The Choicer Challenge—NSFW
THE CHOICER CHALLENGE: Last week, the leader of British Columbia’s Conservative Party, John Cummins, told a radio interviewer that gay people shouldn’t be covered by the BC Human Rights Act because being gay is “a conscious choice.”
Like truthers (9/11 was an inside job!), birthers (Barack Obama was born in Kenya!), and deathers (Osama bin Laden is alive and well and living in West Hollywood!), choicers would appear to be just another group of deranged conspiracy theorists who can’t be dissuaded by science or evidence or facts. And John Cummins isn’t the only choicer out there. We have lots of choicers right here in the United States (Tony Perkins, Rick Santorum, “Stephen Colbert,” et al.).
But what if the choicers are right? What if being gay is something people consciously choose? Gee, if only there were a way for choicers to prove that they’re right and everyone else is wrong… actually, there is a way for choicers to prove that they’re right!
I hereby publicly invite—I publicly challenge—John Cummins to prove that being gay is a choice by choosing it himself.
Suck my dick, John.
I’m completely serious about this, John. You’re not my type—you’re about as far from my type as a human being without a vagina gets—but I have just as much interest as you do in seeing this gay-is-a-choice argument resolved once and for all. You name the time and the place, John, and I’ll show up with my dick and a camera crew. Then you can show the world how it’s done. You can demonstrate how this “conscious choice” is made. You can flip the switch, John, make the choice, then sink to your bony old knees and suck my dick. And after you’ve swallowed my load, John, we’ll upload the video to the internet and you’ll be a hero to other choicers everywhere.
It’s time to put your mouth where your mouth is, John. If being gay is a choice, choose it. Show us how it’s done.
Suck my dick.
I do see a few flaws in this argument, namely that many straight men have sucked dick, although usually for reasons than winning a political argument (money and survival being top of the list).
However, the flaws in Cummins’ argument are bigger, namely:
1. If it’s a choice, so what? Lots of things, such as religious and political expression are choices, and we protect those rights in a civil society.
2. It’s a choice? Really? Given the overwhelming social advantages of being straight, a significant minority of the population just goes on picking the enormously disadvantageous option, and never realizing that they could just go straight and all these problems would be solved?
3. Isn’t choice what freedom is all about?
4. Sorry dude, the science is steadily turning against you.
5. Honestly, do you feel you could make a choice to be gay? Let’s leave Dan’s dick out of this. Really? Seriously, really?