The Civil Rights movement had a very specific purpose: To bring about radical social change.

African Americans wanted to be treated equally. They wanted to drink from the same water fountains, eat in the same restaurants, work at the same jobs, and ride the same buses. They didn’t want to be second class citizens any longer. They wanted to be treated like equal human beings.

That desire was justified. They didn’t want special rules for themselves any longer. They wanted all the rules to apply to everyone, regardless of pigmentation, social status, religion, and yes, even sexual orientation.

And I agree with that notion.

What I do not agree with is the homosexual agenda that is boiling on the surface of our culture today. The screaming voices on their side of the fence claim they want equal rights. They say homosexual marriage is a civil rights issue. They say justice must be done as it was done 50 years ago. But are they really seeking equal rights?

As a heterosexual man I have the right to marry any single (both in status and number), consenting woman who is of age. I cannot marry more than one woman (at the same time). I cannot marry any woman who is underage. I cannot force any woman to enter into a marital relationship with me. There is nothing unfair or unreasonable in those rules.

Every man has the exact same rights as I do. Every man, including homosexual men, have the right to choose to exercise those rights or to abstain from them. So is the homosexual agenda really about equal rights?

The whole premise behind the homosexual marriage movement is to accomplish goals that are the exact opposite of those goals of the civil rights movement.

Homosexuals and their supporters want the federal government to stand up and proclaim that the rules no longer apply to them. They want the federal government to makes special rules that apply specifically to them. They want to be treated differently. They want to be segregated into their own section of the law.

Should we do this? Should the government openly acknowledge a marriage that consists of two men or two women? Who are we to judge someone else’s love? Who are we to stop someone from living our their desires? All we need is to be loving and accepting, right?

Well, if homosexuals can have special rules, I don’t think we should stop there. If it is their civil right to have these special considerations then so should a few other choice segments of our society. If anyone wants to marry an animal they love, they should be allowed to do so and the federal government should acknowledge their relationship. If anyone wants to marry a 13 year old child, they should be allowed. Who are we to stop love?

If anyone wants to marry multiple spouses, who are we to judge? They should have equal rights too. If a parent wants to marry their own child, we just need to be loving and accepting of their choices. After all, that’s the tolerant thing to do.

Homosexuals can vote. They can eat where they choose. They can work anywhere they want (and employers are free to hire them if they choose). They can ride the bus, own homes, and even adopt children if they want. They are considered an equal class of citizen.

This is not a civil rights issue. This is a special rights issue.