Around Iowa: Gay Marriage Discussion Statements
A certain DFIA founding member, who shall remain nameless (but for this purpose we will refer to her as Dr. Alta Price), passed along this list of Gay Marriage Discussion Statements that her son's high school class was offered as the basis for an exercise in tolerance. The statements are provocative and eye-opening. We're going to have to give the teacher an A+ for this lesson.
1. Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, birth control, antibiotics, and clothes, are not natural.
2. Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children .Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.
3. Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, because straight parents only raise straight children.
4. Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears' 55 hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful. Perhaps Gingrich's marriage and extra-marital affair should be our role model. (And the marriage game shows like Bachelor?)
5. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all. Women are property, blacks can't marry whites, and divorce is illegal.
6. Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
7. Gay marriage is not supported by religion .In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we only have 1 religion in America.
8. Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall. I guess heterosexuality is a fragile passing phase and they can change. Maybe heterosexuals need therapy.
9. Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behaviors. People may even wish to marry their pets, because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
10. Children never succeed without both male and female role models at home .That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
11. Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms, because we haven't adapted to inter-racial relationships, cars, longer life spans, women voting, etc.
12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name, are better, because a “separate but equal” institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays & lesbians.
Blog For Iowa 
[12. Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name, are better, because a “separate but equal” institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays & lesbians.]
I see, I bet the gay/lesbian couples in Vermont right now are totally indignant at their clearly discriminatory 'separately equal' status in Vermont. They are heartbroken that their rights and priviledges are recognized, compared to the rest of the gay populace in the USA. I think in support of all US gay citizens, they are ready and willing to give those up rights immediately, til the rest of the country comes to it senses in 5-20 yrs and recognises the logic of civil marriage for gays as the ONLY option. Til then they will be ready to have their families broken apart and refused visitation/burial/inheritence privileges they have in Vermont.
[http://www.petitiononline.com/iacb4704/petition.html]
LikeLike
[Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages for gays & lesbians.]
Retoric/debate calls for comparing equivalent scenarios. The institution of marriage not= institution of education.
********
Marriage = involves 2 adults, and various rights and privileges that they can receive from the state. Those don't change if the name of the institution is different.
—-
Education = involves educators administrators, buildings, material, provided to children thru taxes.
*********
The equivalent scenario in history would be that up until the 1960's blacks could not marry whites. IT WAS ILLEGAL, YOU COULD BE ARRESTED. Gays aren't being arrested as of this moment for filing for marriage licenses or receiving them even if the state laws say we can't. It was only thru an accumulation of states/regions allowing mixed marriages that the Supreme Court finally took a case that made it to the court and overturned the unlawful denial of marriage rights and privileges to mixed race couples that remained in many southern states.
The Unfairness of gay Civil Union is that those rights will not be recognised nationally/federally.
LikeLike
I agree, Chris. The analogy in number 12 does not hold. I also thought the comparison used in number 1 was rather left hanging in the air – no substance.
LikeLike
Chris,
I just want to give some background about these statements. They were meant as discussion starters, and I was very pleased to see my son's AP English teacher use them. Five years ago I went as a representative of Quad Citians Affirming Diversity, an organization advocating for and serving glbt youth, to complain to the principal about an outside speaker – a minister – who was making anti-gay statements in the “parenting class”. My son says most of the students in his class are “God people” and are against gay marriage.
I don't even know where the teacher got this list; I'm sure she didn't make it up. But regardless of the worth or implications to be derived from any statement on the list, the fact that this teacher would want her students to consider the logical fallacies inherent in arguments against same sex marriage I found very encouraging. Even my son, who is very well informed about glbt issues, when he gave me the list said, “Mom, there are logical fallacies in *some* of these statements.” I started reading through them, laughing out loud. I told him there were logical fallacies in *every one* of them. I had to explain some of them to him. I'm sure every statement on there would have been a new concept to some of the kids in his class. Thank goodness for this whole debate, because it is forcing people to re-examine their prejuidices!
Alta Price
altaprice@mailblocks.com
LikeLike