Skip to comments.What "Gay" Marriage Will Mean for our Children
Posted on 02/22/2004 4:50:09 PM PST by GrandMoM
What "Gay" Marriage Will Mean for our Children
By Linda P. Harvey
Column originally published on WorldNetDaily.com, July 19, 2003 © 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
"Same sex marriage? It doesn't bother me!"
In many circles, this is the prevailing sentiment regarding the possible legalization of same-sex relationships as "marriages" in the U.S. If the Supreme Court in the state of Massachusetts rules in favor of the homosexual couples who have sued for marriage rights, then other states will most likely be forced to recognize these couplings as marriages under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the U.S. Constitution.
There's just one problem with this angle: It doesn't take into account the impact on children. If same-sex relationships become the law of the land, then homosexual marriage will be presented to America's schoolchildren as the equivalent of heterosexual marriage.
Here's how and why it will happen. Right now, the vast majority of U.S. public school districts have put themselves in a very vulnerable position, one that conservatives have been warning about for years but few school boards listened. What they've done is add under their non-discrimination policies the category of "sexual orientation." It only remains for enough time to elapse - and for same-sex marriage to be legalized - for "gay" education activists to force schools to implement sweeping changes in curricular content.
Among those changes will be "diverse" textbooks that include same-sex couples as role models, even for little children. To refuse such content will be considered "discrimination," and the American Civil Liberties Union and Lambda Legal Defense Fund will take that district to court, as they have recently in order to force homosexual clubs onto schools. If not those two well-heeled groups, then the National Education Association will sue, as it has promised, on behalf of any teachers involved. Increasingly liberal courts, modeling themselves after the Supremes, are pretty likely to rule in favor of such plaintiffs.
That also goes for the "right" of teachers who are homosexual to wear wedding rings, talk about their homosexual spouses with students and introduce spouses at school functions. Your little Katie will learn in kindergarten that "Mrs." Jones is married to another "Mrs." Jones - and that she can grow up and choose to do the same if she wishes. It is, after all, her "right."
Grade-school and middle-school anti-bias units will now crank into high gear the focus on homosexuals and cross-dressers. Because marriage is now legalized, children will be persuaded in misleading material that anyone who objects to homosexual behavior is not simply biased, that person is breaking the law. The take-away for students from these shallow lessons will be that it is illegal to criticize homosexuality, and every person young or old should be protected from the mean conservatives. Standing up for equality in America will translate into the freedom to practice homosexuality for every student who "discovers" such inclinations.
Sex education will be required to take into account this new form of "family" and abstinence - until - marriage education will take a twisted new turn. Suddenly, it will be co-opted by Planned Parenthood and other liberal activists with their own unique spin. Every student will be taught that, of course, abstinence until heterosexual or homosexual marriage is fine if that's one's choice. But since pregnancy isn't a danger for homosexuals, sex can be a wonderful option for younger and younger people - as long as it's carried out "responsibly," of course - like brushing one's teeth. To not teach this would be, again "discrimination" based on sexual orientation. Condoms are always available for those who can't wait. Let's show you third-graders how this condom fits on this banana, just so you are prepared.
Expect a whole new crop of young adult novels featuring same-sex romance leading to marriage to appear instantly and be adopted just as magically by middle-school and high-school language departments throughout the U.S. Your 13-year-old Kyle will be required to read and give a book report on a novel where Bruce and Jason meet, date and get married. What won't be covered is how Bruce and Jason split up a year later after cheating on each other dozens of times.
And it gets better (or worse). This stop-gap standard will last for just a few years, until the inevitable next piece of the puzzle is in place. Hank and Jim will petition the courts to allow Mary, the biological mother of "their" adopted child, to become part of their marriage. After all, what business does the court have in their bedrooms, determining who they have a right to love? Along about this same time, Cindy and her partner, Luke (who is really Lucy, except that she dresses like a man) will demand that the law recognize Luke as a "husband" in spite of her biology. And so will emerge the accompanying new curricular materials reflecting the legalization of group marriage and transgender unions, making sure every U.S. school child knows that these are future options for him, her or them.
In such a legal and educational environment, what happens to religions that don't believe homosexuality is moral? Will those religions and their ancient teachings eventually come before some future Supreme Court and be told that they are guilty of discrimination? That their beliefs are no longer constitutional because of privacy rights?
If this sounds like lunacy, it's because it is. What we do in the bedroom has always been public, in the form of what we call a family. It becomes what we teach and pass on as wisdom to our children. And if we aren't sure what "wisdom" entails, by golly, the homosexual activists are here to tell us.
° San Francisco Becomes Outlaw Territory ° Homosexual Marriage Debate Moves Into the Schools ° The Latest on Same Sex Marriage in Massachusetts ° Is the Da Vinci Code Christian? ° Parents Against Bad Books in Schools Get info on porn-laden school "literature" ° Hollywood's Distorted Picture of So-Called "Homophobes" ° Christian Witness to a Pagan Planet ° Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood
> Order our video on the "gay" agenda in the schools! NO TOLERANCE FOR TRUTH: What Our Children Are Learning About Homosexuality
> PARENTS & STUDENTS! Take our survey - How is homosexuality presented in your school?
