Someone has commented on my blog entry about the Born Different website. I was originally just going to respond in the comments, but then I figured that there was enough in it for me to post a new blog entry for the response. Here’s the comment:
- process6132 Says:
July 7th, 2006 at 9:06 amÂIt seems ignorant to compare behavior that maliciously injures other people with innoculous behavior between 2 consenting adults. I think the point of the website is that if people are born gay is it right to discriminate against them. How is that different from discriminating against people for any other genetic factor. Just because some people don’t like the idea of same sex couples doesn’t make it OK to relegate them to second class citizens.
1) “It seems ignorant…” This is a catchphrase used to silence debate before it begins. “You disagree with me? Oh, well, that seems ignorant….” These are code words used by the PC world to not have to deal with the substance of an issue.
2) “It seems ignorant to compare behavior that maliciously injures other people with innoculous behavior between 2 consenting adults.” I would argue that homosexual behavior is hardly “innoculous behavior” although it is (generally) consensual behavior. But your sentence demonstrates you have missed the entire point of my original blog post. The point is that the morality of an issue is not dependent upon whether a person is “born that way.” The sociopath proves this point. He does not get a free pass on his behavior simply because he is “born that way.” Thus, my argument is not comparing homosexuals to sociopaths; it is demonstrating that morality is independent of the aspects of a person’s birth.
3) “I think the point of the website is that if people are born gay is it right to discriminate against them.” These are more code words from the PC community. Where have I advocated anything remotely near “discrimination” against homosexuals? For that matter, how do you define “discrimination”? if discrimination = disagreement (the typical PC response) then of course I discriminate, but that’s a complete bastardization of the term. On the other hand, if discriminate = making a decision regarding something, then everyone discriminates all the time. I discriminate against McDonalds when I decide to eat at Subway. I discriminate against Jane when I ask out Jill. Not all discrimination is a bad thing–in fact, it is necessary when making any decision.
4) “How is that different from discriminating against people for any other genetic factor.” Again, the term “discrimination” is not defined. We’re supposed to assume the worst. But I have not advocated anything like the PC “discrimination” that homosexuals assume simply because I disagree with them on a moral issue.
In point of fact, my “discrimination” against homosexuals (i.e. I think homosexuality is immoral) is not based on how the homosexual was born whatsoever. It’s based on the fact that homosexual behavior is immoral. My “discrimination” is on the behavior, not the person. Just as I don’t discriminate against people who have “anti-social tendancies” and yet I condemn them when they murder someone else, I don’t discriminate against those who are attracted to members of the same sex but I do say that they are immoral for actually engaging in the sexual relations.
But let us turn the tables for a bit. Is it not discriminatory for you to judge my morality on this issue? Discrimination is a two-way street here. If I disagree with you and that automatically makes me “discriminate” against you, then your disagreement with me makes you automatically “discriminate” against me too.
5) “because some people don’t like the idea of same sex couples doesn’t make it OK to relegate them to second class citizens.” Again, I’ve never stated that homosexuals are “second class citizens.” They are immoral–but so is everyone else. I don’t view liars as second class citizens, I don’t view adulterers as second class citizens, I don’t even view murderers as second class citizens. I view them all as human beings who have committed evil acts. Just because “everyone does it” doesn’t make it suddenly moral to do evil. And pointing out that an action is evil does not equate to a judgement that said person does not deserve the same human rights as everyone else.
