Must not criticize homosexual parenting
A Christian candidate for the Australian Senate is under fire
"A mother who is raising a child with her same-sex partner has lodged a formal anti-discrimination complaint against Family First senate candidate Wendy Francis.
Kelly Pilgrim-Byrne from Perth is among several complainants seeking action against Francis, who is Family First’s lead senate candidate for Queensland, over remarks she made comparing same-sex parenting to child abuse.
In a Twitter post on Sunday, Francis said: “Children in homosexual relationships are subject to emotional abuse. Legitimising gay marriage is like legalising child abuse.”
The post was later deleted but in a subsequent interview, Francis confirmed that she had approved the message. "I was talking about emotional child abuse,” she told Fairfax Media. “And for me we don't yet know what this social experiment is going to result with.”
However, in another interview with News Limited, Francis denied she was homophobic.
Source
Certain viewpoints must not be expressed -- even during an election campaign, it seems (Australians go to the polls later this month).
One should perhaps note that one can regard homosexuality as a purely personal matter while still disapproving of children being brought up in homosexual households. So the lady is not being inconsistent in denying that she is "homophobic"
"Homophobic" is just a propaganda word anyway. A phobia is an irrational fear and one can disapprove of homosexuality without fearing it.
I wonder how the anti discrimination warriors would have responded if the lady had said: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them" (Lev. 20:13)
But at any event, the issue here is not whether she was right or wrong but rather whether there is free speech during an election. It is sad day for democracy if there is not. I personally think that Obama's entire election campaign was a gross and palpable fraud but I don't think he should be prosecuted for it.
17 comments:
It's better if bigots declare themselves honestly, especially if they are politicians and standing for election so their true colors are known.
I'm glad you defined phobia as most people use the term homophobic incorrectly. I fully believe homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and wrong. However, I do not fear it so don't consider myself homophobic.
Ditto what Doug Said
There are plenty of real victims of child abuse who would be extremely offended if they new a politician compared their plight with being raised by gay parents.
Parenting is not about sexual orientation, if a child has a drunk mother and a drug using father, that is a lot worse than being raised by one or two great parents, regardless of gender or sexuality.
The problem is Bobby that no one can discuss the opinion you present without getting labeled as a hate monger. While there is certainly worse means of abuse that is not the discussion it is whether a gay parent is bad for the child. That might be right or wrong but no discussion can be had as the people that think it wrong start name calling like anonymous 1:36 rather than stating reasoned opinions like yours.
I am the mother who is lodging the complaint against Wendy Francis. The reason I'm lodging the complaint is not because she has an opinion, it is because she alleged that I abuse my child because of my sexuality. She said, "Children in homosexual relationships are subject to emotional abuse" and that "legitimising gay marriage is like allowing child abuse". I will not stand back and allow a politician to acuse me of being a child abuser and I don't believe anybody else would either - gay or straight.
"The problem is Bobby that no one can discuss the opinion you present without getting labeled as a hate monger."
---I agree. There's too much lack of civility and the pressure to have the "right" opinions is too great.
I think people are smart enough to think for themselves. I would never condemn anyone for thinking that children should only be raised by a mother and a father, I would ask them what they intend to do with all the children waiting to be adopted, because when it comes to people who want to adopt or become foster parents versus the children waiting for homes, the supply of children exceeds the supply of people willing to adopt them.
Think about this, with some many teenagers and young kids waiting to be adopted, why do so many Americans go to China, Russia and Central America to get a baby? And what about the kids with special needs? The autistic? The unwanted?
Or worse, what about the people who pay surrogate mothers $20,000 to $50,000 to conceive a biological baby? The sad reality is that when it comes to adoptions we have to take whatever we can get, as long as they're not criminals, drug users, alcoholic, child molesters or otherwise unfit to be parents. At least that's what I think.
Define "unfit". And do you actually believe a child being raised by a same sex couple will have a normal, psychologically and emotionally healthy childhood?
"Define "unfit"."
