Day of disapproval

In response to the Day of Silence, a protest silence against harassment of gays, conservative Christians organized a Day of Truth to publicize their disapproval of homosexuality.

Participants were encouraged to wear the T-shirts and to pass out cards with a message that speaks against condoning “detrimental personal and social behavior.”

About 450,000 middle and high school and college students participated in “Day of Silence” activities Wednesday at 4,000 schools across the nation, said Joshua Lamont, spokesman for the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network. The participants wore black and did not speak (except for designated representatives) for the day to bring attention to the silencing that victims of anti-gay harassment and violence experience.

Agenda Bender wonders conservatives are so obsessed with homosexuality.

About Joanne

Comments

  1. 1. Bible. Most religions are against it. There must be a reason for such an almost universal prohibition. The Why? would be interesting to find out. My brother the biologist thinks homophobia is the result of evolution which would explain how culturally universal it is. If you’re a small, nomadic group of people with a high child death rate and a low lifespan, you’re not going to be especially tolerant of some boy who says he doesn’t like girls. Survival of the group is dependent on everyone having as many kids as possible. I think in ancient Greece they didn’t care if the men had male partners on the side so long as they had a wife and kids as well.
    2. “Culture of Life”. Let’s face it. Gay sex doesn’t even have the remotest possibility of creating life. If you believe that sex is a god given gift for creating life, then gay sex would be seen as obscene because it’s essentially being wasted. God’s gift is being spurned. I think the human instinct for sex is definitely tied up in the desire to reproduce, so it is rather confusing that homosexuals direct this instinct toward members of the same sex. Why?
    3. The more tolerant of homosexuality society is, the more homosexuality there will be. I actually partly agree with this one. I do think in certain quarters it’s become trendy, particularly lesbianism (girls realize they can get a response and attention from guys) and unfortunately this feeds into the fears of the RR making them more hystrionic. I remember reading an article about two girls who were getting boys to pay them to kiss each other as a performance for the boys at school. Are those girls lesbians? I doubt it. Where’d they get the idea to do something like that? There are lefty nutjobs running around like Adrienne Rich who argues that all women are lesbians. I didn’t think she was real at first but apparently so. But the more tolerant society becomes of X, the more X there will be in society. This seems obvious.
    4. AIDS. With the recent news about so-called SuperAIDS and the revelation from related articles that many of the men involved apparently had upwards of 100 sex partners. Many they didn’t even know the names of. I was stunned that this culture hadn’t significantly gone away since AIDS. Has it? It doesn’t seem so from the articles I read. I think people are afraid of legitimizing such promiscuous behavior which is gross whether you’re gay or straight. Also, for many people gay sex produces death in the form of AIDS. Whether such an attitude is legitimate I don’t particularly care. I’ve heard it a lot.
    5. Pedophilia. I’ve been told more than once from friends that apparently several gay rights organizations have refused to denounce NAMBLA. Is this true? I’ve also been told that NAMBLA is allowed to march in the San Francisco Gay Pride parade. Is this true? I think people are worried that if something like homosexuality becomes acceptable, where does it stop? Where is the line drawn? I’ve heard some wacked out stuff about the ACLU defending NAMBLA for distributing information about how to molest kids. I never know whether to believe if this stuff is true or just bullshit. It sounds insane but then I thought Adrienne Rich couldn’t be real.

    I could write more but it’s getting pretty late.

    BTW I’m pretty disgusted by that story. I don’t think any good Christian would object to stopping the harassment of gays whether they do or do not agree with gay marriage or homosexuality. Those people are not good Christians.

  2. Walter E. Wallis says:

    My primary objection to events such as these is that they tend to encourage juveniles to become set in a pattern of behavior before they have the mature understanding of what is involved.

  3. SuperSub says:

    My own personal issue with homosexual rights groups is that they uusually go far beyond simply requesting the basic human rights we all share. They and the social groups that usually fall under their umbrella, in my experience, seek to gain privileges beyond the overall public… and that to me is wrong. As for homosexuality, I really don’t care what other people do for pleasure as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone else, but I don’t like the concept of homosexuals being a separate, protected class.

  4. Tom West says:

    There’s also the aspect of needing a common enemy.

