Why Passing The Texas Marriage Amendment Was Important
Our northern neighbors are caught in the confluence of legalized same-sex marriage and "hate crimes" statutes. According to this recent story in the Minneapolis Star Tribune, legalized alternative marriage in Canada has gone beyond inclusion to revolution.
[Bishop Frederick Henry said] "Children will have to be taught about homosexual acts in health class, as they now are about heterosexual acts. Books that promote same-sex marriage are being introduced in some elementary schools. In one action, complainants have demanded ‘positive queer role models’ across the whole curriculum. If parents complain, they’ll be branded as homophobes." Sound farfetched?
I don’t think it sounds far fetched at all. As I alluded to in earlier posts, homosexual activists are not aiming for allegedly equal rights but wholesale cultural transformation. Legal status for alternative forms of marriage will lead to public schools presenting these brave new marriages and hazardous sexual behavior as healthy, natural, and desirable. The passage of the Texas Marriage Amendment helps prevent this hideous state of alarm from happening in Texas. Schools are not the only battleground for homosexual activists.
"People who disagree with same-sex marriage risk charges of hate speech. In British Columbia, teacher Chris Kempling has been found guilty — and disciplined — for defending male-female marriage in newspaper opinion pieces. Henry himself has been hauled before the Alberta Human Rights Tribunal for promoting traditional marriage in his pastoral letters. "The human rights tribunals have become like thought police," he says. "In Canada, you can now use the coercive powers of the state to silence opposition."
If same sex marriage has the same legal status as traditional marriage, homosexual activists can then use the courts to harass and intimidate churches and others who stand against their cause, using hate crimes laws as a pretext. By strengthening the legal definition of marriage as one man and one woman, the Texas Marriage Amendment helps block this route of attack in Texas state courts.
Of course, Texas was just one (albeit significant) skirmish. The bigger battle is at the federal level. It only takes 5 judicial activists on the US Supreme Court to overthrow all the state defense of marriage laws and constitutional amendments. However, the overwhelming victory of prop. 2 in Texas during an off year election is another signal to Congress that there is a percolating desire among the American people to reign in the robe-clad tyranny and forestall the disaster that is befalling Canada. While we can enjoy a brief rest from our labors to pass the Texas Marriage Amendment, the final confrontation looms for the Federal Marriage Amendment, which will require an equal measure of vigilance.
Filed Under Uncategorized ·
Comments
10 Responses to “Canadians Reap the Whirlwind of Legalized Same-Sex Marriage”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
The link above to the “Star Tribune” is not a news story, it is a column by Katherine Kersten.
Another take on Ms Kersten’s column is here:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/11/7/192946/716
Argus
#2
So ummmmm what’s your take? We already know what the “other” bloggers have to say.
I think I’ve figured it out… all this is really the enviromentalist movement… They figure that if they can’t get us to stop harming the earth, they’ll try to turn us all gay in order to bring our species to extinction.
As with everything always taken to extremes… perhaps the focus should not be on gay marraige but the fact that Canada has a real free speech problem as int he case of the gentleman hauled into court for defending hetero marraige, that was wrong no question about it.
While I am not an opponent of gay marriage…
I am a strict opponent of teaching homosexuality or sex at all in schools.
Bottom line is, Canada has screwed itself by electing and appointing the wacky goverment and judicial systems responsible for these kinds of circumstances. “Oh Cananda” … has evolved into “Oh canada, we really should feel sorry for you, but unfortunately we don’t.” What would Red Green and the boys at the Possum Lodge say? http://www.redgreen.com/
#6: Harold would say “haaaaawww!” LOL!
Anybody who thinks that schools in Canada will be “… presenting these brave new marriages and hazardous sexual behavior as healthy, natural, and desirable” needs to get a grip. Being gay will always be difficult, and no one would choose to be gay any more than they would choose to be left-handed. Both present difficulties in life. In the 19th century it was common thinking that the left-handed were children of Satan. As we overcame that prejudice, we will - over time - overcome homophobia. What the schools in Canada will be teaching is that to be gay - or to be left-handed - is something that happens to some people, and these people are not to be feared or discriminated against.
I think an easy solution to the sex education conundrum would be to use gender-neutral language. Granted, vaginal sex is obviously with a female, but I know quite a few heterosexuals who engage in anal sex. Listen to any rap songs lately?
Sex education isn’t a how-to class, but generally focus on topics like STD prevention and “sexual health.” All sexual behavior is hazardous.
I don’t think it’s necessary to promote homosexuality or heterosexuality to teach STD prevention, abstinence options, or any other part of the curriculum. I say scare the hell out of the kids! They’re all having sex, babies, doing drugs, etc. waaaaay too early these days.
As for “wholesale cultural transformation,” while a clever use of semantic hyperbole, I think it’s sort of expected. Whenever you grant a new group of people the same rights and privileges that are afforded to another group of people, it obviously changes the society.
I think a problem on both sides of the argument in cases like these is that everyone feels the need to promote an ideology… the feeling of someone “being wrong” is always reached. Tolerance and acceptance are two very different things.
#8, Theodora, I am concerned with your contention that homosexuality and left-handedness are morally equivalent.
Homosexual behavior entails all sorts of dangerous and far reaching consequences. (For more info., see http://austinvitw.blogspot.com/2005/10/why-christians-should-support-texas.html)
About the only drawbacks to being left handed I can think of is that finding a good set of golf clubs.