Skip to main content

View Diary: Turn Fear Into Hope: Pushback Against the Marriage Ad Lies (139 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So, here's a question for you Kossacks (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chrississippi, DaleA

    This is more a philosophical question on the subject, but it has practical implications, I think.  We all understand this:

    Their arguments are based on lies, and always have been - marriage equality in California wouldn't have changed how preachers preach or how teachers teach, and Vermont's new marriage law makes clear that religious freedom is still respected

    And we all know that marriage equality proponents are going to great lengths to make sure that the public knows that these laws cannot be used to force religions to change their ways -- no forcing clergy to perform same sex marriages, etc.  On the other hand, we know that certain religions -- religions with millions of follower -- teach that same sex marriage, and that homosexual sex in and of itself, is wrong, sinful, evil, whatever you want to call it.  

    Here's my question for you.  How should we handle parents, churches, schools, that go to great lengths to indoctrinate their children with such views?  My right wing relatives, for example, homeschool their children as part of a large network precisely BECAUSE they do not want their children to hear anything other than their views on same sex marriage, on abortion, on sex outside of marriage, etc.  Many many religious schools are the same way, and teach, as a matter of religious truth, those same things.  

    The dilemma is that, clearly, parents have a right to teach their children their religious views.  Parents have a right to keep them out of public schools, and put them in religious schools, precisely because they don't want the children to hear views of same sex marriage, abortion, sex outside of marriage, that disagree in any way with the views of the parents.  

    So, do you think parents should be allowed to teach their children what they want as a matter of religious doctrine?  And here's the more important question -- if you say no, please tell me what laws you would pass, or what you would do, to prevent it.  

    •  Yes, parents are free to teach their children (8+ / 0-)

      anything. Just as the rest of us are free to prove them to be bigots, racists, homophobes, Luddites, Flat-Earthers, and/or assholes.

      There's a reason why these people always want to preserve their little dark corners of sameness; they wilt in the bright light of truth.

      The best thing to fight this crap is a society that values differences and always---ALWAYS---puts truth over stupidity.

    •  It is unrealistic to think that we would.... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DaleA, Larry Bailey

      ...force parents to give up rights to raise their kids.

      Despite how disgusted we are with what they are teaching their kids.

    •  Fact is a conflict (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DaleA

      Some parents here in Massachusetts sued over this, and lost.

      Folks can believe what they want, but in Massachusetts (and 3 other states now! YEAH!), the fact is that marriage means 2 people regardless of gender. That's the law.

      •  Sure, but (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        DaleA

        as a religious matter, the law does not necessarily mean moral, ethical, or even not sinful.  For example, Orthodox Jew believe that certain things are wrong, or against their religion, even though those things may be perfectly legal.  

        Believe me, there are parents in Massachusetts who, pretty much as we speak, are teaching their children that, despite what the law says, same sex marriage is depraved, evil, immoral, sinful, a sign of depraved character, contrary to nature -- put in whatever awful adjective you want there.  They are doing it (some of them are in the same national homeschooling network as my relatives).  Their children are growing up hearing nothing but this (they homeschool through high school, which is perfectly legal in most states, and then are very selective about which colleges they go to (there are a lot of very high academic achievers, National Merit Scholar types in the bunch) and which courses they take.  For example, several have gone to MIT, which is viewed as a more technology-centered institution, but they wouldn't be caught dead at Harvard.  

        •  Oh of course there are (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DaleA

          But when push comes to shove, they don't have any argument as far as saying that public schools can't teach about it or mention married gay couples or whatnot.

        •  I feel really bad... (10+ / 0-)

           ...for any of those kids who realizes he or she is gay.

           Any gay child who survives a fundamentalist upbringing with his psyche intact is a remarkable story.

           As for the general point, there are several churches that don't recognize things like divorce and contraception -- and yet you don't hear these church adherents "worried about their children" calling for divorce and contraception to be banned by the state -- not publicly, anyway. They're nothing but a loathsome gaggle of hypocrites.

          "Le ciel est bleu, l'enfer est rouge."

          by Buzzer on Wed Apr 08, 2009 at 07:25:20 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  In our society, they are free to do so (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          DaleA

          We don't prosecute beliefs or ideas, only actions.  Period.  

          I would hope that these children will eventually break out of the bubble of their upbringing, but their parents still have the right to teach them their religious beliefs, however repugnant others find those beliefs.  

          And, believe me, if they go to MIT, they are going to be exposed to alternative views.  

    •  This is their fear... (0+ / 0-)

      I've known too many people like this.  Most would never say it 'this way' but in the end, this is what they communicate whether they realize it or not.

      Their 1st person perspective:

      I do not want to admit to or deal with homelessness, racism, 'brown' (or darker skinned) people, sexuality, or just the general old stand-by 'anyone different than I am'. Therefore, when issues arise that will force me to deal with uncomfortable subjects directly and as a thinking person (i.e. adult), my rights are infringed upon because I have the 'right' not to have to deal with things, situations, and or people 'like that'.
      <end 1st person perspective>

      Overall:
      They do not want to deal with any aspect of this kind of 'normalization'. The feel that their 'freedom' is infringed upon for having to deal with any issue they do not want to directly address, for themselves, or their families, and their social belief groups in which they conform.

