Gays and what we should do with them

In recent news one of the most explosive articles to come out of the Western world is that New York has become the sixth state in the United States to legalize gay marriage.

Before we get to it I should say that this article has a few goals to achieve:

1. To proclaim my stand on same-sex marriage

2. To proclaim the reasons for said stand

3. To discuss homosexuality and AIDS

4. To discuss homosexuality and families

5. To discuss the word “marriage”

6. To discuss religion and homosexuality

Piggybacking on this report TV Patrol posted alongside it another story of six gay couples getting married in Baguio City. And Rated K covering a unique supposedly gay couple finding love and are about to get married.

First things first, I support the legalization of same-sex marriage.

Oh I can hear the derivative head comments now.

Ah bakla rin yan kaya niya sinusuportahan mga bakla”

Siguro gusto rin niyang magpakasal sa same-sex partner niya

etc.

To which my official answer would be: “I do not have the time nor the patience to deal with ad hominems. If there are no other more substantial arguments made against my already proclaimed stand I humbly yet strongly advise my detractors to shut the fuck up lest they once again demonstrate their ill-bred, uneducated, fallacious, narrow-minded, discriminatory bigotry to provide further evidence of their inherent foolishness.”

To clarify, No, I am not a homosexual and I do not particularly approve of their choice of lifestyle. However, I do support the legalization of same-sex marriage on the grounds of equal rights. That’s it. Pure and simple.

There are no, I repeat, THERE ARE NO substantial arguments against gay marriage. The loudest and most violent opposers to its legalization is (surprise surprise) the Catholic Church. Thankfully the Church has no influence on what bills can be enacted and what bills can’t, at least that’s how its supposed to work.

The assertion that same-sex unions can result in AIDS is a myth because the only way ANYONE can get AIDS is if they have sex with someone who already has it or if you ingest/absorb an infected persons blood. It doesn’t magically appear without reason merely because you perform anal.

History itself proves the assertion false because AIDS was first reported on June 5, 1981. The earliest known positive identification of HIV-1 was in 1959 and 1960 and genetic studies have shown that it was disease that was passed from chimpanzees to man around the 1900’s.

According to the medical timeline HIV didn’t even exist in humans before the 20th century. However, there are literary and scholarly evidence that proves to us that homosexuality was practiced in society even before the Birth of Christ. If homosexuality caused AIDS then it should logically have existed and discovered centuries before it actually was.

Detractor: “Maybe it already existed during that time and only now do we know what it is. It could have been killing people before only we didn’t have a name for it.”

The answer for that is simple. If AIDS did exist back then the casualty would have been so large that it should effectively wiped out a large fraction of the Earths population, and being such an event a record of that event would have been established. Such examples would include The Black Plague, Polio, Small pox, and the Spanish influenza. And we know that two of these epidemics of the early world are now mild nuisances. If a disease such as AIDS which is classified as a pandemic in the modern world imagine the effect it would have had in the early world. A disease such as AIDS would surely be recorded and no such records exist because like AIDS it didn’t exist back then.

Therefore: Homosexual intercourse does not cause AIDS in two healthy homosexual individuals.

Another myth about homosexuality is that children who grow up being raised by homosexual parents will become confused about their own sexuality and thus live lives crooked and unfulfilled.

Well I can solve this in less than a minute. There have been studies on homosexual couples raising children and real life situations demonstrating that situation. There are no untoward effects on the children that are inherently exclusive to homosexual parents. The problems faced by children raised by homosexual parents (from now on referred to as G) are similar if not exactly the same problems faced by children raised heterosexual parents (from now on referred to as S).

If G would experience teasing in class the same could be said for S. If G is experiencing social ostracism the same could be said for S. If G has suicidal tendencies the same could be said for S. If G is confused about his sexuality (and lets be honest) the same can be said for S.

The only conceivable problem would arise if S would deride and discriminate against G for having homosexual parents. A problem that is not caused by the homosexuality of G’s parents but by the bigotry and discriminatory attitude of S.

Besides these two myths the only argument that can be made would be from the religious point of view. And there is a whole mix of different variations people will go through in whether they accept or reject gay marriage.

There are some people who like to go to the definition of the word “marriage”. In fact this is their most common weapon. Well, if your only argument against something is a definition of a word then it is easily remedied. Change it. Words have definitions but they can (especially in constitutional terms) be changed. Definitions are not carved into stone. This is easily understood once you accept that words are mere representations of objects or concepts. Words don’t really exist, they’re just semantic symbolism created to make communication easier and faster.

Words are flexible and the world won’t collapse if you modify its definition without harming its core meaning. For example:

Revolution can mean a political uprising or the orbit of a planetary object around the sun.

