Fear of a homosexual planet.
My argument in favour of homosexual marriage and parenting
I often notice that there is a fear of homosexuality ingrained in many people in Australia. These people will usually claim they have no fear of homosexuality but I don’t see how there is any other way to describe their feelings and behaviours. The title of this is in regards to Public Enemy’s album in the sense that there are similarities in what dark skinned Americans had to deal with. It is not a direct mirror of the problems they dealt with but it is in that there was a fear ingrained into light skinned persons in America against people with a dark complexion.
There is no other possible reason for the feelings many people express towards homosexuals. What is the possible other reason to be against the promotion of equality? Why shouldn’t homosexuals be able to marry? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to have children of their own? Why shouldn’t they be allowed to adopt children?
Marriage
An argument I have heard recently, with respect to homosexual marriage, is that it goes against the definition of the word ‘marriage.’ This argument was not about disallowing them to “marry” but under the idea that they should create a new word for a homosexual union under law. The biggest problem with this is that the definition of words change all the time. The other problem is the word marriage is used to describe “any close or intimate association or union: the marriage of words and music in a hit song.” This is taken from a definition on http://www.dictionary.com. There is no reason that this word can’t be used to describe a legal or religious ceremony for a union of two people of the same gender.
One of the most common arguments is that there is no need for them to marry. Backers of this argument will often be state that “they have the same rights thanks to the changes to the Family Law Act, so why do they need to marry.” It might not be put precisely like that but that is the gist of it. Anyway, this is a terrible point of view. Although the rights of De facto couples have been increased by a large amount it is still not the same as the rights of a married couple. Although, ignoring that, the best way to respond to this argument is to respond with the same. Considering the rights implemented towards De facto relationships, why do heterosexual couples need to marry?
That is enough of the silly arguments against homosexual marriage, now I will explain my reasons to embrace it. It really is a very simple argument. It is just a question to pose to the people who are in opposition of it. Why the hell not?
Why shouldn’t they be allowed to make the decision any heterosexual couple in love can make? Why can’t they have the same rights as a heterosexual married couple? Why are they only allowed the same rights as heterosexual couples regarding De facto relationships?
This is a matter of equality and nothing else. No adult person with an adult mental capability should have more or less rights than any other person of the same¹. If two consenting adults choose to marry they should definitely have the right to do so.
Parenting
There are many reasonable arguments for being against the right of a homosexual couple to raise children. Even though they may be reasonable arguments I find that they are all flawed and I see no evidence backing them. The reason I am after evidence for this is because it is not just a matter of equality and rationality. There are others involved once it comes to parenting and there are ways to observe whether it is suitable or not. There is a problem with the research into whether it is suitable for homosexuals to be parents. This problem is that there are a lot of terrible heterosexual parents out there and why they need to be looking into this matter is ludicrous.
The best part of these studies is that they find that there is, from my understanding and research, no difference between a child having heterosexual or homosexual parents. Although there is a definite increase in the amount a child will be bullied regarding their parents if they have homosexual parents. Bullying can also be increased if the child has a step parent, lives with their grand parents, has divorced parents, etc. Even if homosexual parents are much more thoroughly accepted by society I believe this bullying of children of same sex parents will take place.
It is also found that it is important to have a community to raise a healthy child. One example of a great homosexual community raising a child is when a surrogate or sperm donor is in the picture. For example the surrogate or sperm donor could also be a homosexual and this can bring in an extra caregiver to the child. This is all for the better as it increases the regular faces that a child will be associating with. This may just be an example but i think it is a great way to show that homosexual parenting can not only be a good thing it can be an amazing way for a child to be raised.
There is evidence that children of homosexual parents will be inclined to experiment with homosexual “behaviour”. Whether this occurs because their parents are homosexual or because they will not be taught that homosexuality is wrong, we will never know. I believe that one day when we no longer have this massive stigma toward sex that people will see no problem with homosexual sex. Will it be a bad thing if it does become common place and normal for a person to have sexual intercourse with either sex?
¹ The reason I state my feelings like this is that I have also heard the argument that a mentally disabled couple should be allowed to marry also. I feel this has many more implications with it and is a much more involved question as there are different levels of mental disability.
Will wearing “modest” clothes make your personality stand out?
I became involved in a discussion, with women of the Islamic faith, that revolved around their wearing of the hijab and other Islamic garb. In this discussion there were a few women who made statements on why they wear these “modest” clothes. It is an argument made often by Islamic women for why they choose to wear hijabs and the like.
The statement is that they wear it for the purpose of being judged for their intelligence and personality as opposed to their attractiveness when they are speaking to someone (specifically male). People may behave in this manner of judging purely on personality and intelligence in some situations but find it unlikely that it is the case in most. If they are not being perceived initially based on their attractiveness they will still be viewed based on what they are wearing, which completely dismantles their statement.
I believe in most cases an Islamic woman wearing a hijab will be perceived quite poorly in Australia. I, not trying to be rude but realistic, will have an idea in my mind prior to speaking to a woman dressed in a hijab. This idea would not be, what I would call, reasonable but I will make this discrimination prior to my better sense jumping in.