    Many hetrosexuals find homosexuality a bit “yucky” (for lack of a better word), thus making homosexuals the “other”. Just like foreigners who eat a food that would make most of us blanche are also “other” – there really is a fundamental difference that we can’t conceive of personally accepting.

    However, condemning the “other” is fraught with social peril. Homosexuality is one of the few “others” that you can still hate without widespread social condemnation. This binding together against the enemy helps strengthen the community. Communities without a perceived enemy tend to slowly drift apart. (Sad, but true – a lack of enemies tends to encourage individual identity rather than communal identity.)

    By the way. the need for an enemy applies to the left as well as the right.

  5. Walter E. Wallis says:

    “Homosexuality is one of the few “others” that you can still hate without widespread social condemnation”?
    Hardly. That slot is occupied by Christian fundamentalists.

  6. John from OK says:

    The Day of Silence assumes an intolerable level of violence against gays without objective measures of that violence, and without any recognition of how much things have improved. It also ignores violence and harassment against anyone else other than protected groups, since sometimes it is perpetrated by those groups. The purpose of these events is in fact to call attention to uncivil behavior, but also to create emotional sympathy for gays that may or may not be warranted, in order to push the gay/feminist agenda. Simplified logic: gays are harassed, therefore we must allow gay marriage to make them more acceptable; gays are normal people, therefore transsexuals are normal people; aggressive boys are always picking on gays, therefore boys should be raised like girls.

    Fundamentalists where I live abhor violence against gays, but will not condone the devaluation of traditional marriage; the encouragement of borderline people to become active and openly gay; the secularization of our culture; or other perceived goals of feminists and gay activists. And perhaps this opposition is a small step away from open hostility, but pro-gay demonstrations will attract those opposing forces.

  7. John from OK says:

    Oh heck –
    I meant SEXUALIZATION, not SECULARIZATION.

  8. Live and let live, that’s what I say. That applies to heterosexuals, homosexuals, and all other “sexuals”. Most of them are not doing anything illegal or immoral, and sexual morality means consenting adults. There is also a difference between practicing a lifestyle and proseletyzing it. Some gay activists are as bad as Bible-Thumpers, and these are the rotten apples.

    As Tom West (?) said, Earthlings seem to need a common enemy to keep their tribes together, and what better enemy than ones who lack the protection of any tribe? Now the same persecution applies to anyone who is “different” (perceived as weak) such as geeks, gifted children, etc.

    How about a Day of Silence for our future Einsteins and Edisons being bullied in public schools? I want to see the National Academy of Sciences defend us, and Mensa, and the ACLU.

  9. Katherine C says:

    I don’t believe this. These so called Christians protesting this says that it’s okay to harrass people, as long as they’re different. They’re titling it a Day of Truth says they’re trying to foce everyone to believe as they do. The Day of Silence does not seem to be saying that as there’s nothign in it to proclaim being gay as right or wrong and I certainly see nothing about gay marriage or such matters. Instead, it’s protesting reacting to such people through harrassment and bullying. I agree with this message. There are other ways to get a message across, civil ways. Also, admittedly I’m not Christian but from what I know of Jesus, I don’t think his way was to yell and scream and to condone beating people up to make them believe he was the son of God. Didn’t be basically extend his invitation to people, show them what he offered, and then let them choose to take it or leave it? These specific people proclaiming to follow him would then appear to be doing the opposite.

    P.S.
    Mariana, Pedophilia is not homosexuality. I don’t understand where you make this link as most homosexuals, just like most heterosexuals, are disgusted by this. Male pedophiles attack little girls too. Aids is also not purely a homosexual phenomenon. I have some other problems with your post but I think I’ll end here.

  10. Tom West says:

    “Homosexuality is one of the few “others” that you can still hate without widespread social condemnation?”

    That slot is occupied by Christian fundamentalists. – Walter Wallis

    Good point. The condemnation of Christian fundamentalists is what keeps a number of left-leaning communities together.

    However, in the interest of fairness, I’ll have to point out that I strongly suspect that more Americans are killed or suffer injury for being homosexual than for being fundamentalists.

  11. “Mariana, Pedophilia is not homosexuality. I don’t understand where you make this link as most homosexuals, just like most heterosexuals, are disgusted by this. Male pedophiles attack little girls too. Aids is also not purely a homosexual phenomenon. I have some other problems with your post but I think I’ll end here.”

