The Same Sex Marriage Debate

Proponents of same sex marriage have succeeded in keeping this subject ever before us pressing the issue for ‘equality’ just like slavery was chipped away at until it was abolished and there was the ‘proclamation of emancipation’.

But the facts are, regardless of how often the issue is compared with slavery, this isn’t about slavery. This is about equating same sex relationships to be equal to hetrosexual relationships. I am sorry – I just cannot buy it, it isn’t equal at all; at best, it is uniquely different.

What homosexuals do is none of my business; I am not trying to tell anyone how to live their life. It’s a free world! But why do they insist on coercing society in accepting homosexuality as normal or natural forcing a square peg into a round hole? Why can’t gays just say, ‘hey, we’re different! We do our thing, we do it this way,’ instead of coercing their agenda upon everyone else to accept their behavior as normal? To be ‘politically correct’, one must equate homosexual behavior with heterosexual. It isn’t!

There’s a natural attraction or natural ‘fit’ between a man and a woman. I don’t know how graphic I need to get… is a man’s anus the natural receptacle for sexual gratification from another man? Or a woman with a strapped on penis? Am I to believe this is natural? Am I politically incorrect if I find this ludicrous? Again, it’s no business of mine what homosexuals do, but don’t force me to believe this is natural or normal. Don’t tell me this is equal to a man and a woman. Two husbands married to each other, or two wives married to each other is not natural or normal. Husband and wife, I will be plain; penis and vagina, that’s the natural order of things. If a person is stimulated by the same sex, or children, or an animal, it’s not natural.

I’ve heard the argument that homosexuality happens in nature, so therefore it must be ‘natural’ – justification for human conduct, because it happens in nature. Animals also eat their own vomit, roll in feces, lick their own crotches and sniff other animal’s rears without any inhibition. But hey- they’re ANIMALS. Most of the time, when people just do what they ‘feel like doing’, it’s the beast coming out in them. Yep, there’s a bit of the beast in all of us, some of us suppress it better than others. We learn not to pick our nose in public, not to scratch our butt itch at inappropriate times, not to spit just anywhere, and NOT to hump someone, of the same or opposite sex, just because we ‘feel like it’… (wow, wouldn’t that be a sight?) At least, that’s how I have been taught. All of us have been taught certain behavior that is appropriate, and that which is not. Why do we learn these things? Are they all just social taboos and we need to just let it all hang out? I lived in a society like that during the ’60’s (Haight – Ashbury). I saw it all; people living like beasts. Some are taboos, but others are not. Some are debatable, I am sure. The argument that if animals do it, it’s natural, therefore it’s OK for humans to do it doesn’t hunt.

Some would interpret this as being bigoted. A bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own. I have lots of tolerance. I certainly can live and let live. Am I trying to coerce anyone to live their life a certain way? Not at all. Actually, any time I meet gay people I am just as respectful to them as I am someone that is straight. I have no hatred against gays and wish them no ill will. But does tolerance mean that I am no longer entitled to my opinion? If that is the case, the real bigots are the ones who will not allow me to have an opinion different from theirs.

Homophobia, according to the dictionary is having an irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or homosexuals. Who is to judge what is irrational? Does it mean that to not be irrational, one must check their brains into a brain trust and not have an opinion? Not at all. I am not a homophobic, as I have no fear; and my aversion is not irrational. I certainly wish no homosexuals any harm. But this does not mean I have to agree or accept their choices or deem it to be natural.

Parents have a right – and I believe, a duty to teach their children who are discovering his/her sexuality what is normal and natural. I see a danger in teaching them that there is no difference or that same sex is ‘normal’, and they are encouraged to pursue whatever impulses that begin to arise in them.

I have been asked if I had a son or daughter that proclaimed they were gay, what would be my reaction. First of all, as the father, the choice is not mine. That would be my son (or daughter) to choose. I would above all things assure them that my love is unconditional, and that they have to choose for themselves, but that I will not change my stance about what is normal. They have to do what they have to do. But I would tell him or her that their choices will not force me to change my definition of normal, and don’t try to coerce me into placing it on an equal par with heterosexuality.

The ideal of nature or what nature intended is not what we always do. As I said, there’s a bit of the beast in all of us. Some suppress it more than others. I wish no gay or lesbians any ill will. But I wish to call it what it is. To just blindly accept homosexuality as natural reminds me of the story of the Emperor with no clothes. Everyone one was parroting what the masses were saying, because that is what the king (society, the media, Hollywood) was deluded into believing. But the truth was blatantly obvious. Again, it’s not natural.

Perhaps I would be accused of not getting the whole point – the point being ‘love’ or bond between two people of the same sex exists, and therefore they wish to be joined together as one flesh. I do get the point; and I realize these feelings exist as does physical attraction to the same sex. Again, it isn’t the ideal or what is normal. But I don’t pontificate. I simply say, folks, do what you gotta do, and call it what you wish, but don’t call it marriage. Leave that to the natural course of nature.