Discrimination SM

Abstract
Being different is one of the most difficult things in this world. One is better off in society following the norm. As research will show in this paper, the gay and lesbian community worldwide has suffered manifold afflictions in the name of being different. I researched on the topic of homosexuality mostly using the internet. One of the points I cover is the question of whether homosexuality has a biological component, and if so, whether it is right for people to try and alter that biological aspect. Who gives people the right to decide who one should and should not be attracted to?
In addition, I have gone through some of the arguments that various people have used to try and prove that the homosexual community is doing a lot of harm to humanity. An example of such arguments is that homosexuality is the reason we have AIDS in the world today. I have attempted to counter these arguments with research that shows otherwise. All in all, my purpose in writing this paper has been to prove that discrimination, whatever form it takes, is inexcusable.
Lucy is a twenty-seven-year-old attorney who has not seen her parents for more than ten years. She has merely kept in touch with them with the occasional phone call. To add insult to injury, she hasn’t seen or spoken to her older brothers who have long since gotten married and have children of their own. Is this the life Lucy loves to have? Does she relish not being with her family? When asked why she doesn’t spend time with her family, she merely mumbles a quick, inaudible reply. The truth is, Lucy discovered when she was sixteen that she had no desire for the opposite sex. In fact, she was intensely drawn to members of her own sex. Ever since she can remember, her father had preached that homosexuals were all headed for hell. Hence, when Lucy discovered her sexual orientation, she tried unsuccessfully to subdue it. Thus, when she was old enough, she left home without ever looking back.
The above scenario is typical of many gays and lesbians. Homosexuality has been viewed as a taboo in some cultures and strongly discouraged in others. It is a subject that has evoked some very deep feelings and arguments. One such argument is whether homosexuality is purely reliant on an individual’s power to choose or whether it has a biological aspect. Secondly, if homosexuality has a biological aspect, can that aspect be altered so that gays and lesbians can scientifically be made straight? Of course this brings forth the argument of whether it is morally acceptable to deliberately turn homosexuals straight. It has also been said that homosexuality was the genesis of AIDS. This is seen especially when most doctors refused to see gay men who first acquired the dreaded disease in the early 1980s. On their side, gays argue that promiscuity is more to blame for AIDS than gays. Moreover, some people have blamed the dilute of the sanctity of marriage on homosexuality.
As to the question of whether homosexuals decide of their own accord to have their sexual orientation be what it is, several scientific studies have been carried out attesting to the fact that there is indeed a biological aspect to being a homosexual. A specific study done on rams found this to be true. “But I was surprised to learn recently that male sheep exhibit homosexuality at least as often as humans: roughly 8% of rams turn out to have sex exclusively with other rams” (Cloud, 2007 para 1.). Are we to reason that sheep can make their own choices? Animals follow their basic instincts. One of these instincts is hunger, and the other one is mating. The fact that some sheep choose to mate with other of the sheep of the same sex should be proof enough that there is a fundamental biological aspect to some human beings being homosexuals.
There has also been research suggesting that gay sheep can be made straight through the manipulation of their brains with a certain hormone. The scientists involved in this research argue that farmers should know whether their sheep are homosexuals or straight for breeding purposes. “A colleague of Roselli’s, Frederick Stormshack of Oregon State, says a means of identifying gay sheep would be useful to breeders who need to ensure that males would reproduce...”(Cloud, 2007 para 5.). Some members of the gay and lesbian community have raised objections to this using the argument that the scientists involved in this experiment might have a hidden agenda of trying to make homosexual people straight. In their defense, Roselli says that they never had the intention of turning gay people straight (Cloud, 2007).
The implication for this is that the homosexual community might feel relief that finally they are able to offer proof to the wider community who frown on their sexual preferences that they were born that way. They would be able to say for sure that it wasn’t out of choice that they prefer sexual relations with members of the same sex as opposed to the opposite sex. While this is true, people should not view homosexuals as having no control on whom they choose as their sexual partners and who they reject. The fact that they feel like they have to prove to the wider community that they have little or no control on their sexual orientation is wrong. What this reinforces is that the wider community is prejudiced, and that they would only excuse homosexuals if research finds out that they are helpless as to their attractions.
“Humanity’s closest living cousin, the bonobo, is now famous for its inventive variety of sexual practices. Bonobo society is matriarchal and same sex couplings between females is common” (Hanlon, 2007 para 13.). Not only are homosexual tendencies observed in some animals, other human sexual behaviors such as masturbation are also seen. “...other sexual practices, such as masturbation, are equally common in species as diverse as horses, lions and vampire bats” (Hanlon, 2007 para 12). This shows that some sexual tendencies are not only unique to humans but to animals as well. To any liberal-minded person, this should be proof enough that homosexual humans, to some extent, do not have control over their sexual orientation and therefore should be accepted in the community just as other minority groups have been in the past.
