The
biggest news in California these
days, is this whole gay marriage thing. Last week, I wrote a rather detailed
article, explaining why gay marriage really does affect everybody.
The
response I always hear from the left is a quick one liner: “You believe in
equality, don’t you?”
Isn’t
it funny how the Left likes to claim the intellectual high ground, portraying
Conservatives as simple minded, and yet the Left has a whole arsenal of these
one-liners, void of thought? “It’s about equality, that’s all!” Yes indeed. That kind of response isn’t
simple minded, is it?
Allow
me to critique the charge that those who do not believe in gay marriage do not
believe in equality.
I’ll begin with an irony. Many who defend gay marriage, also tend to defend Muslim law in the Middle East. They are especially
sentimental toward the Palestinians. My friend, if you’re that concerned with
the rights of homosexuals, how come we never hear you complain about the way
Palestinians and other Muslim nations treat gays? In Palestine, gays are arrested and made to sink their heads in
excrement. Homosexuals are executed in countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, Somalia and Yemen. And yet, the Left has serious problems with Israel a, country which treats homosexuals with respect.
So
much for the subject of hypocrisy. Let us return now to the subject of equality.
Does
your concern include the equal right to free speech and freedom of religion?
Some of us are not fooled into thinking this is only about marriage. The
militant gay activists see marriage as one step in a much bigger agenda, the
goal to make it against the law to say that homosexuality is wrong. They want
this law enforced, even in our churches. For them, “separation between church
and state,” means the church cannot interfere with the state. The state, on the
other hand, can interfere with the church all it wants. Doesn’t equality under
the law include the equal rights to free speech
and equal rights to practice religion,unhindered by the self-righteous
Politically Correct?
By
the way, in case you haven’t noticed, homosexuality is not a race and therefore
does not need the same rights as a race or culture. Homosexuality is a
behavior. Are you as enthusiastic about protecting the rights of polygamists to
marry? How about animal rights activists who want to marry their pets? You
think I’m kidding? You think I’m crazy?
We already have groups like PETA who believe animal life is as important as
human life. How long will it be before somebody connects the next dot? Just wait!
Just watch!
And
how about a much more serious question? Are you paying attention to the
pedophile lobbyists? They want their rights too. They want the right to have
free sex with children. Some of them
march in gay rights parades, using all the same rhetoric, talking about how
beautiful the love is between an adult and a child. Those who don’t see this beauty
are closed minded and intolerant, according to groups like NAMBLA. I guess they figure that if such tactics and
such language worked before, it might just work again. Should they be denied
this right? Should they be robbed of the opportunity to marry children if they
so choose? Aren’t they “equal under the law?” No! They are not! Why? Because it’s unnatural for
an adult to have sex with a child. I know you agree with me. Morally bankrupt
as our nation has become, I know that at the moment, at least, you still agree
with me on that one. Now then, here’s the kicker: If it’s unnatural for an
adult to have sex with a child, why is it natural for an adult to have sex with
the same gender? Explain to me how that is natural.
“But
the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as an emotional
disorder in the year 1973.”
That
is correct, although it was done only for purely political reasons. But if you
are viewing the APA as some kind of
authority, I would point out that this same APA
declassified pedophilia as a mental disorder in their DSM4!
Sadly,
somebody is going to go away from this article thinking I accused homosexuals
of being pedephiles. Of course, I did no such thing and anyone who came away
with that idea did not really read the article. They emotionally reacted, but
they did not read it. I did pose an important question: Why do we draw
the line at one kind of sexual deviation but not another?
Had
enough? At the expense of sounding more complex then my liberal friends
like to believe Conservatives are, many factors must be considered when
discussing this
hot potato and merely repeating the phrase “equality” sounds like a
mindless
mantra. It comes across as bumpkin for the masses.
This
is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.