Another excellent piece by Matt Barber of Concerned Women for America, "Homosexuality: What's all the fuss?" (WorldNetDaily, 11-1-07). He addresses one of the most annoying taunts thrown our way: Aren't you hyperfocused on Homosexuality? But most of us fighting this battle never gave homosexuality much thought prior to November 2003. But then, crazy judges in Massachusetts pushed our faces into the poop, forced us to lick and declare it good. Since then, as Barber says, "we find ourselves – back against the ropes – in a fight we did not pick, struggling in a culture war we did not ask for."
Read what she wrote again:
But most of us fighting this battle never gave homosexuality much thought prior to November 2003.
Now why would Amy lie about when she started verbally bashing gay people? A quick google search finds this article she wrote for MassNews in 2001 about the Boy Scouts and gay people:
The answer that is obvious to many parents is that homosexuals should not be allowed to be leaders in the troop anymore than they heterosexual men are allowed to be girl scout leaders. Parents don't have a problem telling heterosexual men that they don't want to risk entrusting their girls to them. Why should parents feel bad about telling homosexual men that they don't want to take a chance with their boys?
So obviously her "battle" against gay people began years before that. MassNews, who Amy wrote for then, was started by J. Edward Pawlick, the guy started the first petition in the early 2000's to ban same sex marriages. Me thinks the lady doest protest too much.
7 comments:
She's also lacking in the fact department. Men can be leaders in Girl Scouts.
That, and I'm pretty sure that many Girl Scout leaders are female because the point of Girl Scouts is to develop strong girls who grow into strong women, and it's good for girls to see leadership from women.
But hey, fact checking is HARD, as we've seen from so many posts, both from the MassResistance pair and their supporters.
She's also lacking in the fact department. Men can be leaders in Girl Scouts.
Oh. That does hurt her point a bit.
If not for that minor problem, her argument in that paragraph seems to me fairly reasonable, at least compared to her usual nutso standard.
I can imagine scout-leader policies by which heterosexual men and lesbians were disallowed from being Girl Scout leaders, while heterosexual women and gay men couldn't be Boy Scout leaders... meanwhile, under this same hypothetical system, gay men would be allowed to be Girl Scout leaders, and lesbians Boy Scout leaders.
That probably wouldn't be a good policy (goodness knows how bisexual folks would be treated), but it at least wouldn't be virulently homophobic. Which, when we're discussing a diatribe by Amy Contrada, is really saying something.
I can imagine scout-leader policies by which heterosexual men and lesbians were disallowed from being Girl Scout leaders, while heterosexual women and gay men couldn't be Boy Scout leaders... meanwhile, under this same hypothetical system, gay men would be allowed to be Girl Scout leaders, and lesbians Boy Scout leaders.
The flaw with this argument is the assumption pedophilia has a gender preference and children are somehow safer with a "straight" member of the same sex. In fact, pedophilia is about attraction to children rather than gender.
If you think about it, the core of the Catholic abuse scandal was this mode of thinking. Put another way, how many of those priests identified as gay?
Don't forget Father Porter got married after leaving the priesthood.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/serial_killers/predators/porter/ordained_2.html
The flaw with this argument is the assumption pedophilia has a gender preference and children are somehow safer with a "straight" member of the same sex.
..or a same-sex-attracted member of the opposite sex.
Sure; I agree that the argument would be stupid. My point was that, unlike pretty much everything else Amy Contrada has ever posted to the Web, that particular argument, while stupid and ignorant of the realities of pederasty, isn't virulently homophobic. Given her history, that's newsworthy.
Matt Barber, Concerned Woman.
seriously, do they even have anyone else? is Beverly LaHaye too decrepit to spokes for them these days?
But then, crazy judges in Massachusetts pushed our faces into the poop, forced us to lick and declare it good.
...
I'm thinking "issues."
Post a Comment