RECENT  POSTS:  » Pro-discrimination activists continue to use one woman's one-sided spite against ex-husband to attack marriage equality » Audio: Tony Perkins minimizes actual religious persecution; pretends he and anti-gay pals face 'deadly consequences' » Ryan Anderson, Mark Regnerus, Rick Warren, other inequality advocates urge Pope to 'commit to marriage' » GLAAD: Are some anti-LGBT activists missing a self-awareness gene? » FRC faults Dems for broken, obstructionist Congress while advocating for broken, obstructionist Congress » FRC senior staffer: 'Ex-Gays: The Best Kept Secret in Your Child’s School' » Video: In inclusive ad, AZ Sec. of State hopeful makes discrimination his rival » That discriminatory OR baker is really overthinking reason why she's national news » Robert Oscar Lopez confirms belief that gay parents are like slave owners » Video: Values Voter Summit marriage panel was particularly boring, bad, ineffective this year  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

08/24/2006

Warning: Holes in 'pro-fam' logic appear to be getting bigger

by Jeremy Hooper

In a story on the much-debated California bills that seek to eliminate gay bias in schools and other state programs and activitiies. Focus on the Family's Mona Passignano today says to WorldNetDaily:

"If you're a Christian, it's got to be alarming. If you are not a Christian, it's got to be alarming," she said. "Because what comes next?

"
Is someone going to say, 'You can't drive a red car, that's the color of heterosexuals. You have to drive a purple car?"

Yes, because that's EXACTLY the same thing. "Schools can't discriminate against gays, thus encouraging equality and safety for homosexual students" -- why, who can't see the parallels between that sentiment and government-mandated car colors? Six of one, half a dozen of the other!

::sigh::

Worldnet then goes on to say of Passignano:

She said she explains the nuances that could become law by referencing "Nazi Germany."

"
It's just a historical fact, but you could make Germans feel bad every time you say Nazi Germany," she said. "The (California) bills say you can't say anything negative."

Hmm, possibly -- oh, except for the fact that this logic is completely flawed in every sense of the word! "Nazi Germany" is a term for the period between 1933 and 1945 when the National Socialist German Workers, or NAZI, party, was in control of the country. It's a historical reference to an undeniable time. While mentions of Nazi Germany might invoke negative feelings for those who lived or were affected by unsavory developments during this time, the reference is in no way discriminatory. In a gay context, you could even extend the Nazi Germany teaching to include a discussion on gays who were killed in the Holocaust. Again, not discriminatory -- it happened. Now, if a teacher were to say on the first day of school that she was going to run her classroom like Nazi Germany and those who don't fit her societal ideal will be ostracized or worse -- then yes, a "Nazi Germany" reference would not be acceptable in that context, even now. But in the case of historical discussion -- "Nazi Germany" is kosher.

The California bills in question merely seek to eliminate BIAS, not mentions of negativity. All of history's ills, missteps, dictators, and miscreants will still be open for discussion. Harvey Milk's assassination, Anita Bryant's hurtful campaigns, AIDS, Matthew Shepard's murder, soul-numbing attempts to amend the constitution to ban gay marriage -- all invoke emotions for gay people, but they're not discriminatory. "You're a dirty fag" -- DISCRIMINATORY. "You're a bigoted Jesus-freak" -- ALSO DISCRIMINATORY. Surely we can at least all agree that neither have a place in our schools.

Dobson: Tell Arnold to halt 'gay' agenda [WorldNetDaily]

space gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails