RECENT  POSTS:  » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama » In 2008, the AFA was the same on LGBT rights as President Obama; and I was a flying unicorn » The Hitching Post plot thickens in a truly remarkable way  

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

04/11/2007

Oh Barber, please cut the empty hyperbole

by Jeremy Hooper

Picture 13-18Speaking about the gay harassment-thwarting Day Of Silence event that is soon to be held in schools nationwide, Matt Barber of the Concerned Women For America says today:

The radical homosexual lobby has done a masterful job of infiltrating our government schools to gain control of the minds of America’s youth. Their propaganda tactics are time-tested. With liberal school officials in tow, they brazenly circumvent and abuse parental authority to use good-hearted but misguided children as pawns to further their deceptive agenda.

So wait: When we try and curb the still prevalent problem of anti-gay harassment, we are militantly brainwashing impressionable children, yet when they encourage kids to shun their gay peers and foster the idea that gays can "change" -- both of which they are doing through their "Day of Truth" and "Not Our Kids" programs -- they are just being good stewards of God?! And when they try and infuse religious teaching with church-separated government schools, they aren't trying "infiltrate" or "gain control of the minds of America's youth?" And when they use such heated, offensive overstatements to describe gays and their intent, they are acting in a moral way?

Well, sorry Barber, but we'll stick with the kind of "propaganda tactics" that lead to peace, understanding, and acceptance, not the ones that keep "smear the queer" a popular varsity sport!

CWA: Breaking Homosexual “Silence” with Truth [CWA]

Technorati Tags: ,

Technorati Tags: ,

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


Your thoughts

Something my partner sent to me, which I think you (and your readers) might find interesting:

http://www.gurus.com/dougdeb/politics/209.html

It's an explaination of the ways liberals and conservatives think - and why such polar opposites can be thought of as "common sense" by the people who hold said views...

It's actually got a rather thought-provoking explaination about why conservatives are scared by liberal ideas - the whole "I'm just asking to be allowed to live my life" thing sounds really good to us, but we've got to understand that this isn't how others see it... same as they've got to understand that we don't see *their* common sense as being sensible...

I really like the ideas of the "Inherited Obligation" family vs the "Negotiated Commitment" family... Of course it's *better* to be part of a family because you choose to be - to have commitments that you choose for yourself, rather than those forced upon you by historic obligations passed through the generations. And it's equally obvious that gay relationships will do nothing to harm any families based on that sort of volluntary commitment. After all, how can it? They choose their relationships, we're choosing ours, and the two don't have anything to do with each other.

Thing is, from the viewpoint of the family based aorund obligations - the family where duty is important and free will might interfere - our relationships are legitimately scary. Not because we personally will hurt them - we won't, and I think they know it (the brighter ones, at least...). But because we represent a commitment we chose - we chose not to form unions with strictly defined mother figures and father figures with, but rather with enough love to share, and with the roles smeared across both halves of the couple.

We chose - and if we can chose, then so can the children these conservatives have brought up. Their children can choose to move to the big city - and not take care of their aging parents (leaving it to "society" - paying taxes so that everyone's parents can be taken care of, rather than working hard at lower taxes so that they can take care of their own); the article covers it a lot better, but the fear that the tight bonds of mutual obligation that binds a conservative family together may break - well, that's a very real fear.

We choose our own families. We are mobile - if we don't like what's happening here, we can move. We can change. Everything in our lives is a choice - weighing pros and cons. Even our bonds to family - we love our parents because we *choose* to - because they're wonderful people - not because they invested their money into raising us. This is scary to families that have been formed around the concept of obligations. After all, what if we aren't the wonderful people we think we are? Will our children just desert us? If there's no sense of obligations, what happens if our family just leaves? What can we do?

We need to show the conservatives that we believe in commitment as strongly as they do... we need to show them that choosing our own commitments makes them stronger, not weaker. Because it does. There's no doubts that living your truth, and chosing your own comitments works better than having them forced on you. Thing is, the changeover can be scarily nasty for families who never thought they'd have to be different...

(ps - sorry for the long-winded ramble! Hope you enjoy the article :o))

Posted by: Anon | Apr 11, 2007 5:54:09 PM

Hmmmm...

I guess that Barber and his ilk have never attended a Jesus Camp or Revival meeting. Talk about spreading propaganda and trying to indoctrinate kids. The pressure at those events is overwhelming. As a "youth" I attended a church sponsored week long "camp-out", and the pressure to be "saved" and be baptized was enormous. Those kids who at weeks end didn't give the lives to Christ were ostracized by those who were "Saved".

But then again those events are for Christ so it's okay.... NOT!!!!!!!!!

Posted by: Kevin | Apr 11, 2007 8:04:17 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails