Is Homosexuality a class of people like African-Americans?
Is there a difference between skin color and sexual behavior? Why should we classify people because of what they desire to do sexually?
Homosexuals want to be considered a class of people by depicting themselves as victims who, like blacks, have been denied civil rights. That way, they can make the unsuspecting public think that those who oppose their political agenda are discriminating against them rather than their behavior. According to them, conservatives are all bigots on par with racists—we are opposed to fairness itself.
But all of that is nonsense. First, the comparison of homosexuality to race is completely invalid. Skin color is benign, but sexual behavior is not. Having a certain skin color does not hurt anyone, but homosexual behavior can and does hurt others. Furthermore, sexual behavior is always a choice; race never is. You will find many former homosexuals, but you will never find a former African-American.
Second, homosexuality is not an identity or class; it’s a behavior. Homosexuals are not a class of people any more than heterosexuals are a class of people. We are males and females, not gays and straights. In other words, we are males and females by anatomy, but gays and straights by behavior.
Why not classify people by their desires as homosexual activists demand? Because if we start to classify people by what they desire to do sexually, then why not give people with all sexual desires special marriage rights? On what grounds should we say that same-sex marriage is fine but not marriage involving polygamy, incest, or bestiality?
“But those behaviors are harmful!” you say. Exactly, and so is homosexual behavior. So why is it legitimate to carve out a special case for homosexuality but not for those other behaviors?
Skin color and sexual desires do have one thing in common—they are both non-issues when it comes to law. Why should the law care about your skin color or desires of any kind? Laws should be concerned only with behavior.
People can desire to marry whoever or whatever they want, but the behavior of actually marrying a person is what the law is concerned with. As we’ve seen in the six-point case, the state has a compelling interest to keep laws that promote natural marriage and provide no option for government-backed same-sex marriage.
Homosexuals want to be considered a class of people by depicting themselves as victims who, like blacks, have been denied civil rights. That way, they can make the unsuspecting public think that those who oppose their political agenda are discriminating against them rather than their behavior. According to them, conservatives are all bigots on par with racists—we are opposed to fairness itself.
But all of that is nonsense. First, the comparison of homosexuality to race is completely invalid. Skin color is benign, but sexual behavior is not. Having a certain skin color does not hurt anyone, but homosexual behavior can and does hurt others. Furthermore, sexual behavior is always a choice; race never is. You will find many former homosexuals, but you will never find a former African-American.
Second, homosexuality is not an identity or class; it’s a behavior. Homosexuals are not a class of people any more than heterosexuals are a class of people. We are males and females, not gays and straights. In other words, we are males and females by anatomy, but gays and straights by behavior.
Why not classify people by their desires as homosexual activists demand? Because if we start to classify people by what they desire to do sexually, then why not give people with all sexual desires special marriage rights? On what grounds should we say that same-sex marriage is fine but not marriage involving polygamy, incest, or bestiality?
“But those behaviors are harmful!” you say. Exactly, and so is homosexual behavior. So why is it legitimate to carve out a special case for homosexuality but not for those other behaviors?
Skin color and sexual desires do have one thing in common—they are both non-issues when it comes to law. Why should the law care about your skin color or desires of any kind? Laws should be concerned only with behavior.
People can desire to marry whoever or whatever they want, but the behavior of actually marrying a person is what the law is concerned with. As we’ve seen in the six-point case, the state has a compelling interest to keep laws that promote natural marriage and provide no option for government-backed same-sex marriage.
