The Battalion OPINION Wednesday, October 3,1990 Opinion Page Editor Ellen Hobbs 845-3314 Wee Ignorance It is rare that a letter in The Battalion has content that makes me read it twice. Bruce Hudgins’ letter on homosexuality was one of these. The first time through, I was sure that it was a joke. It was only after carefully looking at the letter that I realized it was something far more serious. Take a good look at the letter. It isn’t the work of an illiterate, reactionary old codger whose only source of information is the ministries of Jimmy Swaggart. It is the work of one of our own, a senior in one of the better universities in the state of Texas. Hudgins has been exposed to the same educational opportunities as you and I, been to college lectures, perhaps was even in some of our classes. Yet, with all this, this poor guy honestly believes that what he wrote was a true, factual account of homosexuality and the AIDS crisis. Hudgins is soon going to be graduating. This scares the hell out of me. Bigotry and prejudice are often induced by nothing more than simple ignorance of a minority group. Blacks, for example, are often blamed for poverty and crime. It is in this same manner that Hudgins blames homosexuals for the AIDS epidemic. It is not too hard to see from these examples that the ignorance of prejudice often leads to gross generalizations and misinformation. I don’t expect Hudgins to like homosexuals any more than he does after reading this, but it would be a crime for him to be ignorant any longer of one of the most serious epidemics of the 20th century. leads to prejudice against homosexuals Kevin Robinson Reader’s Opinion The biggest gaffe in Hudgins’ logic is that he assumes that homosexuality is a decision that one makes based on their moral and political upbringing. Some homosexuals that I am acquainted with tell me that they have known they were homosexuals since childhood. The very fact that homosexuality has always been with us in history, and that it occurs in other species of the animal kingdom (where, we assume, chimps and birds don’t have moral dilemmas) is enough to show that being a homosexual is not merely a vice that is analogous, in Hudgins’ crude thinking, to starting and stopping smoking. A homosexual can no more change his sexual preference than Hudgins himself can. T his accepted, intolerance to a characteristic of a person that they cannot change is nothing more than simple prejudice. The AIDS angle of Hudgins’ letter was the scariest part. I would have thought that even a grade school child would have been able to see the inaccuracies of Hudgins’ statements. Most modern theories on the origins of AIDS state that it was not introduced by homosexuals. They merely became the most widespread victims. The scenario of drug addicts selling themselves to homosexuals for drug money and thus spreading the disease to heterosexuals is almost laughable. What would be the problem with a homosexual drug user sharing needles with a heterosexual and transferring the disease in this way? This brings up a major problem with Hudgins’ thinking. He paints a picture of the gay community as a legion of immoral, lust-filled perverts who only want to engage in casual sex and thus spread the disease of AIDS to “moral, conservative. God-fearing” folk. Homosexuals are, in my experience, no different in their sexual drives than heterosexuals. There are, of course, those homosexuals that willingly engage in casual sex with complete lack of inhibition and there are those who never engage in sexual relations at all. For those heterosexuals who may feel morally superior to the homosexual community, go to the Dixie Chicken or Sneakers on any given weekend night and see how many heterosexuals are out for a one-night romp in the sack. Then come and tell me how we are just so much less responsible for the spread of AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases. One of the more disturbing facets of Hudgins’ letter was his falling back on that old crutch, Biblical passages. Taken literally, the Bible also tells us about “giants in the Earth,” ghosts, talking serpents, etc. I may be wrong, but instead of falling back on minute points of scripture, isn’t it more important to follow the basic philosophy of Christ and love your brother with tolerance, no matter how different he may be from yourself? The inclusion of scripture in arguments against homosexuality is not only irrelevant, it’s ignoring the basic teachings of Christ himself. Getting back to the original article that started all of this, Irwin Tang is absolutely correct in saying laws against homosexual practices should be abolished. These laws are highly For heterosexuals who may feel morally superior to homosexuals, go out on any weekend and see how many heterosexuals are out for a one-night romp in the sack. outdated and were introduced by the “majority” at times when homosexuality was not well understood and most citizens still had beliefs like Hudgins. Any law discriminating against homosexuals isjust as wrong in principle as laws requiring blacks to use separate restrooms. Furthermore, any law that tries to tell adults what they can and cannot do during sexual activity in their own home, is not only wrong but ridiculous. More than a real legal threat these laws