How America should react to homosexuals? How America should react to homosexuals
Many experts agree that homosexuality has existed as long as human beings
themselves, although the attitude towards them has undergone dramatic changes in
some countries. Accepted by many societies during Greek and Roman era, most of
the time homosexuals were considered to be sinners against nature and even
criminals. In Medieval and modern periods homosexuals were prosecuted.
Enlightenment brought some liberation, substituting death penalty by
imprisonment. In Nazi Germany so-called "doctors" tried to
"cure" gays by the ways of castration and extreme intimidation. Until
1973 attempts to find a cure against homosexuality, what by majority was viewed
as a disease, were continued. Today, when research on twins suggests that sexual
orientation is not a choice, but our genetic predisposition, homosexual acts are
still considered to be immoral and even illegal in majority of countries and in
the eyes of most religious groups homosexuals, probably, always will be the
subjects of anathema. As much as the future may look gloomy for many gays and
lesbians all over the world, there are remarkable changes in public opinion and
officials’ attitudes toward homosexuals in some countries. For example, in
1989 Denmark was the first to allow the same-sex marriage. In the United States
the subject of homosexuality remains controversial. For example, In Hawaii three
homosexual couples asked the court to recognize their right to get married and
the court did. However, the state government refused to legalize this marriage.
Consequently, a new amendment was introduced to the state Constitution. At the
same time, majority of the states are not even considering this option and
homosexuality itself is still illegal there. Still, not only authorities try to
determine the position they should take towards homosexuals, many common
Americans also have no clear understanding of how to react to homosexuality. Why
should we bother to find the answer to the questions: who are the homosexuals
and where do they belong in our society? First of all, it is important to
realize that homosexuals are an integral part of our society. Your neighbor,
your co-worker, your hairdresser, your child and even your spouse can be one of
them. According to Richard D. Mohr "[t]wo out of five men one passes on the
street have had orgasmic sex with men. Every second family in the country has a
member who is essentially homosexual and many more people regularly have
homosexual experiences"(186). Should we avoid them, ignore, express our
anger and disgust? Unfortunately, many people feel that way because they have a
remote idea about people of different sexual orientation. For them homosexuality
is perversion, abnormality or decease. The ignorance may foster fear, which in
its turn leads to hostility. Homophobia is dangerous, because it affects all
groups of people – heterosexuals and homosexuals, grown-ups and children, men
and women. It may lead to violence and even death. There are numerous cases when
people were actually killed because of homophobia. To name few of them –
Matthew Shepard(homosexual), John Braun (heterosexual), Steve Kennedy
(homosexual) and the list can be continued. Prejudice against homosexuality
sharply limits how all men and women may acceptably behave, among themselves and
with each other. It is obvious that we can no longer pretend that the homosexual
issue is none of our concern. In attempt to evaluate our attitude towards people
of different sexual orientation we will be able to understand them better. What
is more important, we may overcome our prejudice, which often results in
discrimination of one group against another. To acknowledge that there are
people who are different and learn to tolerate them means to live in a safer
world. The next question is: Do we have the right to discriminate against
homosexuals? Until recently homosexuals were invisible minority. Therefore, many
Americans were unaware that gays and lesbians were discriminated against. But
homosexuals were and still are treated unfairly on the basis that they undermine
our morality, that they present danger to our children and that they are
transmitters of AIDS far more than heterosexuals. Today many gays and lesbians
come out of "the closet" and demand the same rights that heterosexual
take for granted. We have to admit that some steps have been made to protect
homosexuals. However, many government and public institutions and individuals
still discriminate against homosexuals denying them employment, housing,
insurance, marriage, child’s custody and so on. Why is it allowed to
discriminate against people who have different sexual orientation? Some may put
forward arguments that being gay is immoral, that it is illegal, that it is a
sin against nature and violation of God’s law and, some people consider
homosexual variety [as a] proof of existence of Satan . Some homophobics qualify
homosexual behavior akin to lying and stealing and, therefore, support the idea
that gays and lesbians deserve to suffer. As Pete Hamill points out
,"…gay-bashing is real; homosexuals are routinely injured or murdered
every day, all over the world, by people who fear or hate their version of human
sexuality"(532). But as was mentioned above, the medical studies confirm
that being gay is not a matter of choice or preference, but a deviation from
normal sexuality, which lays in genes and hardly can be changed. Given a choice
many would have preferred not to be homosexual. It is hard to imagine the
somebody would voluntary give up all the privileges of being straight and
subject himself to harassment, discrimination, assaults and scorn. Some argue
that the homosexual act is unnatural since it is not procreative. Then why
don’t we discriminate against sterile couples or those of over childbearing
age? Others express their concern that by granting homosexuals rights we will
give our blessing to other forms of sexual perversions such polygamy and
pedophillia, for example. Here it is important to notice, that for one,
pedophillia is not necessary a homosexual act. Secondly, it is immoral and
unlawful because one of the partners in this case is a child or a teenager who
more often than not has no other choice than to yield to the power of the adult.
