LGBT_rights_opposition

From the late 1940s to the early 1960s gay rights movements began to form in America and Western Europe, but it was not until the sexual revolution of the 1960s and 1970s that an organized movement arose to oppose gay rights.

United States

Conservative opposition to LGBT rights in the US

In the late 1970s gay rights organizations were forming self-supporting communities in large urban centers in America such as San Francisco, New York City, and Minneapolis. Several states reformed their criminal code to decriminalize same-sex sexual relations between consenting adults, and some cities passed local anti-discrimination laws that included protection based on sexual orientation.^{citation needed}

Anita Bryant organized the first major opposition movement to gay rights in America, based on fundamentalist Christian values.^{citation needed} The group used various slogans that played off the fear that gay people were interested in "recruiting" or molesting children into a "life-style." A common slogan of the campaign was "Homosexuals cannot reproduce — so they must recruit." The Bryant campaign was successful in repealing many of the city anti-discrimination laws, and in proposing other citizen initiatives, such as a failed California ballot question designed to ban homosexuals or anyone who endorsed gay rights from being a public school teacher.^{citation needed} The name of this group was "Save Our Children," and its most successful campaign resulted in the repealing of Dade County's Civil Rights Ordinance by an overwhelming margin of 69 to 31.^{citation needed} Soon after, legislation was passed outlawing adoption by non-heterosexual persons in Florida.^{citation needed} In 1998, Dade County passed an anti-discrimination law that included the protection of people from discrimination based on sexual orientation, but the ban on homosexuals adopting children remains on the books.^{citation needed} The success of the Bryant campaign encouraged the development of other organizations which opposed gay rights legislation.^{citation needed}

Conservative Christian organizations behaved similarly in other nations.^{citation needed} In the 1980s organizations opposed to gay rights successfully persuaded the British Conservative Party to enact Section 28, which banned public schools from "promoting homosexuality" or endorsing same-sex marriages.^{citation needed}

US public opinion

Public opinion has shifted towards increased acceptance of homosexuality and equal rights for gays and lesbians over the past 30 years. According to the Gallup poll, the percentage of Americans who think that same-sex relations between consenting adults should be legal increased from 43% in 1977 to 59% in 2007.² In 1977 56% of Americans thought that gay people should have equal rights in terms of job opportunities. As of 2007 that number has risen to 89%.² In 1982 34% thought that homosexuality should be considered an acceptable lifestyle. As of 2007 that number is 54%.² In 1997 27% of Americans thought that same-sex marriages should be legally valid. That number is 46% as of 2007.² In 1977 13% of Americans thought that sexual orientation is genetically determined; as of 2007 42% thought it is.²

Numerous studies have investigated the prevalence of acceptance and disapproval of homosexuality, and have consistently found correlations with various demographic, psychological, and social variables. For example, studies (mainly conducted in the United States) have found that heterosexuals with positive attitudes towards homosexuality are more likely to be female, young, non-religious, politically liberal or moderate, and have close personal contact with openly gay men and lesbians.³ They are also more likely to have positive attitudes towards other minority groups⁴ and are less likely to support traditional gender roles.⁵

Boy Scouts of America

Policy and rationale

The Boy Scouts of America exclude gay and bisexual people from its organizations, generally for Scoutmasters but also for scouts in leadership positions. Their rationale is that homosexuality is immoral, and that scouts are expected to have certain moral standards and values, as the Scout Oath and Scout Law requires boys to be "morally straight."^{citation needed} The Boy Scout organization does not view their policy as unjustly discriminatory, but instead defends their policy saying that, "Tolerance for diversity of values does not require abdication of one's own values".⁶

In 2000 the United States Supreme Court ruled in Boy Scouts of America v. Dale that the Boy Scouts of America is a private organization, and as such can decide its own membership rules.⁷ There is still a movement to try and persuade the organization to change its policy or allow local chapters to decide for themselves.

Critics claim that gay people are not incompatible with scout values and are allowed to be members in most countries in the world,⁸ including the United Kingdom, where scouting was founded. Some United Ways, municipalities, school districts and businesses have stopped supporting the BSA for those reasons.⁹

Other outdoor-focused, youth-based organizations such as the 4-H club and Girl Scouts of the USA do not have similar policies. The BSA, however, receives a high level of support from religious groups, many of which are noted for their opposition to the gay rights movement.¹⁰

United States Armed Forces

The United States Armed Forces' "Don't ask, don't tell" policy requires gay men and lesbians to be discharged from the armed forces if they come out, but does not allow the military to question people about their sexual orientation. Even before it was established, there were advocates for allowing gay people to serve openly in the military. Critics of the current policy point out that neither unit cohesion nor morale were affected when the United Kingdom admitted gay people.¹¹ A similar comparison has been made to the lack of negative consequences when African-Americans and women were admitted into the military.¹²

Fascist and far-right opposition

Fascist political parties have been universal in their violent opposition to gay rights. Today, Neo Nazi organizations oppose gay rights, and may advocate life sentences in prison or concentration camps for homosexuals, or even the death penalty¹³ (which was instituted by the original Nazis in 1942¹⁴). The British National Party has shifted its platform from recriminalisation to an extension of clause 28-style legislation, ie. making it illegal to portray homosexuality positively in the media.¹⁵

