Twenty-Five Answers

Suggested answers to typical questions commonly voiced in opposition
to proposed legislation providing equal opportunity for gay men and lesbians

CATEGORY: Children/ Teachers

1. QUESTION: "Won't allowing homosexuals to be teachers encourage impressionable children to become homosexual?"
   ANSWER: There have always been teachers who are homosexual, there are now, and there will continue to be, whether or not legislation is passed. Thus, the issue is not whether there will be homosexual teachers, but rather, whether teachers who are doing a good job (no misconduct) must waste energy worrying about losing their jobs if their sexual orientation is discovered, or whether, on the other hand, they can feel confident in their rights as human beings, to keep a job they're doing well, thereby devoting full time to their profession-- teaching. No "sudden rush" to be gay by students of a homosexual teacher has ever been recorded. Homosexuality cannot be "taught" like a political philosophy; students cannot take on their teacher's sexuality they way they might their teacher's politics. Leading experts feel that an individual's sexuality is determined by age four, and usually doesn't change after that
2. QUESTION: "With protective legislation on the books, what would prevent a teacher from molesting students? What could a school do (if anything) about it, without being accused of discrimination?"
   ANSWER: Employers can regulate conduct, they just can't discriminate by using a double standard; one for homosexuals, one for heterosexuals. Molestation is considered gross misconduct by both the gay and straight community. No legislation is being proposed to make it legal in any sense
3. QUESTION: "Since homosexuals can't reproduce, don't they have to recruit others? Isn't that the real objective of having gay teachers, so they can recruit children?"
   ANSWER: No legislation ever proposed authorizes recruiting minors for sexual purposes. Clearly proven misconduct such as this continues to be legal grounds for dismissal. No such problems where legislation protecting gay men and lesbians are in effect have ever been documented. Teachers don't stand in front of a classroom saying things like "Be Gay! It's the only way to be!" They teach history, or whatever the subject matter of the class is. Pressing one's own values on students, whether they be religious, political, or sexual, should continue to be clear grounds for dismissal
4. QUESTION: "Why do teachers have to announce their sexuality to their students anyway? Is this legislation really needed?"
   ANSWER: No pattern of such "announcements" in places which have this type of non-discrimination legislation has ever been identified. There are many aspects of most personal lives which, if made public, could prove embarrassing, both for heterosexuals and homosexuals. This legislation would protect heterosexual employees from idle rumors concerning their sex lives just as it would protect gays. No longer would rumors about an employees' sexual preferences threaten his employment
5. QUESTION: "What about the right of parents to raise their children the way they see fit; their right to keep their children away from gay and lesbian people; their right to teach their children that homosexuality is wrong? Don't parents have rights too?"
   ANSWER: Parents, indeed, do have such a right to teach their children whatever they want to, whether or not it be socially or morally acceptable to others. Legislation being proposed simply states that all human beings have a basic right to obtain, keep, or lose a job based solely upon their ability to do that job, and likewise, to obtain housing and public services on the same basis as all other American citizens, without any regard whatever for their sexual orientation

CATEGORY- Religion/Morality

6. QUESTION: "Doesn't legislation such as this give official approval to something most people consider immoral?"
   ANSWER: This legislation does not condone homosexuality. It merely provides for the fundamental human right of an individual to express his sexual preference without fear of retribution, whether that preference be heterosexual or homosexual
7. QUESTION: "But doesn't the Bible condemn homosexuality?"
   ANSWER: Some theologians think it does, some think not. Equally convincing arguments for both points of view can be lifted (often out of context) from almost any religious document. But again, this question misses the point. The issue is not one of religious interpretation, but rather, one of basic human rights in the legal sense. American human rights do not rest upon the approval of any religious belief. Many visible, influential religious leaders approve of and vigorously support legislation prohibiting discrimination based upon sexual orientation
8. QUESTION: "Didn't Christ condemn homosexuality?"
   ANSWER: No. There is no recorded evidence of Christ ever having said anything about homosexuality

CATEGORY- Health

9. QUESTION: "Won't bills like this endanger the health of our children and the general population because of increased exposure to AIDS?"
   ANSWER: There is no connection between civil rights and public health. AIDS is now thought to be primarily transmitted via direct sexual contact between two people. Such sexual contact implies consent by both parties, and any forced non-consentual sexual activity would continue to remain illegal under existing rape statutes

