We were visited last night by a spirit of intolerance. He posted a list of reasons as to why we should criminalize homosexuality.
This goes about as well as you’d expect.
Before we begin, we should establish why we should criminalize anything. Other than religiously motivated blue laws (or other), we do so because something is harmful to surrounding people/society, and we assess this is the best way to mitigate that harm. Any other reason is poor and/or irrational.
Reason #1 Gay activists have corrupted and have used corrupted judges to topple the Constitutional Will of the American People. The right to homosexuality is not an American right but a judge made right.
How? How have they corrupted judges? Do you mean like petitioning the government, like every citizen can, to try to resolve grievances? Or do you think they cast some kind of spell on the judges?
Homosexuality is not an American right? Here’s the 9th amendment:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
This is important, because some people like to think that anything that’s not explicitly stated in the Constitution isn’t a right. That’s false. The default is that everyone is free to live their lives in the “pursuit of happiness.” The government should (and often does) have a burden of proof to demonstrate a compelling state interest in restricting something.
Combine that with the 5th and 14th amendments, and you have an overwhelming implication that it would be constitutionally unlawful to be singling out homosexuality for banning, without good cause. Thus, it’s a right.
It’d be like if your office rules were that you were guaranteed a 15 minute break every 2 hours, where the rule states “one can engage in any non-destructive activity for relaxation“. If an employee asks, “Can I play my 90’s era Gameboy?“, the fact that this one example wasn’t explicitly listed, doesn’t mean it doesn’t qualify. It may take awhile before someone asks the specific question, but it always was allowed, even if your immediate manager was confused, and thought otherwise.
If too many managers are confused, we may eventually change the written rule to “one can engage in any non-destructive activity for relaxation; that includes 90’s era Gameboys.” It wasn’t added; it was clarified.
Reason #2: The gay political activism is corrupting American children in the public educational system beginning in kindergarten and will not stop until the crime of homosexuality is penalized.
What? Gay political activists are fighting to penalize homosexuality? Edit: In case I’m not the only person on the planet who misread this statement. They’re saying that society needs to penalize homosexuality, otherwise, activism will continue.
In what way are we corrupting American children? It’s healthy for us to educate and equip them with knowledge about sexuality, so that whatever person they grow up to be, they’ll have the best tools available to deal with life… whether they’re straight or LGBT. That’s good. To call that “corruption” is to infuse it with too much subjective opinion… whereas we can look at sex ed and see it objectively working to improve peoples’ lives.
Reason #3 The use of innumerable public bathrooms for their sexual escapades is destroying the decency of our community.
This is a reason for criminalization? It’d be like saying that the reason for criminalizing marijuana possession is that people who possess marijuana keep engaging in illegal drug markets.
If heterosexuality was oppressed in society, they’d increasingly be off engaging in human sexuality in odd places too. When that happens to gay people, that just doesn’t surprise me, and it clearly an effect of their oppression. Without that oppression and stigma, many wouldn’t feel compelled to have a heterosexual marriage, and thus have to go underground to compensate.
So if bathroom “escapades” are a concern for you, the solution is to not criminalize it, and fully pass LGBT rights. That way, they can do all the sexy sexy in the comfort of their own homes. We wouldn’t have politicians struggling between hiding that they’re gay, and navigating their own sexuality, because coming out as gay would obliterate your electability. That’s just sad.
Reason #4 The visible “lewd and lascivious” gay pride parades are destroying local communities and cities and is perverting our local administrators and police.
This relates to #3. The best solution – the solution that is least tyrannical, and most America-compatible – is to stop oppressing them. The “pride” parades aren’t intrinsic to being LGBT. They aren’t about declaring pride for merely being LGBT, but rather, that after all the beatdowns, they’re still there and still standing, and not giving up.
Once homosexuality is normalized (cue the horrified gasp from the social conservatives), the need for such events vanishes. After that, these will just be citizens like everyone else, going grocery shopping, working and walking the dog.
It’s articles like this that demonstrate the need for pride parades.
Reason #5 The death penalty for homosexuality is commanded by God of the Bible
It shouldn’t surprise me that the single most irrelevant, unimportant uncompelling reason provided for criminalizing homosexuality, also happens to be the single most evil reason for doing so.
Sir, that’s a dictatorship. I shouldn’t have to say this, but that’s not an American value.
The Bible doesn’t promote constitutional rights, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, due process, electing (or impeaching) leaders, separation of powers, checks and balances, equal equal protection, opposition to slavery (in general, not just one tribe), etc. The Bible is the complete, utter antithesis to the Constitution.
Even if God commanded homosexuality to be accepted, that’d be an dumb reason to do so. We atheists don’t care what the chief evil villain in your ancient book of mythology thinks about various social topics. Know your audience.
Reason #6 The perversion of child adoption is a threat to that child where the home ought to offer a high quality example of sensible and moral values. Dangerous lifestyle of homosexuality recognizes pornography, male and male orgies, and lewd parades as part of their life style and is a threat to the moral well-being of children.
This, like many other points, is assuming the conclusion it needs to demonstrate – that there’s something wrong/perverted/corrupted about homosexuality. The arguments seem to spring off that core assumption.