are merely insults to a people that have long outgrown the repressed sexual mores of the Victorian era. Remember, heterosexual oral sex is still illegal in many of our Southern states. I think that the preceding statements are something just about anyone intelligent enough to gain admission to this University probably thought of on their own after reading Hudgins’letter The fact that the letter was even writtet by a senior at a world-class universitj answers very effectively Hudgins’ statement about the quality of AIDS education and minority awarenesstha has been implemented by the Reagan and Bush administrations. When the homosexual population is somewhere around 10 percent and always has beet it means that Hudgins has now probabi alienated himself from many of his fellow students, probably at least one®' his professors, and possibly even some of his own friends. Not all homosexuals “come out.” I try to tell myself that Hudgins is a fluke here at A&M.thatbt somehow got past any kind of cultural awareness by some terrible mistake. However, these kinds of beliefs can never be dismissed. As I stated before, they can’t simply be written off3sthe work of a redneck hillbilly that is 100 years out of his time. No, I would lay odds that Hudgins isjust as intelligent as you and I, and where there’s one heit there are bound to be more. I wonderes s the other night how in the world David Duke thought he would haveenou; support to win state senator. I thinkht just received my answer. In a world where more and more knowledge and education is available to anyone withth flick of a TV switch, the door of apublt library or the pages of an inexpensive magazine or journal, a letter like Hudgins’ gives you something to thinl about, doesn’t it? Kevin Robinson is a senior English major. G Mail Call ByCf OfTht A r inevit; ceinbt tmgla “M< pen,” Regen been i We gc pen b< never Fra Koble being “I ( “Aftei soone: event. For many by the Kar lenz Si man si Itatioi Ipartyi: But not las Get /ears; aggec tempt: sion fc “Ev it whe wonde gobac Dr. and a many “Ev their c will ca Reader’s letter shows ignorance EDITOR: This letter is in response to the letter written by Bruce G. Hudgins, that obviously sadly uneducated person who wrote in response to Irwin Tang’s letter concerning the rights of ho mosexuals. Mr. Hudgins expressed his primitive view that “homosex uality is a sickness that infects the weak-minded and morally corrupt,” completely exposing the fact that he is unaware of any modern thought in this area. If he had read anything on the subject published by experts within the last 10 to 15 years, he would have seen that most educated people no longer ac cept this view. Homosexuality is not considered a disease, ill ness or pathology of any kind. It is considered a preference — a natural orientation of the individual. As a note of interest concerning the “morally corrupt,” I wish to inform Mr. Hudgins that there is documented fact that at least five Catholic popes and countless other religious officials, including nuns, bishops, cardinals, priests and min isters of all religions, have engaged in explicit homosexual acts and relationships. Which brings us to another issue Mr. Hudgins exposed his horrible ignorance of: homosexuality and Christianity. First of all, nowhere in the Bible does it say a man shall not love another man or a woman shall not love another woman. Second, all versions of the Bible are different in their transla tions of the original texts over many thousands of years. Scholars have noted that many Bibles have taken the liberty of translating neutral words of the Aramaic and Hebrew lan guages into specific definitions that can only be derived from the context of the passages. In the passages noted by Mr. Hudgins, it says a man shall not lie with a man as with a woman. When a homosexual man lies with another homosex ual man, he is lying with him because he is a man. It has noth ing to do with women or the replacement of them. On the issue of AIDS, Mr. Hudgins, you had better read up on current statistics. First, at present, it is said that hetero sexual women are the highest risk group for the disease. Sec ond, AIDS is not a gay disease in particular. Statistically and medically speaking, homosexual women are the lowest risk group for any sexually transmitted disease. Mr. Hudgins is right: This is the good old conservative South; however, there are many (gay and straight) who are in high hopes that Southern thinking will eventually evolve to a higher point. As Mr. Neal Peart of RUSH so eloquently wrote: Quick to judge, quick to anger, slow to understand; Igno rance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand. Kristin J. Frederiksen ’91 Hudgins’ letter refutable, silly EDITOR: I write in rebuttal to Bruce Hudgins’ letter on Sept. 28. Bruce, your first paragraph is pure opinion which cannot be easily refuted, though if you knew any gay people, you would realize how silly it is. However, some of your other points are more readily answered. First, it is true that heterosexual intercourse is the natural method of reproduction. But there are many varieties of het erosexual expression in which people indulge simply because they are fun, though they are just as “physiologically wrong” as homosexual sex. Are you going to tell everyone