I Hadn't Thought About it That Way

I read an interesting quote the other day. It is from Focus on the family Policy Update dated May 2007. It seeks to answer the reason for the attacks on the Love Won Out conferences.

" ...If the gay rights movement loses the argument that homosexuals are "born gay" and are unable to change, then the foundation for their entire political and cultural agenda crumbles. If "gayness" is not an immutable characteristic, then why should society redefine marriage for an ill-defined, changing group? Indeed, why should a vague category of people be accorded special civil rights protections of the sort given to ethnic and racial minorities?"

Good question...and good point. I've long held the belief that any group of people should not have special rights, or be a protected class of people. That inherently sets them up above the rest of humanity. That's fundamentally wrong, and dangerous.

Comments

Jodi said…
Interesting point, although I am not sure it would hold up. There are many things for which we receive protection under the law that we are not 'born with'. The one that stands out most to me is the protection given to the disabled, many of which were not born that way. We also constantly give care to people through the government who by their own choices have placed themselves into a situation where they need help and/or rights that the average, healthy individual does not. Yes most often disabilities are not brought on by the individual, but if you read the statistics of how much obesity is costing this country and with no one refusing to pay for the health care of a person who continues to remain obese then how can we turn to a homosexual and say that they don't deserve the same? This just isn't a morality issue, in my opinion, it is an issue of basic human rights.
9:16 AM
Post a Comment

Popular Posts