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.
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 a 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?
Francoeur, Robert T. “Should Society Recognize Gay Marriages?” Taking sides: Clashing
Views on controversial Issues. Issues in Human Sexuality. 4th Ed. Stephen Satris: The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc, Guilford,1994:246-247.
Geraci, Joseph and DonaldH. Mader. “Pedophillia.” Encyclopedia of Homosexuality
Ed. Wayne R Dynes. Garland Publishing, Inc , New York, 1990: v2, 964-970.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Ulanowsky, Carole. “The Family.” Encyclopedia of Applied Ethics. Editor-in-Chief
Ruth Chadwick. Academic Press: San Diego, 1998: v2,
