Posted on 02/20/2005 11:08:58 AM PST by DirtyHarryY2K
A mini-controversy has arisen over an episode of “Postcards from Buster,” a children’s program produced for PBS, which features a same-sex couple from Vermont. The Secretary of Education refused to distribute the episode and asked that government funds used to produce it be refunded.
In response gay activist Winnie Stachelberg accused the Secretary of denying children “an education about the diversity of American families.” The program is not, as Stachelberg claims, an effort to promote tolerance, but part of a comprehensive campaign by gay activists to change the culture and marginalize those who oppose the redefinition of marriage. Having lost badly in the 2004 election cycle, gay activists realize that their only hope lies in influencing the next generation to accept their agenda. Therefore, the children are their main target.
Their goal is to present same-sex couples with children as just like father/mother families, but fatherless or motherless families are not the best possible place to raise children.
Children love a right to be conceived in marriage and raised by their biological father and mother. Any other situation constitutes a serious loss for the child. Adults can respond heroically to the tragic circumstances which separate children from one or both biological parents, but no one should intentionally make a tragedy.
Society has no duty to normalize the acquisition of children by same-sex couples -- children who will be permanently and intentionally fatherless or motherless. The gay activists insist that what matters is the number not the sex of the parents, but the children know differently.
When openly lesbian Rosie O’Donnell was asked in an interview how she would react if her adopted son expressed a desire for a father, she replied that he already had expressed such a desire. She had told him, “If you had a daddy, then you wouldn’t have me for a mommy because I’m the kind of mommy that wants another mommy.” She explained adoption by telling her son that “he grew up in another lady’s tummy, that God looked inside and saw there was a mix-up and God brought him to me.” In other words, the boy’s natural desire for a father was a rejection of his mother and God was part of the conspiracy to make him fatherless.
Some female couples have chosen to conceive babies by artificial insemination. A young woman so conceived has spoken out about the practice: “[I]t’s not something that a seal of approval should be stamped on. We shouldn’t say it is a great and wonderful thing and then you have all these kids who later in life will turn around and feel cheated.” When she was growing up, she “always had the feeling of being something unnatural.” In spite of this she still feels a duty to protect her mother.
The acquisition of children by same-sex couples is not part of the normal diversity of society, but a particularly pernicious form of child abuse. Children are treated as objects who exist to provide the pleasure of parenting to adults. It is not that same-sex couples do not love their children. Children are naturally lovable. However, the very fact that they love their children and want what is best for them creates a dilemma. Same-sex parenting is the result of a conscious premeditated decision which deprives the child of something every child needs -- a parent of each sex. The adults who make that decision cannot admit that their actions hurt the child they love. They are either deny their children’s pain or blame the inevitable problems on “homophobic, heterosexist” discrimination.
The children love the people who raise them and want to protect them. Often the more dysfunctional the parents, the more protective the children. The children of same-sex couples soon learn to hide their feelings. They feel guilty for wanting a normal life, afraid they are betraying their parents, and ashamed of their natural desires.
Gay activists know that their success depends on propagandizing the next generation to accept these unnatural situations as normal. “Postcards from Buster” and other similar initiatives are means to that end.
The only way to deal with this issue is not to bring it up in front of children. If it is raised, then counter arguments must be given equal access. No one wants that, because such discussion will add to the suffering of the children who have already been intentionally deprived of a mother or father. No one wants to have to explain to kindergartners why making fatherless or motherless children is the act of selfish adults. On the other hand, parents who opposed the redefinition of marriage and the acquisition of children by same-sex couples can not stand idly by while their children are told that their parents beliefs are intolerant and bigoted. They have a right to make their case that the best interests of children must always be given priority over the desires of adults.
Dale O'Leary is a writer, pro-family activist and educator living in Rhode Island.
just let us parents decide how to raise our children, thank you - stay out of our living rooms
(and read my Tagline)
That's pretty sick right there.
If you want on/off the ping list see my profile page.
Sick indeed!
The program is not, as Stachelberg claims, an effort to promote tolerance, but part of a comprehensive campaign by gay activists to change the culture and marginalize those who oppose the redefinition of marriage. Having lost badly in the 2004 election cycle, gay activists realize that their only hope lies in influencing the next generation to accept their agenda. Therefore, the children are their main target.
Exactly!! with emphasis on "part of a comprehensive campaign by gay activists to change the culture and marginalize those who oppose the redefinition of marriage."
Thank you so much for posting this. Now, on another note, I put up a post earlier about the fact that on The Simpsons, they will address the subject of same-sex marriage. Does anyone see a trend here? Kids do in fact watch The Simpsons, and it seems that we are inundated with the topic of homosexuality in programs these days. Kids don't need to be exposed to that. I applaud the education Secretary for standing up against this. I would hope that more people do the same. Again, thank you so much for posting this.
I foresee a Mommy Dearest-type book coming from her children, in the future.
There’s a big outrage for J Jackson having a bare a breast at the superbowl. But not for this!
Time to contact your State Reps., FCC, WPT, PBS and federal reps. To stop this targeting of children and make confused kids easier targets for seduction. And the stealth corruption and undermineing of parents.
From the FCC page
Obscenity, Indecency, & Profanity
It’s against the Law!
It is a violation of federal law to broadcast obscene programming at any time. It is also a violation of federal law to broadcast indecent programming during certain hours. Congress has given the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the responsibility for administratively enforcing the law that governs these types of broadcasts. The Commission may revoke a station license, impose a monetary forfeiture, withhold or place conditions on the renewal of a broadcast license, or issue a warning, for the broadcast of obscene or indecent material.
Obscene Broadcasts are Prohibited at all Times
Obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and cannot be broadcast at any time. To be obscene, material must meet a three-prong test:
An average person, applying contemporary community standards, must find that the material, as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest;......
Read more here
http://www.fcc.gov/parents/content.html
Wisconsin Public Television plans to target homosexual show at young children.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1342676/posts
BTTT
BTTT
Just goes to what I was saying the other night. Our future is screwed.
Not really. Our future is pretty bright. The younger generation will be much too mentally unstable to compete with us :)
Well, we know how "the average person" is totally duped by all this PC nonsense. So nothing but pornographic sex would pass the "obscene" test!
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.