Protecting the sanctity of marriage

I did some digging for those of you who ridicule statement that gays are trying to influence children in response to concerns expressed by "LadyLurkin" on 12/11. Let me ask you: what are the parents who do not share the gay views supposed to do?
Feel free to study quoted sources:


"We immediately seized upon the opponents' calling card - safety - and explained how homophobia represents a threat to students' safety by creating a
climate where violence, name-calling, health problems and suicide are common...
We knew that, confronted with real-life stories of youth who had suffered from homophobia, our opponents would automatically be on the defensive: they would have to attack people who had already been victimized once, which put them in a bully position from which it would be hard to emerge looking good...
In MA, no one could speak up against our frame <of the debate> and say: "why yes, I do think students should kill themselves". This allowed us to set the terms of the debate"
(speech to Human Rights Campaign, 1995, posted on (but since removed from) the GLSEN website <then www.glstn.org, now www.glsen.org)

"It is in the younger years that students form their impressions of lesbian and gay people. It is imperative, then, that they learn about lesbian/ gay issues in an age-appropriate way from the beginning of their schooling"
(The P.E.R.S.O.N. Project Organizing Handbook, Appendix IX: Creating Safe Schools - the Seattle and Massachusets models) ><available at the website of PERSON (Public Education Regarding Sexual Orientation Nationally), http:
www.youth.org/loco/PERSON/project?. The quotetion is found on page 5, in a section about a MA program, titled "Making schools safe: a blueprint for action for schools addressing lesbian and gay issues";

"First and foremost, teachers must act promptly to stop anti-gay comments at their first appearance, explaing to children why they are wrong, and that there is nothing wrong with being gay. Students who persevere need to be disciplined or suspended to show children and their parents that the schools are serious"
(Paul Varnell "Among school children", "In step" November 1998.
"In step" is a homosexual newspaper based in Madison, WI. Varnell adds:
"students who are repeatedly homophobic also need to be mandated to counseling to discover why berating others is so important to them... Anti-bias programs must be required as early as kindergarten and continue on through highschool")

At a 1998 GLSEN - sponsored conference in Boston, GLSEN member and New York kindergarten teacher Jaki Williams said teaching five-year-olds about homosexuals is important because children at that age are just "developing their superego" and "that's where the saturation process needs to begin"
(Brian Burt "Gay leader says dream is to "promote homosexuality",
"Lambda Report on Homosexuality" Jan/ Feb 1998)

The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) ran an article in its newsletter, "Young Children", suggesting answers to a question from 5 year lod Ethan about whether day-care classmate Tommy can marry his best friend Sam when the two grow up. The excerpt below includes one of the authors' suggested answers: "sometimes a simple, honest answer suffices. One teacher response might be "Tommy and Sam can choose to live together when they grow up. There are men who prefer to make a family with another man instead of with a woman. And they love each other just like other families. They can even have a wedding if they want". This is a clear and factual response that
answers the question directly, although it does not raise new questions about complexities of laws about and societal attitudes toward lesbians and gays"
(Betsy J. Cahill and Rachel Theilheimer "Can Tommy and Sam get married"
"Young Children", the newsletter of the National Association for the Education of Young Children, January 1999, pp.27-31). NAEYC, based in Washington, DC, accredits day care centers across the country.

Debra Chasnoff, a lesbian and co-producer of the video "It's elementary: talking about gay issues in school", which shows grade-school children receiving the pro-homosexuality lessons in class, says her motivation for making the film was that her son was entering kindergarten in public school
(Debra Chasnoff, interview with MD Public Television, June 7, 1999)

A leading force in promoting and approving view of homosexuality is the National Education Association teachers union. The following is the NEA's view of diversity, laid out in a 1997 pro-homosexuality "Action Sheet":
"Recognizing that our world is heterogenous and not homogenoues is a first step toward validating the existence of diverse groups of people. The second etep is talking about and acknowledging differences. And the third step involves accepting as contributing members of society those we previously considered as "other". No longer can we expect people to be alike, under the assumption that likeness will produce a shared culture and generally harmonious relationships. Now, we must be prepared to respect people who are different, even though their beliefs may conflict with our own and make us feel uneasy"
("Understanding Gay and Lesbian students through diversity" National Education Association "Action Sheet" June 1997, page 1)

"Gay, lesbian bisexual and heterosexual people experience the same basic developmental issues... All of us learn to express our sexuality through intimacy, sensuality and identity. And all of us act through a sexual orientation that is bisexual, heterosexual or homosexual... These orientations are not chosen but are discovered through normal child development... The degree to which we accept who we are is the degree to which we can accept those who are different...
(as above)

