Issues are Subjective

To the editors:

Stephen E. Sachs '02 is after something in "Questioning Homosexuality." He is conniving, using slithery arguments and doubling back, but why? Flare is a silly publication, and they have produced a silly headline in "Moving Beyond the Morality Debate," but this is all secondary. Can we honestly believe that there is still a debate to be had? We can carry on our "morality debate" until we're blue in the face, but it won't matter. Morality, as of now, is still subjective; until a moral philosopher comes along and cements the whole thing, and all humanity says "Oh, now I get it!" and we have an absolute moral code to follow, it will continue to be subjective.

And if homosexuality loses the morality test, what then? What would the recourse be? Demote homosexuals to second class citizens? Enslave them? Kill them? Tell them to stop being homosexuals, because they made the wrong choice? I daresay we are not "past" the issue of homosexuality in our society, but we should be. We are also not past the issue of race and racial discrimination in our society, but no one should propose reopening the debate on whether or not black people are inferior to white people, or whites to blacks, in order to figure out how to coexist. I daresay again that that tactic might be more divisive than helpful.

How, and why, does Sachs propose entering into this debate? If he wants to get in to a morality debate over homosexuality with the "so many Americans--whose opinions and votes matter," he will lose, because there is nothing moral about homosexuality. There is nothing moral about living, either.

Harry G. Kimball '03

March 13, 2001