Out of the mouths of babes and billionaires - random thoughts about gay "rights"

Donald Trump's announcement that Carrie Prejean would be permitted to keep her title as Miss California will hopefuly put an end to the altogether unnecessary brouhaha over her support for the traditional definition of marriage. Miss Prejean, you will remember, incurred the wrath of the gay community (or at least some of them) when she honestly answered a question posed to her during the Miss USA pageant. Since that time Miss Prejean has become, depending on whom you listen to, either the heartless incarnation of all things evil or a minor celebrity on the verge of martyrdom and sainthood. The truth is that she is neither. Miss Prejean's greatest crime is that she had enough courage to give an answer that is consistent with her convictions.

Mr. Trump, in his statement at the press conference, reminded us all that Miss Prejeans' position on gay marriage is the same as President Obama's. Miss Prejean then spoke in her own defense, reminding us that she was exercising her right of free expression, a right that her grandfather had fought for. She gave a stirring defense of herself and her right to express her opinion. Since both Miss Prejean andthe President are of the same opinion are we to gather that the opinion of Miss California is of more importance and carries more weight than that of the President of the United States? After all, no one in the entire country has spoken critically of the Presidents' stance on gay marriage. I knew that we were becoming a celebrity driven culture, but I never imagined this! Where does the line form to appoint Miley Cyrus Secretary of Health and Human Services?

But I digress.

The most troubling aspect of all this has been that what we are seeing is the attempt to completely eliminate an opposing point of view. There was a time in history when good men could disagree honorably and with respect. That is no longer the case. As mentioned in this space before, the current method of debate seems to be the "whoever makes the most noise wins." However the dynamic at play in the whole Carrie Prejean debate (?) seems to conveniently forget that the majority of people in the country agree with Miss Prejean (and the President). Putting it plainly, the American people define marriage as the union of one man and one woman. No amount of screeching and posturing can change that fact. The inability of gay activists to win in the court of public opinion has driven them to the courts. That they have recently won in the courts is a dangerous thing. There are two possibile outcomes to this plan of action. The first possible outcome is that they win the "rights" they are seeking. The danger is that we would no longer have an elected representative government. The other possible outcome is that the people of the nation would rise up and excercise the right to vote and elect men and women who will see to it that the next generation of judges hold to the same understanding of "rights" that they do. The first would be a disaster, the second is difficult to imagine in light of our current culture.

The simple truth of the matter is that I know of no great movement in the populace (or among conservatives) to deny anyone their basic constitutional rights. At the heart of the current gay "rights" movement is not the attempt to establish the basic rights that are due to all men (as was the case in the civil rights movement), but the attempt to create a favored class of people. This is the antithesis of the intention of the founding fathers. There is no credible evidence that homosexuals have been denied the right to vote, to assemble, to worship or to speak. Demographic studies reveal that homosexuals have higher incomes, educational acheivement, and disposalbe income that heterosexuals. They hardly seem to be an oppressed minority to me.

I am well aware of the fact that these words are politically incorrect and that in many countries I could face fines or jail time for expressing them. But I am going to continue to express my opinion, whether the President of the United States, Donald Trump or anyone else agrees with me. I will also defend the right of everyone else to express their opinions as well, whether I agree with them or not.