In general, I would have positive thoughts in my head when speaking to an attractive woman dressed modestly (jeans and a T-shirt). I would, initially, have mostly negative thoughts in my head when speaking to an Islamic woman dressed in a hijab. I will also have negative thoughts for a woman dressed “slutty” but for different reasons. This is possibly my failing but I believe I have good reasoning behind this but I will not go into that reasoning now.
I hope, that not just I, but all people one day make no judgment of a person based purely on appearance. I do not mean to behave this way but I believe it is just part of nature to assess all things based on appearance. The reason I judge an Islamic woman in religious clothing is because I view it as an affront to freedom. They may say they are free in making the decision to wear it but I disbelieve this. I see in no way how a person can feel like they are free in making a decision when indoctrination is involved. Are they truly making a decision of their own free-will or are they indoctrinated to believe they are making that decision themselves?
Are they using this viewpoint, of modesty and being treated as something other than “a piece of meat,” as an excuse instead of a genuine reason? I believe in the majority of cases this could be answered with a definite “yes” or am I asking the wrong question. I know there is really no way we can know for sure that they are doing this from their own well thought out decision. I just cannot accept that a person feels free in making a decision that ends with them dressing as below (I know this is an extreme form of the dress).
When it boils right down to the last, they are wearing a hijab on the basis that it is to show their faith to their religion. This is what bothers me more than anything. They think that reducing their freedoms will increase the appearance that they accept their bronze age myths thoroughly. I can in no way see how this is freedom, no matter how much they might claim they are free to make the choice. I try to make this argument as reasonable as possible but I know I am very stubborn in this subject as I see it as misogynistic.
God hates homosexuals but he made Bonobos bisexual
For those who do not know who Peter Madden is please watch this video. It will also make the following much more understandable.
Yes, I am happy that an atheist in a De facto relationship is in power. I think it’s fairly overdone to say she did it through craft and manipulation. I’m not sure what he means by craft though, considering the definition of craft is “skill in an occupation or trade.”
Are The Greens Paganistic? I am certain they are not called the Pagan Democratic Party. I would be annoyed that the greens are fighting for equality if I was a ludicrous Christian too.
The Gay & Lesbian Mardi Gras only attracts drunken youths in the hundreds of thousands, there are no sober youths or drunken/sober adults. While these drunken youths are at the gay Mardi Gras they will be incited with all manners of lust and filth, apparently. Meanwhile they could be incited with lust and filth at home while reading the bible. I do not exactly know where Madden receives his information but I would guess that most people would view the Mardi Gras as being about love and equality.
I am not surprised he does not sway from his ignorance at all. He follows the same crazy idea that birth begins at contraception as the rest of the nonsensical religious zealots. Hopefully he does not have the belief that condoms are against his god’s word. Otherwise he would be responsible for a lot of murders. Miscarriages occur often, even without anyone knowing.
I believe the dark times of our nation are receding as the black cloud of religion shrinks away beyond the horizon. I do not really understand what “moral depravity” is. I think he needs to look at a dictionary instead of reading the bible and listening to speeches by fundamentalist Christians. I think he may mean non-Christian values by “moral depravity”. Is it sexual immorality (I have no idea why it needs to be preceded with sexual) for consenting adults to perform a sexual act? I see no immorality when faced with this conversation:
The first man says, “May I please put my penis into your anus?”
The second man responds, “You certainly may.”
I use men in this example because I am without a doubt that he is mostly offended by men having sex with each other. I also do not find it immoral for him to enjoy having sex with lots of women, including paying women for sex. There is no immorality if everyone is consenting. There may be more in depth moral questions relating to why some of these women are having sex for income but that is another topic.
His rant just goes on with unfounded accusations of what occurs at this event. There are many bizarre ideas held by him with no evidence to back it. Is there violence at the Mardi Gras? If there is I would be surprised if it is caused by people celebrating the event.
We need to look out for that “militant homosexual lobby.” You know the one… they fight for the right for homosexual couples to adopt children, be married and have the same rights as heterosexual couples. Meanwhile the non-militant Australian Christian Lobby fights against all of these things. They are also campaigning against abortion and euthanasia (no matter the situation), R18+ games, prostitution, ethics classes for non-religious students, etc. They are campaigning for Internet censorship, Christianity in the school curriculum, prayer in parliament, etc. Who’s militant?
I will leave my response to his excessive stupidity at that.
It has been good to hear that Peter Madden’s brother (also Christian and straight) is fighting against this silliness. He even took part in the Mardi Gras to make his objections to his brother’s opinions known. There was also another rally that was called a “Pash Protest.” This involved straight men and women pashing each other in the same location Madden’s rally was held. Triple J’s Hack had a great segment on this which you can listen to by clicking here, it also contains an interview with Peter.
My understanding of sexuality be it Homo or Hetero is it is all normal. Just look at one of our nearest relatives in the animal kingdom, the Bonobo, they are a fully bisexual species. Madden is another of the idiots that makes my view of destroying religion, and all the bad that goes with it, that much more sensible.
