Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Corvino: The homosexual agenda
Gay-marriage opponents claim that we gay folk are trying to influence your children. In one sense, they are quite right.
We are not trying to “recruit” your children, if by that you mean “turn them gay.” As gay people, we understand enough about how sexual orientation works to know that you can’t turn people gay—or straight, for that matter—by some act of will.Rather, we’re trying to do just what those scary “protect marriage” ads say we’re trying to do. We’re trying to teach them about same-sex marriage. In school.
There—I said it. The secret’s out. The gay agenda has been leaked. Call the Maine Yes-on-1 campaign and tell them there’s new material for Frank Schubert and company to quote out of context.
Meanwhile, let’s talk about that campaign—specifically, the ads warning that if Maine keeps marriage for gays and lesbians, Maine schoolchildren will be taught about homosexual marriage.
Put this way, the claim is extremely misleading. Maine (unlike California, which micromanages everything) does not dictate teaching about marriage. Maine curriculum is controlled locally, and individual schools can teach about same-sex marriage (or not) whether or not Maine has marriage equality.
To put the point another way: just because something’s legal, that doesn’t mean it must be taught in Maine schools (or vice-versa).
But whatever happens with Maine’s Question 1, I want Maine schools to teach about gays getting married. Other states’ schools, too.
Part of my reason for wanting this has nothing whatsoever to do with my support for marriage equality. I also want schools to teach about genocide, and I’m pretty staunchly anti-genocide. Schools are supposed to inform students about what’s happening in the world. For better or worse, same-sex marriage is happening in the world. Even if it is taken away in Maine, it will keep happening elsewhere. Indeed, even if it were somehow eliminated everywhere, it would remain part of our history. Students need to know this.
Of course, when we teach about genocide, we make it clear that genocide is a Very Bad Thing. By contrast, responsible teaching about same-sex marriage would have to acknowledge that it is a controversial thing, with sane and decent people on different sides of the issue.
And that is doubtless one reason why you, dear parent, fear teaching about same-sex marriage in schools. You’d rather that your children not know that there are some sane and decent people who deny that same-sex marriage is a Very Bad Thing. Indeed, that there some who think it is a Perfectly Fine Thing. You want to shelter them from such diversity. I don’t.
I want them to know that there are people with different views on marriage, and that gay people are getting legally married in parts of the United States and elsewhere. I want them to know it because any informed citizen ought to know it. But I also want them to know it because some of them might themselves be gay.
That’s right: there’s a small but statistically significant chance that your child might be gay. Ignoring the issue won’t make it go away. And isolating him from the fact of other gay people won’t make it go away, either. It will just make him…well, isolated.
Now, your child might not be gay, and if that’s so, learning about gay marriage isn’t going to make him gay. Sexual orientation doesn’t work that way. (If it did, I’d be straight.) If your child is straight, he will remain straight, regardless of what happens in Maine, California, Massachusetts and elsewhere.
But let’s suppose he’s gay. If so, and if I’m right that he can’t willfully change that fact, then his best chance for a happy, fulfilling life is probably in a relationship with someone of the same sex. (I say “probably” because some people—a very rare subset—are happier single; let’s assume he’s not one of those.) Realistically, his choice is not between a gay relationship and a straight relationship; it’s between a gay relationship and none at all.
Now I don’t expect you simply to take my word for any of this. You want your child to be happy, and you can’t imagine his happiness as a gay person. Maybe you’re deeply convinced that he’d be better off alone than with someone of the same sex.
I don’t doubt that you sincerely believe this. But I sincerely believe that you are wrong—badly wrong, wrong in a way that does needless harm to your gay child.
I want your child to know that his love is a good thing. I want him to know that he deserves a chance at romantic bliss. I want him to know that, regardless of sexual orientation, he can seek someone to have and to hold, for better or for worse, until death do they part.
I want him at least to have that option.
And that, to be very frank, is the bigger part of my reason for wanting schools to teach about gay marriage. I want all kids, including gay kids, to have a fair shot at happiness.