Has this person ever met a heterosexual? They’re apparently all decent, sexually pure uncorrupted angels. On the other hand, we have the bigoted assumptions that gay people are somehow have nuclear powered hormones, and just can’t help but have orgies left and right. The bias here is thick, if not surprising. Heterosexual’s don’t watch pornography, or keep it in the home with children? Really?
It just doesn’t match reality.
Relax, the children are fine. Having knowledge of homosexuality is no more harmful to them than to adults. Well, not-socially-conservative adults, because they’re currently losing their minds over this topic.
I’ll never buy into this idea that suppression of knowledge is a good thing.
Reason #7 Homosexuality is a violation of social compact which is created for the perfection of society not its perversion. The bathroom confusion in California has revealed the extent of the homosexual spirit in its ability to destroy civil society. The power of the majority of Americans have the right to restore the punishment for homosexuality.
First, the “social compact”? So society decided to oppress gay people, and we’re violating that compact? Boo hoo. We’re modifying that social compact. This software patch includes several improvements, such as a decrease in tyranny and social latency.
Second, I didn’t realize that “bathroom confusion” could destroy society. Are we that fragile? What does it even mean to destroy “civil society”? If Bob and Jane bang in the bathroom, does that mean that the whole geographic region should be renamed “the wastelands”? Will there be super mutants? Can I join the Talon Company? I guess I just have a little more confidence in the ability of “civil society” to survive some promiscuity.
Third, the majority of Americans have no more power to “restore the punishment for homosexuality” than they do to reinstate slavery. As my conservative colleague would say, “America never was a complete democracy“. We can vote for things, but those things have limits. That’s one of the primary core functions of the Constitution.
Reason #8 Those who discourage public debate by name calling are a danger and threat to the very nature of free government. Jesus said that calling someone “Roca” (empty headed)is a punishable offense. Why? Because it destroys the process of enlightenment which is required for making the majority sensible for important social impacting decisions.Name calling is a criminal offense. The Gay Community relentless use of name calling such as homophobic, troll, moron, bigot, nut-case, and other derogatory statements destroy public debate, and it is destroying free government based on the enlightenment of the majority and is criminal and another reason to make homosexuality illegal.
I basically agree that we should refrain from name calling… not eliminate. Sometimes, it’s justified and warranted. It can be just as much an important element of conversation as anything else. It just shouldn’t the the sole thing we do. To criminalize people for name-calling would be idiotic, and a Constitutional violation.
Oh wait, you’re calling for criminalization based on that premise… you’re an idiot.
To say that people venting their frustrations – assuming that LGBT people are the majority of name-calling, and the people who are constantly blasting “fag” out their mouths aren’t – are destroying free government is silly. The only thing threatening free government right now is the unchecked spending and wholesale purchase of politicians by billionaires, gerrymandering, and dominionists actively trying to take over the American government.
People calling you a bigot isn’t even a blip on the radar.
The “enlightenment of the majority” is delusional. The Pew Research Center has been tracking the statistics of what the majority have thought about gay marriage.
In 2001, the American popular opinion was 57% opposed. In 2015, it’s 57% in favor.
So which is it? Is the “enlightenment” that gay marriage is okay now? Did the universe change suddenly in the past 14 years so that it was bad then, but okay now? Is it “enlightenment” only if you don’t personally think it’s “corrupted”?
… or is it that the “enlightenment of the majority” can be anything but?
Reason #9 The relentless corrupting of American people by media outlets for gay perversion must be brought to the end. Restoring the punishment for homosexuality will end media corruption. Homosexuality is corrupting public opinion, and this is turning state and federal law against the moral with huge penalties in order to support the immoral.
Wow, this is just going off the deep end of conspiracy theories. Desire for name-calling increasing… since there’s little else to address than saying “you’re nuts!”
You keep calling it “corruption”. You have to justify this, otherwise, I see it as “enlightenment” that we’re becoming a more just, civil and moral society. As long as people
are aren’t hurting each other, it’s the morally correct thing to do, to allow them to live their lives. It’s even more moral to enable it. If people want to go boating out at sea, or swim in the ocean, we provide a coast guard and live guards as safety nets. That’s good!
Homosexuality is amoral. It’s not even a moral question. The fact that you think there’s an invisible sky-creature, who doesn’t like what you do with your diddlybits, does not establish this as immoral.
Reason #10 The gay community has resorted to death threats and mailing of gay pornography in order to attack the reputations of those who oppose them. This in of itself should alarm every American, and anyone who give support to the gay community…
… they have? You’re engaging in a lot of projection. That’s not to say there aren’t instances, but if if there’s an example of death threats, most likely, it’s from a religious person, if for no other reason than they’re the majority, and therefore, a lot more of them.
…and their tyrannical behavior must be considered an enemy to free government.
I… can’t even express the degree to which this is projection. This is coming from a person whose entire article is about promoting oppression and criminalization.
I give it 5 out of 5 projectors.
“Thou Shall not lie with mankind as with womankind, it is abomination.”
I don’t care. Your book is wrong on so many things, factually and morally.