More Than Equality: Responding to the LGBT tactics

In many Christian conservative circles where homosexuality is frowned upon there is a common belief in the existence of the infamous 'Gay Agenda': an agenda to make the world gay affirming! It sounds like a great plot for a James Bond spoof film doesn't it; but is it true? The answer is yes and no. The fact is there is a very large majority of gay people who are just trying to get through life with their dignity in tact and with at least a little happiness; they have no intentions to making the world gay, straight or affirming any other sort of sexual orientation. However politics is important. One thing a friend reminded me about (something I never had any disagreement with) is that the ideology of: shaming gays for proposing that homosexual behaviour is wrong or homosexuality is a sexual perversion, is from the extreme political-left; groups like GLAAD (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) and GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network). How is this political angle important? It is the popular lobbyist groups that change the views of the masses; so more and more average persons - gay and straight - are believing and being staunch advocates for these extreme politically-left views. Not everyone - gay or straight - believes in the extreme leftist nonsense regarding 'gay rights' but they are increasingly becoming popular views among common folk.

Making sense of nonsense:

Lets briefly analyze four examples of ideals that are held and promoted by many extreme political leftists:

• Say anything bad about the LGBT community is to shame them. 
• To argue that homosexuality is perverted or gay people are obsessed with sex or to simply argue that 'gay is *not* good' is parallel to saying that the gay man or woman is ontologically perverted, sexually driven and thus *not* good. 
• There has to be a distinction made at this point: there is saying something bad about 'the person' and speaking ill of the sexual orientation and its associated behaviour. The former would be an ad hominem attack whereas the latter is a proclamation about a situation and an action. The situation is a sexual attraction towards members of the same sex and the action is responding in kind to that attraction. There are good people in this world and there are people who are not very good, lets call them bad for distinction purposes. A good person can be in a bad situation and decide to make bad choices, but that doesn't make them a bad person. To say something bad about the LGBT community as people is wrong and it should never be done; but again there is a distinction between characterizing someone based on their behaviour and or worldview and attacking their character: Adolf Hitler was a bad person, Mother Teresa is a good person. Just as there are nasty people who are straight and good people who are straight there are gay people who are just not nice and others who are very personable; the niceness or meanness of someone has nothing to do with their sexual orientation. However to say something good or bad about a community in terms of its ideals should be done based on the ideals.  
• To hold the LGBT to the same standards that everyone else is subject to is shaming them. 
• A common criticism made by many conservative Christians is the idea of the LGBT community doesn't want equal-rights, they want uber-rights. What would normally be applicable to 95% of the population the LGBT community should be exempt - this is obvious in a Gay Pride Parade.  
• 99% of people in the LGBT community are level headed, law abiding citizens; and I'm pretty sure that there are many pro-gay people who are against the debautry that goes on in the Gay Pride Parade and the 'gay scene' all together. However as pointed out my previous article (located here) there seems to be a view that all acceptable behaviours are void in the name of gay pride, during the Gay Pride Parade such as walking fully naked past a crowd filled with spectators of all ages, including children. Why should the LGBT community get a pass on illegal activity, such as flashing their genitals in the name of the alleged goodness of the homosexual orientation?
• To merely suggest that the homosexual orientation is something to be discouraged is shaming them. 
• To argue that homosexuality is ill-advised and thus should be discouraged has been interpreted to suggest that the gay man or woman should be discouraged in being themselves. 
• There are situations and actions that are wrong and they are thus to be discouraged. Homosexuality is one such example. This is a criticism of the homosexual orientation, not on the person who is gay. 
• Legal recognition of marriage is not enough - everyone has to personally accept them - as homosexuals - in mind and heart.
• Much of the LGBT community is not just interested in having the same legal recognition as heterosexuals do regarding marriage - they want homosexuality to be praised as good; and unless all hearts are praising it as good, the mere tolerant heart is blamed to be a bigoted heart. 
• In a perfect world everyone would accept everyone; even though pro-racism is functionally obsolete on the political arena there are many individuals who merely tolerate people of different ethnicities but personally disassociate themselves from them based on race. Women and men are equal in society today - yet there are plenty of people who are sexist. In sum to desire a perfect world is to live in a world of fantasy. In the same way the LGBT community should revel in their victory in establishing a legal recognition of gay marriage and just ignore persons who they believe are bigots - people who merely socially tolerate them but keep their distance from them based on their sexual orientation.

Responding to the Gay Pride Parade: 

There was a time when gay bars were routinely raided, and often it was done without pushback.  However in 1969 in Greenwich Village, New York at the the Stonewall Inn "...things were different. The clientele fought back, and soon the police were dealing with with a full-blown riot."[i] As the night of arrests progressed a crowd of 150 gay people gathered outside the Stonewall Inn.[ii] By now the media was involved and "...intrigued by the fact that it was homosexuals ... who were fighting back..."[iii] And "less than 24 hours after the initial raid, several thousand people had gathered in the Village proclaiming "Gay Power," "We Want Freedom Now," and "Equality for Homosexuals."[iv]

Given the oppression the LGBT community has had in the past the Gay Pride Parade (GPP) is understandable - but given its pornographic style it is unacceptable. In this light the GPP is more than a good time for the LGBT subculture but it is a time for remembrance of their oppression and a celebration of sorts for how far they have come. Just like how religious people have the right to celebrate their religious holidays the LGBT community has the right to celebrate a significant or memorable time for their people. I agree with the former Canadian Prime Minister, Perrier Trudeau when he stated: "There's no place for the state in the bedrooms of the nation."[v] However consensual adult sexuality in all its forms is private; as such there's no place for the bedroom in the public streets of the nation, and this applies to the LGBT community as well. So if the LGBT community wishes to celebrate gay-pride let them do it appropriately. Their celebration should *not* be done in a sexual way. I remember doing a project for school where I had to do a study on sadomasochism - there were two types of websites dedicated to this perversion: A) pornographic and B) educational. The LGBT community should celebrate their gay-pride educationally, not pornographically; and be willing to deal with objections to their celebration intellectually not emotionally.
___________________

[i] - Michael Brown, A Queer Thing Happened to America: And What a Long, Strange Trip It's Been. (New York: Equal Time Books, 2011), 15.
[ii] - Ibid., 16.
[iii] - Ibid., 18.
[iv] - Ibid., 18.
[v] - http://www.cbc.ca/archives/categories/politics/rights-freedoms/trudeaus-omnibus-bill-challenging-canadian-taboos/theres-no-place-for-the-state-in-the-bedrooms-of-the-nation.html - Accessed March 24, 2014