That’s my homosexual agenda in a nutshell.
******
John Corvino, Ph.D. is an author, speaker, and philosophy professor at Wayne State University in Detroit. His column “The Gay Moralist” appears Fridays on 365gay.com.
For more about John Corvino, or to see clips from his “What’s Morally Wrong with Homosexuality?” DVD, visit www.johncorvino.com.
His upcoming speaking appearances include:
November 10: Central Washington University (debate with Glenn Stanton)
November 11: Colorado State University, Pueblo (debate with Glenn Stanton)
November 12: Miami University of Ohio
November 16: Bergen Community College (NJ)
Check school websites for rooms and times.
Hmmm… a whole lot of gay people are commenting about the bigotries of straight people as though they don’t hold bigotries of their own. This is the problem in a nutshell: everyone’s got an agenda and a perspective and screw the opposition. Can none of you think of any reason OTHER than religion to revile homosexuality? (What turns you off of heterosexuality? Religion?) *Really*!? Never thought about the mechanics of gay sex and how it might turn other people off? Never thought about the inappropriate sexual displays at various gay events? I’m gay and I have to say that a lot of homosexual people and practices rub me the wrong way to the point that I have very little interest in associating myself with any given group of self-identified GLBT people. I, like Mr. Corvino, would like to educate our children and our adult peers about the facts of homo and transsexuality. Knowledge is power, after all.
DaveW exemplifies exactly what is wrong with people in this world: black-and-white thinking in a world that requires shades of gray to function. I know many religious people (religious of ALL varieties) and there is no common view of homo or transsexuality among them. I know people who go to church every day and fight for the rights of GLBT people. I know people who think that anything called god is a total sham and believe that homosexuals are a blight on the planet. I’ve met people who are in between those places. Approving of homosexual marriage or not does not indicate a person’s total decency factor, and if you are willing to judge people based upon their views or solely upon one view, you are just as bad as those that you are railing against. Heterophobia is as damaging to society and the GLBT rights struggle as homophobia is.
“Gay-marriage opponents claim that we gay folk are trying to influence your children. In one sense, they are quite right.”
Great… I can’t wait to see this phrase taken from this sight by the anti-gay marriage people to use in their slanted vague commercials and scare gullible voters into believing this crap. Thanks Corvino. Thank you very much. You are what is wrong with the gay movement, evoking these vague Utopian claims yet reality dictates that parents don’t want their kids exposed to this stuff. Can’t face reality well too bad. Kids are half-baked drones that are already indoctrinated enough by this failed institutionalized public school system, destroying child creativity and imagination and molding children into robotic systematic conformity. Children are homophobic because what they are taught at home and then forced into submission by a cruel public school system. It is the system to blame for homophobia where innocent kids are exposed to homophobia by these other kids. Let kids be kids. And BTW kids don’t vote so let us not waste our time and resources into this mindless bable. Let’s focus on the real issues, marriage and DADT. Kids are too busy being distracted by other things, or don’t you remember when you were in school? Mr. Corvino makes a failed attempt and is unaware of the big picture at hand concerning public education. There I said it.
Dear John
In another article about the passage of hate crimes legislation, it states that there are people who are “religiously or philosophically opposed to homosexuality”. This struck me as strange: I understand religious antipathy toward gays: a book with a lot of old stories calls it an “abomination”. This same book sponsors genocide, slavery, treating women like chattel, and the death penalty for wearing cotton and wool at the same time. Fine. I get it. The book says no. Or so we’re led to believe – as a translator who has studied the translation history of that book, it’s surprising that anyone thinks that it could possibly be anything but the word of the translator: the translations from Hebrew to Greek to Latin to English show very clearly that everyone made stuff up along the way. But I’m getting off track…
What I don’t understand, and hope that you might, is the “philosophical” opposition to homosexual civil rights issues. What philosophical school of thought has a convincing NON-RELIGIOUS argument to oppose civil rights for gays? “Political” opposition, as best I can tell, is 100% based on religious views, so political philosophy doesn’t count, as its arguments are justified only by that book. Do you know of any “purely” philosophical reasons against samesexers achieving civil rights parity? I ask because I believe that opponents of parity will soon have to move away from the religious arguments. I want to know what our opponents could possibly base their arguments on if religion is extracted. Science will not back up our opponents. Medicine, psychiatry, ditto. What about philosophy? On what could such “philosophical opposition” be based?
