COLUMN: Fostering a greater understanding
In the Wednesday, April 16 edition of The Utah Statesman, Jon Adams wrote an article, “Gay rights affect all people,” concerning gay rights and offered many opinions. I would like to clear up some of the false notions perpetuated in his article, and offer a rebuttal to some of his arguments.
The biggest problem with gay rights movements is they do not recognize that they have little or nothing in common with civil rights movements in the past. Blacks had voting privileges, good work conditions and basic constitutional rights withheld from them. Women were treated as inferior and were not allowed the same opportunities as men. However, those with non-heterosexual orientation have exactly the same rights, opportunities, and privileges as everyone else. The argument for gay marriage is not legitimate. Marriage has always been, and always should be, defined as a legal union between a man and a woman for the purpose of creating a family unit, the basic unit of all society worldwide.
In fact, it seems that “gay rights” is largely a misnomer. Because it is illegal for employers to ask about sexual preference – that kind of discrimination can’t legally happen. Gay people can vote, hold public office, receive education, and use government facilities and services like everyone else. This is not another step towards civil rights, as there are not civil rights being kept from them.
The fact that we know many people who encounter feelings of homosexuality is not a reason to condone related behavior. In fact, those you love may struggle with many things, but that is all the more reason to help these people through their trials. If we know felons, drug addicts, or thieves, for example, that does not mean we hate these people for their actions. Our love for them does not validate their actions, though.
Historical precedent is not a viable reason to allow behavior that is obviously and inherently wrong, or to allow further legislation for these people. Many historians cite homosexuality as one of the main reasons for the collapse of many civilizations, including Rome, Greece, etc. It is not a new issue, and we should not change our societal values as if it is somehow new or different.
The fact that homosexuality is exhibited in nature is not a reason to allow and encourage such behavior. Animals have all kinds of conduct that is not right for humans to do. The difference between humanity and nature is that we have the ability to sensibly choose what our actions will be, not based on instinct or impulse.
There is some evidence that homosexuality is tied to genetics. However, there is not conclusive proof and it cannot be listed as the only source. The issue cannot be simplified as such. Many factors play a role in this topic, including childhood experiences, sexual abuse, media influence and much more. In fact, many women who claim same-gender attraction were victims of some form of molestation when they were younger, creating a very negative image of men in their minds. There are many cases of people who have been confused about their sexual orientation and have determined, after previously claiming homosexual preference, that they are heterosexual. People can and do change all the time, and it is a fallacy to say that people cannot. It is a psychology issue we do not comprehend completely.
A couple of the examples brought up by Mr. Adams did show a severe problem in society, which is a misunderstanding of the nature of homosexuality. Forced, extreme therapies are always wrong and never seem to have good consequences. Forced heterosexual marriages upon gay people as a remedy have ended in broken hearts and homes. Ignoring the issue is not a way to deal with the reality. Violent behavior in reaction to the matter is also wrong.
Mr. Adams also addressed the actions of the LDS church in relation to homosexuality. The church has been, and always will be, opposed to any homosexual activity or union. However, as apostle Jeffrey R. Holland stated, “Let me make it clear that attractions alone, troublesome as they may be, do not make one unworthy” (“Helping Those Who Struggle with Same-Gender Attraction,” Ensign, Oct. 2007). The church has always taken the stance that feelings and temptations are not sins, but action upon unworthy feelings is. It should not be implied that the church has changed its stance on homosexuality, or that it will ever. Understanding the nature of these feelings and the struggle that these people face is part of the learning process for us all.
We should not have to classify ourselves in terms of our sexual orientation. That is a very small part of who we are as individuals, and we should not think of that as our one defining feature. We have the ability to choose who we are as people, even if we cannot choose our taste and feelings all of the time. As one wise person said, “The choice is in the response, not in the temptation.” Even if the vast majority of homosexual people do not choose to feel that way, they can choose their actions.
In the end, the argument for understanding and acceptance of people who struggle with homosexual/bisexual feelings is on the right track. We should not be hateful of those around us and should try to show love and kindness for all. Equality for these people already exists. Let’s all do our part to foster further understanding of the struggles of those around us, and not try to redefine our cultural values and principles because of the struggle of a few.
Andrew S. Campbell is a sophomore majoring in chemistry. Comments and questions can be sent to him at andrew.s.campbell@aggiemail.usu.edu.