From: leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Leonard Erickson)
Subject: Re: new initiative
Reply-To: Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 05:12:32 GMT

downsj@atlantis.CS.ORST.EDU (jason downs) writes:

>In article <C109Ky.G8x@agora.rain.com>,
>	rickc@agora.rain.com (Rick Coates) writes:
>>Well, you got your answer.  It *doesn't* matter, because there aren't
>>enough of them.  Look out, you folks with rare blood types.  Since you
>>are a _small_ number compared to those of us with "normal" blood, it
>>doesn't matter if you die.
>>
>>If I could do something to help *one* teen not kill themselves, regardless
>>of *any* other factors, I would.

>the point that you so eloquently missed was that fact the mentioned teens
>are a part of a larger group of people. they should be handled by existing
>"suicide prevention" counselors. if some teenager is suicidal, for 
>whatever reason, it's up to other people (family, teachers, etc.) to
>notice this, and tell the teen where to find help.

>it isn't up to schools to tell everyone that homosexuality is OK, and
>you shouldn't kill yourself just because you feel that way, since that's
>promoting that particular life style... just like, for instance, if all
>the liberals decided that public schools should say that the Christian
>religion is OK when compared to, say, Islam.

The problem is that they are being told that homosexuality is *wronr*, 
that it is *sick*, etc. And given this, they are *afraid* to ask for
help. Heck, the main reason that they commit suicide is *because* that
feel that they *can't* talk to anyone, and all around them, society is
saying "people like you are [nasty|evil|perverted]". Heck some of them
commit suicide because they are *afraid* that they *might* be gay. 

What they need more than anything else someone to tell them that
their feelings are *normal* for adolescents, and may just be a 
stage. And that even if they *are* homosexual, that it is *ok* to be
that way.

Your religion analogy has a problem in that it *assumes* that sexual
orientation is a choice. There's evidence that for at least *some* 
people it isn't. And before objecting to that, I suggest that you
stop and consider. Because if you say it *is* a choice, then you have
to tell me when *you* "decided" to be heterosexual. Because if it *is* a 
choice, then you made it! And it follows that *you* could change your
mind and be sexually attracted to men. If you *can't* then you have
no basis for claiming that anybody *else can change *their* mind.

But ignoring all that, what can *possibly* be wrong with saying that
it is ok to be a member of an unpopular religion as long as that is
not combined with trying to claim that any specific religion is better.

Let's try *race*. A lot of black kids have it harder than white kids
because blacks are looked down on. Would you try to claim that it was
wrong to teach that blacks are just as good as anybody else? That they
are not stupid, or more inclined to be rapists than anybody else. 
If that's ok, why isn't it ok to teach that homosexuals differ from
other people *only* in their being attracted to members of their
own gender rather than members of the opposite gender. That they
aren't any more likely to rape than heterosexuals. 

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)
Newsgroups: or.politics