And that brings me to my next question: you say that “decent and sane” people oppose my right to marry. I don’t know that I’m 100% on board with that: these people, acting out of fear, are placing their religious beliefs above my chances for happiness. Is that “decent”? They claim catastrophic results. I’ve lived in Canada for the last 5 years. I grew up in Belgium and England and France. All have had legal gay marriage for some time, and there has been no catastrophe. So, are the folks opposing my marriage really “sane”?
No, John, “decent and sane” people do not oppose things that do not harm, involve, or affect them (especially when there is proof that none of the consequences they fear ever come true).
“Delusional and sane” doesn’t work. “Decent and ignorant” is the probably a more accurate way to describe the people who oppose your right to live with your boyfriend. It is also probably the kindest way to describe these people. I’d rather think they’re ignorant, fearful, powerless – and not just nosy and spiteful.
It is quite obvious that these people have no idea as to what the kids think or know. I would suspect that most youngsters know a little about gay people. Informing them about the people that get married will not shock them (the kids) it will not hurt them (the kids) the only thing this might do would be to show how out of touch their parents are. Its been said many many times.
GET OVER IT!
Take a few moments to envision your best understanding of The American Dream.
There you have it. The Gay Agenda.
Why do people want the truth kept from their children? Is it because they had to keep the truth about the priests from their kids?
Great column. Thank you.
It really gives you pause, you know, when they assert that we are abridging their religious freedom: to indoctrinate their children with their intolerance and hate for us? They are afraid that we might teach a child that it’s OK to be gay and there are others like them, and thus save that child from committing suicide. How can anyone think that preventing a child from suffering is a bad thing? Then they assert that their religion is all about love. Somehow it all boils down to that xenophobia that we got through evolution (unless you don’t believe in evolution!!). It just really hurts my brain to try to understand that point of view.
Hey MK and Robert Katz. My point was a little more black and white. I had an issue with John saying “sane and decent” to describe our oponents. Who is the enemy might be a different discussion.
Robert: that woman your mother shared a room with, sorry to say, is not decent! She thinks it is ok to deny my rights for some reason (can’t get her head wrapped around it). I don’t call her the enemy, but I just was taking issue with her being labelled decent. Decent people DO NOT vote away people’s rights because they “can’t get their head wrapped around” an idea that equates to equality. We’d have to ask her why she can’t get it wrapped, so maybe it is religious delusion which then falls afoul of John’s other adjective: sane. I agree, not the enemy, but someone who needs to be told that her prejudices are inhumane.
I simply don’t think of people as good people who cannot get over their prejudices. I was raised in Atlanta as a bigot, the part of my family still there says some very embarrassing things about african americans (and yes I protest, walk out of dinner etc, but I’m now just a “damn yankee”). Point is I have gotten over bigotry and prejudice that was drummed into me starting at birth…in school, in church and yes sadly at home.
MK, you make a great point about conservative christianity. They certainly don’t accept facts when they run afoul of the strange beliefs. I also agree it is fear of god, or everlasting damnation, that allows them to accept the prejudices they are taught.
I still say we shouldn’t consider them “normal”..sane and decent. They need help. You said it better than me about why they fall into this, I’m just saying we cannot accept them as decent or sane people when they can’t look at facts because they are scared to death of the lake of fire.
As a movement we need to stand firm on this: oppose our rights (note I did not say be ucomfortable with us)…oppose our rights, cast that vote, and you are allowing your prejudices to cloud your judgement. Prejudices of your own making or of religion’s teaching, still it is NOT DECENT to harm people because of your prejudices.
