You argue that sexual orientation cannot be justified as a civil rights issue. I disagree.

“Civil rights are the protections and privileges of personal power given to all citizens by law. . . . Civil rights can in one sense refer to the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of race, sex, or other class[.]” (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights).

The laws of most jurisdictions in this country do not protect nor empower gays and lesbians with the privilege to marry, extend health care benefits to their partners, or even adopt children. However, heterosexual couples in the same situations can. Up until very recently, we even deemed certain lifestyle choices completely unlawful. Recall Lawrence v. Texas (2003). If blatant and unapologetic discrimination against people based on sexual orientation alone is not a civil rights issue, then THAT, my friend, would, in your words, “really bring into question the legitimacy of civil rights as a whole.”

By the way, is sexual orientation really a “lifestyle choice”? You know this conclusively now, while all the other social scientists and scholars struggle with that debate? Good for you. Good for you. Frankly, I still think it is an immutable characteristic, exactly like race.

…

And Claire is laughing so hard as she reads my comment. Dear Casual Observer, you know you’re really in trouble when an uber conservative Republican defends the other side.

You argue that sexual orientation cannot be justified as a civil rights issue. I disagree.

“Civil rights are the protections and privileges of personal power given to all citizens by law. . . . Civil rights can in one sense refer to the equal treatment of all citizens irrespective of race, sex, or other class[.]” (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_rights).

The laws of most jurisdictions in this country do not protect nor empower gays and lesbians with the privilege to marry, extend health care benefits to their partners, or even adopt children. However, heterosexual couples in the same situations can. Up until very recently, we even deemed certain lifestyle choices completely unlawful. Recall Lawrence v. Texas (2003). If blatant and unapologetic discrimination against people based on sexual orientation alone is not a civil rights issue, then THAT, my friend, would, in your words, “really bring into question the legitimacy of civil rights as a whole.”

By the way, is sexual orientation really a “lifestyle choice”? You know this conclusively now, while all the other social scientists and scholars struggle with that debate? Good for you. Good for you. Frankly, I still think it is an immutable characteristic, exactly like race.

…

And Claire is laughing so hard as she reads my comment. Dear Casual Observer, you know you’re really in trouble when an uber conservative Republican defends the other side.

My opinion is that minorities, all of us, need to respect one another’s struggles and not engage in pissing contests. If we CHOOSE this path of solidarity, it would make for a great, uhhh, lifestyle.

My opinion is that minorities, all of us, need to respect one another’s struggles and not engage in pissing contests. If we CHOOSE this path of solidarity, it would make for a great, uhhh, lifestyle.