Suggested usage of LGBT terms
in articles, essays, reports, etc.

	that "homosexuals account for half the murders in large cities." (It is not clear whether they are claiming that gays and lesbians are victims or perpetrators of the homicides).
	gays and lesbians account for only 1 to 2% of the population of the U.S. Most reliable estimates suggest about 5%.
	gays and lesbians are responsible for 50% of the suicides.
	the media age at death of gay men is 42; that of lesbians is 45.
	gays and lesbians are 19 times as likely to die in a traffic accident than the average person.
	part of the gay agenda is to turn people away from Christianity.

None of these "facts" appear to represent reality.

Sexual feelings: person who is sexually attracted to members of the same gender. This is the meaning generally used by gays, lesbians, mental health professionals, medical professionals, religious liberals, etc.

or to:

Sexual behavior; a person who engages in sexual activities with a member of the same gender. This is the meaning generally used by religious conservatives

Sometimes an author will switch between meanings in the same article. This causes a great deal of confusion. A person can be considered gay or lesbian due to feelings of sexual attraction that they have exclusively to members of the same gender. But they may not act on those feelings and engage in homosexual behavior.

The solution is for authors to make it clear to the reader whether they are referring to "sexual orientation" or "sexual behavior."

Religious conservatives generally talk about "preference" in order to reinforce their assertion that the gender to which a person is sexually attracted is a choice, and that (through prayer or therapy) one can change from preferring sexual activity with one gender to another.

Others refer to "orientation" to reinforce their assertion that feelings of sexual attraction is fixed and not chosen. Evidence seems to indicate that for the vast majority of adults (perhaps all), their orientation cannot be changed. Many, perhaps most, bisexuals do have a preferred gender that they find sexually attractive; for them, the term "preference" makes sense. However, they comprise a small minority in society, perhaps on the order of 5%.

Since the available evidence seems to point towards orientation being fixed, we recommend against the use of the term "preference." According to Focus on the Family, a Fundamentalist Christian organization,

Gays, lesbians, sociologists, psychologists, researchers into human sexuality, members of liberal and some mainline faith groups, etc. normally view all sexual orientations as normal, natural, permanent and unchosen. It is defined as feelings of attraction exclusively to members of the same gender.  It is believed to be caused by an interaction of genetic and environmental factors. Studies on identical twins separated at birth and raised independently have confirmed these beliefs. Pedigree studies of the sexual orientation of ancestors of gays have added support. Anatomical and similar studies have been inconclusive.

Religious conservatives tend to view same-gender sexual behavior as an abnormal, unnatural, changeable and chosen preference. It is often viewed as having been caused by poor parenting or being the victim of sexual abuse as a child. A very miniscule percentage of mental health professionals agree with this position.

We recommend following the lead of most physical and mental health professionals, and consider all sexual orientations to be an unchosen and fixed that are normal, and natural.

The LGBT community, and their supporters in various religious and secular communities, often refer to their quest for equal rights, including the right to marry the person to whom they are attracted and to whom they are committed. This would give gays, lesbians, and bisexuals exactly the same type of protection against assault and discrimination as has been already guaranteed to other groups, on the basis of their gender, race, age, nationality, ability level, etc. They sometimes draw comparisons between the 1960's civil rights movement for racial integration and their anti-discrimination efforts in the early 21st century to extend anti-discrimination laws to include sexual orientation as a protected class. They were successful in 2009 with the passage of the federal hate crimes law.

Some religious and social conservative groups believe that comparing race with sexual orientation is not valid. Hate crime laws traditionally have guaranteed protection for groups on the basis of characteristics that they cannot change: race, gender, age, etc. They feel that to extend this list of protected classes to include the LGBT community is to give them special rights- - rights based on their behavioral choices, not on a factor that is beyond their control.

Gays, lesbians and their supporters point out that, in their opinion, a person's sexual orientation is beyond their control; it is not chosen and is not changeable. Most conservative Christians reject that argument, and point to the alleged successes of reparative therapy in converting persons with a homosexual orientation to heterosexuality. It is difficult to assess the effectiveness of this therapy because no studies on it have been published in peer-reviewed journals, and because no long-term studies have been made into its effectiveness. However, in 2013, the main promoter of reparative therapy -- Exodus International -- realized that this therapy is dangerous, ineffective, and has hurt many in the LGBT community. They have abandoned the practice.

It is worth noting that religion has always been a protected class, and it is certainly both a choice and changeable. Yet persons demanding religious freedom are never referred to as asking for special rights.