---I can't, but private adoption agencies and government agencies already have definitions of that. Adoption after all is a privilege, not a right. There are many factors to consider. However, saying a single-father, grandparents, or same-sex parents can't adopt is ridiculous.
"And do you actually believe a child being raised by a same sex couple will have a normal, psychologically and emotionally healthy childhood?"
---According to WebMD, they do.
http://www.webmd.com/mental-health/news/20051012/study-same-sex-parents-raise-well-adjusted-kids
Besides, there's something special about couples who adopt kids, regardless of sexuality. Parents who adopt want to have kids, there's no accidental pregnancy, they're generally financially secure, their kids don't have to be fed by the government (like the children of the very poor), and they are thoroughly examined, adopting a kid is not as easy as getting a driver's license or a passport, it's quite complicated.
In the end, it would be ridiculous for me to dismiss two great parents just because they don't have the right gender. There is no one-size-fits-all adoptions.
I'd like to repeat a comment someone made when this issue was first raised. If, for any reason, you were forced to give up your baby for adoption, whom would you prefer to bring up your child: (a) a husband and wife, (b) a homosexual couple, (c) a lesbian couple, or (d) it makes no difference to me?
If this question were put to an opinion poll, I think we all intuitively know what the result would be - and I can't see the gay adoption lobby being overjoyed by it.
If a person or couple is prepared to give up their child for adoption (for whatever reason) through an approved agency, what moral right have they to dictate or even express a preference as regards to whom the agency should decide to allocate the child.
Also, it used to be the practice (at least when I was adopted so long ago) that would-be adopting parents had to be Christian and church-going even in a "secular" adoption agency, as in those days that was seen as being respectable and "normal". It was also a policy once that babies of one "race" should only be adopted by couples of the same assumed "race". It is not dissimilar to make other "political" policies that have no real bearing on the actual suitability of a would-be adopting couple. Mere sexual orientation is another such irrelevant consideration.
"If, for any reason, you were forced to give up your baby for adoption, whom would you prefer to bring up your child: (a) a husband and wife, (b) a homosexual couple, (c) a lesbian couple, or (d) it makes no difference to me?"
---Well, in the case of Dan Savage and his partner, the pregnant woman ended up choosing b.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/09/11/fashion/sundaystyles/11LOVE.html?ex=1284091200&en=831a9d891fab020c&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
They did what's called an "open adoption," in that case the biological parent chooses who adopts her baby and is allowed to participate in the life of the child and the child knows her as his or her biological mother.
Bobby said...
"Define "unfit"."
"I can't, but private adoption agencies and government agencies already have definitions of that."
Yes, and for the most part, they are politically motivated definitions.
"Yes, and for the most part, they are politically motivated definitions."
---I agree, and by the way, private and Christian adoption agencies also have their own standards, like not placing kids with single parents or non-believers.
Bobby said "In the end, it would be ridiculous for me to dismiss two great parents just because they don't have the right gender."
No, what would be ridiculous would be to think that a child needs two good parents of any gender. They need a good mother and a good father. There are different genders for a reason, and they do not have the same skill sets, regardless of what feminazis try to make us believe.
You could also argue that traditionally a child also needed close contact with aunts and uncles, grandparents or a whole village community in order to develop properly.
"No, what would be ridiculous would be to think that a child needs two good parents of any gender. They need a good mother and a good father. There are different genders for a reason, and they do not have the same skill sets, regardless of what feminazis try to make us believe."
---What a child needs and what's available are two different things. If we're gonna look for perfect parents then the result is that most kids are simply going to rot in state care.
Besides, what about marriages where the woman dies after giving birth and the husband doesn't remarry? Is the child somehow deprived because he doesn't have a mother? Perhaps, yet I don't see the state forcing the father to get married again just so the child has a female influence in his life.
Either way, different families raise the kids in different ways. Should we deny kids to people who don't want them to watch TV? Should only parents that can afford to send their kids to Harvard become adoptees?
Post a Comment