Freedom of Choice

I will start this post with a preamble, because I think it is in fact important to address that I do not believe homosexuality is a choice. What I do believe, however, is that it shouldn't matter in the slightest whether or not it is a choice. Just to repeat- according to respected scientists, and in my personal belief and experience, homosexuality is NOT a choice.

We choose (arguably) what religion to prescribe to, and what political party we align with. These rights to decide are granted to us by the freedom guaranteed by our government. The privileges of certain religious groups may be sometimes be hindered, as live animal sacrifice is banned in most countries, along with polygamy, but the right of the individual to believe in that religion is not questioned. Other religious groups or society as a whole might in fact question their choice, but do not question their right to have it. Their privilege to practice their religion is perhaps what we could consider a 'non-issue.'

The same goes for membership in a political party. I hope that most people realize that party membership is a choice, even if a large majority stay in the same party as their parents. My father is a Republican living in one of the most liberal areas in California, and his right to be in the party is not questioned. His ideas, perhaps, but not his right to vote Republican or respond to issues differently than a Democrat might, or any other small political party in the United States.

We also choose how, when, and where to have sex, with some obvious exceptions. Rape is not condoned, nor should it be, because consent between adults is the single-most important thing in considering a sexual act's legality. This is why pedophilia, rape, and bestiality, to name a few, do not hold as comparable to any other sexual acts. They implicitly deny someone, or something, the right to choose. Clearly, taking away someone's freedom of choice is inherently harmful when it comes to their bodies and their minds.

So then why is it that a sexual act between consenting adults, acting on their FREEDOM of choice, forces those adults to give up the privileges that other consenting adults still enjoy? Can there be an evaluation of what occurs in someone's bedroom to somehow decide that they are no longer free to exercise the full rights of citizenship? I don't think it should matter. The government has no right to dictate or even show preference to what sexual act its citizens perform in the bedroom. And yes, denying homosexual couples the right to marry is explicitly showing preference to a style of sexual act, because gender and sexuality are completely separate. Two heterosexual men will not enjoy the same exact things as one another, so why dictate that all men and all women need to enjoy the same things?

The second important point to mention is that I don't think it should matter if friends get married, because again, you'd merely be policing what they do or don't do in the bedroom. Some heterosexual friends get married for the myriad of benefits it bequeaths, and there are various limitations, socially, that dissuade those who are not committed to each other from 'tying the knot', as it were. The gender of the participants should not really be questioned.

If I were to leave the house some morning, find some unsuspecting man, and somehow convince him to get married to me, my choice would not be attacked by society to the same vitriolic tune as my choice to marry someone I love. Marriage is a choice, just as most of the other things I have discussed are. Straight couples are not forced to get married, but homosexual couples are forced to abstain. Their choice was taken away from them.

I think we would find this country highly unpleasant if all of our major life choices were no longer choices, but rather dictated by society. If little Johnny wants to go to Harvard, has the qualifications required, and the financial means, gets in, but then is informed that they have chosen to refuse him because they found out his political party or religious affiliation, most people would be outraged. These things, however, are choices. Why does it somehow change when the choice is sexual? All of the arguments I have seen have to do with religious beliefs, but many heterosexuals getting married are not religious, and the government has general rules regarding how much influence religion should have.

This is not to say that homosexuality should be taken lightly as some sort of preferential lifestyle. Far from it. The fact that it is not really a choice makes the discrimination suffered by homosexuals much, much worse. Then little Johnny is being denied admission to Harvard because of the color of his eyes, the texture of his hair, the melanin levels in his skin. Things that seem absolutely ludicrous, insignificant, and inconsequential to a college application.

The bottom line is, however, that whether or not it is a choice belittles the central tenet to the American  governmental pedagogy- freedom. This is a country "built on freedom", that stands for "freedom" that is the "land of the free", and regardless of the paradoxical content that such statements eschew, the choices we make, assuming they do not explicitly harm others, are ours to make.

Is the idea of freedom of choice really so troubling to so many?