By Peter Espeut

When I write, I seek to be clear and logical; but no matter how hard I try, there are always those who misunderstand what I write, often because they themselves fail to be logical.

In my column 'Gay rights aren't human rights' (Gleaner, February 15, 2013), I never said or implied that gay persons are not human, nor did I suggest that they are not entitled to human rights. Yet some readers have come to that conclusion. I invite them to consider that they need to brush up on their logic.

In the comments on The Gleaner website below my column of two weeks ago, someone with the nom de guerre onagarf writes: "If gay rights aren't human rights, then, logically, gay people are not human." Another commentator calling himself TheVoid writes: "This man is calling gay individuals subhuman beings."

Writing in this newspaper two days ago, Brian-Paul Welsh, calling me a Christian fundamentalist, writes: "The article must be rejected for the affront to humanity that it is. It is not for Christian fundamen-talists to determine who is human and, therefore, who is deserving of the rights afforded to human beings." In the comments below his article on The Gleaner website, jahmekan4justis writes: "Should homosexuals accept animal status and leave themselves to be treated thus because a group of people think so? I think not."

These comments reveal one of the major flaws in our education system: it teaches some people how to read and write, but teaches even fewer how to reason and be rational.

SYLLOGISMS AND FALSE LOGIC

I had written, "Gay rights are not human rights." How do these (supposedly) well-educated Jamaicans get out of that statement that I claim that gay people are not human? This is how their logic works; let me summarise their false argument in a syllogism:

Human beings have human rights.

Gay people are human beings.

Therefore, gay people have gay rights.

Surely you see the flaw in the third line. Here is a valid argument:

Human beings have human rights.

Gay people are human beings.

Therefore gay people have human rights.

Indeed, gay people, and all LGBT people, have the same human rights as every other human being, as contained in the preamble and the Thirty Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Nowhere are 'gay rights' or 'LGBT rights' mentioned in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and therefore, "Gay rights are not human rights." Gay people are human, and they have human rights, but they do not have 'gay rights', for those do not exist.

Gay people have the right, if they wish, to be gay in the privacy of their homes; that is their human right (Article 12). Gay people have the human right to life, liberty and security of person (Article 3). LGBT people have the human right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers (Article 19). And lesbians, all-sexuals and gays have the human right of peaceful assembly and association (Article 20). So gay people have human rights.

mashing down gay rights

What, then, are 'gay rights'? Are they of a higher order than 'human rights'? Do gay people want to have more rights than the rest of us?

Here is another false syllogism:

Human beings have human rights.

Gay rights are not human rights.

Therefore, gay people are not human beings.

Here is how the logic should go:

Human beings have human rights.

Gay rights are not human rights.

Therefore, human beings do not have gay rights.

Even if someone has not formally studied logic, as long as he has been through UWI, he would have to pass the course 'Use of English' to graduate, and therefore should not be making the simple logical errors that onagarf, TheVoid, Brian-Paul Welsh and jahmekan4justis have made above.

Even though I am a churchman, I do not argue in the public square using scripture or theology; that will appeal only to people of faith, and will mean nothing to secularists. I choose to use natural law, philosophy and logic, which every reasonable person should accept. So far, the LGBT debate has been charged with emotion and there has been a noticeable absence of logic. Let us hope that the quality of the debate will improve.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.