As Joseph Geraci and Donald H. Mader point out "the power imbalance between
the adult and the younger partner in a pedophille relationship is so great that
it inevitably leads to coercion and exploitation" (969). Unlike pedophillia,
a homosexual act is consent between two adults, no harm to others is done and
with our bodies we are free to do whatever we please. Therefore, there is no
point to call it illegal. Moreover, discrimination against people of different
sexual orientation will be a violation of the constitution, which guarantees
common rights for everybody. Thus, despite our own preference we have neither
moral nor legal right to discriminate against them. As for disapproval of
different religions of homosexuality, everyone should have the "freedom to
go to hell as one wants", as Udo Schuklenk and Tony Riley put it quoting
Enlgelhardt (602). The last question that is important to discuss: Should
homosexuals be a protected minority? Like any other minority homosexuals deserve
the protection by any government and public institution. An absence of
protection against discrimination will result in more violence and injustice.
For a example, a gay who was beaten and harassed may not seek justice in court
because by doing so he puts himself and his loved one in the open position for
further discrimination. Most homosexuals prefer not to engage themselves in such
procedures for fear of losing more. Therefore, while heterosexuals feel free
victimize them in different ways, homosexuals can not even exercise the rights
given them by law. Some may argue that homosexuals themselves often cause
trouble. "Gay activists harass doctors, disrupt public meetings, and scream
self-righteously about their "rage""(Hamill 534). It is hard to
dismiss this point, but by denying homosexuals their rights one can not stop
violence. Only by accepting them into the society on the same terms as we accept
heterosexuals will give us a chance to stop the escalating rage from both sides.
Other opponents of homosexuality argue that granting gays and lesbians the same
protection under law that is granted to other minorities is to give them
"special privileges". But homosexuals do not ask for "special
privileges". They want the same rights as heterosexuals – the right to
have a job they want and be treated according to their skills and performance at
work, but not by the fact that they share their bedrooms with the same-sex
partners. They want to live in the house they like and be judged according to
their action, but not for who they are. They want the same benefits from their
employers and insurance companies as heterosexuals have. Finally, they want to
get married and have children, but those basic human choices cause the main
disagreement among heterosexuals. As was mentioned above, there are many
families with homosexual members. Some parents are disappointed that their child
will never be married and they will never have grandchildren, but most of those
parents still want to see their children happy and hope that they will find
somebody to love and share their life. Why should not society find it possible
to share the same maturity. Moreover, in the wake of AIDS encouraging gay
monogamy is simply rational public policy. However, according to Washington Post
poll 70 percent of Americans oppose same-sex marriage, yet only 53 percent
oppose homosexual relationship between consenting adults (Francoure 246). Some
will argue that one of the family’s function is it conceive and raise
children. But today sex is not the only way to have a child. It can be conceived
in vitro through sperm and eggs donors or by surrogate mother, and there is
always such option as adoption. In addition, the wide spread opinion that
homosexuals will raise children who also will be homosexuals has no scientific
evidence. To the contrary, some studies show that the sexuality of a child is
determined very early, perhaps at conception and it is very unlikely that
parents can have influence on his or her sexual orientation. As one can see,
there is no justification to deny homosexuals their rights. In addition, if
there is no other way we can provide gays and lesbians with those rights without
making them a privileged group this is not their fault. Since homosexuals often
are the subject of harassment, violence, mistreatment, discrimination, or
illness for no fault of their own we should chose the position which will allow
them to have the same rights as heterosexuals do. As science and technology
moves forward, we easily accept changes in the outside world, and yet we are
reluctant to leave our beliefs and prejudices behind. I hope that people are
becoming smarter not only in developing sophisticated methods, producing and
operating complex devices, but also in understanding other human beings. It is
time to abandon our ancient prejudice about homosexuality and start think
reasonably. We have to acknowledge the scientific fact that being gay is not a
decease, not a curse, not an immoral act, not a preference, but just another
type of sexuality. Gays are a permanent minority and aren’t likely to go away.
So, instead of burdening ourselves with unnecessary tension by rejecting them,
we have to adjust our apprehension, accept them for who there are and treat them
fairly. By doing so we will reduce violence, hate crime and stress. Is it not a
good reason to overcome the last of our prejudices?

Bibliography1. Francoeur, Robert T. "Should Society Recognize Gay Marriages?"
Taking sides: Clashing Views on controversial Issues. 2. Issues in Human
Sexuality. 4th Ed. Stephen Satris: The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc,
Guilford,1994:246-247. 3. Geraci, Joseph and Donald H. Mader. "Pedophillia."
Encyclopedia of Homosexuality Ed. 4. Wayne R Dynes. Garland Publishing, Inc ,
New York, 1990: v2, 964-970. 5. Hamill, Pete. "Confessions of a
Heterosexual." The Aims of Argument. A Rhetoric and Reader. 2nd Ed. Timothy
W. Crusius and Carolyn E. Chanell: Mayfield Publishing, Mountain View,
California,1998: 531-536. 6. Mohr, Richard D. "Gay Basics: Some Questions,
Facts, and Values." Taking sides: Clashing Views on controversial Issues.
Moral Issues. 4th Ed. Stephen Satris: The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc,
Guilford,1994:186-194. 7. Nickel, Jeffrey. "Everybody’s Threatened by
Homophobia." The Aims of Argument. A Rhetoric and Reader.2nd Ed. Timothy W.
Crusius and Carolyn E. Chanell: Mayfield Publishing, Mountain View, California,
1998:527-530. 8. Schuklenk,Udo and Tony Riley. "Homosexuality, Social
Attitudes Toward." Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Editor-in -Chief Ruth
Chadwick. Academic Press: San Diego, 1998: v2, 597-603. 9. Ulanowsky, Carole.
"The Family." Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Editor-in-Chief Ruth
Chadwick. Academic Press: San Diego, 1998: v2,