In Israel, both mainstream ultra-Orthodox religious groups and Jewish right-wing movements such as the Samson Blinded oppose LGBT rights which are claimed to run contrary to the Torah.^{citations needed}

Psychological

Some LGBT groups do not see sexual behavior as a choice. Orson Scott Card commented "In my opinion, all homosexuals should be enraged at the notion that of all human beings, only homosexuals cannot control their sexual behavior by conscious choices."¹⁷

Some groups, many of which are funded by religious organizations, promote conversion therapy, which is designed to reduce homosexual attractions and behaviors and for some people increase heterosexual attractions. Sexual Identity Therapy is another alternative where clients can choose the direction based on their personal values, whether it be gay relationships, celibacy, or heterosexual relationships.¹⁸¹⁹²⁰²¹¹⁸

Health

Some opponents of gay rights argue that promoting gay rights leads to an increase in health risks coming from men who have sex with men, such as STDs and anal cancer.²² Critics charge that political correctness has led to the association of sex between males and HIV being downplayed.²³²⁴ Some also associate gay sex with higher levels of promiscuity.²⁵

Traditional Marriage Movement

People in the traditional marriage movement believe only unions between one man and one woman should be legally defined as marriages. They believe that children should be reared in homes with both a father and mother.²⁶²⁷ They have said same-sex relationships are not marriages,²⁸ that legalization of same-sex marriage will open the door for the legalization of polygamy,²⁹ that it is unnatural³⁰ and that it encourages unhealthy behavior.³¹³²

Religious

Christian,³³³⁴³⁵ Jewish,³⁶ and Islamic³⁷ social conservatives view gay sex as a sin, and its practice and acceptance in society as a weakening of moral standards. For example, The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has stated "The powers of procreation are to be exercised only between a man and a woman lawfully wedded as husband and wife. Any other sexual relations, including those between persons of the same gender, undermine the divinely created institution of the family. The Church accordingly favors measures that define marriage as the union of a man and a woman and that do not confer legal status on any other sexual relationship."³⁸ However, it does permit people in homosexual relations to attend worship services,³⁹ and does not object to rights regarding hospitalization and medical care, fair housing and employment rights, or probate rights.⁴⁰ The Unification Church concurs with this view. This is a primary reason why many religious social conservatives oppose the gay rights movement.

Some also cite natural law, sometimes called God's law or nature's law, when opposing the gay rights movement.⁴²⁴³⁴⁴

Conflict with other rights

Religious leaders in England have expressed concerns that gay hate-crime legislation infringe on freedom of speech and commented that "People holding firm opinions on sexuality will generally be reluctant to risk the emotional and financial costs of being challenged by a neighbour or colleague and being investigated by the police."⁴⁵ They cite examples of Harry Hammond, Stephen Green, and other Christians who have been arrested for expressing opposition to homosexual relationships.⁴⁶⁴⁷

Concerned Christians Canada expressed similar concerns over investigation over comments made by Craig Chandler against homosexual relationships, calling such investigation a "witch hunt".⁴⁸ Also in Canada Chris Kempling was suspended from his job from writing in a newspaper against homosexual relationships.⁴⁹⁵⁰

Leaders of adoption agencies complained of discrimination of Roman Catholics after new gay right laws shut down an adoption agency in England.⁵¹ Earlier, when Catholic adoption agencies in Boston chose to close their doors rather than comply with non-discrimination laws, Mitt Romney commented "It's a mistake for our laws to put the rights of adults over the needs of children... I find the current state of the law deeply disturbing and a threat to religious freedom."⁵²

Gay rights have also brought up conflicts with religious rights in the workplace,⁵³⁵⁴ as a government-subsidized Christian organization in Canada was ordered to abolish a conduct policy which prohibited employees from viewing or engaging in various sexual acts, including gay and lesbian relationships. The Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario wrote that "the effect of the policy was to make (the employee) a pariah within the organization."⁵⁵ and churches are forced to hire people in sexual relationships outside of marriage.⁵⁶ An Ocean Grove church group is suing New Jersey, saying that the state is pressuring it to allow a civil union ceremony for a lesbian couple at its oceanfront pavilion, thereby violating the group’s First Amendment rights.⁵⁷ The pavilion lost its exemption from property taxes, as its exempt status was dependent on being open to all members of the public, and a state official ruled that the church's prohibition of civil union ceremonies constituted a violation of this requirement.⁵⁸

Some ex-gays have felt oppressed by the gay rights movement. PFOX sued and won a case where they said the Arlington school district discriminated against them because they allowed gay rights group to pass out fliers to a school and not ex-gay groups. Randy Thomas has said "As a former homosexual, when I was involved in the 1980s promoting the gay agenda, our only focus was to seek tolerance, whereas today's political activism has moved from true tolerance into political domination and power. It's an amazing thing to watch a group that said they were oppressed become oppressors."⁵⁹

Contents

History