent and oppressive. Most just opt in to make sure gay's basic rights are denied. It's easy for them to do. Why do they hate gays? I think it's mostly a societal thing -Gays are painted to be weak and inferior so "bullies" and "haters" prefer to treat them as such. The people of Group 5 are Genuinely Immoral.

So which groups should you be concerned about? Surprisingly only Groups 2 and 5. Group 2 frustrates me to no end because they don't take a stand until they allow themselves to be blindly swayed by others to whatever opinion is imposed upon them. They are a living sway vote. They are also Indifferent -in this case to the suffering of others. 

Group 5 personally frightens me. But I remember that all bullies and people that are cruel should not be feared, they should be pitied. They are defective in some ways and hate has led them to lose site of their humanity. It's Sad.

As for Group4, I don't hate Christians who honestly believe gays will go to Hell. In their eyes it is not something they have a say in. They are entitled to their beliefs and as long as the beliefs they choose to follow do not harm themselves or anyone else emotionally or physically, I will leave it to them to believe what they choose.

So here it is, my foundation of logic that allows me to know fully understand why there is nothing wrong with homosexuality or gay marriage:

Homosexuality is A-moral. It is neither moral or immoral, it is just an orientation.

Could you say being straight is immoral? Not unless you want a whole bunch of people on the street looking at you like you are an idiot. Could you say being straight is moral? Some do, but you can't really. You aren't really doing anything, you just ARE something. It's like saying you are moral for being tall.You are attaching morality to a sexual Orientation. Like saying on a compass: North is immoral, but South is good.

Some people like to argue that gay is a choice or a lifestyle. Is straight a choice? When you see someone of the opposite sex walking down the street do you make the conscious decision "I am choosing to be physically or romantically attracted to this person". Or does it happen subconsciously? When you try vanilla ice cream for the first time do you say to yourself, "I am choosing to prefer this over the chocolate flavor"? No. 

How is it immoral to be gay? It is not a disease anymore than being straight is and it is not a choice anymore than being straight is. What strait person could consciously decide to "turn gay". What gay person could consciously decide to "turn straight". Orientations are a given. Sometimes they can be shaped by the society we live in and specific gender roles, but orientations themselves are something within us we don't have much say in. 

If we did, don't you think those people who were found out to be gay during the Inquisitions would have stopped knowing that they risked being burned alive and beheaded? If you had to choose between vanilla and chocolate ice cream, knowing chocolate is going to send you to unfair trial and to then a violent public death, wouldn't you opt for the vanilla? And yet they didn't. It's almost like they didn't have a choice in the matter, or less of one when it comes to preferring one flavor of ice cream over another. 

What IS the one thing in your life you would risk your own life for? Isn't that a person you care about and love?

Straight and Gay are not moral or immoral. Of course then some people could argue that "acts that can occur in the homosexual relationship" are immoral. But the same could be said of straight relationships. If a straight husband has sodomy his straight wife, is that immoral? But that act doesn't make being straight itself immoral. And two people having consensual "relations of an intimate nature" is not immoral as long as they are consenting adults. 

And the only argument would then be, that when that act occurs between gays it is wrong. Why? Because they're gay. Why is gay immoral if we JUST established it is a-moral? Uhhhh.... 

In other words, you can't say: "Gay is wrong because being gay is wrong." 

I win! :)