The Homosexual Invasion: Follow-Up
I was about to respond to this comment to my last post, but my comment became so long that I decided to promote it to a post. Below is the response to my last post by prying1 that sparked this one. I reprint it in its entirety to be fair to the author.
prying1:
May 1st, 2006 @ 6:22 pmAre Homosexuals the only ones who should have rights? Don’t parents have the right to tell their children what they believe about the homosexual lifestyle as well as politics, religion, and dietary restrictions. Do schools have the right to usurp the parents beliefs with ‘fairy tales’ that are obviously from a gay rights handbook. Would the school have the right to force a Muslum child to eat pork?
Parents should and do have rights for good reason.
I do not think that parents are teaching children to HATE, be INTOLERANT and FEAR homosexuals. If there are it is a miniscule minority. These are unsubstantiated charges frequently thrown out against the ‘Radical Religious Right’ because they (the right) don’t think of the homosexual lifestyle as being a viable lifestyle…
It is simply a disagreement between both sides. One says it is a choice and the other says they are born that way. Then we are faced with stories like Anne Hecht who decided to switch sides. So what is that if not a choice? Ellen DeGeneres decided to continue in the homosexual lifestyle. So what is that if not a choice?
Back to the original issue. Should parents have no rights at all in the raising of their children? Should the story of the gay princes, two men getting married be considered a sex education lesson?
If I was being taught about ‘different types of weddings’ I would be expecting customs of different nations not my home state…
My response follows. I know that many of you who read my blog regularly may disagree with my politics. That is why I rarely discuss politics here. I appologize if this disturbs or offends you (I don’t really appologize for my views, however).
The difference, prying1, is that your views are supported and taught in most schools and you do not complain that my viewpoint is not represented.
Your response is extreme and typical of the responses that I am concerned about in the first place. No one in this situation is saying that parents don’t have rights. The only people being denied rights in this situation are those who want tolerance and diversity taught to the children in that school.
Saying this fairy tale amounts to sex education is absurd as well. If we accept that argument then all books, magazines, newspapers, movies, and discusions that depict two individuals in any kind of relationship or having any physical contact beyond a handshake ought to be considered sexual education material and only made available to students after the informed consent of the parents. How would you re-write sleeping beauty? Perhaps she could be awakened by a loud knock at the door or the ringing of her cell phone. The prince wouldn’t dare enter the bedroom of a sleeping princess and kiss her without her consent. In my state that would be a sexual offense.
I don’t think children should be taught that they ought to try being gay and see how they like it, I do think that children should be taught that gay people exist in the real world and they are not out to harm you or anyone else. That homosexuality, whether it is a lifestyle choice or a predetermined preference, is not a threat.
I will not accept that the “religeous right”, as you call them, have a right to determine what is right and wrong, what is good and evil, what is to be tolerated and what is to be supressed. If you look back into the history of our country you will see that we were founded on principles that guaranteed not only freedom of religeon, but freedom from religeon.
Technorati Tags: Religious Right, homosexual, gay, rights, tolerance, diversity, sex education, homosexuality, right and wrong, good and evil, religeon, hate, fear, intolerance
We can go back and forth on this subject for the rest of our lives. I think that you have fallen into the trap of making general statements. Not extreme statements as you accuse me but general statements that encompass certain untruths.
For example, You imply that religion teaches intolerance, fear and hatred. The church I attend has never taught me to hate, be intolerant, and/or fear homosexuals. If I heard such nonsense from my pastor’s lips I would first verify what his thinking is. If he stood firm I would be out of there, or better yet, demanding his removal. I only know of one church that teaches so and that is Fred Phelp’s church which has about 70 members. Hardly representative of any or all religions. Churches/Religions that teach hatred for anyone are far and few between. At least in this country. The Middle East is a different story.
I’m not sure what part of my comment you considered ‘extreme’? I take it that it is not extreme to consider the homosexual lifestyle to be a choice as opposed to something one is born into? Your answer, “…whether it is a lifestyle choice or a predetermined preference…” shows that either opinion is still open for debate. I’ve met some homosexuals that say choice. I’ve also met some that say predetermined preference. So it goes.
Perhaps it was about the story “King & King” being a sex education lesson. Please note that in my comment I ASKED the question, “Should the story, of the gay princes, two men getting married be considered a sex education lesson?” - I did not answer my own question but left it open.
From your answer that I gather that you think it is not a lesson in sex education. I lean towards agreeing with you. That does not mean that the book is not controversial. It is.
Those who wish to could purchase the book and share it with their children. Obviously some of the parents in Lexington felt it to be a sex education lesson and hence the uproar. - We will see what the court says. Please note it was controversial before this Lexington event. -
This book has been controversial since it first appeared on the shores of this great nation. Chances are the teacher knew of the controversy and read it “without parental permission” to the little prepubescent children anyway. Is that the right thing to do? I think not. Shouldn’t parents of children be given a chance to let their kids be children? On this question I’ll answer yes.
I dug the following quote from a “King & King” book review on bookslut.com -
(…quoted parent says) “I’m not homophobic,” she said. “But I’m also someone who’s very careful about what I allow my child to be exposed to at such a very early age. I want to let my child be a child.”
(Chris Zammarelli, the bookslut writer says) - Obviously, I’m writing from the point of view that gay marriage should be legal and accepted. But I also understand the idea that issues of sexuality are probably best discussed when children hit puberty. That said, King & King is less about homosexuality than about teaching children acceptance.
- end quote -
http://www.bookslut.com/banned_bookslut/2004_04_001900.php
By the way. I know how it goes with comments getting long. -(:-) - GBYAY - Paul -
It is also important to note that gay marriage is legal in the state that this took place. Most people in that state feel that gays should be allowed to marry. The teacher was reading a story that would be the equivalent of a controversial fairy tale about women voting or blacks being something other than property, concepts that were once rediculous but are now seen as basic civil rights.
This is not to say that the topic is not controversial. It obviously is or we would not be having this discussion.
I’m not sure if this was mentioned or not but this book was primarily written for children who have gay parents which is starting to be or already is a common thing.
As said before, these people live in a state where same-sex marriages are legal. So, these kids are going to see gay couples all the time. They probably have kids in their class that have gay parents. They are going to have to learn about sometime. It’s not like this book went into graphic detail what being gay means.
One day I was watching a talk show I think it was either Oprah or Montel and they had some kind of psychologist or whoever on. This expert was telling parents that teaching their kids about sex early on when they are young is a good thing. He pretty much said the sooner the better which I kind of agree. You just have to know how to approach the topic with your kids. The more your kids know about the topic, the less likely, when the time comes, they will make the wrong decisions. By doing this, your letting them know they can talk to you about anything, keeping the line of communication open and letting them know they can trust you with these things. Children are naturally curious and they already ask questions about sex. I don’t think ignoring those questions would be a good idea.
Prying, you said that some of the parents in Lexington were in an uproar right along with the parents of the kids. Well, yeah they were and they were also apart of the same organization with those parents. So, that makes me wonder if it really is all about their children’s well being or if their cause also has something to do with it.
Children are going to learn things that differ from their parents views anyways, mostly from their friends. If these parents are so concerned, then they should just homeschool their kids and be done with it.