Bakotopia

All > Discussions
What Would Roper Do?
Topics: Bakersfield, Bakotopia, Bakotopia.com, gay marriage, genetics, politics, Chase Brockett, gay
Posted by Chase Wed May 28, 2008 10:50:18 PDT
Viewed 456 times
0 responses 2 comments

What Would Roper Do?  
Legalizing the 'gay ole time'


By Chase Brockett, Bakotopia Staff

"God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!"  And I do not argue with that. 

Assuming, that is, the biblical account of creation is accurate, but for the sake of argument let's assume so. 

First and foremost, if God had intended to create a homosexual couple initially, it would not have been Steve. The name is way too British.

Considering now that homosexuality has little biological function in the sense that life is always striving to procreate, gays cannot procreate, therefore the presence of such a sexual orientation is (in a purely biological sense) “flawed.” But then again so are asthma, flat feet, and an interest in recreational reading once you get down to it (because after all, isn’t development of complex language merely fluff on the most basic of survival skills?). The fact of the matter is though, homosexuality is not a choice to the extent that many people perceive it to be. Denying the rights that come with marriage is a perspective built not only upon misunderstanding of human physiology, but also mountains of fallacious reasoning.

One of my biggest arguments for the idea that homosexuality is in fact biological, and not otherwise, is the presence of hermaphrodites. I’d like to hear anybody argue that improper gender assignment in the womb is a “choice.” So, then coming from a religious perspective, is God not responsible for the curious position of that group of people who are, without any doubt, genetically varied?  Where is sexual orientation when you are in fact both sexes? If the argument that being gay is a choice is nullified, then you have to look at the cultural reasons.

And now I welcome you all into a softer version of women’s suffrage, of finally rounding black people up to a whole number from a fraction.

Another issue I point out is that people criticize the homosexual community for being overly promiscuous.  Allowing marriage (or what I feel would be better, a fully equal rights union with a different name, I’m thinking straight people get married, gay people get gay-married, it’s a win-win!) is the ultimate monogamy! This, then, is a group saying “I want to be committed wholly to one person!” I know my own experiences relating to marriage have left me at many moments an emotionally crippled commitment-phobe - to have a group of people who do not even have the chance to screw up marriage still fighting for it, it says something about their intent. But then again, maybe by preventing gays from marrying is the way for the more than 50 percent divorce rate from infecting another group of people. How considerate.

I do agree that in the homosexual community there is a lot of common culture built around detrimental vices, these at least being concluded from the number of gay people I have known throughout the years (Stats students, I’ve known at least 25). But vices of equivalent caliber can be found in even the most “moral” of groups. I am not familiar with enough information to let me speak on which came first: the culture or the orientation. I can say that there is undoubtedly an outside hand that has influenced the birth of the negative go-tos in the homosexuality debates.

It does seem, historically speaking, humanity has a natural aversion toward homosexuals. Justifications tend to get grounded in notions of “morality” and a number of canonical phrases, but to me it seems like a struggle to reconcile a primitive instinct that has little purpose in this day and age. That and, according to sitcoms, the male has a natural aversion toward fashion, cooking, or anything unrelated to sports, beer and sex with women (the way God intended it!). It should also be noted that men who do have an appreciation of fashion, cooking, or anything unrelated to sports and beer are, in fact, gay themselves.

But for Christ’s sake (and I mean that in whatever way you want to interpret it), denying rights found exclusively in marriage to those who have a different sexual orientation is not something that should be persisting given everything we have learned about culture, biology and any other factor influencing our society.

To respond, contact Chase at Chase@bakotopia.com.

Story also printed in Bakotopia magazine, issue 29, 5-29-08

Send to a Friend

Report a Violation

Comment From: Chase

Someone left me a comment that made it to my inbox but apparently didn't stick around on here. Yes, I meant round black people up to a whole number (3/4ths situation). But thanks! Comment From: AnnieLWhite

this artical is soooo gay (hehe)i liked it