Date: Thu, 30 Mar 1995 17:28:11 -0500 (GMT-0500) From: "Thomas W. Holt Jr." Subject: KSU COLLEGIAN EDITORIAL: CIVIL RIGHTS ACT SHOULD EXCLUDE GAYS (fwd) FROM THE KANSAS STATE COLLEGIAN / KANSAS STATE UNIVERISTY EDITORIAL PAGE / MARCH 30, 1995 ========================================================= CIVIL RIGHTS ACT SHOULD NOT INCLUDE HOMOSEXUALS By John Hart Collegian Gay rights is shaping up to be the civil-rights issue of the decade. Today, homosexuals view themselves as carrying the same torch of justice and equality blacks carried in the great civil-rights crusades of the 1960s. In reality, homosexuals are on a bizarre civil-rights tangent that seeks to gain special rights for a select group who choose a particular lifestyle. According to gay-rights advocates, homosexuals are being denied jobs and housing for no other reason than being gay. They hope to bring justice to this situation by making it unlawful to discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. The Civil Rights Act of 1964, in part, prohibits employers from discriminating because of race, color, sex, religion or national origin. Gay-rights advocates want to add sexual orientation to the list, yet doing so would set a disastrous precedent. Sexual orientation is a complex issue. Human beings are not rabbits -- we have the option to exercise self-control in our sexual behavior. The human distinctions outlined in the Civil Rights Act are involuntary and amoral except for religion, which only entails belief, not practice. The state does have the right to prohibit certain religious practices that violate other laws, such as Satanic rituals that include animal mutilation and human sacrifice. Sexual orientation is the oddball of the batch. Would it be OK if homosexuality were involuntary? Homosexuals already have their rights. What they are seeking, then, are special rights. The U.S. Constitution already guarantees homosexuals equal rights. The 14th Amendment provides all citizens, gay and straight, equal protection under the law and due process of law. If the Civil Rights Act were extended, it should include all groups. The best choice is to not extend it any further. Including sexual orientation in the Civil Rights Act would put a civil stamp of approval on the homosexual lifestyle. The phrase sexual orientation is far too broad. Sexual orientation could include any sexual orientation from bestiality to sadomasochism to pedophilism to heterosexuality to homosexuality. If gay-rights advocates only want special protection to be allotted to homosexuals, on what grounds do they exclude persons of varying sexual orientations from enjoying the same privileges? Why choose one lifestyle among many and attach it to the end to the most important piece of civil-rights legislation of the century? It is ironic that homosexuals are so committed to achieving equal rights when they are one of the most affluent and successful of people in our nation. However, material parity with the rest of America is not the true aim of gay-rights advocates. What they really want is society to endorse the gay lifestyle as morally acceptable or at least ignore it. Galvanized by AIDS. John Hart is a senior in political science. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Copyright 1995, Student Publications Inc. All rights reserved. This document may be distributed electronically, provided it is distributed in its entirety and includes this notice. However, it cannot be reprinted without the express written permission of Student Publications Inc., Kansas State University.