Monday, May 17, 2010

To Be Or Not To Be - Gay

I've been watching the media agonizing over Supreme Court Justice nominee Elena Kagan's sexual preferences. Is she or isn't she? The same has been asked, without the fervor, of Janet Napolitano and Janet Reno. None have decided to say so everyone assumes they are. What does all this mean?

For one thing it dispels the myth that gays or lesbians are less able than the straight world! Heck, with the positions these three hold (or held) you might even say they are more able! I know, that's too much of a generalization. I also know it will be argued Ms. Kagan's sexual identity could influence her opinions on gay marriage and "don't ask, don't tell". Sure it will, just like Justice Sotomayor's ethnic background may influence her thinking on issues pertaining to Latinos. Or women's issues. Let's face it, who we are has a lot to do with how we think concerning just about everything. So why the big deal on sexuality?

It seems to me one's sexual preferences should be a most private matter unless the person wishes it known. It should not be a litmus test for anything. I've often felt the gay community would be a lot better off if they'd lay off the semantics and settle for substance but that doesn't seem to be their agenda. Equality at all cost. It's really all in a word.

I don't think even the "marriage is between a man and a woman" mantra holds the weight it once did when you have churches elevating gay clergy to high positions. The Episcopalians just ordained their first lesbian bishop!

Actually having gays and lesbians form marriage-like relationships isn't all bad. With the state of over population in the world, they are more likely to adopt than father or mother their own. Two mother and two father families takes a little getting used to, but if it's a loving family unit why not? It's happening so why not support it as you would an interracial family? The obstacles the children will face are not unalike!

Slowly the tide is turning and I expect it will continue to do so. What would be of great help is with all the DNA research that's being conducted, they would come up with a marker that identifies a homosexual gene. That would put the argument as to whether or not one is born "that way" to rest.

I happen to believe you are. I won't even begin to argue with anyone who disagrees. Until such a marker is found, either could be correct. In the meantime, why don't we just live and let live. It matters not if you're a potential Supreme Court Justice or the kid next door trying to figure it all out.


Margie's Musings said...

I couldn't agree more. I have several gay friends and they have always been gay. It was not a choice. With all the diversity in nature as well as human, why is it even a problem?

marlu said...

Your thoughts are so wonderfully expressed - especially since I agree with you completely on this matter!
Wish I could write as clearly as you do on all the subjects you tackle.
Of course, there are some things I do not agree with you on, but you still write so well!

Dogwalk said...

marlu, thanks. One cannot take controversial positions without people disagreeing. It's nice to know there are those of you who will appreciate the way a point is made even if you disagree.

John Dwyer said...

I emphatically agree with your article. However I have a comment on one of your points where you state that the "gay community would be a lot better off if they'd lay off the semantics and settle for substance." If you ever find a reasonable defense by the gay community on why they insist on this stand, I would like to see it. I believe if they would give in on this issue the logjam would end.