Lark, much as I sometimes share feelings similar to yours, not being a homosexual, and much as I don't think that socialists need to follow a particular sexual orthodoxy, I still feel that homosexuals are deserving of more tolerance and acceptance than they;re currnetly accorded in America.This MUST be differentiated from sexual libertarianism, or libertinism. One can accept homosexuality without accepting just any old sexual practice. Too many people justify gay rights on the ground that 'the government has no right to legislate sexual morality', 'the bedroom is a private space', etc. Well, that;s not true. We DO have a right to make decisions about sexual morality, and nothing in human life is trulry private. The real question is not whether some kidns of sex should be prohibited or disap[proved of, but is homosexuality in that category? i believe it isn't, for teh following reasons.
I do not see enough proof that homosexuality is immoral, degrading or damaging to society. The only argument that I respect and give credence to is the religious argument, that most Christian Churches (or at least their leadership) condemns the practice. That is a reason I can't argue with. However, given that not everybpody subscribes to those beliefs or religions, is it just to make those religious rules contingent on everyone? I don't think it is. That the religion prohibits homosexuality is a reason not to allow gay bishops, etc. But I don't think it ought to govern society in general.
homosexuality is differemnt from other sexual practices, because it's not a 'practice', it's a typ[e of attraction that can take different manifestations, just liek heterosexual love. Your equation of homosexuality with sadism, etc. isn't accurate, for teh following reason. I can make an argument to you, attempting to prove why sadism is bad (cruelty). Ditto for adultery (faithlessness), masochism (degradation), pedophilia (exploitation), prostitution (a free market fantasy). i can even make a (weak) argument as to why masturbation is bad for society (selfishness). I have a hard time thinking of a reason why homosexuality is bad for society or for anyone concerned. Can you? aside from the religious argument which as I said a good argument, but which will not convince everyone, me included.
in fact, there is evidence that loving homosexual relationships fulfil similar roles to heterosexual love, the function of procreation excluded. I know you're sick and tired of hearing baout chimpanzees, so I won't mnention them, except to say that homosexual love appears, in chimpanzees, to fulfil a positive social function of fostering loving relationships and reducing conflict.
For these reasons, I believe that homosexuality is worthy of a kind of acceptance that the more libertinous sexual practices are not. There;s my answer to your question.