According to several studies, the average "coming out" age for "gay/ bisexual males" has plummeted fromaround 21 years old in 1979 to under 15 today, with young people identifying "gay" attractions at age 13.
(work of homosexual researcher Ritch C. Savin-Williams, a developmental psychologist at Cornell University: "And then I became gay" ><Routledge, New York 1998>

Another central component of the "gay" education agenda is the formation of
school-based "Gay-Straight Alliances". In MA, where GSA's are taxpayer-founded, over one-half of about 300 public high schools host the clubs, which seek to combat homophobia. Every year, the Comission on Gay and Lesbian Youth helps bus "gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender" students from across the state to Boston for a pro-homosexuality rally on the steps of the state capitol.
(Jim Hanes "Youth pride day hails new "gay" school groups" <Culture Facts,
May 22, 1999>

MA teacher-activists have had considerabkle success in spreading the concept of GSA's to other states, especially in large metropolitan areas with large homosexual populations. In addition, MA Comission on Gay and Lesbian Youth has proposed $1.5 million for pro-homosexuality school programs in the next school year"
(quote from "Parents Rights Coalition" of Newton, MA)


The use of gay/ lesbian specific situations in explaining mathematical procedures (example: if 10000 people marched in the Gay Pride March in 1990 and 25000 in 1992, what was the average increase?)
(The P.E.R.S.O.N. "Project Organising Handbook" appendix IX, op. cit.,
see section on "Mathematics"0

"I would like to see mandatory homophobia prevention education integrated into elementary and secondary school curricula"
(Debra Chasnoff quoted in "Out Facts" <New York: Out Publishing, Inc, 1997), p. 43>

I think that some of the last few posts brought up some points that got me thinking about what exactly "sanctity' in marriage means. For Christians who are opposed to gay marriage (I'm definatly not one of them) I think it's important to seperate what I call 'spiritual' marriage vs. the legalistic marriage as recognized by the whatever State (government) one lives under. If one looks back at history "marriage" as an institution it grew primarily out of legalistic contract basis from the State. At one time the Christian church wouldn't recognize or even marry people in the way it happens now. It's true look it up! :D

Nowadays the word marriage has been all mismashed in with religion with religious folks believing that the 'sanctity' comes from whatever God they believe in. For them this is fine. Personally I don't have a problem with that because I fundementally believe in the freedom of religious or non-religious belief of individuals. It comes down to seperation of Church and State which I believe is a founding principle of the US as well as here in Canada.

In Canada gay marriage is now legal. Though it is up to the individual Churches to choose whether they will marry gay couples or not. If their particular 'spiritual' understanding of what marriage is does not gell with what the State decrees then fine, they don't have to do it.

Thus is my mind if certain types of Christians or whatever religion a person happens to follow do not recognize this type of marriage in their OWN particular churches then fine. Believe what you must and do what you must within those boundries. However this does not give them the right to dictate to others who do not share their beliefs of what they should do in this regard.

This is part and parcel to what happens when we live in a pluralistic society that's founded on principles of personal freedom. As many people have stated in various threads here we do not live in to live in a 'Theocratic' State. Of course there are many types of Christians that do want this...or to a point think they might want this to happen but if they are open minded enough and you get down to the nitty gritty of what such a type of government would mean for them and their own beliefs the idea becomes less appealing.

I'm not sure if I'm explaining this really well so perhaps a personal example might be in order.

I had to get married twice. To the same man of course.
How is this so? Well our first marriage was not recognized by the State that is Canada. We were married with a traditional native ceremony because he is part native. It followed the traditions of his beliefs and was performed by an Elder religious figure in his community. The Elder was not 'sanctioned' under Canadian law to perform marriages as recognized by the State. However it was done under the eyes of "God the Creator." It, in my opinion was Sanctified in a religious sense according to my and my husbands spiritual and religious beliefs.

So according to us, my family and my community we were married and consider that day to be our true anniversary.

Now for the most part we were happy with that but then the legal stuff came in. My husband is a vet and thus has pensions etc etc which as his spouse I would qualify for. In talking with the Vets affairs they said that it wasn't impossible for them to recognize this marriage but it was a real pain in the ass. (It's good to note that there has been a longterm struggle to have many native marriages recognized for years and this is slowly changing as well)

We decided that to save a lot of trouble that we would get married again in my church in order to make the legal stuff easier. In talking to my pastor she said that their was only two things that she had to do and say that would make the marriage 'legal' under Canadian law. These are...."Are there any impediments (meaning legal) that would keep you from being married" And "I now pronounce you husband and wife."

That's it. All of the rest of the ceremony was church based and particular to that particular tradition. I found this really interesting in light of the whole 'relgious' vs. who can get married 'legally' debate that's been going on here and in the US.

What it comes down to is that the State (ie government) really doesn't give a rats ass about a couples religious or spiritual beliefs when it comes down to who is considered to be 'married' under the law as it stands now. It's individual preference to what is 'sanctified' (spiritual) or not.

