From: doug@crevasse.ATMOS.ColoState.Edu (Doug Cripe)
Subject: Re: Can Colorado discriminate against straights?
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 19:50:24 GMT
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523

In article <1992Nov7.190409.11354@tc.cornell.edu>  writes:
> In article <Nov06.204504.74727@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> writes:  
> >Homosexuals DO have equal rights under the law.  Or aren't ordinary  
> >laws good enough for them?
> 
> Apparently not, since we can be fired from our jobs for no
> reason other than sexual orientation.

On the other hand, with protected status, it would be next to impossible  
to fire an incomptetent homosexual.  Yelling "discrimination" would  
silence anything the employer had to say.  Moreover, an employer should  
have control over whom he or she hires.  If homosexuality runs contrary to  
an employers philosophy of life and beliefs, the employer should not be  
constrained to have to hire a person of that persuasion.  Unlike race,  
sex, or physical limitations, which have nothing to do with a person's  
beliefs or philosophy, homosexuality represents something that the  
majority of Americans disagree with.  I for one would not want an avowed,   
practicing homosexual teaching my children in elementary school, and I  
know I'm by far not the only one to feel this way.

>We can't serve in the military.  

General Collin Powell said in a recent interview with Barbara Walters that  
he is opposed to allowing gays to serve in the military because when a  
soldier is on the battlefield, he is not willing to lay down his life for  
country, God, or apple pie, but for the other guys in his platoon.   
Homosexuality destroys that cohesiveness, and instead causes divisiveness  
and suspicion.  Moreover gays have served their country well in the  
military and have done so without making an issue of their orientation.   
The problem is you want government sanction of your lifestyle, and the  
majority of Americans won't stand for that.

>We can't marry our partners. 

Do you think it is sheer coincidence that no civilized nation on this  
planet includes homosexuality in the definition of marriage?  Marriage,  
from time immemorial, has always been defined as the joining of a man and  
a woman, forming the basic family unit.  Perhaps some other, legally  
recognized union could be established for homosexual "couples", but that  
should never supplant, or be on the same level as, marriage.  Besides,  
what do we do with the man who wants to "marry" his sheep?  Or the mormon  
who wants 7 wives?  Or the man who wants to "marry" a nine year-old boy?   
After all, these are merely sexual orientations...

>We aren't covered by inheritance laws.  

Of course not.  Inheritance again is defined in terms of family bloodlines  
the world over.  I can just imagine the chaos that would ensue when Bill,  
who was Bob's lover for 3 months, not to mention Bob's 100 other lovers,  
starts trying to make inheritance claims after Bob passes on. 

>We don't get visitation rights when our partners are hospitalized.

Here, I'll agree with you that this isn't right, although I can't imagine  
under what circumstances this would happen.

>We can't adopt children.  

Nor should this ever come about, in light of the fact that study after  
study after study has shown that children need parents of BOTH genders to  
grow up well-adjusted.  Besides, since when is adopting children a "civil  
right?"  Many heterosexual couples are unable to exercise this "right."

>We can be thrown out of our housing. 

Well, so can I!  The landlord owns the house and, just as with an  
employer, we have to play by the rules of the game as they define it, or  
look elsewhere if we don't like it.  Besides, there are laws against  
breaking housing contracts if it's drawn up legally.

>We can be denied security clearances.

So can I.  See above about the rules of the game.

>It appears, in fact, that ordinary laws are not enough to protect our  
>civil rights.

The problem is you want to redifine those laws, impose your lifestyle on  
everyone else and ask for the government's benediction.

> 
> >A right to do what?  The Supreme Court has ruled that sodomy is NOT a  
> >"right" somehow protected by the constitution.  
> 
> See above.  We aren't talking about sodomy.  We're not even
> talking about sexual practices.  Celibate and virginal gay
> and lesbian people are subject to the same persecution as
> sexually active ones.  The question is one of identity.
> Colorado has just distinguished itself by passing a law
> saying that it's okay to discriminate against people
> based on *who they are*, without regard for what they've
> actually done.

Colorado has distinguished itself by just saying no to giving homosexuals  
protected status. Again, what goes on in your bedroom is none of my  
business.  And I would never know if you didn't make an issue of it.  It  
becomes my business, however, when as an employer I see you presenting  
yourself or behaving in a way that is not consistent with the values of my  
establishment.  It becomes my business when I see the militant gay  
political agenda and their push for quotas, "marriage" recognition, trying  
to change adoption policies, etc.  It becomes my business when I see  
"gay-pride" parades and all lewd simultated sexual acts that go along with  
it in public or on TV.  It becomes my business when, because of homosexual  
practices, the nation's blood supply becomes contaminated with the HIV  
virus, etc., etc.

> 
> And what is it with straight boys and sodomy, anyway?  Why
> do they obsess about it so?  And why do they consider it
> a "homosexual" practice, when straight couples do it all the
> time? 

What is it??? If you don't find inserting your penis where excrement comes  
from disgusting, then I doubt you are capable of finding anything  
repulsive.  Moral  questions and health aside, even a cursory exam of  
human anatomy shows the "plumbing" is such that a man was meant for a  
woman. The anus, if you hadn't noticed, has a specific function and when  
it is abused you see the result of how quickly diseases are spread.  And  
how would you know what straight couples do?  I doubt they "do it all the  
time."  I even doubt the majority of them do it some of the time.  None of  
my married friends (at least the ones who are frank enough to talk about  
their sexual practices) admit to doing it. 

> 
> >The homosexual community claims (rightly so) that what goes on in their  
> >bedrooms is nobody's business.  Then why can't they shut up about it?   
> 
> Because we're being persecuted for it.  If people like you
> would let us simply live our lives, believe me, we would.

Well everyone's persecuted to a certain extent and I'm sorry for the  
persecution you feel.  There are existing laws that guarantee your rights  
to live a free citizens of the U.S., and punishment for those who would  
deny you those rights.  Those rights are the same ones I live under.  And  
I doubt that I am responsibile for your unhappiness, or that I'm really  
even capable of keeping you from living the life you choose.  I have no  
problem working with homosexuals as long as they keep their affairs to  
themselves (as I will mine).  But do not expect me to just roll over and  
accept the homosexual community's attempt to redefine laws or seek  
protected status.
> --
>            Hate is not a family value.

Who said it was?  Honesty sure is not an EPOC value.

>Boycott Colorado

If you feel that will threaten us, think again.  Our morals and values are  
not up for sale.
> 
>        Melinda Shore - Cornell Theory Center - shore@tc.cornell.edu

Douglas Cripe - Atmospheric Science - Colorado State University
Newsgroups: alt.politics.homosexuality,soc.motss