The results of these efforts, even if 100% followed them, would not be felt for many years. Yet the ads run and groups set up Earth Day fairs and throw Frisbees.
You do have to start somewhere.
Gay marriage sends a message that being gay is AOK. Truth is - being gay is AOK. Gays were in the closest 10, 20, 30 years ago. Not anymore. In 10, 20, or maybe 30 more years, children will live in a world where being gay is just as acceptable as being hetero. Many applaud this. Today at least, even I think it's fine.
But unfortunately - there's a big problem.
Gays don't reproduce. Thus, while other countries continue to have 4-7 children each, America very well could become a place with less children and a huge portion of our people having same sex partners.
As you've guessed, I don't mind gay people. To each his/her own. It's not my style, but that's because there was a stigma about it as I grew up. My parents weren't intolerant. It was probably more that being gay was taboo, so during the seldom times the topic came up, it was quickly shuffled away as such, leading my generation swiftly away from that lifestyle choice.
But not today. The media adores it. The government validates it. Today, being gay is applauded and rewarded.
It's honestly difficult to say this as I do not intend to sound intolerant nor offend any gay person. But while gay rights and equality is important, what about our actual humanity? The physical people that populate our country?
It could take 75-150 years. But if/when all our generations die and any stigmas die with us, on our current path, it will be 100% acceptable to be gay. Then - you have twice the odds of finding a partner or just having a good time. There are about 50% of each sex. If 50% decide to be gay, that's 50% of future America not having kids, and within 150 years, our population is cut in half.
If you're going to turn off light bulbs and conserve water - what about conserving people? Assure that our population continues? We'll certainly consume less water and electricity if there are half as many of us. Yet could you imagine a public service commercial where a celebrity says "don't be gay, because then you probably won't procreate, and for future generations, there will be less tax revenue, less workers, less soldiers, and far smaller America. So do your part - don't be gay."
Is there some innate element within people that would still lead a majority of them to ultimately be heterosexual and have children, regardless of whether being gay becomes universally accepted in America?
This would be the ideal argument from a gay person. Yet they shouldn't need to defend themselves. Or should they?
Is a potential decline in the American population due to widespread acceptance of homosexuality a topic too hard to talk about? How do you preserve and respect human rights and the right to choose the partner of your choice - while also preserving America's future population?
I don't think gays seek to overtake America. To the point, they can't/don't reproduce. Seeking acceptance and equal rights is fair and just - yet to gain it, sometimes you must go over-the-top. Perhaps this is why there has been an ever-growing surge of "gay" - just about everywhere. To be heard, sometimes you must yell really loud. And the media likes loud.
Yet since gays don't seek to overtake America and are simply seeking equal rights, if equal rights were given universally in America, perhaps a campaign of "quiet" would ensue. I don't say it should be to sweep anyone back into the closet. With equal rights and total acceptance, they can live a life like anyone else. But once that becomes set in stone, then there is probably less need for such widespread exposure of gay themes, TV, laws and other counterparts. American culture could once again return to the premise that heterosexuality is ideal - simply for population reasons - while giving gays complete freedom of equality.
Of course, there is the eternal argument that some people are born gay. That may or may not be true. Yet it doesn't matter regardless. If in our near future, if children are raised to believe either sex is 100% the same when choosing a partner, all bets are off. Man, woman. It may go against what you know and believe today. But in the future, when considering current events and popular culture today amplified in coming years - everyone may equally find a shirtless man or woman in a bikini equally attractive, and have an equal chance of sharing a phone number with either.
Our biggest hurdle is creating an understanding - from both homo and heterosexual people. Gay activists might say an article like this is pure hatred. It's not. Conservative folks will bring the Bible into it. Nope. Either of these arguments are like walking up to a stranger and instantly getting into a sword fight.
Instead, both sides should say "well, maybe there's some merit here. Let's talk about it."
If you want gay rights, have them. The government should facilitate. There should be tolerance. Yet if you do not support gay rights, gays will get louder and louder and take their rights, influencing others along the way to consider homosexuality via growing influence in media and popular culture - only existent because gays seek equal rights - and ultimately the line between man and woman will be erased causing a decline in population - because you didn't support gay rights. Gays don't want a decline in population, either.
Would universal acceptance of gay equality quiet down the gay talk and themes permeating America and allow for the number of gays to remain as naturally occurring? Or would gay themes accelerate, causing more to consider homosexuality causing not only partnership lines to be blurred, but also the decline of population?
There is nothing wrong with being gay. Some don't agree with that.
There is a problem if American population declines. 100% agree with that.
Edited by whereismantaw, 22 May 2013 - 05:33 AM.