One of the objections that people have used as an excuse to be prejudiced against gay people is the fact that the HIV virus that causes AIDS was first manifested in gay men in the US. In these people’s minds, homosexuality is the very genesis of AIDS.”In 1981, stories began to emerge nationwide of men getting sick from a strange disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that five young men in Carlifornia had suffered from lengthy fevers and pneumonia…” (Aasen, 2007 para 10.). Since this disease was being seen primarily in active gay men, many assumed that they were causing it with their “unnatural” sexual behaviors. Granted, nobody wants to promote a disease that is sure to kill its victims. This, however, does not excuse anyone from failing to rise up to the challenge of helping the victims out, regardless of their sexual orientation. The very act of shunning gay men who were diagnosed with AIDS in 1981 shows a fundamental prejudice in the part of the wider community.
In the face of the dreaded disease and various health practices shunning the gay men who were sick from it, a man by the name of Brady Allen rose up to help. He had just graduated from medical school when this disease struck and didn’t hesitate to help his fellow human beings. “The men showed up at Dr. Brady Allen’s office in the early 1980s tired and achy, with swollen glands and fever. Some had rapidly lost weight. Others complained of red spots in their eyes” (Aasen, 2007 para 1.). Dr. Brady is a sure role model to those people who showed such prejudice and hatred to the active gay men who had contracted the HIV virus in those early days.
Other doctors covered their prejudice with various excuses. “Some older doctors with established practices felt that taking on a new disease was overwhelming. Others were homophobic” (Aasen, 2007 para 13.). Reading this, I cannot help but wonder why the physicians who were acting so prejudiced had taken the physician’s oath in which they swore to protect the lives of those who sought their help. It takes us back to early America where white doctors refused to see patients who were black as they viewed them as an inferior race. Some may argue that this was a completely different subject, but prejudice is prejudice, no matter what form it takes.
Another point worth taking note of is that Dr. Allen himself was a gay man with a long time partner. We cannot lose the point that Dr. Allen was a good man, despite his being gay. Whatever happened to judging people by their character and, in this case, not by their sexual orientation? It is written of Allen that “…work consumed Allen. He would leave for work at 6:00am and get home around 10:00pm. He said he often felt hopeless and helpless. He formed a support group in the early 19s...he said he never wanted to stop working” Aasen, 2007 para 20.). This is an example of a man who stood up for what is right. Society should view him more as a person who had an upright character and who deserved to be treated with respect. He should not simply be viewed as a homosexual. In fact, society, instead of discriminating against him and his kind, should have applauded his being there in time of need.
One of the counterarguments that people have come up with is that homosexuality dilutes the sanctity of marriage. They argue that since one of the fundamental purposes of marriage is the procreation of children, homosexuality threatens this sacred institution. On this issue, Breda O’Brien, a writer of the Irish times, says, “The erosion of this idea of marriage, whatever its flaws, that had children at the heart of it, has come from the heterosexual community and not from gays” (O’Brien, 2006 para.8).However, there is an alarming number of couples who are opting to be without children. This somewhat weakens the argument that marriage is only for procreation. Granted, marriage has children as one of its pillars. Most couples feel the need to have children as a big part of their marriage. This is true of some people and not true of others. The human race would not be extinct unless everyone on the planet earth decided to be gay. This is something that is most unlikely to happen.
Another argument on the part of the homosexual community is that people mostly get AIDS from being promiscuous and not necessarily because they are gay. There are several stories of promiscuous gay men that attest to this fact. One particular story is that of Arriola Javier, a gay man living with AIDS. “For years, he had numbed his pain and fear with drugs, alcohol and anonymous sex…he dragged himself to a clinic for a HIV test…At age 29, he had full blown AIDS” Kershaw, 2008 para.1.) Needless to say, it has statistically been proven that the number of people who are homosexuals have a tendency to acquire the AIDS virus. Therefore, those among us who have homosexual sisters and brothers may try to discourage them but very carefully and with boundaries.
After everything is said and done, we have to make sure we are true to ourselves and accept other people for who they are. We should view others by their character and not by their sexual orientation, color of their skin, or any other such prejudices. This is especially true with the medical community. If we are to treat patients, we have to accept them. Even if we don’t agree with some of the things they do, it is not for us to judge. We simply have to treat them.
References
Aasen, E. (2007, December/January). Doctor saw Aids patients when others wouldn 't. Dallas Morning News. Retrieved January 29, 2008, from Ebscohost database.

References: Aasen, E. (2007, December/January). Doctor saw Aids patients when others wouldn 't. Dallas Morning News. Retrieved January 29, 2008, from Ebscohost database.