Tag Archives: same sex

Why wouldn’t it be ok to be gay?


When starting this blog, I made the conscious decision not to make this a gay blog. Yes, I am currently in a gay relationship, but I would be disappointed if that would be all that defines “me” (no offense to those who do decide to make it an important issue on their blog – it is simply not my choice).
So when I saw the blogosphere explode with posts on the recent outburst of news reports on gay teen suicides (because there is no huge increase in suicides… there is simply an increase in media attention), I kept quiet. Because of my relationship, I am obviously biased, and that generally doesn’t make a good base for a blog post. But reading the comments and arguments, especially from the contra-side… it cracks me up, saddens me and angers me all at the same time. So I thought I’d have a go at explaining why I feel that some arguments against gay marriage, gay adoption and gays in general simply do not make sense.

WARNING: since none of the “arguments” below are politically correct, I feel justified in replying to them in a politically incorrect manner. This is my, maybe twisted, kind of humor. Still, the fool speaks the truth through his jokes.

Rainbow flag, symbol of peace and tolerance (Amsterdam 2007)

Gay people choose to be gay, so they have to accept the consequences.
This is a recurring argument, and a really though one, too. But at the end of the day, why does it matter whether they choose to be gay or are born that way? Is it more ok for people to be bullied about something they choose than about something they are? Are you allowed to bully a kid for wearing glasses (he should’ve gone for contacts, really) but not for being black? Why are people who choose to rob a bank, murder their neighbor, … allowed to marry whoever they wish (of the opposite sex) but people who choose to have sex with a same-sex partner in the privacy of their home are not? I do not believe homosexuality is a choice, but even if it were, why aren’t people allowed to make that choice without losing many of their civil rights?

Gays have different moral values and beliefs, I do not want my children exposed to that.
Gays can have open or closed relationships, they can cheat on each other, have multiple partners at the same time, and may have the strangest fetishes. Or they could be the most boring, monogamous couple you’ve ever met. I am tempted to say gays tend to be more promiscuous, but then again, I more often talk about sex-related issues with gays than I do with straights, which may cause some bias in my perception. Gays do seem to be more at ease at discussing sex, but whether is an inherent feature of gay people, stems from the fact that gays have spent more time consciously discovering their sexuality, or even has any relation with promiscuity, I couldn’t say. That said, I have never had the impression that my gay friends are more prone to discuss their sex life or display morally unacceptable behaviour in public/in front of children – more on the contrary, I see more heterosexual teens making out on the central square than gays. From another point of view, pedophiles “also” have a different view on morality, but they can still marry (if their spouse-to-be is 18+ and of the opposite sex, obviously).

I don’t mind gay people, but I don’t want them to feature on television, in advertisement, or publicly display their relationship – my children might become gay as well.
This is closely related to the previous one, but what bothers me the most about this type of argumentation is the “I am ok with gay people, I just don’t want my kids to be one”. If you don’t want your kid to be “one”, then you’re not ok with gay people. I am perfectly ok with you not being ok with it (if you got decent argumentation), but let’s be honest, shall we?
What is really being said here, is that you “become” gay by seeing/interacting with gay people. Hum. I agree that there are more openly gay people allowed on screen (which I of course approve of), but more often than not “the gay” is just there for comical effect, and they rarely develop to have a stable relationship (but this makes for a whole different rant). Moreover, could anyone please explain to me how come there are so many gay people older than 50? Because I’m pretty sure their “exposure” to gay people was fairly limited.

Gays are an anomaly of nature/sick.
For the sake of the argument, let’s assume for a moment this is correct. Shouldn’t you then like… feel for them? Instead of bullying them? Just a thought. I’m also not sure what the reason is that people “suffering” from the disease homosexuality should not be allowed to procreate, but people with “other” “hereditary diseases” (if you’re also a fan of the hypothesis it is genetic) are? If it is indeed an incurable disease, shouldn’t you be happy that the “patient” is still capable of living a high quality life when allowed to live with a same-sex partner?

