Well, Mission America host, Linda Harvey, has never made her dislike of homosexuality a secret. But her logic falls apart when it comes to understanding basic things, like what a person is. In her rants, she had this to say (click to listen to audio; transcript below):
Why should the equal protection argument be made in favor of homosexual behavior, which is changeable? People are not naturally homosexual, so the definition of “person” in the Fourteenth Amendment is being twisted to make this assumption.
“Person” should be understood based on historic, beneficial, or at least neutral and fact-based traits; it should not be twisted to incorporate behavior that most religions and most cultures have said a firm “no” to.
It’s also behavior for which there’s no recognized science demonstrating a genetic or hormonal origin. And it’s also not beneficial and does not stand the definition of marriage, used for millenia – that is, the act of consummation. It’s another sad fact of homosexual behavior that two men or two women can never consummate a marriage; they can never conceive children together.
This should still have some standing and it remains a fact that there are only two types of human in the world: male and female. Any other distinctions made are appearance, custom, and construction. So marriage is the lawful, orderly confirmation of what we already see in nature.
The Supreme Court says they will give their decision in June. Pray, friends, for truth to prevail.
Now, there are so many errors here it is difficult to even start. First, her statement that “behavior” determines if one is a person, or not. This is patently false; the U.S. Constitution does not determine if one is a person based on behavior.
Next, she claims there is no recognized science on homosexuality. This is also false. The theorized origin along with the neurological difference between homosexual and heterosexuals are discussed in this video produced by National Geographic:
Then to the claim that marriage is about consummation; also false, as the definition tells us the term refers to a contract, and in the guise of a marriage it is the first sexual act of the partners. As premarital sex is nearly universal among Americans, this argument of hers falls apart right there, as most marriages would not consummate at all, as the partners are not virginal.
Then she goes on to claim that consummation means the conception of children. As there have always been childless couples within the United States, this argument also falls apart. By her definition, George Washington was not a person, as he and Martha never had children together.
Then her last point, that there are only two kinds of people, male and female, shows a severely limited world view. In fact, there are far more than just male and female. One of the most obvious cases being that of the hermaphrodite. For those who live in a black and white world, there are hermaphrodites around us every day. And this is not a new phenomenon either, with examples spoken of in art and literature throughout history, such as this wood cutting from the 17th century:
It is well known that people such as Ms. Harvey have a tenuous grasp of science as it is, but this argument of her takes the cake. It is an insult that she makes such claims on a broadcast show, and if she has any semblance of moral strength she must apologize to her audience for telling them such untruths.