to refrain from everything but coitus? Next, the original meanings of the Biblical passages you cite are actually open to question. Also, quoting the Bible may end debate where you come from, hut in a large university, and in the world, there are many people who do not regard Christian dogma as the final world on morality. Now about AIDS: worldwide, “statistics will show” that it is heterosexuals who have spread the disease the most. Not surprising, since there are more of them. And “knowingly spreading a disease”? WRONG. It is usually spread by people who are ignorant of their infection, or just ignorant. But edu cation is working. Among gay men (more informed, on aver age, than straights) the spread is slowing to a crawl. The new “high-risk groups” are teen-agers (who think they are immor tal) and rural people who think AIDS is an urban problem. And, by the way, Webster’s defines “bisexual” as: “having sex ual desire... for members of both sexes”. I assure you that such people do exist. As for Barton’s views on the Disabilities Act, I wonder if he intends to deny benefits to straights with AIDS, since they also should “know the chances” of their behavior as well. And how is anyone to tell the difference? Is he going to ref use ben efits to people who look gay? The rest of your letter can be reduced to: gays, shut up or go away. I don’t think it’s going to happen. Humans come in many varieties, and you’re just going to have to learn to live with them. Paul D. Jones’92 few weeks now, but when I read Bruce Hudgins’ comments I just couldn’t stand it anymore. How could somebody be so ignorant and intolerant? Though Bryan-College Station is in the “old conservative South,” Texas is still a part of the United States of America, isn’t it? I’m an international student from Germany and I am em barrassed to see that the country claiming to be the most dem ocratic and liberal nation in the world produces citizens like Mr. Hudgins. What annoyed me most were the demands that he posted, literally calling for the prosecution of all homosex uals. I do not care what he thinks or believes, that is none of my business, but what I do care about are the individual’s right to personal freedom, which should be found some where in the U.S. Constitution. Another thing that caught my eye in Mr. Hudgins’ letter were the terms “moral” and “God.” First of all, doesn’t God want you to love your fellow human beings? So if you area Christian, you should practice it. Second, “moral” is a very broad term, and has often been abused for the purpose of ar guing what is right or wrong. From Mr. Hudgins way of arguing, I can infer that he has probably never been outside of Texas, or at least has not en larged his mental horizon beyond the state lines. Hasn’t he learned anything from history? The German people experi enced one of the worst cases of discrimination during the Third Reich, killing people just because of their faith. Of course it was easy to blame the homosexuals for spreading the AIDS virus, as well as it was easy to blame the Jews for the economical and political problems we had in Germany in the ’20s and ’30s. Think about that, Mr. Hudgins, and look again at your “Declaration of Independence.” I still wonder how dare you judge somebody else you don’t even know and, furthermore, how you call for the punishment of homosexuality. ety.” Sky the lai Germ: nation But long house: have U “Or need ; Juliane Buschhorn ’94 EDITOR’S NOTE: Bruce G. Hudgins’ letter, “Homosexuals are sick, immoral,” appeared in The Battalion’s Mail Gallon Friday, Sept. 28. Intolerance embarrassing for U.S. EDITOR: I’m responding to Bruce G. Hudgins’ letter printed on Friday concerning the rights of homosexuals. I’ve been read ing the Opinion Page of The Battalion pretty regularly for a Have an opinion? Express it! Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff resents the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author’s intent. There is no guarantee that letters submitted will be printed. Each letter must be signed and must include the classification, address and telephone number oj the writer. All letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald, or sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111. The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Cindy McMillian, Editor Timm Doolen, Managing Editor Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor Holly Becka, City Editor Kathy Cox, Kristin North, News Editors Nadja Sabawala, Sports Editor Eric Roalson, Art Director Lisa Ann Robertson, Lifestyles Editor Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup porting newspaper operated as a commu nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan- College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editorial board or the au thor, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regu lar semesters, except for holiday and ex amination periods. Newsroom: 845-3313. Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur nished on request: 845-2696. Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col lege Station, TX 77843-1111. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station TX 77843-4111. Adventures In Cartooning by Don Atkinson Jt HCV, DOflJ. DO DOC KNOW whrtr "boor-cuAsen." ^ (WHO'S fmflOW io com govs \