NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/alt/rushlim/12270

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-24 | 3.5 KB

Xref: sparky alt.rush-limbaugh:12270 alt.fan.rush-limbaugh:10697 alt.politics.clinton:19104 alt.politics.bush:14920 alt.politics.homosexuality:8451
Path: sparky!uunet!wupost!sdd.hp.com!col.hp.com!smithw
From: [e-mail] (Walter Smith)
Newsgroups: alt.rush-limbaugh,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,alt.politics.clinton,alt.politics.bush,alt.politics.homosexuality
Subject: Re: Education Regarding Alternative Family Units (Re: The Analogy Betwixt Gays & Blacks (Re: Children in Same-gender Families))
Date: 25 Dec 1992 01:27:38 GMT
Organization: Colorado Springs IT Center
Lines: 55
Distribution: usa
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
References: <[e-mail]>
NNTP-Posting-Host: fajita19.cs.itc.hp.com

[e-mail] (Tim Pierce) writes:
> In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Walter Smith) writes:
>
> >to a 1st grader,
> >what differences would they grasp between 2 adults who care a lot
> >about each other, but have seperate rooms, vs. 2 adults who care
> >a lot about each other, but go to sleep together at night?
>
> It represents the difference between Daddy's closest buddy or Daddy's
> roommate and a relationship like Mommies and Daddies have with each
> other.  As I said before, I grasped the fact that my mother and father
> have a different relationship with each other than they do with other
> people very early on, but the quantitative difference was not made
> known to me until many years later.

This exchange demonstrates where some people get the idea that the
book is propaganda aimed at young children;  teach them that it is
'ok' for daddy to have the same kind of relationship with his new
roommate that he used to have with mommy, when the child has no real
conception of the "quantitative difference" involved; then when the
child is older,  and begins to grasp the "quantitative difference",
he will already have a favorable outlook on such a relationship.

I don't know if I agree with the notion (that it's propaganda) or not;
but I can definitly see where people would think that it is.

I can also see where this situation can lead to even more extremism
on both sides; parents who feel that for religious reasons,
homosexuality is not 'ok' are forced to deal with the issue at a
point where they may not want to; the kid is taught at school that
it is ok, and taught at home that it isn't.  So how will the child
and parent possibly end up viewing the school?  As an anti-Christian
source of propaganda and politically-movitaved teachings?  The old
"can't trust the non-Christian people in the world, they're out
to pollute your thinking with loose thinking", etc.  (don't laugh,
there's minority Christian groups that already *do* teach that.
On the other side, that attitide from straight people would only
make the situation worse for gay/human rights.

I asked this in another thread, but it seems like a good place to
bring it up again; as long as mainstream churches in the western
world teach that homosexuality is wrong, how can 'acceptance' of
homosexuality be accomplished?  Can the two (current mainstream
Christianity and gay rights) coexist?  Or does either the outlook
of the churches on homosexuality or the goal (accpetance, not just
tolerance) of gay rights activists have to change?

I'll be out of the office for a few days for Christmas, and my news
reader tends to expire things quickly;  if anyone follows up to
this, please also CC a copy to me via email, as otherwise I'm
unlikely to see it...

Walter Smith
[e-mail]