The following opinion piece was sent to the Rutger's University paper, The Daily Targum. The editorial is a response to a Edward Reep's editorial, "Gay rights movement must advance."
Homosexuality:
Tolerated or Accepted
In Edward Reep’s recent
opinion article “The Gay Rights Movement Must Advance,” he expresses the goal of
the homosexual agenda, “. . . we truly want to create a world where same-sex
relationships are accepted, not just tolerated . . . .”
Gay activists hope that the
day will come when a gay couple will be as accepted in the community as Ozzie
and Harriet, or June and Ward Cleaver.
History and human nature lead many to believe it will never happen.
There is as great a chance of convincing every homosexual to go straight
as there is convincing every heterosexual to accept homosexuality.
The general public will “tolerate” homosexuality but never fully
“accept.” Why?
Natural law, freedom, and the power of the theistic world view.
In every age the vast
majority of people have held to the heterosexual view of marriage.
The propaganda that 10
percent of the population is gay is a myth. According to the National Health and
Social Life Survey only 2.8 percent of men and 1.4 percent of woman identify
themselves as gay. That figure
has stayed very consistent throughout history.
Natural history demonstrates that heterosexuality will always be the
predominant view.
Those nations and ideologies
that have tried to stamp out natural law/ theistic morality have crumbled time
and time again. The
secularists of the French Revolution tried to force on the populace the cult of
reason. They even renamed
Notre Dame Cathedral, the
The only way to create a
brave new world of homosexual acceptance would be for a power hungry minority to
take away freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of conscience.
Religion would have to be completely stamped out.
Those who attempt this will have a civil war on their hands.
Freedom may have setbacks, but in the end freedom always wins--bigger and
stronger. In the classic words
of Ronald Reagan, nations which stifle freedom will find themselves “on the ash
heap of history.”
Many in the public fear a
reverse intolerance on the part of homosexuals which will lead homosexuals to
push for laws requiring acceptance.
Rather than allowing everyone freedom of speech and conscience, the new
tool is to charge with hate crime violations those who do not accept
homosexuality. It sounds
very much like an Orwell’s 1984 police state.
Case in point, Viki Knox, a teacher at
If one teacher decides to
teach students to accept homosexuality, what is wrong with another teacher
communicating the counter opinion?
Isn’t secular moral relativism all about diversity of opinion?
Or was that just a ploy until homosexuality gained equal time?
Once empowered, are some activists going to silence traditional morality
through a big brother state?
At this point, the gay rights argument must be addressed.
Homosexuals claim gay rights are morally equivalent to racial civil
rights. As nobody would want to give
equal time to a teacher disseminating pro-racism, in the same way a good society
must be unified pro-homosexual since it is assumed that homosexuality is morally
right by default. Says who?
In the public’s mind, gay sex will never rise to the level of racial
equality. Why?
Inequities based on race are universally offensive because they violate
the theistic moral foundation imbedded in the conscience of every man.
It is intuitive that men are brothers made in the image of God.
Racism can only be perpetrated by false religion or some animalistic
“survival of the fittest” view of man.
For this reason, slavery was tolerated in society, but never fully
accepted. Once a society could
progress in democracy, the unnatural state of slavery was overthrown.
Homosexuality does not have
a theistic moral foundation.
“In the beginning God made them male and female.”
Therefore, homosexuality will never have the additional moral weight of a
theistic world view. Gay
rights may advance, but they will never find full acceptance.
The abortion issue is a parallel.
The pro-choice position is generally founded upon humanistic ideas of
human freedom, and it does not find the full support of a theistic world
view--“Men are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights; that
among these are life.”
For this reason the abortion issue is polarized at about 50 percent for,
50 percent against; and after a generation of infanticide, public opinion is
shifting pro life. I
suggest that the homosexual issue will follow the same course: support for gay
rights may grow from 10 to 20 to 30 percent, but there will be a stopping point
and polarization.
O course, homosexual
activists believe they can modify mankind’s theistic world view.
Liberal secularists hope against hope that through advances in modern
scientific ideas, mankind’s thinking can be “evolved” into rejecting certain
theistic underpinnings.
We have seen this before; every generation of radical secularists believe
that this time they can make it happen.
I suggest it will never happen because the foundations of theism--life,
sin, and death--are too real. Think
what you will, but at least consider the possibility that history proves full
homosexual acceptance will be an exercise in futility.
Theists believe God’s
natural, moral laws are like the laws of gravity.
Activist groups celebrate when they win some legislation to engage in
immoral practices. Theists are
not overly concerned, for such groups have just won the right to jump off a
moral cliff. The
punishment is built into the vice.
In the end God always wins; rebels lose.
As expected Edward Reed believes religious people are the losers.
He writes, “If people believe gay sex and romance are not ethical and
moral because of the supposed will of a deity, it’s their loss.”
Time and experience will show in the end who is right.
The proof is in the pudding.
Fear not--any false reality superimposed on the real universe will fail in the
long run.
Homosexuality will never be
fully accepted by the general public just like the general public will never
fully accept other moral choices such as polygamy, abortion, strip clubs,
adultery, pedophilia, incest.
The recent progress felt by the gay community is deceptive.
It is only an appeasement to keep homosexuals quiet.
The best homosexuals can hope for is a moderate amount of toleration and
even that, only temporarily.
B.E.Winship,
1989 Alumnus, M.B.A.