Friday, January 15, 2016

Unabashed bigotry on display

Others are wed to the belief that they have the right of approval as a precondition of our participation in society. They most certainly do not”.

Austin Ruse is a fervent Defender of the Faith. He also promotes some rather strange notions about gay people and he runs an anti-gay hate group, C-Fam. Today Ruse writes “They Are Not Everywhere, They Are Not Like Us” at Crisis Magazine, an orthodox Catholic outlet. It is an attack, a diatribe, an effort to denigrate gay citizens. Exactly why Mr. Ruse indulges in these displays of abject homophobia is not hard to understand. I'll get to that later. Mr. Ruse promotes hate. My friend, Jeremy Hooper believes that we should not use the word “bigot.” Sometimes it seems impossible not to.

The gist of Ruse's piece is that there are not that many gay people and we should be defined by anal sex which he finds disgusting.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, a measly 1.8 percent of adult men and 1.4 percent of adult women identify as homosexual. This translates into a tiny 2.1 million men and 1.7 million women. This is less than half the number of Methodists in the United States.

Because they are “everywhere,” a concomitant argument they make is that attitudes have changed because of the personal interaction people have with them.
Two points:
  1. I do not know how representative the CDC sample was. That is less important than the fact that the number of gay and bisexual men and women is irrelevant. Were there just 100, or even 10, they would be entitled to Equal Protection and Due Process. Were there just 100, or even 10, they should be free of discrimination in public accommodations, employment and housing.
  2. We do have an out-sized impact for a very simple reason. Unlike race and religion families are not homogeneous when it comes to sexual orientation. Four Jews or Catholics might represent one family. However four gay people might be representatives of four families. I would estimate that about 40% of heterosexual Americans have a close family member who is LGBT.
Later on:
Are they like the rest of us? Certainly. They are children of God, made in his image and likeness, and deserving of their human dignity. But, in the choices they make, in their attractions and in their behavior, and in the results of both, they are profoundly different.
Ruse is very intelligent. Yet he is convinced that sexual orientation is a choice which is necessary in order for the world to cooperate with Catholic teachings. “The children of God” stuff nauseates me. It always seems to precede “but they are perverts.” In that regard, Ruse does not disappoint.
Accepting homosexual marriage is tacit acceptance and even moral approval that anal sex is not only acceptable but that it is comparable to sexual intercourse.

I will not discuss what goes into this contemptible act which is widely and almost exclusively practiced by homosexuals and porn stars. Studies show that even homosexuals with the HIV virus still widely use this vile practice.
[…]
And what are the results of this practice? Disease and death. The anus was not made for this. It was not made for penetration. The anus has thin skin that is easily broken and is therefore an easy conduit not just for HIV but for many other diseases. Yet, homosexuals want us to believe that this practice is exactly the same as intercourse.
Worldwide, AIDS is a heterosexual disease. Unprotected sex of any kind by anyone is risky behavior. Period.

Ruse's final sentence is telling. He seems to think that we require his approval of our sex lives. As I stated above, we are constitutionally entitled to Equal Protection and Due Process. We should be free of discrimination in employment, public accommodations and housing. Sadly we are not.

The argument that Ruse is really making is quite sinister. In the final analysis he is saying that we should not be afforded non-discrimination protections and other benefits because we engage in a sex act that he disapproves of. He wants others to disapprove of the act and, thus, disapprove of us.

Ruse's concern is how non-discrimination protections affect Catholic institutions which is the purpose behind all of this. We can debate those issues and have a meaningful discussion. Calling us perverts is not only unproductive but counter-productive for it informs us why we need such protections in the first place; Others are wed to the belief that they have the right of approval as a precondition of our participation in society. They most certainly do not.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.