It used to be ok to use the N word and to deny access to drinking fountains. As with that movement, we have to take the higher ground and get society to start not accepting such thoughts and actions against us.
Its that simple. That is why I posted…John’s piece suggested its ok to be a bigot, you can be sane and decent.
I wholeheartedly disagree.
@ Robert Katz: “The bigger issue, it seems to me, is the very troubling tendency among some people to not want their children–or any children for that matter–to be exposed to ideas with which they don’t agree, as though ignorance of different points of view were a virtue of some sort.”
Speaking from the perspective of having grown up in a fundamentalist Christian family (but not now being a Christian), I fear that willful ignorance is endemic to the Christian life. Christians (and, by extension, sometimes the religious right generally) often seem to think that anything that contradicts their world view comes from the devil. {{{Sigh…}}}
I think there are good people in the world who are decent, but have had their reason stolen from them by religion, or by the dominant view of morality in our culture perpetuated by religion. In most walks of life, these people can empathize with the struggles of minorities, but we gays have been vilified as the new devil, come to steal away and pervert their kids.
In my opinion, the inherent guilt built into Christianity (i.e., “all have sinned and come short of the glory of God”) keeps some people so scared they can’t really see us as human, who have the same cares and struggles that they do.
However, I’m not naive to the fact that the religious right is a juggernaut led by certain extremists who will use any means to advance their agenda — and I think we all know about their willingness to lie and distort the facts for those ends.
However, I think some decent, yet religious, people get sucked into the juggernaut because they are afraid of defying God, and they look to their leaders for what is the right thing to do. They just don’t have the judgment/education/intellect/etc. to discern fact from fiction sometimes.
It is those people in the religious right that we can really reach. I don’t see any reason to summarily dismiss them as “the enemy.”
Thanks, John Corvino, for yet another compelling column.
You are waaaay too reasonable, John. Bigots don’t care about that stuff. And, speaking of agendas, the right wing’s agenda is not about homosexuality or family values. It is about money and political power. Totally different conversation.
We can quibble as to whether the folks who oppose marriage equality are “sane and decent.” As a strategic matter, let’s give them the benefit of the doubt.
Right after Prop 8 passed, my mom (who strongly opposed Prop
shared a hospital room with a very nice woman who was fine with domestic partnership recognition but who still could not wrap her head around the idea of marriage being for any two people who love each other. People like this woman are NOT the enemy.
The bigger issue, it seems to me, is the very troubling tendency among some people to not want their children–or any children for that matter–to be exposed to ideas with which they don’t agree, as though ignorance of different points of view were a virtue of some sort.
One of the most sensible articles re the matter I’ve read!
Dr. Corvino, please pass this along to Maggie Gallagher!!
@ DaveW
VERY well stated and argued. (Good to see someone who isn’t afraid to tell the “religious” bigots where they actually stand!)
John, sorry but I don’t see any “sane and decent people” against my marriage.
If it is religious delusion that makes them bigoted, that is not decent and probably not sane.
If it is ignorance, than it is not decent to take away rights from people because you don’t understand. Find out or don’t speak out.
If it is to protect one’s closet, that is certainly not decent and again possibly not sane.
People say they are uncomfortable with gay sex…fine, but it is not decent to project your discomfort on a minority’s rights.
People say they want only traditional marriage..that is not decent as it seeks to impose their narrow view on society to the detriment of real families.
I simply cannot find a non-insane or decent reason to be against marriage equality and I don’t think you are right to be granting them that pass.
If we don’t stand firm with a hard line not to be crossed: take away my rights and you are prejudiced, we will be giving them the moral higher ground we currently hold.
I’m not interested in giving up anything at this point, and that includes marriage rights in Maine!
Very well argued case! Children are not stupid and they understand love and relationships can be same sex if they are not indoctrinated by churches or right wing politicians!I’ve seen it myself; their natural innocence could show adults a thing or two!