October 2002

Homosexual Behavior Should Not Be Accorded Special Protection
Mathew D. Staver

The federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 laid the foundation for future civil rights laws. The two driving forces behind the Civil Rights Act of 1964 arose primarily out of discrimination against African-Americans and women. Homosexual activists are attempting to hijack the civil rights train by claiming that homosexual behavior deserves the same special protection granted to racial and gender minorities. However, other than mimicking the rhetoric, the sexual preference movement has nothing in common with the civil rights movement.

Prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the states ratified the Thirteenth, Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments, which were designed to abolish slavery and involuntary servitude, to afford the right of citizenship to any person born or naturalized in the United States, to guarantee that no person would be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law, to guarantee the equal protection of the laws, and to prevent the government from denying any person the right to vote on account of race, color or previous condition of servitude.

Despite the passage of these three constitutional amendments, discrimination against people of color continued. For many years, the country operated under the so-called "separate but equal" doctrine, which was not overturned until 1954. Paralleling the struggle of African-Americans and other people of color for civil rights was the women's suffrage movement. Women were not able to vote until 1920, when the Nineteenth Amendment was added to the United States Constitution. Despite these four constitutional amendments, widespread discrimination continued against women and people of color. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was an attempt to remedy the ongoing discrimination.

The unifying characteristics of the protected classes within the Civil Rights Act of 1964 include (1) a history of longstanding, widespread discrimination, (2) economic disadvantage, and (3) immutable characteristics. The longstanding discrimination resulted in obvious economic disadvantage. Race, color, sex and national origin all share the same common bond of having immutable characteristics. Although religion is the sole category within the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that does not share the exact pattern of the immutable physical characteristics, the characteristic of immutability or inalienability is deeply rooted in the founding of the country and became part of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. All five categories within the Civil Rights Act of 1964 have specific constitutional amendments protecting each class. These constitutional amendments existed prior to the historic 1964 legislation.

"Sexual orientation" does not meet any of the three objective criteria shared by the historically protected civil rights categories. Thus, "sexual orientation" should not be elevated to the category of a protected civil right. At a recent public hearing in Orlando, Florida where the public was invited to speak about a proposal to add "sexual orientation" to the city code, the homosexual community could only find three people who presented potentially legitimate claims of employment discrimination. The rest of the comments focused on the desire to amend the code or hearsay of someone who faced discrimination twenty years ago! No one presented any information about discrimination in public facilities or housing. During the congressional debates over the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (which now fills almost 9,000 pages of Congressional Record), the stories of real discrimination were not hard to find.

Typically real discrimination results in economic disadvantage. This is so because people are excluded from the political and economic marketplace. However, a person's "sexual orientation", or more accurately stated, "sexual preference", has not resulted in economic disadvantage. To the contrary, the homosexual community maintains an economic advantage over the heterosexual community. In 1991, the Wall Street Journal published information from the Simmons Market Research Bureau and the United States Census data based on figures from 1988. The survey showed that the average annual income for homosexuals was over $55,430 compared to the national average of $32,144. Simmons Market Research Bureau's first survey was released in 1989. Their second survey, which was released in 1996, produced similar findings. The 1996 study found that 28% of gays earned more than $50,000, while 21% of gay households had incomes over $100,000. A gay research group known as Overlooked Opinions reported similar findings following a survey released in 1993. One internet census reported that 22% of gays and 20% of lesbians had an income of between $70,000 and $100,000, while 29% of gays and 16% of lesbians had incomes in excess of $100,000. This survey was based upon 2001 statistics of 6,351 individuals who identified themselves as gay, lesbian or transgender.

"Sexual orientation" does not include immutable characteristics. One need not debate whether homosexuality is genetic or social. The definition of "sexual orientation" includes the status of being, or the perception of being heterosexual, homosexual or bisexual. The definition therefore includes the entire spectrum of human sexuality. The lack of immutable characteristics creates a moving target, one that can change from day to day. The lack of immutable characteristics warns against elevating "sexual orientation" to a protected civil rights category.

Elevating "sexual orientation" to a protected civil right is economically, politically and socially divisive. History shows that the addition of "sexual orientation" to an anti-discrimination code results in frivolous lawsuits, which will wreak economic havoc upon the business community. Relying on a "sexual orientation" law in Tampa, Florida, a man dressed as a woman who worked for a company delivering sandwiches, claimed he was wrongfully terminated. The manager of the company received complaints from a hotel manager that the sandwich company employee was soliciting oral sex from military men who were guests at the hotel. The hotel manager told the sandwich company that it would no longer allow the delivery of sandwiches. When the sandwich company fired the employee, the employee filed a "sexual orientation" discrimination complaint.

Adding "sexual orientation" to a protected category causes political division. A number of cities throughout the country have repealed "sexual orientation" policies after they have been enacted. Political division is evident in Florida, where the homosexual community has become downright vicious where they now claim that local citizens committed fraud in obtain over 51,000 signatures (only 35,000 are required) for a referendum to repeal the "sexual orientation" ordinance.

According sexual preference special status will also create social division, resulting in a type of "affirmative action" for homosexual behavior. To implement Vermont's statewide "sexual orientation" law, Vermont issued a grant to an organization called Outright Vermont. The private organization used the state funds to teach about homosexual practices in the public schools. In addition to providing what the organization called "safer sex parties" in which students were given condoms, packages of lube, dental dams, and latex gloves and asked to demonstrate and practice "condom use", the organization also conducted a hormone needle use instructional program to educate participants regarding the proper use of needles to inject hormones for the purpose of altering gender characteristics.

In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, the public schools implemented the statewide "sexual orientation" law by training teachers and students about homosexual practices. A so-called heterosexual questionnaire asks the following question: "If you've never slept with a person of the same sex, is it possible that all you need is a good gay lover?" Including "sexual orientation" is merely the beginning rather than the end of the conflict. Future attempts will be made to add domestic partnerships, civil unions, and in some states there have been efforts to pursue same-sex marriage.

History and reason illustrate the insanity of according special civil rights protection to a person's sexual preference. Once homosexual, bisexual and transgender behavior is elevated to a protected status, there is nothing to stop bigamy, pedophilia, or any other deviate sexual practice from receiving the same protection. It should be remembered that when elevating any activity to special status, opposing activities and viewpoints lose protection. If "sexual orientation" laws become commonplace, then any person who speaks against deviant sexual practices will be vilified, their rights will be thwarted, and their freedom of religion and of conscious will be crushed.