1. Dysfunction doesn't equal inferiority. I'd never consider Oscar Wilde an inferior human. Dysfuctional (by the definition I laid out in my last post)? Yes. Inferior? No.
2. I don't advocate treating gays as pariahs or pity cases. They, IMO, have a dysfunction--we all possess dysfunctions to some degree, but I JUST DON"T WANT TO CELEBRATE THEM.
I don't want to see:
"OCD Pride Parades"
"Obesity Pride Parades"
"Addict Pride Parades"
"Tourettes Pride Parades"
"Nymphomaniac Pride Parades"
(I actually might watch these last two)
And I don't want public education funds being spent to inculcate children with the notion that simply because a small minority of people are genetically predisposed to these conditions, these conditions are "normal". They occur within the gene pool with a certain frequency, but occurance doesn't equal "normalcy".
"... it is disingenuous to portray a quest for dignity and moral parity as a bid for unfair advantage."
In my opinion, dignity comes from within and can't be bestowed upon one by others. Similarly, I don't seek moral parity with others--I have my own moral compass and make my decisions in order to satisfy my own sense of propriety, and am willing to face the consequences if this puts me at odds with society's sense of morality. Finally, I don't consider those in the gay pride movement to be seeking an unfair advantage, but rather seeking societal approval and acceptance of their mini-minority sexual practices--an acceptance and educational "campaign" funded by public monies. This opens the door to the education of children about all manner of sexual proclivities, and educational funds are much better spent on worthier subjects.
If this makes me a bigot, then mea culpa, mea culpa. |
