Date: Thu, 9 Dec 1993 10:52:12 -0600 Something to send to all our fundie friends: ARE "FAMILY VALUES" AND "GAY LIFESTYLE" STRANGE BEDFELLOWS? by Stephen Chapman, Chicago Tribune, Thursday 12/9/93, Section 1, P 13 - Copyright - reprinted without permission It looks as though homosexuality will be coming to Williamson County, Texas, after all. Last week, the county commissioners voted to reject a $750,000 property tax abatement for Apple Computer, which wanted to build and $80 million office complex on a patch of Central Texas ranch land. The reason was not that the commissioners didn't want the 1,500 jobs that Apple would bring but that they didn't want the kind of people the company might hire. What kind of people? Apple furnishes health benefits not only to the spouses of its employees but also to their unmarried partners--including gay ones. Commissioner David Hays, who cast the deciding vote, feared that "if I had voted yes, I would have had to walk into my church with people saying, 'There is the man who brought homosexuality to Williamson County.'" That may not be an epitaph any of us would want, but fortunately it is also one none of us could ever deserve. Poor Hays and his fellow congregants may actually believe that since their part of the country was settled, it has never served as a haven for homosexuals or homosexual liaisons. But in a county inhabited by 140,000 people, there are doubtless enough gays and lesbians to scandalize every church in the area. Most locals apparently realize as much: Fully half of them, according to a poll, disagreed with the decision. And on Tuesday--despite opponents warning, "An Apple today will take family values away"--Hays provided the vote to pass a modified tax break. "My vote is not a change in my values," he said. "I am merely acknowledging Apple's right to come into Williamson County under a very favorable economic relationship for the people of our county." True enough. Granting a tax break to a corporation no more means endorsing every one of its internal policies than building an office complex in Williamson County means agreeing with every scatterbrained comment that comes out of a local politician's mouth. But there's a more pertinent issue here. Homophobes in this part of Texas think they are upholding "family values" when they oppose corporate benefits for unmarried partners. One young mother of three said. "I know not everyone can have a perfect family, a husband and wife, 2.5 children. But this is what we strive for." Okay. But how are families like hers endangered if Apple offers health insurance to a gay or a lesbian who lives with another gay or lesbian? How is that policy going to hinder red- blooded heterosexuals from marrying, propagating and raising kids in stable, loving homes? The fact is, some small but significant share of the population is homosexual. And it's as implausible to think the typical homosexual could "choose" not to be gay as it is to think a heterosexual could decide to become gay. Given that some people are homosexual, how can they best be treated in order to foster the values cherished by traditionalists? Opponents of the Apple tax abatement apparently think the only option is stern condemnation. But what result will that approach have? Even in a hostile society, gays are no more likely to be charmed by celibacy than straights. So many will resort to furtive promiscuity, which minimizes the chance of being found out. Some will be induced to marry, in an effort to conceal or overcome their true nature. Some will be pushed into self- loathing and even suicide. It's hard to see how any of these is good for homosexual individuals, or even for heterosexual families (many of whom, after all, have gay members). In his excellent new book, "A place at the Table: The Gay Individual in American Society" (Poseidon), gay conservative critic Bruce Bawer argues that "the sensible--and truly conservative--way of dealing with the fact of homosexuality would be to arrange society in such a way that homosexuals can grow into well-integrated and productive members of it as easily as their heterosexual counterparts." To try to wish them away "is to push many of them to the edges, to foster the radicalization of people who might be conservative themselves." You'd think that anyone disturbed by the bizarre flamboyance of a few gays would fervently want homosexuals drawn into staid, conventional arrangements, and the sooner the better. Apple's policy does exactly that by conferring benefits only on homosexuals involved in the closest thing they can achieve to marriage--fostering the sort of commitment and stability that most heterosexuals say they revere. Millions of gays and lesbians live quiet, middleclass lives indistinguishable from those of their neighbors, and a lot more would do so if not for the hostility, ostracism and even violence invited by open homosexuality. Heterosexuals who cherish "family values" ought to welcome gays who want to practice them. - Stuart Laird (slaird@prairienet.org) 411 W. Hill St., Champaign, IL 61820 (217) 359-2745 (v) -2755 (fax) "Friends don't let friends vote Republican"