From: karl@ddsw1.mcs.com (Karl Denninger)
Subject: Re: BofA and UW can now support discrimination against blacks and Jews
Summary: Evil, homosexuality, and other people passing judgement
Organization: Macro Computer Solutions, Inc., Chicago, IL
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 05:29:56 GMT

In article <Bu8tt2.91D@ddsw1.mcs.com> arf@ddsw1.mcs.com (Jack Schmidling) writes:
>philipla@microsoft.com (Phil Lafornara) writes:
>:     Here's a question for you:  Why is it that homophobia is now
>: the only acceptable form of discrimination in the U.S.?
> 
>For the simple reason that it is considered evil by the majority of
>the population.  However, there are many such forms of discrimination
>that are considered acceptable in the US.
>
>For example, discrimination against child abusers, rapists, murderers..
>the list is endless.  What is unique is that this is the only form of
>"evil" in the US that is considered acceptable by enough American to
>be a powerful enough political block to be able to force itself on the
>majority.

I just can't let this one pass without comment.

There is a big difference Jack between a child abuser, a rapist, a murderer,
and a homosexual person.  

That difference is harm to non-consenting persons.

By your standards "the people" should be able to discriminate against people
who aren't Jewish, or Christian, or Islamic, on exactly the same grounds.
Religion, in fact, >is< a choice -- and a conscious one at that.  Why is
that not fair game as well?  In fact, some would argue that it is.

I disagree.  

Homosexual behavior is a lifestyle choice.  >Homosexuality< may not be.  The
facts aren't absolutely known, but it >is< known that those who have
homosexual tendencies tend to have them for life -- whether they express
them or not and regardless of any "therapy" which may be attempted.

If someone is gay, how does that affect you?  Are you forced to be their 
partner?  Of course not!  Those who choose to engage in these behaviors 
do so of their own free will, and harm no one else.  In fact, it can be 
argued that they don't even harm themselves (leave aside AIDS; those who 
bring this one up will be hit with the fact that Lesbian transmission of
HIV is less likely than heterosexual transmission).  The fact is that if 
you and I were to meet you would have >absolutely no idea< of my sexual 
orientation unless I brought along my partner or made reference to him 
or her.  How does this possibly affect you?

Where do you, or anyone else, get off declaring a consensual activity, with
no outside participants being harmed, as "evil"?  Who appointed you God?

This country started out as a nation of people who tolerated the differences
in others -- even if those differences weren't condoned.  Most of our
forefathers came here >precisely< because their differences weren't
tolerated in their homeland.  No one is asking people to condone, or engage 
in, these lifestyles.  All people ask is tolerance -- a reasonable request 
in my viewpoint.

Those of you who justify your position by claiming to be "in the majority" 
should be extra-careful; the majority is a shifting thing, and you could 
easily find yourself on the wrong side of that argument in a hurry.  It is
for this reason that we should all practice tolerance of those choices 
which others make that do not harm us personally in a tangible manner -- 
it is in our own self-interest.

It is through tolerance which we find unity as a race -- the human race.  
It is through this unity that we may grow stronger and better able to 
address those concerns that really >do< impact our daily lives.

--
Karl Denninger (karl@ddsw1.MCS.COM, <well-connected>!ddsw1!karl)
Data Line: [+1 312 248-0900] Anon. arch. (nuucp) 00:00-06:00 C[SD]T
Request file: /u/public/sources/DIRECTORY/README for instructions