Sunday, June 14, 2009

More for the Rest of Us

I've been sitting on this completed post for a couple of months (hence the outdated source article), debating about whether or not to run it. I think I've finally edited it enough to strike a fair balance between opinion, offensiveness, and entertainment.

Vermont's legislature has voted to veto the Governor's veto of a gay marriage ban.

Aside from my personal belief that homosexuality is an unnatural and undesirable trait of any society that seeks longevity, I don't really have a problem with the practice so long as people keep it to themselves. What someone does on their own time and in their own home is none of my business. Just don't bring it into the workplace or public places. I don't put bumper stickers on my car or attend rallies promoting heterosexuality. We don't hold non-gay pride parades, complete with major corporate sponsors who are eager to demonstrate how diverse they are by donating to our cause. I've never heard of such things. The gay community has long sought to make this a 'civil rights' issue, but it is not. The issue is one of legitimacy and self-acceptance. "Oh wilikers Jiminy, if only we can gain [insert some new special privilege here] then we'll finally be real boys."

I'm not saying there aren't people that discriminate upon learning someone is gay. That is always going to exist somewhere, just like there is still bigotry towards race, religion, social class or one's apparent level of education. Gay people are not being denied health insurance because they are gay. Nor are they denied marriage because they are gay. Gays are being held to the same rule of law that governs the other 96% of the population (actual percentage is probably even higher since the 'registered voters' cited obviously does not include children), except in a few jurisdictions that have recently granted special rights to that 'select' group of people. 

[It sure seems like I've blogged about this before, but for the life of me I cannot find that post.]

That said, I think some of us get a bit too worked up about the issue. For one thing, homosexuality is not hereditary and by the natural laws of reproduction, cannot be passed to an heir. There simply aren't any heirs from homosexual couplings. Homosexual people essentially remove themselves from the gene pool, ensuring their eventual demise. The issue will resolve itself through one individual generation at a time. The only way to perpetuate the practice is to recruit heavily from outside the ranks. [This is now sounding very familiar. I wish I could find that old post.]

The second reason is, and this is for my unmarried male readers out there, the more gay people there are, the better your odds in the world of dating. As the number of gay people goes up, the male/female ratio improves in your favor. Which is why whenever the subject comes up, I say, "Big deal. That's more [women] for the rest of us." 'Us' meaning unattached heterosexual males. I'm attached.

No comments: