Vaid’s Liberal Argument :: Research Papers

Vaids great(p) ArgumentAndrew Sullivan and Urvashi Vaid argon two of the most prolific advocates of transgendered equality. Urvashi Vaids book, Virtual Equality, argues that transvestics are living as if they are equal to heterosexuals when in fact homosexuals are still treated unfairly and need to search true liberation. Sullivans book, most Normal, examines several different political groups and their differing beliefs concerning how society should remove with homosexuality. The arguments expressed in Vaids book suggest that Sullivan would categorize her into chapter four of Virtually Normal, entitled, The Liberals. It becomes evident that Vaid is neither a Prohibitionist, Liberationist, Conservative, nor an advocate of Sullivans ideal politics. Sullivan would categorize Vaid into the Liberal kinsfolk because her ideals concerning societal education, anti-discrimination laws, and individual freedom match those of Liberal politics. though Vaid may share the same goals as othe r political groups, her methods of achieving these goals are definitely Liberal.Vaids argument does not fit Sullivans Prohibitionist category. Prohibitionists, according to Sullivan, entrust that homosexuality goes against the grain of both Christianity and natural law. Homosexuality, the Prohibitionists believe, is deemed morally wrong in the bible, and should be denounced as well as punished. Sullivan writes It is that homosexuality is an aberration and that homosexual acts are an abomination (20). Sullivan goes on to write Drawing on Aristotles desire of normative nature, Aquinas theorized that all human beings had a single perfect natureAccording to Aquinas, all human beings sexuality is linked to raisingThis is what sexual activity is for (32). The above thinking is what Prohibitionists call natural law. distributively being has a natural function, and, for humans, that function is to reproduce. Here, it would be wrong for hatful to have sex without the intention to repro duce. Since there is no reproduction convoluted in homosexual sex, Prohibitionists denounce homosexuality. Though Vaid herself may be a homosexual, it is her argument and not her identity that suggests that she could not be placed into the category of Prohibitionist. Vaid writes At its core, this right-wing movement rejects the two-hundred-year-old experiment of American pluralism and, in its place, proposes a Christian state, a theocracy. Right-wing leaders and organizations explicitly reject egalitarian values like tolerance, dissent, individual freedom, and compromise (307). Vaid believes that the religious right, a advocator of Prohibitionist politics, is against diversity, democracy, and equality. For this reason, Sullivan would not categorize Vaids argument in the Prohibitionist category.