> Help stop PFLAG and GLSEN
> Students - See our web site at Choice4Truth
> Organize a Group to Fight the "Gay" Agenda in Your School
Yes but school children are not mind numb robots who will buy into the this. They are already rejecting homosexual propaganda by changing the meaning of the word gay. Now anything that is stupid is gay. Ask anyone in high school or younger.
Every student will be taught that, of course, abstinence until heterosexual or homosexual marriage is fine if that's one's choice. But since pregnancy isn't a danger for homosexuals, sex can be a wonderful option for younger and younger people - as long as it's carried out "responsibly," of course - like brushing one's teeth.
It already is. Sesame Street has been talking about 'two mommies' and 'two daddies' for years. Couldn't believe it when I was watching my friend's little girl and SS was talking about homosexuality. It's going on in schools too. Parents should be the ones to talk to their kids about sexuality- any kind- not the public schools or viewer funded television.
Since history was recorded, the institution of marriage evolved because it, more than any other kind of union, offered the stability of the family unit.
Nothing in the prevailing discussions has convinced me that centuries of holding dear a rock-bed foundation of marriage needs altering now to accommodate an alternate lifestyle that produces no progeny, biologically speaking.
What I think is happening in America is this: We'll be so relieved when marriage is preserved as it now stands (by constitutional means, if necessary) that we'll accept "civil unions" in relief. Perhaps that acceptance now (which could never have occurred even ten years ago) is what the gay community had planned as the REAL hidden agenda of their cause, knowing that over 65 percent of Americans wouldn't tolerate anything else.
Except when he's cheatin' (99% chance he is)
The Innate-Immutable Argument Finds No Basis in Science In Their Own Words: Gay Activists Speak About Science, Morality, Philosophy
A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D.
Shirley E. Cox, Ph.D.
Jeffrey W. Robinson, Ph.D
. The following article was published in the Salt Lake City Tribune, in slightly abbreviated form, on May 27th, 2001. Lead author A. Dean Byrd, NARTH's Vice President, received many responses (mostly positive) to this intellectually provocative editorial.
The Salt Lake City Tribune has published several articles in recent months regarding homosexuality. While many of the articles are well-written, they do not reflect the scientific literature. In fact, the social advocacy of many of the articles seem to suggest a greater reliance on politics than on science.
Leaving aside the politics of the issue, perhaps it is time to examine the innate-immutable argument about homosexual attraction. First of all--although the issue is enormously complex and simply cannot be reduced to a matter of nature vs. nurture--the answer to that debate is probably "yes" --it is likely that homosexual attraction, like many other strong attractions, includes both biological and environmental influences.
What is clear, however, is that the scientific attempts to demonstrate that homosexual attraction is biologically determined have failed. The major researchers now prominent in the scientific arena--themselves gay activists--have in fact arrived at such conclusions.
Researcher Dean Hamer, for example, attempted to link male homosexuality to a stretch of DNA located at the tip of the X chromosome, the chromosome that some men inherit from their mothers. Referring to that research, Hamer offered some conclusions regarding genetics and homosexuality.
"We knew that genes were only part of the answer. We assumed the environment also played a role in sexual orientation, as it does in most, if not all behaviors.... Homosexuality is not purely genetic...environmental factors play a role. There is not a single master gene that makes people gay....I don't think we will ever be able to predict who will be gay."
Citing the failure of his research, Hamer further writes,
"The pedigree failed to produce what we originally hoped to find: simple Mendelian inheritance. In fact, we never found a single family in which homosexuality was distributed in the obvious pattern that Mendel observed in his pea plants." What's more interesting is that when Hamer's study was duplicated by Rice et al with research that was more robust, the genetic markers were found to be nonsignificant. Rice concluded.
"It is unclear why our results are so discrepant from Hamer's original study. Because our study was larger than that of Hamer's et al, we certainly had adequate power to detect a genetic effect as large as reported in that study. Nonetheless, our data do not support the presence of a gene of large effect influencing sexual orientation at position XQ 28."
Simon LeVay, in his study of the hypothalamic differences between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual men, offered the following criticisms of his own research:
"It's important to stress what I didn't find. I did not prove that homosexuality is genetic, or find a genetic cause for being gay. I didn't show that gay men are born that way, the most common mistake people make in interpreting my work. Nor did I locate a gay center in the brain.
"INAH3 is less likely to be the sole gay nucleus of the brain than part of a chain of nuclei engaged in men and women's sexual behavior...Since I looked at adult brains, we don't know if the difference I found were there at birth, or if they appeared later."
Indeed, in commenting on the brain and sexual behavior, Dr. Mark Breedlove, a researcher at the University of California at Berkeley, demonstrated that sexual behavior can actually change brain structure. Referring to his research, Breedlove states,
"These findings give us proof for what we theoretically know to be the case-that sexual experience can alter the structure of the brain, just as genes can alter it. [I]t is possible that differences in sexual behavior cause (rather than are caused) by differences in the brain."
....more can be found here"http://www.narth.com/docs/innate.html
I will pass on you insult!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.