Homophobic Preachers Not Prepared to Listen to Fair Discussion
In the last few hours I've stumbled across two examples of blogs whose writers have chosen to speak out against homosexuality yet have disabled public comments thereby hindering feedback and fair discussions of they views. If you're going to attack a group of people then you should allow them a forum in which to defend themselves.
The first culprit is professional ex-gay Stephen Bennett whose blog needs no further explanation.
The other is Mass Resistance, a blog written by people who think their kids are at risk of being turned gay by homosexual activists in schools and want to save them through obnoxious writing. One post claims that articles such as one posted in The Boston Parents' Paper, in favour of gay parenting are anti-heterosexual propaganda. They claim that people are already well educated on homosexuality then follow with one of the most ignorant descriptions of gay parenting that I've ever seen. The paragraph that particularly offends me reads:
The first culprit is professional ex-gay Stephen Bennett whose blog needs no further explanation.
The other is Mass Resistance, a blog written by people who think their kids are at risk of being turned gay by homosexual activists in schools and want to save them through obnoxious writing. One post claims that articles such as one posted in The Boston Parents' Paper, in favour of gay parenting are anti-heterosexual propaganda. They claim that people are already well educated on homosexuality then follow with one of the most ignorant descriptions of gay parenting that I've ever seen. The paragraph that particularly offends me reads:
"But who are the "parents"? One assumes the two men partake of anal intercourse. If they were habitual smokers, or drug users, what would the PP say? Would they hold them up as model "parents"? Yet it is medical fact that anal intercourse and other typical homosexual sex practices are inherently unhealthy, even if the couple is monogamous and "committed." And the boy will of course accept it as normal, and perhaps be drawn into the very unhealthy and dangerous GLBT world."
1. The percentage of gay men who partake in anal intercourse is surprisingly low.
2. Anal sex can be a perfectly safe practice if precautions are taken.
3. Why is the word "committed" in quotes?
4. The GLBT world is not inherently unhealthy and dangerous.
5. If children's sexuality reflects that of their parents' then why do so many straight couples have gay children?
I would go so far as to say that the writers of Mass Resistance are vulgar, ill-informed, oppressive bullies who want to take away our human rights, and if they want to object, I'm more than happy to take comments on the matter.
2. Anal sex can be a perfectly safe practice if precautions are taken.
3. Why is the word "committed" in quotes?
4. The GLBT world is not inherently unhealthy and dangerous.
5. If children's sexuality reflects that of their parents' then why do so many straight couples have gay children?
I would go so far as to say that the writers of Mass Resistance are vulgar, ill-informed, oppressive bullies who want to take away our human rights, and if they want to object, I'm more than happy to take comments on the matter.
2 comments:
Here here.
Are we supposed to believe that all blokes who object to gay men because they might have anal sex, have never taken a woman up the arse?
Post a Comment