The term “legal voting age” formerly prohibited individuals under the age of twenty-one to vote until it was changed to eighteen.

So to base your entire argument solely on the definition of a word when issues like equality of rights far outstrips it in importance is childish to say the least.

There are the people who reject it because of their religion (that’s the most common). But there are also people who are religious but want to support same-sex marriage and are trying to make the two agree.

Well I’m sorry to disappoint but religion (in this case Christianity) is very clear and making it agree with same-sex marriage is impossible.

I pulled the following example from the Yahoo News comments section of the article I was talking about earlier. And if the person mentioned below would like to have their comment taken out of this article just inform me and I will oblige.

Maria Aragon said: Man created the Bible. God does not discriminate and never will. šŸ™‚

She admits that the Bible is not the inherent and divine word of God which I agree with but at the same time asserts Gods existence when the only proof that the Christian religion has ever provided for the existence of such a being is the Bible. Discounting the Bible is the same as renouncing your faith. So, that doesn’t work.

However, Miss Aragon is on her way. The hardest part in making a Christian see the utter immorality of the Christian religion is to make them see that the Bible is not a book wiped across the brain of God but a collection of fairy tales composed by desert people.

There is no difference between denying a gay person the right to marry and denying a woman the right to vote or denying a black man to sit at the front of the bus. These are inherent rights given to every person regardless and there are no substantial arguments against certain people having them. This is one of the foundations of our Constitution. Denying them any of these rights is an injustice.

If you are against same-sex marriage for no substantial reason then you are treating these people as second-class citizens and don’t even deny it because you are. You are no better than the Nazis were to the Jews. True you never committed genocide and mass torture against homosexuals but your religion (Christianity) tells you that they will suffer an eternity in hellfire for no other reason that they are homosexuals.

And the Christian homosexual community should think about that. The God and savior you subscribe to is condemning every breathe you take as a sin and will send you to Hell after you die. And you didn’t do anything wrong. Is that justice?

Do these “children in Chirst” even realize the hate speech they are spewing against an otherwise benign presence in their society. Gays are commonsight in Philippine society and these people are subtly and not-so-subtly being told their entire lives are a sin and they don’t deserve the same rights as other people.

There are even questions as: “What’s the point of giving them marriage anyway? They could just live together.”

The point is the option should be available to them whether they would opt for it or not. It’s the same stand for the RH Bill nobody’s going to be forced to use contraceptives the option is merely made available to the impoverished classes. They are free to use them or not but the choice is there. No one decides but the people involved, no old withered priests to interfere, and that is how it should be. That is whats called freedom (in the legal sense of course). And there are legal advantages to being married ie. inheritance matters, taxes, emergency response etc.

If a healthy financially stable heterosexual couple decide to get married there’s nothing stopping them. If a healthy financially stable homosexual couple decide to get married they can’t. Why? Because God said so? Not only is that a non-substantial argument it doesn’t apply to everyone. Not everyone subscribes to the same God and that is the wisdom behind the separation of Church and State. Not everyone applies the Christian hate speech against gays to their own lives because they are enlightened enough to see that homosexuals are fundamentally no different from heterosexuals and are no more a threat to society than anyone else.

Sure a lot of Christians will say (as they have for years) that acceptance of homosexuality and homosexuality itself is the devils work and that we must reject all of it as behavior from hell and its integration into society will slowly degrade our morals until the world reaches a pitch black abyss of immorality, ending the world and choking us all into the fiery netherworld eternally void from paradise.

There are simpler allusions like: “The new Soddom and Gommorah ”

“Its an abomination”

“God never intended it that way”

“Victory of the devil”

Try to tell me this isn’t hate speech. If there are no other reasons against same-sex marriage besides “God said so” then I’m afraid you logically have nothing to stand on. Since there isn’t any justification for the belief of God in the first place. The only evidence of which is written in a two-thousand year old book of dubious origin with conflicting texts and amoral virtues.

My only critiques of the Baguio couples is that they shouldn’t have gotten married because the sad fact is same-sex marriage is illegal in the Philippines (something that should be addressed and rectified). And the rated K couple aren’t homosexuals because they were physically and sexually attracted to the opposite sex. I don’t care if the one is gay and the other is a lesbian; One has a dick and the other has a vagina that’s opposing genders ergo heterosexualism.

Advertisements

4 Tugon to “Gays and what we should do with them”

  1. THANK YOU for posting this. šŸ™‚ I still dream of a world full of love and acceptance. Kung lahat ng straight eh kagaya mo ang pagiisip, mas madali para saming mga LGBT na mabuhay. šŸ™‚

Mag-iwan ng Tugon

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Baguhin )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Baguhin )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Baguhin )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Baguhin )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: