As the Democrats sifted through their arguments to get closer and closer to the bottom of the barrel in this week’s Supreme Court confirmation hearing, they happened upon a line of attack that was as ridiculous as it was irrelevant. Brought to the hearing by Sen. Mazie Hirono, a Democrat who is every bit as radical as they come, the argument went something like this: Because Amy Coney Barrett used the word “sexual preference” to describe sexual orientation, she has been proven to be some kind of bigot who must be kept off the nation’s high court.
Referencing an earlier question asked by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Hirono said, “I was disappointed that you wouldn’t give a direct answer and whether you agreed with the majority in that case or you instead agree with your mentor that no such right exists in the Constitution.
“So even though you didn’t give a direct answer,” she continued, “I think your response did speak volumes. Not once, but twice you used the term sexual preference to describe people in the LGBTQ community. And let me make clear: sexual preference is an offensive and outdated term. It is used by anti-LGBTQ activists to suggest that sexual orientation is a choice.”
Fully on her highest horse, Hirono concluded: “It is not. Sexual orientation is a key part of a person’s identity. Sexual orientation is both a normal expression of human sexuality and immutable, was a key part of the majority’s opinion in Obergefell, which by the way Scalia did not agree with. So if it is your view that sexual orientation is merely a preference, as you noted, then the LGBTQ community should be rightly concerned whether you would uphold their constitutional right to marry.”
First of all, Barrett’s feelings on gayness in general don’t really speak to the constitutional issues at the center of the gay marriage dispute.
Second of all, why is it wrong to refer to same-sex attractiveness as a “preference”? That word, contrary to what Hirono said, does not imply a choice.
If you prefer Doritos to Cheetos, does that mean that somewhere along the line you sat down, pen in hand, and made a clear, logical choice about which chip best suits you? Of course not. You like what you like. And whether you were “born” with that preference or you developed it somewhere along the way, it comes to the same: It was not a “choice” in the way that Hirono is trying to make it sound.
This was just a desperate attempt on the part of Hirono to make Barrett look like a religious extremist who would use her power on the Supreme Court to levy bigotry against the LGBT community. That she did it with the slippery language of political correctness is just one more sign that when we change words and terminology to make sure no one’s feelings get hurt, we are falling right into the left’s political traps.