Reality Check 101

First, in honor of my friend Pastor Ralph Houston, I think it fitting to offer a Biblical observation.  Possibly the most important evidence of a Biblical disapproval of the LGBTQ lifestyle is the complete absence of any              positive mention of it in the Old or New Testaments. This is very significant because the Bible addresses the full spectrum of sexuality and sexual morality, both positively and negatively.  If this lifestyle was to be treated as a natural part of the human condition, it would have been sanctioned as such.

I would like to address issues surrounding the claims of discrimination by the LGBTQ community.  The most potent weapon of the gay rights movement has been to belittle and marginalize their opponents sincerely held moral convictions as sexist (in various forms), ignorant, or driven by fear.  The reality however, is much different.  Rejection of a certain sexual behavior is not automatically a result of fear or prejudice.  If it were, the same reasoning would apply to any other recognized moral offenses such as sexual abuse,      sexual slavery, pornography etc.

In addition, the effort to parallel those accusations with racism is a demonstratively false argument.  Segregation and slavery arguments are meaningless.  LGBTQ’s are not owned or sold as a condition of law or social approval.  They are not relegated to separate drinking fountains, back seats on buses, separate back door entrances.  As a matter of fact, as a group, same-sex citizens’ national average income levels ($111,000 to $115,000) is above that of heterosexual citizens ($69,000 to $101,000).  Similarly, same-sex households are better educated – 95% to 60%.  [Business Insider, 6/27/15]

Equal rights are not unlimited rights.  For example, there is no right to a certain talent, a particular social status, or to a level of achievement. There is no right to the exercise of destructive, immoral or illegal activities. The definition of equality by Declaration of Independence’s and the Constitution’s guarantees of the Declaration’s statement of equality, refer to opportunity not entitlement – to availability to strive, not freedom to behave in any way one desires or demand privileges to do so. 

The life, liberties or pursuit of happiness shared by all citizens are defined in the Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Given that absolutely essential foundation, a genuine civil right does not, ipso facto, give license to add supplemental special rights.  Our constitutionally guaranteed civil rights simply recognize preexisting natural rights.   Sexual behavior cannot simply generate its own subset of natural rights any more than any other preferred behavior can.  Three questions follow:

Should 2.5% to 4% of the population who define themselves by their attractions be allowed to create new “civil” rights based simply on their behavior?

 If this or any subset of the population is able to promote a new created “right”, should that supposed right supersede a naturally endowed right?

Should an outside-of-norm behavior be allowed to define a new normal?

The LGBTQ community claims that they do not have the same rights as hetero’s is really about private businesses, private housing, and non-profits who have moral objections or missions in opposition to the LGBTQ lifestyle.  Those situations are the only ones where LGBTQ “liberties” or “happiness” are curtailed by the constitutional rights of others’ consciences.  In their efforts to force themselves on certain businesses and private enterprises, they confuse a product with purpose.  A Christian or conservative service or product is not the same as the purpose or public image of that service or product.

Discrimination is a requirement of existence in an ordered society.  Proper discrimination is defined by the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the 14th, 15th and 19th amendments, and, for Biblical Christianity, the Scriptures.  A business is established with a unique purpose and carries a public image and reputation as a part of its chosen niche in the market.  For example, a locksmith does not provide lock picks to a thief. The pick sets are just bent metal but their usage and the business’s purpose are not compatible with supplying thieves, even if the thief managed to graduate from locksmithing school, hasn’t gotten caught yet and has a technically legal right to demand the lock picks.  If the locksmith provided the tools, he would break the law, would ruin his public reputation and violate his purpose for existence. 

Aside from the exercise of constitutionally protected rights of property, free speech, and religion, no laws exist which allow or promote persecution or discrimination of anyone based on one’s private sexual behavior.  In this age of rampant political correctness, same-sex marriage, and self-imposed employer gender quotas, there are no systematic infringements of rights against the LGBTQ community.  Any claim to the contrary is the responsibility of that community to demonstrate them, not with emotional appeals or undocumented claims but with evidence and prosecuted cases.

There is no need to affirm by ordinance, rights which are already affirmed through constitutional guarantees as well as federal, state and local statutes.  Again, the true aim of the LGBTQ community is to establish a new set of special rights which limit someone else’s.  The cases of reverse discrimination are already beginning across the country.