As I said, I realize I am not very politically correct in my wording and argumentation, but I hope you have enough common sense to see the irony, and what the point is I want to make. Homosexuality is not a disease, it is not a choice (it is ironic that, while both arguments are mutually exclusive, they are often used by the same people). What I’m trying to say is – these arguments are not only nonsense, they also serve no purpose. Because there are millions of people who want to live together, marry and raise children with a same-sex partner and who are not allowed to do so. They do not want to take over the world, they do not want to impose a different view on morality, and they by all means do not want to brainwash or “convert” your children. They want to live the life they feel they are most happy in. It is a simple family life, with highs and lows, with tears and laughter, a life which does not negatively effect anyone either in- or outside their family. So on which grounds do you claim to have the right to deny them this?

But the reality is that co-mothers see their children being taken away when their partner, the biological mother, divorces from them or passes away. Children are bullied for being gay or having gay parents. Couples are refused the entrance to a hotel, because they have the same sex. Employees are fired because they are gay. Many organizations, religiously or otherwise inspired, openly condemn homosexuals and get away with it. Legal protection is limited or non-existing. And it is this reality of discrimination and inequality that was the reason for many of the gay teen suicides. It is easy to blame the bullies, the school boards, the teachers, but ultimately it is this climate of intolerance that made the bullying possible. Because how can you explain to these bullies that they are wrong in not treating gays as equals when, by law, they are not equal?

This post was originally triggered by a – very adult and sincere – discussion over at Scary Mommy, who was brave enough to invite Texan Mama for a blog post on the subject. The discussion is very much worth the read, so if you’re interested, head over there!

My news of the week


Anything that struck me because it was shocking, interesting or simply hilarious : my news of the past week.


  • Proposition 8 was overturned in the state of California.
    In november 2008 Proposition 8 was passed during state elections in California. As a result, same-sex marriage was no longer allowed in the golden state. Last Wednesday, however, a judge decided the amendment is unconstitutional. Now, if they had found it consitutional, it was high time to change the consitution. I have heard a lot of arguments against gay marriage but “public schools may teach our children gay marriage is ok” is by far the dumbest. That it is morally inacceptable that LGBT people would marry, is NOT a christian decision to be made (remember separation of church and state? you wouldn’t let muslims pass a law on kerchiefs, would you?). We are talking adult people here, fully sane and aware of what they are doing. If they both don’t find it morally despicable what they do in their bedroom, or to be married to a same sex partner, why should you care? Even if you feel you have to protect them against theirselves because they will go to hell, leave them be. Weird as it may sound, they have the right to go to hell, if they want to.
  • 65th anniversary of the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima.
    A sad anniversary, especially since this did not so much end World War II (okay, it may have helped), as start a new era, an era of nuclear threaths, cold wars, and distrust between states. A few years back Japanese artist Isao Hashimoto released a video showing all 2053 nuclear detonations between 1945 and 1998. It is a slow, painful time-lapse map of human foolishness. I don’t claim to have the solution to all worldly problems (if only), but I’m pretty much convinced nuclear bombs shouldn’t be part of it.

  • Bishop Vangheluwe paid his cousin considerable sums of money.
    It was not hush money, but compensation for suffered damage. With all due respect, but if you abuse someone for years, and afterwards pay him large sums of money, you are asking him to keep his mouth shut. If you realize that what you have done is wrong, you turn yourself in at the police station, instead of buying off your guilt. More easily said than done, I know, but especially someone in his position should have the courage to stand up and take responsability. It is a matter of respect.

  • Kazachstan strikes back. While the original Borat movie is still on the black list in Kazachstan, Kazachstan director Erkin Rakishev plans sweet revenge. “My brother Borat” will tell a different story and reveal Borat is nothing but a fraud. I always found it a bit childish of Kazachstan to be so sensitive on the subject (djee, it’s a MOVIE), but really, I like their way of getting revenge – now let’s hope they can find a decent camera to record the movie.