Stop your whining
Re: The closet is for your clothes, sugar, Nov.6
To the Editor:
Sara Archer asks us to discard inhibitions and explore new possibilities. OK, how about we try that for just a moment and see how open- minded we can all be. I find raw hate and prejudice as repugnant as I find Sara Archer's CAMPUS COMMENT. It was a poor attempt to sow guilt. Let me respond to some of the criticisms leveled at the non-gay community appearing in The Gazette (Oct. 24 and ensuing debate).
Sara, as long as the gay community continues to try to portray itself as victimized, it will be. Worse still, however, as long as it is seen as some type of fragile egg needing protection, it will commit the same type of wrongs it accuses everyone else of doing. I find this call to awaken childish and irrational.
Homosexuals aren't the only ones who feel lonely, nor does society really care about sexual preference. Society (heterosexual society if you wish) reacts to militancy and victimization. I know of many single heterosexuals who desperately want a relationship. They suffer from loneliness in silence for the most part without all this "Woe is me I'm so oppressed!" This feeling of loneliness felt by the gay community is a human feeling, not a gay one. If gays were the least bit open-minded they would realize society's reaction to them was not based simply upon fear and ignorance!
I bet right about now, so-called "open-minded" members of the gay community must just be jumping up and down thinking "where in the @#$% does this guy get off saying stuff like that! He must be homophobic!" Names don't bother me really, because I know words like homophobia and bigot don't mean anything anymore anyway. They have become mere titles used to label people who object to homosexual opinions.
True bigots are immoral not because of their unwillingness to recognize or respect the opinions expressed by the gay community, but because they lack any moral standard when they deal with members of that community. It becomes rather tiring when vocal or militant members of the gay community over-use "homophobia packaging" fanatics with principled defenders of more traditional value systems in order to use the former to smear the latter. This promotes moral relativism (or the tolerance of anything except intolerance) as the ideal which merely serves to sedate people into passively accepting harmful anti-social values (some of which are extreme and do tear the social fibre).
It's funny to hear defenders of the gay community constantly accusing others of intolerance though, when often the gay community exhibits its own intolerance of the highest order. For example, there haven't been too many "pro-gay articles" yet in The Gazette that didn't bash Christian churches as a prime spot to find bigots. How very open-minded almost ironic! Considering the diversity existing within Christianity today, I find these anti-Christian perception almost laughable. Christian views on the issue range from the theologically generous United Church which accepts homosexuality to more vocal opponents who oppose it. The majority of churches, however, are timid and remain silent on the issue for fear of offending anyone with anything that could be construed as a righteous pronouncement. This is far from orchestrated persecution and just diverse enough that no generalization about the Christian church may be made.
I fail to understand why some make an issue about sexuality if the goal is to encourage society to not make sexuality an issue! Yet, when the issues are raised in open forums, anyone who disagrees is somehow committing sins against a lifestyle. Though your sexuality might be a sacred cow to you it does not mean it can not be touched or is without reproach.
Although gays are as worthy as anyone else of being treated with dignity, when issues like these are raised, I will stand against them in public forums on principle and disagree with their opinions, though they might be fine people. I do so neither out of fear nor ignorance, for I don't believe that the homosexual community poses a threat. I do so not because I stand against homosexuals as people, rather I stand against a value system I do not agree with and in a democratic society it is my civic obligation to uphold the principles I believe in or oppose the ones that I disagree with.
I really don't care what you do with whom but I'm not going to sympathize nor tolerate the debate when it marginalizes my opinion and forbids me from speaking simply because I disagree.
Perhaps I will be accused of being closed-minded because of my views. That would be a criticism without sting, however, because my opinions and others like them have as much a monopoly on closed-mindedness as the ones I've seen presented lately in The Gazette in defense of homosexuality.