    Yes, Katherine C, I know this. You should reread my post. Did I say anywhere in my post that I believed it was? No, I did not. You did not answer my comments about gay activist organizations and NAMBLA though. You just made an assertion. Most the gay people I know are repulsed by pedophiles as well, but I’ve personally known maybe 6 gay men. My comments represented things I’d been told from the Left and the Right, particularly about NAMBLA and the ACLU. So is the info I listed under pedophilia true or just pernicious urban myths?

    My post was intended to answer a comment in Joanne’s post: “Agenda Bender wonders [why] conservatives are so obsessed with homosexuality.” I was trying to answer that. And, yes, everyone knows AIDS is not purely a homosexual phenomenon; however, it is a primarily homosexual phenomenon. This is what I was addressing.

  12. Ross the Heartless Conservative says:

    Here are the FAQ’s for the Day of Truth and the Day of Silence.

    I have a side I agree with more on this issue but I don’t see anything wrong with either group trying to advance their agenda. I suspect there are idiots in both groups but that most of the people in both groups are decent people who disagree about a religious issue.

  13. BadaBing says:

    That would be really cool if they could extend the Day of Silence to a Year of Silence.

  14. Several comments come to mind.

    Biological arguments against homosexuality don’t hold a lot of water now that surrogates and sperm banks exist. Our technology has made any cultural prejudice against that sort of behavior out-dated at best. Children of gay parents deserve to have the same rights children of straight parents have – and that’s why things like marriage are so important for gay families. They protect the kids.

    Christians of all stripes would do well to remember that Jesus was notorious for hanging out with those on the periphery of society and for not judging them but rather treating them with respect. The big quote was “let he who has not sinned cast the first stone.” He had a lot to say about the responsibility of those who have much to care for those who have little. Jesus also had little tolerance for religious leaders who insisted on knee-jerk following of “the rules” but showed little compassion for other people.

    Catholics also fall into the “OK to hate” group – after all, our priests are also just a bunch of pedophiles.

    Gay people want equal treatment and equal rights. Those involved in the “truth day” want to impose their version of morality on everyone as though it is undisputed “truth”. Thousands of years of controversy in the Christian church would give lie to that particular claim. I wish those Christians who feel strongly about this would condemn this behavior within the context of their own church membership – but leave the rest of us alone.

  15. You mean like homosexual activists leave the rest of us alone? To the woman caught in adultery at the well, Jesus said, “Go and sin no more.” Do you think Jesus was a moral relativist like you? “Everybody love each other and go on doing whatever you want because God tolerates anything and everything you do. I mean, who is he to judge?” And what do you mean “biological arguments against homosexuality don’t hold a lot of water …”? I wouldn’t call a sperm bank nature’s way of producing human offspring. Forgive me but I also do not think it nature’s intent that a man insert his erect penis into another man’s anus. Children of gay parents are being cheated out of the uniqueness that each sex, male and female, brings to the table of family life. It’s not right.

  16. “Children of gay parents deserve to have the same rights children of straight parents have – and that’s why things like marriage are so important for gay families. They protect the kids.”

    Children have a natural right to a mother and a father. Gay parents are violating their kids rights. There was an article about gay couples who had children in the NYTimes Magazine last year. The children in this article attended a support group to deal with the fact that their parents were gay. I’ve heard of people attending support groups to deal with being abandoned or the children of alcoholics and drug addicts, but this blew my mind. It’s an unfair weight to place on children. There are enough problems children have to deal with. It shouldn’t be socially acceptable to create more problems for them.

    “Jesus also had little tolerance for religious leaders who insisted on knee-jerk following of “the rules” but showed little compassion for other people.”

    Jesus must have really hated God then.

  17. Reginleif says:

    The children in this article attended a support group to deal with the fact that their parents were gay.

    Because attitudes like yours and those of BadaBing make it difficult to be the child of gay parents, lindenen.

    It shouldn’t be socially acceptable to create more problems for them.

    Then stop creating them.

  18. Reginleif, you don’t even know me, so fuck off.

    Also, you should read the article I mentioned. The source of their problems seemed to have less to do with homophobia so much as a seriously confused self-image due to having gay parents. The one girl they talked to most in the article seemed to think she was doing something wrong or something was wrong with her for not being gay like her parents. She was incapable of relating to men and just struck me as massively f’ed up due to it. That article changed my opinion on the whole damn issue.

