The real issue is, do you believe that everyone is either 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual, with no area in between?
We'll assume for the sake of argument that homosexuality is not a chosen tendency, but is something hot wired into homosexual individuals due to genetics, hormonal inbalance, or whatever. If that's the case, we would expect varying degrees of this defect (and it is a defect) from one afflicted person to the next. Just as there are people who are only mildly mentally retarded, or are born with a minor defect in their knee, there will logically be people with only mild homosexual tendencies, or tendencies balanced midway between hardcore heterosexuality and hardcore homosexuality.
Hardcore homosexuals will be homosexual no matter what society thinks about such behavior, though they'll be more discrete in a traditional society and not show up at the St. Patrick's Day Parade with "gay" banners to be waved in front of all the Christian families.
But what about people whose homosexual tendencies are only mild? Will they not be more likely to act on those tendencies if they have social and legal ratification? Will they not have lost the social structures which would allow them to more easily resist a mild temptation if we elevate homosexuality to iconic status?
What about teens with raging hormones and the usual confusions that accompany those years? Should we use them as guinea pigs to find out how many might be lured into homosexuality by celebrating it in our culture?
Homosexuals themselves know that their behavior is unnatural. Historically, homosexuals simply have accepted that their tendencies are abnormal. They discretely seek out "partners" and leave everyone else mostly alone in such a society.
But things change when society ratifies the homosexual lifestyle. Nothing anywhere in the natural world would indicate that homosexuality is normal. So this creates a problem for uncloseted homosexuals. Once they're told that their behavior is normal, and even good, they feel compelled to eradicate every suggestion that it isn't. It's the "Emperor's New Clothes" syndrome. They need constant reinforcement of the belief that their behavior is good and natural, or they'll remember that it isn't. Every dissenting voice must be stifled. Every institution must be altered to accommodate homosexuality.
This is why we get such obvious nonsense as the demand from California's gay caucus that textbooks highlight homosexual inventors or composers, or whatever. As if anyone ever thinks of themselves as a heterosexual inventor. Was Einstein a heterosexual physicist?
Uncloseted homosexuality results in a significant loss of liberty and popular sovereignty. It unleashes government forces far in excess of the mild social strictures that kept homosexuality in the closet until recent years. Such forces are necessary to push the 95% or more of the popuation who aren't homosexual into the closet that the homosexuals have vacated. And so we get the Boy Scouts tossed out of public parks and speech codes regulating our public discourse.
No. There are many variations including bisexuals, transsexuals, hermaphrodites, etc. I would imagine that bisexuals would be the midpoint of the condition. Within all of that, I'm sure there are degrees also.
But what about people whose homosexual tendencies are only mild? Will they not be more likely to act on those tendencies if they have social and legal ratification?
The question is, do they have that right? From a legal standpoint, the answer is much clearer than from a social standpoint. As long as they are universally condemned by fundamentalists, the social aspect will remain in question.
What about teens with raging hormones and the usual confusions that accompany those years? Should we use them as guinea pigs to find out how many might be lured into homosexuality by celebrating it in our culture?
When I see something other than anecdotal evidence, I will be better prepared to decide how I feel about it. I simply don't believe that anyone not already so predisposed is suddenly going to choose a life of homosexuality and scorn, young or not.
Homosexuals themselves know that their behavior is unnatural. Historically, homosexuals simply have accepted that their tendencies are abnormal. They discretely seek out "partners" and leave everyone else mostly alone in such a society.
I don't know that to be true. They have previously remained discreet because of laws and social scorn, not necessarily because of any self-judgment about the normality or abnormality of their sexual preferences.
Nothing anywhere in the natural world would indicate that homosexuality is normal.
Two points. As for normal, of course if there's only 5%, then 95% would be the norm, and 5% would be outside of the norm. Quadriplegics fall into that category too. Studies have shown that animals (other than humans) can display homosexual tendencies.
They need constant reinforcement of the belief that their behavior is good and natural, or they'll remember that it isn't.
Again, you are painting a picture perhaps larger than reality here. I've seen no evidence yet suggesting that their legal status and some degree of social acceptance will increase their numbers. Most of the hard corps anti-gay folks are fundamentalist Christians, who truly believe that first of all it's simply a choice, and second should under no circumstances be tolerated.
This is why we get such obvious nonsense as the demand from California's gay caucus that textbooks highlight homosexual inventors or composers, or whatever.
I don't disagree. I have serious problems with that also, especially in lower grade schools. Nor do I accept gay marriage, as I not only believe it should be between one man and one woman, and it opens it up to other variations. In any case, I also believe it is a state issue, and if the people of Massachusetts feel strongly enough about it, they will do something about it within their constitution. I'm confident that the USSC will not uphold any ruling that requires a state to legalize gay marriage.
Uncloseted homosexuality results in a significant loss of liberty and popular sovereignty. It unleashes government forces far in excess of the mild social strictures that kept homosexuality in the closet until recent years.
That same argument was used after abolition in the South. The point is that if two gays or lesbians want to engage in whatever activity floats their boat, then they have the right to privacy to do just that. As for visibility, if it is not illegal to be homosexual, then it can hardly be illegal for them to be visible, whether either of us like it or not.
"The real issue is, do you believe that everyone is either 100% heterosexual or 100% homosexual, with no area in between?"
It's not really an issue because it doesn't exist. I believe there are different types of homosexual, with different levels/balances of attraction to the same or opposite sex - those who have a curious sexual attraction to individuals of the same sex to those who are 100% only atracted to the same sex.
"But what about people whose homosexual tendencies are only mild? Will they not be more likely to act on those tendencies if they have social and legal ratification?"
In a proportion of cases, it's more likely that individuals with any homosexual tendencies are more likely to act on them if homosexuality is more acceptable in society. But that depends on the individual's own personality and the pressures of their own immediate social environment.
"Homosexuals themselves know that their behavior is unnatural... Once they're told that their behavior is normal, and even good, they feel compelled to eradicate every suggestion that it isn't... They need constant reinforcement of the belief that their behavior is good and natural, or they'll remember that it isn't. Every dissenting voice must be stifled..."
This is so accurate!
My own observations and experience is that this is exactly the case. When walking in a 'gay pride' march, they know that they are deviants, but they try their hardest to deny it and blank it out. When society gives them an ounce of acceptance, they want total acceptance, plus more, like spoilt children.
The acceptance has to be total, or they will always know that they are deviants... less than normal... So they have to demand everything that you would not give a sexual deviant, to prove that their deviancy is acceptable to society. They have to push all the boundaries, constantly, in order to be able to say "Look, I am a scout leader and I have adopted a son, because I am allowed to, because it's good and positive... because being a homosexual is quite normal and not a danger to anyone."
If they don't respond this way, then they will always know that they are 'subnormal' deviants. They don't want to accept that. There are many factors that pushes them to fight for what they want.
Your presentation is indeed true to life in so many respects.