| |
-
-
- Arguments
-
- Here
are some common non-biblical arguments used by
many conservative people to accuse us of being
destructive and harmful. I will provide a general
respond to each.
They destroy the family.
Often used by "pro-family" group.
But we ARE the family. Gays and lesbians are
themselves children, siblings, cousins, friends,
and even parents. We do know the importance of
family (e.g. our fight for gay-marriage and
adoption rights), and have established our own.
In fact, one of the biggest source of pain for
homosexuals is the rejection from our own family.
The idea of nuclear family cannot be forced upon
others as the only acceptable form of family.
What about single parent family? What about step
family, adopted children? Isn't love and role
model the most important for children? Shouldn't
care and commitment be the center of a family?
Jesus questioned Mary's attitude toward family
when he said His place is in the Father's house
(Luke 2). For Christians, family is important,
but God's grace and will is even more of a
priority. Jesus was not exactly a product of a
nuclear family, neither was Moses. What God has
made clean, you must not call profane (Act
10:15). Pro-family slogan against homosexuals is
nothing but a fan for the fire of ignorance.
They are sexually dangerous.
We are not. There is no statistic showing
that we are any more likely to be pedephiles or
rapist. In fact, it has been shown that we are
very similar to heterosexuals in all kinds of
social pattern, both good and bads. We are just
people.
They are promiscuous.
A large portion of the gay population is not
sexually promiscuous. And even if we are
promiscuous, it simply means sexual activity is
high within the gay circle. How is that a danger
to others in the society? I find it very ironic
that such objections often come form the same
people who oppose gay marriage. What do you want
from us?
They want special right.
We want the exact same set of rights
straight couples have. We want no privileges. If
two people made a commitment of cohabitation,
same sex or not, the financial and social
situation is very similar. The rights, e.g. tax
or insurance, is based on needs, not definition
of marriage. It may goes under a different
catagory, but we deserve the same treatment.
Their acts are disgusting (detestable).
Well, we are on the same level until the day
you would show your sex video in public. Sex is
sex, you don't exactly show it to everyone as a
beautiful presentation. We are no more disgusting
than you are. Physical intimacy is an expression
of love and trust, we are designed with the
capability to pleasure our lovers. If sex is just
for reproduction, then with today's technology,
there is no justification for any kind of sex.
It is unnatural (abnormal).
Einstein's genius was abnormal, and organ
transplants are unnatural. Simply because
something is unconventional does not make it
wrong. The evaluation of something has to be
evaluated socially, and spiritually, especially
for Christians. Homosexuals has done nothing that
effect heterosexual people's life negatively.
They breed diseases like AIDS.
Gays and lesbians don't breed disease,
sexual activities does. By accepting homosexuals,
we can better cope with our emotional needs and
talk about our problem openly, which help lessen
the need for "desperate sex". This also
helped people to develop a healthier view on
their sexuality. AIDS is not a gay problem, but a
health problem closely related to how society
treat us as a whole.
Their relationships are short-lived.
Heterosexual has a 50% divorce rate.
Domestic violence and broken family have cost
North American society billions of dollars. Don't
forget that straight love is supported and
celebrated by all cultures, religions, pop music,
movies, family, peers, role models, politics,
commercial product, science, art, and literature
throughout the entire history of the human race.
Judging from how messed up straight people are,
gay people are doing really well with all the
prejudice, hate crimes, misunderstandings,
religious condemnations, family tensions, and
guilt that we have to put up with.
If we follow their logic, we would have to
accept other sexual deviances, like pedephiles
and incest too.
The gay issue does resemble other sexual
deviance logically. But other sexual problems
deal with issues like maturity, age, obsession,
abuse of power, and disruption of established
families. The gay issue is unique. Gays are
building a new, independent kind of love between
free adults. Although our logical path does seem
to point to the possibility of justifying other
sexual problems, arriving to the conclusion of
acceptance is another matter. We will draw a line
somewhere by our common sense. Just like allowing
swimming suit in public does not imply accepting
nudity in public, gay acceptance does not imply
accepting sexual perversions.
They can control their desire just like I
control my occasional lust.
Straight people don't understanding the word
"orientation". In trying to understand
us, the closest thing they can resemble is their
lust. But the gays can tell the difference
between lust and true attraction. We get hurt if
our partner cheat on us. There exist a difference
between good and bad sexual and emotional conduct
within the gay circle. Our sexual attraction does
not come from the same place where one would find
lust. We can choose to be a celibate but we would
still be gay. Our sexuality is fundamental and
mysterious just like heterosexuals'. A straight
man can be loving to his wife, or lust after a
female neighbor, or become a monk; all these
happen on the bases of him being attracted to
woman. The legitimacy of his sexual activity lies
in his conduct. What ever his action, he has a
contextually unchangeable fact that he is
attracted to women. Same kind of base line exists
for the homosexuals, hence the word orientation.
The word has been so overused that conservatives
consider it a fancy word for lust. As I have
shown, orientation is not the same as lust. Our
loving action can be beautiful and fulfilling.
It is a choice
- Although
there is little evidents that prove the genetic
cause of homosexuality, but social evident has
show that almost all homosexual did not choose to
be gays and lesbians. With all the negative
pressure in society now, it is unrealistic to
think people are becoming openly gay because of
lust. We are being open and politically active
because we believed in a true cost for rights.
And what if it was a choice. For example, it is a
person's choice to love a foreigner, does it mean
the immigration department should stop granting
the foreign spouse of a citizen the right to
reside in their country. A clear bias and double
standard is being imposed on homosexuals.
-
- People
will abuse the legal title of gay marriage if we
provide it.
Heterosexual marriage have been abused for
the longest time: anything from divorse,
immigration, taxation, to social benefit. Any man
and woman can enter a spousal relationship and
receive all kinds of related legal privileges,
but most people tend to respect such union. What
makes you think that allowing same sex marriage
would increase such scam? Any legal institution
can always be abused, but that doesn't meant we
shouldn't consider their legitimacy otherwise.
And if gay marriage parellel straight marriage,
divorse means spliting property, which make the
legal bond as serious, and as restricting as
straight couples' anyway.
-
back
-
|
|
REASON
>> Arguments 
