Yes, That’s True. And Your Point Is…?

There’s this website called “Americans for Truth About Homosexuality”, which I was led to via Friendly Atheist. They have this post up advertising a rally/lobbying session by the Illinois Family Institution (a known hate group) which lists at the bottom all the horrible ramifications of gay marriage in states like Massachusetts. Hemant screen-capped the bullet points and I was so baffled by how hilariously obvious and harmless most of it was that I thought I’d insert my own commentary. All emphasis is theirs.


Religious liberty and freedom of conscience (i.e., the freedom to oppose homosexuality) will be repressed by the state in the name of “gay rights”; Illinois has already experienced this under our “Civil Unions” law [see the case of the Walders’ bed-and-breakfast in Paxton, IL].  Despite the current bill being amended to protect churches and religious institutions, business owners — even devout Christians — who cater to weddings (such as banquet hall owners and photographers) could be forced to use their facilities or expertise to celebrate homosexual “marriages”;


This is such a tired argument. Of course businesses have to serve homosexual couples just like heterosexual couples! Once again and regretfully not for the last time, would it be acceptable for a banquet hall owner to turn away an interracial couple because they don’t approve of interracial marriage? Discrimination on the basis of race is illegal for businesses that provide public accommodation because it’s a fundamental part of who a person is, over which they have little control. Just like sexual orientation, fluid as it is.


Liberal teachers, especially in public schools, will be emboldened to promote homosexual relationships to students in the classroom; homosexual teachers will be given a platform to discuss their “marriages” and to model homosexuality as normal, natural and good to students. Parents will have a harder time stopping the promotion of homosexuality in schools;


‘Liberal teachers will tell kids being gay is alright and will talk about their spouses like everybody else does! Isn’t that awful?!’ The part that makes me laugh is the “to model homosexuality as normal, natural and good.” Haha, maybe because it fucking is and to do the opposite is more actively damaging than being gay ever could be.


Homosexual “sex ed” will gain ground in Illinois schools. Under the radical egalitarian idea that all relationships are morally “equal” and worthy of marriage, “safer gay sex” will be taught non-judgmentally alongside (normal) heterosexual sex. “Abstinence until marriage” (which regrettably is not the norm but only the ideal for most Illinois health classrooms) would apply to homosexual- and bisexual- as well as “straight” students — despite the reality that all homosexual sex is inherently immoral.  High-risk and unnatural practices like anal sex will be mainstreamed in our schools. (Could teaching the truth that sex between men is linked disproportionately to HIV and various sexually-transmitted diseases lead to charges of “anti-gay discrimination”?) And deviant lesbian sex will be taught for girls who in the future might “marry” a woman.


You guys, it’s a RADICAL EGALITARIAN IDEA that same-sex couples are worthy of marriage! I wasn’t even aware that egalitarian views could be radical! And it’ll be taught “non-judgmentally” which effectively means that it won’t be condemned at the end of each sentence. I’m not even sure what they’re saying about abstinence until marriage applying across the board. If you subscribe to this view, you don’t believe that same-sex couples should be able to marry, thus telling gay students to be abstinent until marriage is telling them to be abstinent permanently.

Homosexual intercourse is inherently immoral and anal sex is unnatural. I won’t even acknowledge the former except to say that it’s a pointless argument that’s impossible to prove. Anal sex is about as unnatural as fellatio and cunnilingus, but they aren’t charging around against those sex acts. Nor do they explicitly mention anal sex between heterosexual couples, although it probably happens a lot.

“Deviant lesbian sex will be taught for girls..” woah woah, hold on there. Is this saying that they’ll be teaching how to have deviant lesbian sex? I don’t know what schools those are, but I wish I had attended them. Nothing like a gym teacher showing you how tribadism works via hand gestures.


Businessmen will be forced to recognize and subsidize their employees’ immoral same-sex “marriages”; a form of this is already happening under Illinois’ “Civil Unions” law;


You mean businesses will have to offer benefits to the dependants of employees? The horror.


Society will be corrupted as unequal things are treated as equal; children will be further confused as the law (which is a teacher, as the saying goes) creates a Brave New Morality that officially “weds” sinful, unnatural and changeable behavior to the noble and life-sustaining institution of marriage;


Yes, acting on sexual impulses is a choice and a changeable behaviour. However, having those attractions is not a choice, much unlike moral stances and religious views, which are not in any way innate and must be learned.


Homosexual activists will be energized to use the homosexual “marriage” law to pressure citizens to approve of their lifestyle and step up their crusade to stigmatize, demonize and discredit pro-family Christians and moral opponents of homosexuality. Groups like AFTAH that embrace wholesome, godly morality will be vilified as “hateful and bigoted.” And, as we have witnessed in Massachusetts, the push for ever more extreme “LGBT rights” would be propelled by enactment of “same-sex marriage” — including“transgender” activism in schools.


LGBT activists will expect to be treated with respect? They’ll point out intolerance of differences when they see it? (Since that is the definition of ‘bigotry’.) How a group like this can think they’re ‘wholesome’ or that they’re embracing any just morality is dumbfounding. The use of another overly dramatic term–in this case ‘extreme’–in association with the word “rights” is in any context completely ridiculous. Asking for the same rights as everyone else is not radical or extreme and viewing it that way is so twisted I don’t know how they see straight.


Legalized homosexual “marriage” will help “normalize” homosexual adoption, thus consigning greater numbers of innocent children to be raised in households that are motherless or fatherless by design.






Featured image from sodahead.com-Thor picture I stole from MAL I think?

Previous post

Quickies: 22/02/2013

Next post

Queer History: February



Lux is a female genderqueer weirdo, writing from Kansas. They happily identify as a militant atheist(+), feminist and liberal. Their time is consumed with Doctor Who, reading, and playing WoW with a cat on their lap. If you're lucky, you might catch them smithing jewellery or cleaning something.

1 Comment

  1. February 22, 2013 at 3:56 pm —

    Ifind it funny (in addition to very disturbing) that they even put LGBT rights in quotes, as if they don’t think it’s real!

Leave a reply