  19. I forget to also include that the parents in the article freely admitted that they were essentially using their children as social experiment guinea pigs. I read one article and my opinion did a complete 180.

  20. nailsagainsttheboard says:

    This is a good illustration of why we need to stop social engineering in public schools. Thomas Sowell is the clearest thinker on this topic and a good read…he can state the case far more eloquently than most eduwankers…I mean eduwonks. Teachers should teach without political agendas….controversial/moral issues such as homosexuality, premarital sex, et. al. should remain within the purview of the family, especially at the elementary school level. Whatever happened to the concept of propriety?

  21. Katherine C says:

    Children of gay parents worry because they’re not gay like their parents. Hmm, and gay children of straight parents don’t worry because they’re not straight like their parents?

    Also, the claims that it’s cheating the child not to have a mother and a father would indicate that along with gay parents you’re also condemning all single parents. Seriously, I always thought the point was to have loving parents who provided and cared for you. I was wrong?

    Oh, the biological arguments against being gay make me wonder something: If sex was supposed to only serve the purpose of procreation, then no woman would ever desire it after menopause would she? If it was such a crime against nature, then why would nature have created them in the first place? They must serve a purpose , I would assume one beyond simply being able to bring other groups together in hate.

  22. BadaBing says:

    Katherine C is engaging in a logical fallacy known as question begging or circular reasoning. She assumes that nature “creates” homosexuals and argues her case from that faulty premise. The jury is still out on that one. Personally I suspect that one’s becoming homosexual may have something to do with a predisposition (possibly genetic) + the way a child is nurtured.

    I think it’s highly probable that homosexual children of heterosexual parents DO question their own aberrancy. This is why many of them seek psychological counseling. It’s because they realize that something is wrong, out of the norm. People don’t go to a psychologist/psychiatrist because they are heterosexual. They often go because they have an attraction to the same sex.

    And please do not equate having homosexual parents with having a single parent. If Katerine C. had any critical thinking skills, she might see that she is comparing apples to tangelos. Allowing homosexuals to adopt children or to have them created for them is a formula for producing more dysfunctional people in a society that has enough dysfunction in it already. Having a single parent is not the ideal. Having homosexual parents is farther from the ideal. As a society we should lift up an ideal of parenthood and marriage that makes society and everyone in it better, and that ideal is a two parent household consisting of a mother and a father, not two daddies or two mommies.

    The homosexual crusade to gain acceptance as normative behavior does not take into account society’s best interests. Said agenda is not interested in the welfare of children nor in the future those children will inherit. It is a totally selfish and hedonistic campaign to gain acceptance from everyone and to be ennobled with victim status. Those that don’t celebrate their deleterious lifestyle are labeled homophobic and bigoted. It’s a tactic that works well, given the fear people have today of being stigmatized by such name-calling.

    Homosexuality is not a beautiful thing. If you want to practice it, go ahead, but quit sticking it in my face, demanding that I cheer you on. It is bad for the people involved in such a lifestyle, and it is bad for society. But if you want to practice it, be my guest. I don’t care. Do your own thing. What I do care about are children and the future they are going to be forced to live in.

  23. Katherine C says:

    Badabing, I don’t believe my logic is as faulty as you are trying to make it sound. Admittedly, everyone comes to arguments like this with their own assumptions. I do make the assumption that homosexuals are created by nature. Given all the things that they have to go through and the fact that the majority of them try to hide it seems to suggest this to me. If it was a choice, why would they hide it? Additionally, I wonder what kind of environment you’re thinking contributes to it as it’s certainly not being around other homosexuals. If this was the case, children of gay parents would be more likely than other children to be gay and that’s not the way it’s turned out.

