With the House’s passage and Senate’s debate of the “Hate Crimes” legislation, there is a lot of debate about how this bill would alter the very make up of American freedom.  Would it infringe on the freedom of religion and speech or punish those who practice and preach hate?  Would it create a protected class or simply protect a minority who are treated by bigotry and hatred?  Will it be another “living” document that would change as definitions change, or is all that just a smoke screen to perpetuate hate?

Well, it was a comment to an earlier piece I wrote that really inspired me to look at the idea of it creating a protected class.  I have thought that throughout this argument, but I thought today I’d put that into words and show just how far down the rabbit whole we are going.

I want to look at the idea that sexual orientation should be a protected class.  This is where I feel the fallacy of this bill starts.  If it passes, it will create a protected class of people, privileged above others, based on a personal choice they make that the majority of the population, and history, feel is wrong and deviant.

The argument we hear, on this issue, same-sex marriage and all other homosexual issues, is that this is all about love.  That is where the argument breaks down, in my opinion.  This is not about love, never has been.  That is just a smokescreen.

Love does is not defined by gender.  I love my wife.  I love my male friends and my female friends.  I love my dog.  I love food and coffee.  There are different levels and kinds of love.  The cause us to treat people different and behave differently based on the kind of love we are exhibiting.  I would take a bullet for my wife or a friend, not for a cheeseburger.

For example, I have a friend “John”.  I love “John”.  I would do anything in my power to help him.  I would give him money if I had it.  I would help him do repairs on his house or car if he needed.  I would hug him if he needed it, I would give him my shoulder to cry on if he needed that.  Only my immediate family would have a greater portion of my love and attention, because of how close they are to me.

Does this make me homosexual, to have that much love for “John”?  No, it makes me a compassionate person, a human.  Why?  Because my being a hetro- or homosexual has nothing to do with the love I have for a person.  I can love anyone and I am not defined by that love.  Sex is the difference.

It is only when we decide to have sex with someone that our sexuality is defined.  Therefore, this is never about love.  No one is opposed to Fred and Frank loving one another.  When they interject sex into the equation, that is where they are defined as homosexual, and that has nothing to do with love, just lust, a base, animalistic characteristic.

So, that leads us to the idea of choice.  Homosexuals state they have no choice in the matter, they are simply being “true” to themselves.  Really?

I remember being four or five years old.  The idea of being friends with girls had a huge creepy factor.  It’s that way for most guys.  We wanted to hang with other boys, do things with them, go places with them.  The idea of girls was just icky.  And, for girls it was the same with them and other girls and boys.  As children, we learn from being around other children of the same gender.  It’s who we are most comfortable with and who we prefer.

As we got older, though, our instincts came alive and we began to feel the basic need to be around people of the opposite sex.  We began to think about people in a different manner, a sexual one.  Girls grew softer, more alluring, in ways boys never could be.  We kept our same-sex friends, we had a connection with them and we could talk about and do things with them we still just weren’t comfortable saying and doing with our opposite sex friends, but we wanted to be around our new friends.  We wanted to pursue them in different ways.  We made a choice, whether we understood it or not, to follow those instincts.

Granted, some people’s “instincts” along this line are stronger than others, while some may be to the point of feeling non-existent, but they are there.  So, we all have a choice to make.  At some point, we even learn what the “norm” is and what is “deviant.”

Let me illustrate this another way.

If you take a two-year-old to a candy store, he has a strong feeling to get some candy.  He may even feel that it’s all free and just take what he wants.  He isn’t mature enough to know the difference between right and wrong.  But, as he grows older, he learns that difference.  He then make the choice to obey the rules and pay for the candy.  Some, though, may still feel this is “unfair” and take what they want.  They are selfish and feel the rules don’t apply to them.  Some may even deny the rules.  In either event, they must make a choice to do what is right and accepted.

There’s always a choice, even if it’s not an easy one.

So, by passing this new hate crime legislation, we will be creating a protected class, one based on lust and choice.  This is America, people are free to do what they want, as long as it does not harm others, but they do not have the right to have that choice protected, forcing others to accept their choice as normal.  If we can just clear the air of these smokescreens, love and choice, we can stop the intrusion on actual rights.