Strictly speaking, no group promotes special rights for the LGBT community. No proposed or existing law would actually grant rights to persons in the LGBT community that heterosexuals would not have as well. Instead, they grant equal protection for persons of all sexual orientations. A heterosexual who was discriminated against on the basis of their sexual orientation has the same protection as a lesbian, gay, or bisexual -- or for that matter, an asexual person.

Both "special rights" and "equal rights" are hot-button terms. They should be used with care. We recommend a phrase such as "equal rights for persons of all sexual orientations," as preferable to either term. 

Religious and social conservatives often lump together three groups of people among the "Ex-gays:"   Persons who have permanently changed from a lesbian or gay orientation to either bisexual or heterosexual. Few studies are available on this; what little data is available indicates that this is either extremely rare or impossible. Some LGBTs who were once leaders of the "Ex-gay" movement, but have since left it, have said that they had never seen someone who had actually changed their sexual orientation or gender identity. Bisexuals who have made a conscious decision to engage in relationships only with members of the opposite gender; this is a choice open to all bisexuals. Members of the LGBT community who have made a decision to remain celibate. Unfortunately, much of their advertising and writing subtlety implies that therapy is largely successful in changing lesbians and gays into heterosexuals.

Others acknowledge that bisexuals can choose either same-gender or opposite-gender sexual behavior, and that everyone can choose to be celibate. But they stress that a person with a homosexual orientation can never (or almost never) become an "ex-gay" in the sense of becoming sexually attracted to individuals of the opposite gender.

We recommend that writers be clear and specific when describing a person who is no longer sexually active with member(s) of the same gender: Has a miracle or near miracle occurred, and they have changed from gay or lesbian to a heterosexual orientation? Are they a bisexual who has decided to have a relationship with member of the opposite gender? Do they remain a gay or lesbian, while deciding to be celibate?

On the basis of six or seven passages in English translations of the Bible, that God hates homosexuality.

Others conclude that: 

On the basis of the original Hebrew and Greek texts, that God hates same-gender rape, prostitution, sex in Pagan temples, men sexually abusing boys, and heterosexuals engaging in same-gender sexual behavior. They conclude that the Bible is silent on consensual homosexual sex in committed, monogamous relationships.

This difference in interpretation causes much conflict.

	In the Netherlands, gays and lesbian citizens and people with residency permits were earlier allowed to register as partners. They were given the right to marry in the year 2001. A bill allowing same-sex couples "the right to marriage and all the trappings" passed the lower house on 2000-SEP-12 and was subsequently passed by the upper house. 3 This was the first political jurisdiction in the world to allow same-sex couples to marry and receive full benefits that have been routinely given to opposite-sex married couples for years.
	Belgium followed the lead of the Netherlands.
	In a few states, same-sex couples, either residents or visitors, can enter a civil union. These are not marriages. However, both are theoretically equivalent (or almost equivalent) to marriage in terms of rights, privileges, and obligations granted by the state. In practice, couples in civil unions have to fight for equal treatment and sometimes do not succeed. Further, "civil unionized" couples do not receive the 1,138 federal benefits that same-sex and opposite-sex married couples do if their marriages are recognized by the state in which they reside.
	Canadian law originally granted same-sex partners equal rights and privileges with common-law heterosexual couples. However, a senior court in the Province of Ontario ordered the province to start issuing marriage licenses in mid 2003. Since then, the federal government changed the marriage laws. As of 2005-JUL, all couples can marry -- both same-sex and opposite-sex, except for certain relationship and age restrictions.
	Same-sex marriage (SSM) came to Massachusetts in 2004. As of 2013-OCT, 13 additional states comprising one third of the American population have legalized SSM. By the end of 2013, we expect that loving, committed same-sex couples will be able to marry in 17 U.S. political jurisdictions: the District of Columbia and 16 states.

The public is generally unaware of the precise meaning of terms like: civil unions, domestic partners, registered same-sex partners, etc. We recommend that writers take care to use the correct term, and define the rights and privileges that it brings to the same-sex couple -- both in theory and in practice.

The use of the term "same-sex marriage" eliminates this problem.

Another concern with "gay marriage" and "homosexual marriage" is that some gays and lesbians object to the terms. They do not typically regard themselves as entering into a "gay marriage." They are simply getting married. They generally do not differentiate between a same-sex marriage and an opposite-sex marriage.

Site navigation: Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality > Basic data > here