      Personally:

      I believe that divorce is far more of a threat to marriage than people who love each other, be they heterosexual or homosexual.

      I was married for 15 years and have been divorced for three.  I came from that 'you always work out your problems and stay true to your vows' crowd but even that kind of upbringing for one partner, can't ever account for the decisions made when two people are involved in the equation. It's not marriage that is threatened by homosexual people. It is irrational fear. The fear being used by those who use religion and ideology as a crutch for supporting their own unadmitted and unjustified intolerances is the worst kind in my opinion.

      I've had gay friends. I hate saying it that way. Many do, but I prefer to say that I have had friends who happened to be gay. None of them ever made their sexuality something they forced or flaunted on a personal, let alone a professional level. Some couples I knew years back are still together to this day (male and female) and that's something to celebrate, not denigrate.

      Lamented and assured to the lights and towns below, Faster than the speed of sound, Faster than we thought we'd go, Beneath the sound of hope...

      by Vayle on Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 12:56:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  We have no choice. They HAVE that right... (0+ / 0-)

      ...to teach their children anything they want and we want them to always have that right, as it's integral to our very way of thinking as Americans.

      However, those children will eventually (most) move out from under the intellectual sway of their parents and they will, as young people are increasingly today, change their way of thinking based upon what they perceive to be norms OUTSIDE their families, as so we grow as a people.

      For example: I grew up in Tennessee and until entering college was an intellectual (or lack of maybe) creature of my father -- who, rest him, did have a horrible racist streak in him that would have made George Wallace blush. Until age 18, he taught me everything I thought at the time about how to treat African Americans -- like 2nd class citizens, de-humanized even. It was, as it turns out, a major lifetime failure on his part. I love his memory today, but for different reasons -- none having to do with politics. When I left his home and went to college and became exposed to different ideas, it dawned on me very quickly that my father was a racist and that I did not want to be like that at all. So, I changed myself (with the help of a college community).  Those children of homophobes today who are being trained to be our next homophobes will also change themselves, as soon as they are out from under the sway of bigoted parents.

      Bottom line: gay rights and equality are now inevitable. I've always thought so, since realizing that I was gay as a natural condition (I know, bad joke on Daddy, huh). But, I know it with certainty today and I watch society move in increments and now with some speed. So, it's only a matter of time and not even cowardly politicians are going to stop that. It could speed up with just a little courage from our national Democratic political leadership, but they don't have it in them -- even though a whole gaggle of them will surround whatever President who happens to sign that legislation some day that finally erases the eons of bigotry that are built into our Federal laws.

      39 Years Of Yellow-Dogging And Then 1 Year Of WTF

      by Larry Bailey on Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 04:22:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Of course parents should be able to teach their (0+ / 0-)

      .... children whatever they want.

      But this is just a question so the Republicans can have talking points for the next election.

      All Religious (and non religious) people have "free will" or conscience.  This means that they as adults chose to believe in certain doctrines, or not, and choose to follow certain laws, or not.   If a religious denomination's leadership chooses to tell its followers to make doctrinal war upon its government(s) by refusing to follow laws, such as encouraging child abuse or encouraging discrimination, then it is up to the followers of that religion to decide themselves just how far they intend to adhere to the church's rules vs. living in a civilized society.

      In other words, it's not the government's "problem" to make any laws making them change their minds.  

      It is up to the churches to decide whether or not they want to live in a civilized society and follow the laws of a secular government.

      Once their children are adults, if these offspring chose not to live in an abusive, hateful situation, then they should again have the freedom to leave it.  This is, ignoring the political campaign finance scheme for a second, what is bothering the fundamentalists, the lack of control over a very small percentage of their flock who does not conform and will not hate themselves and stay in the religion.

      And that is the religion's problem, not the government's.

      We have seen what happens when one religion is allowed to blatantly discriminate against another, you end up with armed mercenary squads representing different tribes roaming the country, killing at will.  This is not government.  They may have done it to these countries in the mid east in preparation for their own version of Armeggeddon, but there is no reason to coddle them here.

      I hope I've made myself clear. The argument that the religious folk try to make that this means everyone "hates" them is not true.  This is a conscious choice they have made to promote hatred and discrimination against a certain segment of our nation. This is against our Constitution, which respects all religions but does not give any one the ability to run our government, which is secular. I am old enough to have seen the same entities do the same arguments  based on race, or against "communism,"  or against women, so any sort of revisionist history isn't going to have any legitimacy with me, and why I am answering in terms that can be understood by them (altho it sometimes gets me in trouble here with people who don't realize what I'm doing.)

      "Toads of Glory, slugs of joy... as he trotted down the path before a dragon ate him"-Alex Hall/ Stop McClintock

      by AmericanRiverCanyon on Thu Apr 09, 2009 at 08:35:54 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  you've answered your own question (0+ / 0-)

      The dilemma is that, clearly, parents have a right to teach their children their religious views.  

      yes, that clearly is a parent's right, and therefore the is no dilemna.

      what are you trolling for exactly?

      "I don't think they're going to be any more successful in 2010" -Yes On 8 co-manager

      by jethropalerobber on Fri Apr 10, 2009 at 01:55:36 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site