Yeah, I think we can do without this idea,
Rep. Gingrey:
Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.) told colleagues on the House floor on Tuesday that young boys and girls should take classes on traditional gender roles in a marriage because there are some things fathers do "maybe a little bit better" than mothers.
"You know, maybe part of the problem is we need to go back into the schools at a very early age, maybe at the grade school level, and have a class for the young girls and have a class for the young boys and say, you know, this is what’s important," Gingrey said in a speech supporting the Defense of Marriage Act. "This is what a father does that is maybe a little different, maybe a little bit better than the talents that a mom has in a certain area. And the same thing for the young girls, that, you know, this is what a mom does, and this is what is important from the standpoint of that union which we call marriage."
So we can't teach them about sex, but we
can divide grade school kids into a girls' class and a boys' class and teach them that back in the 1950s mom stayed home and cleaned dishes while dad went off to his high-paying job at the booze factory. This will help them by … well, I have no idea. Help me out here, Gingrey:
"Of my three daughters and one daughter-in-law, they all work," he said. "They all work, some of them full-time, some of them part-time. But they’re still there as moms. And when they come home and take over that responsibility, they need a shared partner, and that partner is that partner for life. And I’m talking about, of course, the father."
Nope, still not getting it. This was offered in the context of defending marriage from The Gay Folks, mind you, so the implication here is that America's gone all wrong and is insufficiently intolerant of The Gay Folks because the young kids today don't understand how the nurturing mom-dad fusion is supposed to work and are screwing it up. Or something.
Can anyone out there translate what this guy is going on about?
