There is no
debate or dialogue over same-sex marriage. Its opponents’ totalitarian view of
the world makes sure of that
As I’ve written
before, ongoing efforts to legalize same-sex marriage in Taiwan is a positive
development, and one that points to the modernity of its people. But as seen
elsewhere in societies that are moving in that direction, its opponents, aware
that they don’t have a case, are resorting to the basest of means to defend
their cause — an unholy mix of lies, pseudoscience, and outright hatred.
What always
strikes me about the debate between supporters of same-sex marriage and its
detractors is that there is no such thing as a debate. Instead, opponents come
up with alarmist slogans, campaigns, and literature that are so outlandish as
to make rational discussion all but impossible. How can one possibly counter
the outlandish claims that allowing same-sex marriage will destroy society, spread AIDS,
encourage rape, bestiality, promiscuity, confuse children about their sexuality, or lead nearly half of the population
to be homosexual a few decades hence?
How does one
reason with individuals who, confronted with scientific evidence demonstrating
that homosexuality is genetically determined and not a mental disease, discard
such information in the same fashion as creationists deny the very existence of
evolution?
Above all, the
opponents’ refusal to see reality for what it is — usually for religious
reasons — repeatedly contradict the values that the scriptures seek to cultivate
in them. On the one side we have a minority group of people (homosexuals) and
their supporters, who seek to extend fundamental human rights to a larger group
of people; or rather, this group seeks to end the ability of the majority to
deny rights to which a minority are fully entitled (marriage). Theirs is a
message of love, of equality, and non-denial. There is nobody in that camp who
seeks to deny others rights that they already have, or to impose a way of life
that does not fit them. Ultimately, their side of the argument simply seeks to expand
the sphere of tolerance.
The other side
(opponents) turns to hatred and adopts language that is often analogous to that
used by the Nazis on the eve of World War II. Everything that has come of from
that corner is negative, destructive, and divisive. For organizations that
purportedly know about love (or “true love,” as they condescendingly refer to
it) through their religion, their discourse is one of hatred and of close
mindedness. It repeatedly (and conveniently) ignores the many positive stories,
such as that of my family, that have surrounded the coming out of homosexuals,
where the sky didn’t fall, the world didn’t end, children weren’t screwed up for life,
and everybody involved in fact ended up happier, for all could finally live in truth.
And rather than
tolerance, it seeks to impose a narrow understanding of love on every single member
of society. Theirs is a totalitarian view, one that brooks no dissent, no
argument, and which does not hesitate to use lies, fabrications, and what can
only be called alarmist fantasy to scare everybody into submission.
This latter
group will hold a street protest on Nov. 30. The colors of the rainbow were
theme of the LGBT Pride parade last month, a symbol of acceptance and
diversity. Given their hateful views, I can only think of one fitting outfit
for those who will protest on Nov. 30 — brown shirts. (Photo by the author)
No comments:
Post a Comment