Letter to the editor: In response to the article titled, “A Different Kind of Romance: St. Valentine’s Day Experiences in the LGBT+ Community.”,

Benjamin McClay

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.

First of all, I wanted to acknowledge that the LGBT+ community is a community that embraces love and acceptance. These are two values that we all should strive to embody on a day to day basis. However, the type of acceptance that the community accepts is detrimental. I have several problems with the article’s overall moral basis as well as the movement as a whole. If you read this letter and disagree with me, that is your right. By no means am I attempting to be “hateful,” or am trying to scream bigotry. However, there are three main reasons, biological, legal and moral, as to why acceptance of this movement is detrimental to society.

The ninth paragraph of the article: “A Different Kind of Romance: St. Valentine’s Day Experiences in the LGBT+ Community.”,, reads: “… there’s something about gifts and things at stores becoming so heteronormative.” The term heteronormative is defined by Mariam Webster’s online dictionary as: “of, relating to, or based on the attitude that heterosexuality is the only normal and natural expression of sexuality.” The article implies that this so called “heteronormacy,” is a problem, and that stores should not act in ways that violate nature. In nature, in order to procreate, there has to be sperm and an egg to reproduce a new child. Without one or the other, a new generation of offspring cannot form. Natural procreation has occurred all throughout history in animals, plants, and humans. Therefore, this “heteronormacy,” is the way that things always have naturally been, and will continue to be as long as natural reproduction exists. In ethics, we say that this violates a condition met under the second law of the Conservative natural law theory, which states that something is “immoral,” if it violates procreation.

Although this article does not exclusively push for the equality in marriage between homosexual couples and heterosexual couples, the advances in legality between homosexual couples have obviously progressed throughout the past decade. According to CNN.com, gay marriage was first legalized in Massachusetts in 2004. During the summer of 2015 same-sex marriage became legal in all fifty states. The main argument that progressives and other supporters of the LGBT+ community present is that two consenting individuals ought to be married to WHOEVER they want, regardless of the sex. The moral precept that a person ought to be married to WHOEVER they want, due to sexual orientation implies that they ought to be able to be married to a man and a woman if bisexual. This would be considered polygamy which most consider to be impractical and immoral. However, the pushing of the LGBT+ rights, implies that these types of rights can advance more throughout the next decade if ideologies progress as fast as they have been.

Finally, homosexuality presents a moral dilemma for a society. Obviously there wouldn’t be an enormous movement and heated debate if there was not an opposing side. The eleventh paragraph of the article states, “Eagles for PRIDE, Ashland University’s LGBT club, works to create a safe space for LGBT youth on campus.” It then reads, in the following paragraph, “…I think that helps for people just to come out because this is the first time that they are away from their families…” No one should ever feel threatened in any way due to their sexual orientation, but the more that we bombard people with propaganda that go against heteronormative ideas the more likely someone is to follow said ideas. The idea of homosexuality implies that if I am a guy and I like guys, rather than girls, it is morally okay. This obviously undermines traditional “heteronormative” dating relationships and undermines the traditional family set-up in America.

Before I make my next point, I want to acknowledge that this article talks nothing about homosexual marriage or adoption. However, the LGBT+ community pushes for both agendas AND the pushing of LGBT + dating implies marriage to be acceptable. Homosexual adoption may have, both short and long term, issues with the child. According to the American College of Pediatricians (ACP), “This research has revealed that children reared in homosexual households are more likely to experience sexual confusion, engage in risky sexual experimentation, and later adopt a homosexual identity. This is concerning since adolescents and young adults who adopt the homosexual lifestyle, are at increased risk for mental health problems, including major depression, anxiety disorders, conduct disorder, substance dependence, and especially suicidal ideation and suicide attempts.

This would undermine the qualities that a heteronormative upbringing would give the child: the nurturing, empathy, emotional support, femininity and loving affection of the mother or the discipline and masculinity of the father. The LGBT movement undermines distinct roles between male and female and suggests that there really “is not difference,” in gender. The LGBT+ community also is starting to suggest that there really are more than two genders. My sister experienced this first hand at college where the RA told her residents (on an all-girls floor) that her “pronoun,” is “they,” because “they,” cannot decide if “they” were a boy or girl. If this does not present a moral dilemma than I don’t know what will.
This moral dilema also creates a dilemma for straight boys and girls who are trying to figure out what it means to be a “boy,” and what it means to be a “girl,”. The fact that we tell our children that there really is “no difference,” between male and female implies ignorance, confusion, and moral blindness.

The LGBT agenda also has a startling effect on the suicide rates within society. Numerous studies show that 3% of heteronormative youth have had suicidal thoughts, 6% of the homosexual youth and 17% or the bisexual community. These stats are alarming for all sexual orientations until you examine the suicide rates of transgender people. 41% of the transgender community will attempt suicide at some point in their lives. The LGBT agenda has led to a drastic moral decline in society today.

Overall, after reading this letter, you might see me on campus and identify me as some type of “homosexual hater.” This is not the case. The purpose of this letter is to declutter the moral blindness and ignorance that our society has created when accepting the LGBT agenda as morally acceptable and okay. Thoughts and emotions toward these people are very natural and loving them is essential. However, being okay with what the agenda promotes implies a disorder in nature, a legal dilemma, and a moral problem.

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.