Legislating "normal"

What is "normal"?  Most people think of "normal" as the way things are in a vast majority of examples.

For example, if perhaps, 95 out of 100 people in a region are all born with dark skin, having dark skin for those people would be considered "normal".

Human beings have two legs, two arms, one head.  This occurs so often that it is considered "normal".  Anyone born with or having a difference from those is considered not "normal.

People count on things being "normal" so much so that when something comes up that is not normal, people tend to find a way to correct it or make it as close to normal as possible.

This is why deformities and birth defects have so many doctors trying to find ways to prevent or correct them as soon as possible.

Conditions and diseases that are passed genetically have millions of dollars and thousands of people looking for ways to "cure" them.

No one seems to be arguing that finding a "cure" for Down's Syndrome is something to work for.

Everyone seems in agreement that polio is something that should be "cured".

Yet, we have politicians and people who want to change through legislation, to force a new "normal" on a society when they think there is something to gain by it.

Anything from deviant behavior to sexual "orientation" is being pushed on society at large to accept as normal what most people see as not "normal".

They work to try to tie things together.  for example that one must accept the behavior and the "person" at the same time or it is an expression of "hate" and thus the not recognizing of it as "normal" is criminalized.

This is so far from accurate.  We tell each other daily that we must separate the action from the person.

We say that what a person does is not necessarily what a person is.

Someone who steals a loaf of bread is not necessarily an evil, bad person.   They made a bad choice, they need to amend for that bad choice but they are not necessarily a bad person because of a bad choice.

We do not have to accept not "normal" behavior while at the same time, we still accept the person.

For example, to find it necessary to legislate property sales and rentals based on anything beyond potential to pay ones rent or mortgage is understandable.

If someone is "born " a certain way.  Without an appendage, or with a mental handicap or blind, deaf, etc...  it isn't necessary to itemize those situations.  It is only necessary to tell the seller/rentor that as long as the customer is able to show ability to make payment, there is no need to deny opportunity.

Government has no business trying to re-define "normal" via legislation  and thus making behaviors, actions, etc.. that are commonly perceived as "not normal" and force folks to see them as "normal"  That is nothing more than an ugly effort at social control.

Our government needs to knock off the social experiments and stick to doing those things the Constitution requires of it, nothing more.