On it's blog, the National Organization for Marriage is spotlighting a column which features an anecdote supposedly spotlighting the "dangers of gay marriage."
But like so many other things the organization pushes, this anecdote pushes several lies.
The first lie is about NOM's consequences ad, where the organization makes the already debunked claim:
But then Belair vaguely mentions an incident in Massachusetts:
That claim is a lie. It stems from a false moral panic caused by David Parker and a Massachusetts organization, Mass Resistance against Estabrook Elementary school in 2005.
I've written extensively on the David Parker incident and you can see that here.
But to summarize, this incident was not about a child being "required to learn about homosexual marriage," but rather an incident in which a local parent (David Parker) and a hate group (Mass Resistance) created confusion in the community simply because they didn't like the fact that Parker's son attended school with children from same-sex households.
Of course this simple truth meant nothing to Belair and it mean nothing to NOM.
After all, who cares about truth when there is a chance to yet again demonize the lgbt community.
But like so many other things the organization pushes, this anecdote pushes several lies.
Raymond Belair also serves as general counsel to Family First of Eastchester and the Children First Foundation of Eastchester. He writes (and mentions our NY "Consequences" Ad in the second paragraph):
... A further baseless claim of the homosexual lobby is that SSM poses no threat to natural marriage or the nuclear family. But a history of such legalization in other states belies that claim. There is a television spot running in New York that makes a valid point regarding consequences "for kids." It is entirely predictable that after SSM is approved that elementary-school students could be subjected to re-education about homosexual marriage being "normative"; this has happened after SSM passed in Massachusetts. A parent there objected to his 6-year-old's required attendance at programs favorably depicting homosexual marriage. The school board rebuffed him, asserting authority to teach "civic values" in conformity with the Massachusetts SSM law, and that it was good for children to be taught things their parents would never approve of.
The first lie is about NOM's consequences ad, where the organization makes the already debunked claim:
Massachusetts schools teach second graders that boys can marry other boys.
But then Belair vaguely mentions an incident in Massachusetts:
A parent there objected to his 6-year-old's required attendance at programs favorably depicting homosexual marriage. The school board rebuffed him, asserting authority to teach "civic values" in conformity with the Massachusetts SSM law, and that it was good for children to be taught things their parents would never approve of.
That claim is a lie. It stems from a false moral panic caused by David Parker and a Massachusetts organization, Mass Resistance against Estabrook Elementary school in 2005.
I've written extensively on the David Parker incident and you can see that here.
But to summarize, this incident was not about a child being "required to learn about homosexual marriage," but rather an incident in which a local parent (David Parker) and a hate group (Mass Resistance) created confusion in the community simply because they didn't like the fact that Parker's son attended school with children from same-sex households.
Of course this simple truth meant nothing to Belair and it mean nothing to NOM.
After all, who cares about truth when there is a chance to yet again demonize the lgbt community.
2 comments:
Even if schools teach students that there are some people who are gay and lesbian, which is a FACT, it still doesn't prove his claim that "[a] further baseless claim of the homosexual lobby is that SSM poses no threat to natural marriage or the nuclear family."
No, sir, same-sex marriage does not pose a threat to "natural marriage," it does pose a threat to parents to teach their children that gay and lesbians are sick, twisted, perverted, sinful, etc. And that, of course, is the crux. They want to be able to teach their children this stuff.
I really don't expect much in the way of decent behavior from religious people, but even to me it's just amazing how these religious anti-gay crusaders never seem to feel the slightest compunction about their many lies. They seem to have no conscience whatsoever.
Post a Comment