Now many would say that in light of this that for homosexuals that "civil unions" should be the way to go because it really comes down to all the legal stuff that goes along with being a couple. I say no way. This is a second tier cop-out that denies what I call the 'spirituality of love' that brings two people together. To me the 'love' part of a marriage is what sanctifies it. It is them up to the individuals to how they what to proclaim that love to the rest of their community. It should be their choice whether this is down in a religious or spiritual environment or a simple declaration on the steps of a courthouse.

So to sum up. To all the religious folks that are anti- gay marriage feel free to believe what you must in your own Churches and it's community. Don't marry them under your tradition then. That is your perogative and if can dare to say feel lucky that you live in a country that allows you to do that.
However recognize that others do not and most likely will never believe the same way you do but have just as much right to love and live according to their own beliefs.

from Abraham Lincoln: “Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves.”

BRAVO!! Glad to hear you were raised by such loving gay/lesbian parents. I applaud you for your beliefs and your standards.

Well Done! That was beautifully said. I am the straight child of two lesbian moms who have been together for 35 years. I am a straight A college student, never used drugs, never been in trouble of any kind. My mothers were amazing as they helped me learn to handle all of the mean comments from the 'christian' parents who were outraged that I attended public school. They raised me to be considerate, thoughtful, and compassionate to everyone. And they did it while being shunned, spat at, cursed, ignored, slandered and denied rights. I have 7 childhood friends from heterosexual parents legally married, who have been abused, neglected. 2 of them sexually abused by their pastor and deacon father, 1 commited suicide because he was so afraid of his parents when he failed 11th grade. 3 are heavy drug addicts. 1 is doing much better after therapy for anorexia. All of them were church raised by a man and woman.
I AM VERY LUCKY to have had such a wonderful childhood and such loving parents. both women.

I read something the other day that I thought people might benefit from, it goes something like this. "Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding god's law.... When people try to defend homosexuality i remind them of Lev. 18:22, however, I am having trouble with some other Lev. passages, here they are, Lev. 19:19, states that who cannot grow two different crops in the same field, nor wear garments made of two different kinds of thread, (cotton/polyester), My uncle and aunt do both of these things, is it really necessary the the whole town get together to stone them?(lev 24:10-16) couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws?(lev 20:14)
Lev. 11:6-8 says that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, (can I still play football?)
Lev. 19:27 says my male friends should not get their hair trimmed, even around their temples. They do it anyway, How should they die?..."
This is longer but you get the idea. If they are going to push agendas then they must be able to follow every part of the bible, not just pick and choose. True there are admonishments to homosexuals in the bible but there are also over 362 admonishments to heterosexuals, should that be banned, doesn't god love them? Of course, if the get the part that says "JUDGE NOT" or even if the try to understand the part that says Love one another.
There is so much hate in this world, isn't it time we tried to stop worrying about who the neighbor loves and worry about who we love?

I, like many of you here, am a christian. But I am also many other things. I am a daughter, sister, aunt, friend, guitarist, singer/songwriter, church choir member, tax payer, home owner, community volunteer, registered voter, certified medical professional, licensed driver, domestic engineer, partner, lesbian, and mother of 6 wonderful children. We function as any other family. (just a little larger) My children attend public schools, Sunday school, and church. They also play guitar, flute, banjo, hand bells, baseball, softball, cheerleading, tennis, football, run track, cross country and anything else that will fit in our schedule. I chaperone dances and attend all school parties, sports, and activities that they are involved in. That being said, it is sad that society really only judges me on the basis of 1 of these things. That being my sexual orientation.

There has been much discussion here in regards to procreation where the LGBT community is concerned. Some have said that the gay community is the answer to overpopulation. Instead, maybe we are the answer to child neglect and abandonment. I will tell you that there are many heterosexual people in this world who are creating precious life yet not caring for it. Why are there so many children in social services? My 6 children are all biological siblings. I, nor my partner, are their biological parents. Their biological parents,who were married, are drug addicts who could/would not care for then due to the addictions. They were given opportunity and offered help to get their lives together and take care of their children, but chose not to. This is a growing problem. Many children in this situation are being cared for by their grandparents.

Back to the topic.(sorry for rambling on my soap box) Even though we have 6 children and a happy family we are still denied marriage. My children ask me all the time when we will be able to legally marry. This is a discussion in our home on a regular basis. Why should my children be denied the basic right to have their parents marry? When the democratic party won my 2 teenagers decided that we are getting close. The sad part is if I died tomorrow my partner would be denied all benefits applicable to married heterosexual couples. What is so wrong with 2 same-sex people who love each other legally committing to one another? The reality is that when many people who are opposed to same-sex marriage think about same-sex relationships they only think about the sexual end of those relationships. Well I have 6 wonderful children. Need I say more.