Have homosexuals been the object of ridicule and scorn?
The answer is most obviously “Yes.”
Apart from the broader goal of legitimizing homosexuality, the alleged aim of all “gay rights” initiatives, is to protect homosexuals from discrimination based solely on their “sexual orientation.” “Gay rights” advocates desire the freedom to practice their sexual “preferences” in a social environment free from prejudicial treatment by those who do not agree with homosexual practice.
Indeed, “Have homosexuals been the objects of scorn, ridicule and moral condemnation?” or “Have homosexuals been criminally abused and injured, as well as socially ostracized?’ – the answer is most obviously “yes.” But if we mean, “Have they been legally discriminated against in the same way as African-Americans or women, so that additional civil rights laws protecting them are necessary?” – the answer is decidedly “no.”
As citizens of the United States, individual homosexuals have all the fundamental rights accorded to every citizen: the right to vote, the right to privacy, the First Amendment rights of free speech, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, etc. However, what homosexuals, or anyone else, for that matter, do not have, is the right to have no one disagree with them on the morality of homosexuality. Nor do they have the right to be free from “attitudinal discrimination” against their sexual orientation. But neither does anyone else have such a right.
Today, more than ever, many within gay communities around the world now view and classify the conservative Christian who holds to the traditional and Scripturally-correct view that “the practice of homosexuality is incompatible with Christian teaching and conduct” as being politically incorrect, intolerant and homophobic. Ultimately, the crisis we face today is not about homosexuality or gay rights, but rather a “crisis of truth.” Undeniably, ‘truth is’ and it matters greatly regarding homosexual practice and the promotion of gay civil rights.
“The gay agenda” is a phrase that implies a uniform social and political agenda shared by all homosexuals. It also implies there is something inherently wrong in having an agenda. Both points are untrue. There is great diversity among homosexuals, including political and social diversity. For that reason no one agenda could be nor is it shared by all homosexuals, although it is fair to say there are some goals – same-sex marriage, acceptance of gays in the military, and so on – that are common to the political gay rights movement, even if and when they are not shared by all homosexual people. However, to promote the idea that the gay community is a united front in terms of gay rights or even the word ‘gay’ to correctly denote homosexual practice is inaccurate and an illusion. Around the world there is great, great diversity within gay communities when it comes to the promotion of gay rights and homosexual practice.
Whether or not homosexuality is “good,” and therefore, whether or not it ought to be socially accepted, has nothing to do with its legality or its political correctness.