He told me that he was gay since he was nine years old.
I found that assertion incredible, since adolescence takes place in the teens for most people. Anything earlier than that is usually the result of unexpected trauma or sexual abuse.
He then told me that tolerance was not good enough. He demanded that everyone in this country accept him, and give him the right to marry.
I believe that marriage is a private matter, always was, always will be.
The federal government had no right to get involved in the sacrament, yet sacrament, of marriage.
If two men and two women want to label their coupling a "marriage", that is between them.
I can respect a person's individual choices: tolerance.
I do not have to like or support their choices: acceptance
I do not believe that people are born gay. The evidence from diverse sources all points to the truth that sexuality in general is a choice, in that the sexual partner (or partners) which men and women choose remains thus a choice.
Conservative columnist Dennis Prager pointed out to me that women go to prison and engage in sexual relationships with other female prisoners. When they get out of prison, they marry and have children.
I have heard many stories of men and women who lived the "gay lifestyle", then existed that behavior to get married and have children.
Even LA Weekly had a cover story called "Gay Happiness", and the conclusion, at least from one letter commentary, suggests that gay people are not all that "gay".For most men especially, the gay life is all about getting together with a strange man, sleeping with, then moving on.
Not a very fulfilling life.
Still, the young man said to me, and advocates to the rest of the political community: "You have to accept me."
I cannot accept a person based on conduct which harms his body. I do not accept anyone because they smoke, or even if they do not smoke. I cannot accept a person because of what he does or does not do, nor what he says or what he does not say.
Rights have nothing to do with us at all.
Furthermore, when someone charges that I "must" accept him or her, then it's no longer "acceptance", but tyranny.
Regarding homosexual conduct -- tolerance is acceptable. Acceptance is intolerable and impossible. Not just for me, but in the natural order of things.
The cause and consequences of homosexuality is a much needed element in this debate.
There is no credible evidence which suggests that people are born gay. It is a choice of behavior, and thus it is both cruel and disturbing to teach people that they are "born that way."Homosexual conduct damages the body, mind, and spirit of a person. Doctors, epidemiologists, and even psychological reports and historical commentaries can attest to the deviance, dysfunction, and danger inherent in the "gay lifestyle".
If a man or a woman chooses such a manner of behavior, that is his or her choice. The federal government should not be involved in managing the private choices of individual persons. One element of a free society must permit tolerance of conduct -- but not acceptance.To force private institutions, like the Boy Scouts or any spiritual community, to "accept" homosexuality as a right -- that is wrong.
I hope that the leaders of the Boy Scouts make the decision to resist lifting their ban on "homosexual conduct" in their organization. (for the record, homosexuality is not an identity -- radio commentator Tammy Bruce, an open lesbian by choice who voted for Reagan both times, attests to this truth.