CATEGORY- General

10. QUESTION: "Doesn't legislation like this give protection to criminals?"
    ANSWER: It is generally not illegal to BE homosexual, but only to participate in homosexual activities. Sodomy laws prohibit specific sexual acts, regardless of the sex of the participants. Therefore, heterosexuals are frequently guilty of sodomy. It is, incidentally, possible for gay people to have sex without sodomy. As usually applied (and sometimes as written) sodomy laws are blatantly discriminatory
11. QUESTION: "Is being gay a matter of choice, or are people born that way?"
    ANSWER: No one really knows. Most experts agree that sexuality is largely determined by age four, and extremely difficult, if not impossible, to change after that. The question is, more importantly, not whether people can choose (and therefore change) their sexual orientation, but rather, whether all people should be forced to conform to the majority in order to be considered equal human beings with equal rights to employment, social services, housing, and legal representation
12. QUESTION: "Aren't there people who have changed from homosexual to heterosexual?"
    ANSWER: It's irrelevant. We don't require that Jews or Catholics (or members of any other group of human beings) change their fundamental humanity in order to be granted equality under the law
13. QUESTION: "If we're going to prohibit discrimination against homosexuals, why not for schizophrenics or wife-beaters, or left-handed people?"
    ANSWER: The same argument was used against Black civil rights. But the validity and necessity for such legislation has been conclusively proved. Left-handed people don't get fired when their boss discovers they're left-handed. Wife-beaters have victims -- assault is clearly criminal. Nothing in this legislation protects criminal acts. Schizophrenics functioning well in their community may indeed need protection, but that's another issue. We'll cross that bridge later
14. QUESTION: "Isn't there substantial evidence that gay people are sick?"
    ANSWER: If one studies psychiatric patients, one will conclude that they need psychiatric help. Homosexuality is no longer studied or classified as a psychiatric disorder. The American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from its list of mental disorders several years ago. The majority of medical and psychiatric professionals agree that being gay is not a "sickness"
15. QUESTION: "Doesn't adding gay and lesbian people to the list of protected classes increase the case load of the Civil Rights Commission, which is already swamped, and necessitate more expense for the taxpayers?"
    ANSWER: Gay people pay taxes too. Experience in localities where such non-discrimination legislation has been enacted indicates no flood of gay-related complaints
16. QUESTION: "If there haven't been many complaints filed under laws like this, doesn't that suggest that these laws aren't really needed?"
    ANSWER: One does not judge the effectiveness of a law by the number of violations, but rather, by its deterrent effect. The possible loss to the employment force, both public and private, of talented, dedicated, educated, creative, productive gay people costs far more to society in general, than the costs of enforcing this legislation
17. QUESTION: "Won't increased tolerance of homosexuality lead further toward the destruction of the "American Family"?"
    ANSWER: Current definitions of "Family" are open to a wide range of interpretation. It is difficult to believe, however, that the traditional "family" is so weak as to be threatened by simply allowing all American citizens equal rights under law. Those jurisdictions which have enacted similar legislation have not experienced any sudden increase in their gay population
18. QUESTION: "Isn't this law just a device to protect homosexuals while they proselytize on the job or in schools?"
    ANSWER: No such problems have materialized where laws like this exist. Clearly proven misconduct is not protected. People will still get fired for it
19. QUESTION: "With this law on the books, what's to prevent homosexuals from soliciting, or even having sex, in public?"
    ANSWER: Solicitation and public sex are still illegal (both heterosexual and homosexual). This legislation does not address that, it only applies to employment, housing, and public services. Again, no general increase in those activities have ever been recorded in localities passing similar legislation
20. QUESTION: "Didn't homosexuality lead to the fall of Greece and Rome?"
    ANSWER: All historians of any reputation today reject that notion
21. QUESTION: "Couldn't employees claim to be gay or lesbian just to avoid being fired for something else? How would a school, or any other employer, prove that a person isn't gay or lesbian?"
    ANSWER: The burden under law is upon the complainant to prove discrimination, not upon the employer to disprove it. Considering the social stigma in many communities suffered by gay people, is it really rational to think that anyone would "pretend" to be gay? The question is not whether the fired employee is gay or lesbian, but rather, the employer's motive for the allegedly discriminatory act
22. QUESTION: "I just don't see any way that an employer could be sure of hiring enough gay or lesbian people to match the percentage of gay and lesbian people in the general population. I mean, there isn't any agreement about how many lesbians and gay men there are, and besides, how would an employer know who's gay or lesbian? Is the employer going to ask every applicant?"
    ANSWER: Not only is affirmative action for lesbians and gay men NOT included in this bill, it is explicitly excluded. Affirmative action is not workable for homosexuals without invading private lives of applicants and employees. Affirmative action is intended to help people GET jobs. Most discrimination against lesbians and gay men takes place AFTER hiring, when the employee's sexual orientation is discovered. Gay people are already in the workplace, they don't need affirmative action
23. QUESTION: "The definition of "affectional or sexual orientation" in the bill speaks of "by orientation or practice". Doesn't "practice" mean that men could be making advances, or even having sex, at work?"
    ANSWER: No. An employer can still regulate the conduct of his employees. The key word is none of the above, but rather "discrimination". That is, applying one set of rules to some employees (or renters, or applicants for public assistance, etc.), and a different set to others. All discrimination, on any grounds, is illegal because it is patently unfair
24. QUESTION: "What about (person cites specific case of child molestation)?"
    ANSWER: Many statistics prove the greatest number of child molesters to be heterosexual relatives of the victim. Lesbians and gay men are every bit as angered by this crime as are heterosexuals. Gay people have children and younger brothers and sisters too. The issue here is legal human rights. It does not address criminal acts or punishment for them
25. QUESTION: "Doesn't this bill give special privileges to homosexuals?"
    ANSWER: No. This legislation merely recognizes the fact that gay men and lesbians have been unfairly treated, and seeks to restore the individual rights that other citizens take for granted

© 2005 LINQ Communications