    Mentioning single parents. I only did this because the post said that the reason being a gay parent was bad was because it deprived the child of having both a mother and a father. Well, single parents are also depriving their children of having a mother and a father and I was wondering why people see this as being so important. I understand the idea of gender role models but that doesn’t have to be a parent. Other than that, like I said, I don’t understand the argument against this one. I’d certainly rather have a kid be with a gay couple who loves them and cares for them more than anything else in the world than with a straight couple who fight all the time and take it out on the kids. (I know in your ideal the parents wouldn’t fight, but the truth is that real life is not ideal and so you have to decide when best to pick your fights. Someimes you have to sacrifice. Gay parents may not be ideal but at least they’re someone to love the child. I’d rather have a child grow up here than in the system. Admittedly, I’m thinking more along the lines of adoption than artificial insemination. I have my own problems with that.) Additionally, by claiming that gay parents are father from the ideal than single parents, you’re making a judgement call. You’re judging the parent’s sexual orientation as more important than the number of adults in the house to nurture the child. That’s your own assumption. I, for one, don’t agree with it. You also make the assumption that there will be dysfunction in a home with gay parents. I don’t. You may see being gay as being dysfunctional in itself, but that’s your assumption that you bring to the table. I don’t share it.

    As for going to a psychiatrist, homosexual behavior is in the minority and that makes it outside of the norm. People outside of the norm have trouble dealing with being outside of the norm sometimes. That’s not just homosexuals.

    As for homosexuals wanting to be “ennobled with victim status” yeah, it’s kind of like battered wives or someone who gets pulled over by the cops simply because of the color of their skin or the geek in school who is tortured relentlessly be his peers. They may all be different cases, but they do share one similiarity and that’s that they’re harmed and harrassed. I, for one, do believe in giving victim status to those that are victims. This doesn’t mean I think everyone who’s gay is a victim but a number of them are or have been.

  24. “If it was a choice, why would they hide it?”

    People make bad choices every day that they would like to hide. A person addicted to crystal meth will try to hide it. Was he born that way? A person with lots of traffic tickets will try to hide it from his insurance company although he probably can’t.

    “Well, single parents are also depriving their children of having a mother and a father…”

    They may or may not be “depriving” their children. A widow certainly hasn’t made a choice to deprive her children of their father. Neither has a father whose ex-wife is an alcoholic chosen to deprive his children of a mother. Unfortunately, such children will grow up with only one gender model unless the parent remarries, and remarries with the welfare of the child in mind.

    “I’d certainly rather have a kid be with a gay couple who loves them and cares for them more than anything else in the world than with a straight couple who fight all the time and take it out on the kids.”

    This is a rather slimy little trick and falls under the category of bifurcation. It’s meant to sound as if gay parents never fight and that married couples are usually dysfunctional. You may not have intended that, but I’ve spoken with people that have. If there is child abuse in the home, there are other options for the children than hooking them up with homosexual parents.

    “Additionally, by claiming that gay parents are father [sic] from the ideal than single parents, you’re making a judgement call.”

    Of course I’m making a judgment call. You don’t make judgment calls? You’re judging me. Those who say they don’t judge are being disingenuous. It’s fashionable in a PC world to say that one doesn’t judge others. I don’t care about being fashionable or PC. I’m interested in what’s good for people, particularly children in this instance. I believe most adults would choose to have been raised by a heterosexual couple or heterosexual single parent rather than your “loving” gay couple. I would also submit that gay couples have more dysfunction in their relationships than do heterosexual couples, although I have no scientific proof to back it up. I say this on the basis of anecdotal evidence from what my own personal experience has offered up to me.

    “…it’s kind of like battered wives or someone who gets pulled over by the cops simply because of the color of their skin or the geek in school who is tortured relentlessly be [sic] his peers.”

    Battered wives may have some dysfunctional problem if they keep going back to the guy that beats them. Experiencing racial injustice isn’t the same as going to therapy because you think something’s wrong with you. Wronged black people don’t seek counseling to change the color of their skin. A kid that’s bullied because he’s a “geek” may need a shrink to improve his self-esteem or whatnot. There’s really no parallel to homosexuals’ seeking therapy to overcome their desires or sex addiction, and don’t tell me that sex addiciton has nothing to do with being gay. Not always, but with a large number of them sex addiction (and promiscuity) is a part of the lifestyle.

    “I, for one, do believe in giving victim status to those that are victims.”

    Do I get victim status for being called a bigot and a homophobe because I’m not in love with the gay lifestyle?

  25. Reginleif says:

    “Reginleif, you don’t even know me, so fuck off.”

    First, I’m very impressed with your debate skills.

    Second, what you choose to quote tells me quite enough about your beliefs on this matter.

    Katherine, I wish you luck trying to argue with these two.