GOP Congressman Says Firing Gays Should Be Legal; Claims Being Gay is a Choice

Underscoring why the Christianists continue to promote the "ex-gay" myth regardless of the positions of legitimate mental health and medical experts is the statement by Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) who told Think Progress last week that it should be legal to fire gays from their jobs because "being gay is a choice."  The only choice on the entire issue would seem to be Lankford's choice to be an ignorant bigot.  Without the lies and falsehoods disseminated by NARTH, PFOX, and similar snake oil merchant organizations and the claims of "ex-gays for pay" like PFOX's Greg Quinlan, Lankford wouldn't even have the smallest shred of a basis for his foul statements.  Here some  highlights from Think Progress on Lankford's both utterly ignorant and bigoted statements:

Rep. James Lankford (R-OK) told Think Progress last week that he believes someone should be able to be fired for his or her sexual orientation.

In a conversation on Capitol Hill, Lankford expressed his strong belief that being gay is a choice, and that LGBT workers should not be protected from workplace discrimination because it’s something they can change. “You don’t walk up to someone on the street and look at them and say, ‘gay or straight?’” Lankford said:

STRASSER: Would you support a law that says you can’t fire someone for their sexual orientation –

KEYES: Similar to protections for people on race or gender?

LANKFORD: Well, you’re now dealing with behavior and I’m trying to figure out exactly what you’re trying to mean by that. Because you’re dealing with — race and sexual preferences are two different things. One is a behavior-related and preference-related and one is something inherently — skin color, something obvious, that kind of stuff. You don’t walk up to someone on the street and look at them and say, “Gay or straight?”

KEYES: But you think that even if you can’t see they’re that way, you don’t think someone is born gay necessarily?

LANKFORD: Do I personally? No. I don’t. I think it’s a choice issue. Are tendencies and such? Yes. But I think it’s a choice issue.

As I said, it is to give a semblance of legitimacy to individuals like Lankford and his anti-gay statement that motivates the Christianists to spend big money promoting the "choice" and "ex-gay" myths.