There's Nothing Gay about Being Gay

By Alan Caruba

There are two topics I generally try to avoid discussing. Number one on the list is homosexuality. Number two is most things having to do with religion, although it is impossible to ignore it in a world where a militant Islam is causing so much conflict.

I would avoid examining gay “marriage” if I could, but the gay and lesbian community will not let me.

With seven decades of life under my belt, I have had plenty of time to learn about homosexuality, know homosexuals, and to have arrived at some conclusions about it. My basic conclusion is that homosexuality is hard-wired into an individual at birth. It is not, in my opinion, a lifestyle option one learns about and decides to choose.

Those who discover their homosexuality, early or late, know well that it positions them outside the acceptance of our society and those worldwide. As such, it is a cause of much abuse and, to varying degrees, self-hatred.

The three monotheistic religions made it clear in their sacred texts that homosexuality is a sin, but that is a matter of belief. On a strictly physiological basis, nature ordains that there are two sexes, male and female, and they exist for the propagation of the species. That’s why marriage is regarded as essential to any society.

Since homosexuals must function within our society, one might reasonably assume they would accept society’s need to maintain marriage as between a man and a woman, but among militant homosexuals, there has been a growing movement to require a redefinition of this ancient model.

This brings us to the decision by a federal judge to overturn California’s Proposition 8, calling for a state constitutional ban on gay marriage. Proposition 8 was approved by voters by a margin of 52 percent in favor versus 48 percent who opposed it. The majority of U.S. States have laws recognizing marriage as between members of the opposite sex.

What makes Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker’s decision questionable, beyond issues of the law, is a factor noted in a Washington Times article that reported “The Los Angeles Times and San Francisco Chronicle have both reported that Judge Walker’s sexuality, though he is not ‘out’, is an open secret in California gay and legal circles.” As such, he should have recused himself from the case.

Our judicial system has been poisoned by activist judges.

The campaign for Proposition 8 raised $39.9 million for it and against it $43.3 million. It became the highest-funded campaign on any state ballot, surpassing every campaign in the nation in spending except for the presidential contest.

I have not known that many happy homosexuals. I have known those who have made their personal peace with the fact that they exist in an area outside general public approval.

Putting aside the link between homosexuality and AIDS, such studies as have been undertaken have generally concluded that being homosexual increases one’s potential for a variety of bad lifestyle choices.

The debate about gay marriage is not about civil rights and certainly not about the equal rights amendment which was passed following the Civil War to ensure that newly enfranchised black citizens received formerly denied protections. The 13th Amendment, ratified on December 6, 1865 bans slavery. The 14th Amendment was ratified on July 9, 1868. Neither applies to homosexuality.

I began by saying that the gay and lesbian community will not let me ignore the issue of gay marriage. This holds true as well for the majority of the population which is overwhelmingly heterosexual and must contend with the issue.

It seems to me that the issue does little other than to inflame the fears and prejudices of the majority for no good purpose.

How and why the term “gay” came to be applied to homosexuals I do not know. I do know that its former meaning, one of happiness, does not apply to the way many homosexuals feel about themselves, nor the way the more militant among them continue to test and abuse the tolerance of the greater heterosexual society in which they live.

© Alan Caruba, 2010

Marriage, California Style

By Alan Caruba

Oh, those wacky California judges!

In the same way you cannot abrogate gravity or the law of thermodynamics, you cannot totally ignore the central core of all societies, the role of marriage and family.

This not a screed about homosexuality. I am not a child. I know that some people are born wired to be sexually attracted to their own, not the opposite sex. I have known many homosexuals in my life and most of them have not appeared to be that happy with the hand they were dealt.

I even was pleased when various laws were changed to remove the onus of criminality from something over which homosexuals have no choice except to hope they will find a measure of acceptance among their family and friends.

I do not, however, believe that the law should sanction gay marriage. Domestic unions that extend equal protection, yes, but marriage, no.

Marriage, for the sake of society, must be between a man and a woman. It is about procreation. It is about the maintenance of family and that means the care of children.

Lesbians, of course, can have children. They can raise children, but they do so without a male figure in the household; something called a father. California judges may argue that there are many single mothers raising children, but that child has a father somewhere that society and the law says has an obligation to provide support.

Little girls need fathers. Little boys need fathers. Providing them with two mothers or two fathers dilutes the necessity of the fundamental family unit, one mother and one father.

I am told that polls show that some sixty percent or more Californians oppose gay marriage, but when courts feel free to ignore public opinion, particularly when it is rooted in history that goes back beyond even early civilizations, you end up with bad decisions.

I do not know, nor care, what legal justification the California court found for extending the right of marriage to homosexuals, but there is simply no justification. That truth is based on millennia in which the bond between a man and woman has been sanctified by nature, religion, law, practice, and common sense.

It is the reason the traditional marriage ceremony has always begun with the question, “Do you take this woman?” and “Do you take this man?”

Legalizing marriage between homosexuals is just one step away from legalizing polygamy and other practices that undermine society. It discredits marriage still further in a society that already has a divorce rate somewhere in the area of fifty percent. It weakens an already weak society that is filled with children deprived of the security of parents, a mother and father, whose mutual focus is their welfare and their future.

Ordinary people understand this. Why can’t the courts of California?