Tuesday, February 23, 2016

Stella Morabito explains the sinister LGBT agenda

Stella Morabito
Stella Morabito is obsessed with the idea that people are out to stymie dissent with political correctness. Civility and even good manners aren't at issue at all. Morabito is convinced that people are out to silence Morabito and her spew of bigotry. I am not out to silence anyone. In fact I subscribe to the belief that people like Morabito do us a service. They become cartoonish characters with their anti-LGBT diatribes.

Last Wednesday, the silenced Ms Morabito gave a lecture about transgender citizens at an event held by the the anti-LGBT hate group Family Research Council. Morabito is a Defender of the Faith1. In April of 2014 she asserted (while silenced) that same-sex marriage was a “bait and switch” proposition. The goal of the gay community wasn't equality, she claimed, but abolishing the institution of marriage. I guess that we have been quite inept at accomplishing our objectives. Nevertheless, once again she asserts to know the sinister motives of the LGBT community.

An exercise in bigotry: Today Morabito (with an assist from Joy Pullmann, the Federalist's managing editor) makes little sense by attempting to turn the tables on oppression and vulnerability. They have written a piece for the Federalist titled “The Transgender War Against Human Rights, Science, And Consent.” Apparently they are wed to the notion that their readers are spectacularly stupid. Judging from some of the comments they might be right. Now they will call me an elite. So be it.

I'll just highlight a few passages of this rather verbose (kitchen sink) piece.  Regarding the mean-spirited legislation in South Dakota, they write:
LGBT groups are spewing forth even more of their usual overhyped invective. The laughably named Human Rights Campaign has been sending forth feverish press releases imperiously demanding that men be allowed to shower in the same area as little girls, lest children be endangered. Yes, really: “These appalling proposals [to keep men out of little girls’ showers and bathrooms] would compromise the safety and well-being of the young people we all have the duty and obligation to support and protect.” A little more self-awareness, please.
This isn't about men and it's not about showers but it is about children. The simple proposition is that transgender children should use the facility matching their gender presentation. Trans Equality explained “…hundreds of South Dakota students have signed a petition opposing HB 1008—and not a single South Dakota resident testified in favor of the bill at Senate hearing last week. Governor Duagaard should listen to the real experts on the ground—South Dakota students, teachers and school administrators—and reject this discriminatory legislation.”

In other words, the kids get it. This is about extremely vulnerable (and understandably fragile) transgender children. I don't know about Pullmann but the starting point for Morabito is that she does not believe that these children exist in the first place. She tortures social and medical sciences to conform to religious doctrine. Then with some selective observation she can declare:
These lawmakers’ common-sense stance was totally non-controversial about a year ago. Now all of a sudden schools that have boys’ and girls’ bathrooms are being propagandized as “extremist.” Why the rush? Because this logical extension of the LGBT agenda is so obviously anti-reality that to succeed they must push it through, fast and furiously. In this case, the method is to smear the legislators and the vast majority of South Dakotans they represent, claiming they are “attacking transgender children.”

Nothing is further from the truth. South Dakotan legislators and their compatriots across the country are standing up, both to protect the vulnerable women and children of America who comprise a majority of the population and to protect rights for everyone that are far more important than forcibly rearranging private spaces to accommodate feelings that are probably best resolved through psychotherapy, not enabling self- and other-abuse.
The authors cannot help themselves. They are assigning the condition of being transgender to “feelings” that can be treated by psychotherapy. Does she honestly think that the parents of a transgender child have not been through the gamut of therapy? Please. As the APA states: “It is not helpful to force the child to act in a more gender-conforming way. Peer support from other parents of gender-nonconforming children may also be helpful.” But Morabito and Pullmann know better in spite of the fact that they are out of their depth. They are not interested in transgender children — their interests are in religion.
On the heels of the Supreme Court Obergefell decision that forced states to legally sanction same-sex marriage, we have seen a flurry of censorship laws disguised as sexual orientation and gender identity non-discrimination (SOGI) laws. They’re the sort of laws that can result in a $250,000 fine in New York if you “misgender” a transgender person. They can also shut down your business and bank accounts if you politely recuse yourself from applying your artistic talents—whether in flower arranging, cake designing, or photography—to celebrating a same-sex wedding.
Enough with the victims. For eight years now we have heard the same noise about the same photographer, the same two bakers and the same florist who flouted non-discrimination ordinances in public accommodations. They had to throw in the victims.

The $250,000 fine (she links to Breitbart, of course) is the maximum for violations that are the result of willful, wanton, or malicious conduct. This reflects the will of the people of New York State. It is law passed by their elected representatives and enacted by the signature of their elected governor. Citing this law has become necessary boilerplate in any anti-LGBT piece. After all, those fundamentalist Christians are all the victims of political correctness run amok.

Most people are perfectly content to serve all comers. Even if they don't like same-sex marriage nobody is forcing them to enter into one and they welcome the additional business. This handful of crackpots is at the right wing fringe. Now they even have me off topic since this is supposed to be about transgender people. Victims are a precious commodity.
The vitriolic reaction of the LGBT lobby to honesty from Americans about their consciences, religious beliefs, scientific knowledge, and political stances shows that their agenda boils down to shutting down free speech.
I have no idea what scientific knowledge they are referring to. This has nothing to do with speech. If an employer routinely refers to female staff as his “cunt-force” or calls an employee “Jew boy” then he will be sanctioned for discrimination and harassment. In other words, free speech has rational limits. You can say whatever comes into your feeble brain. However, if the consequence of that speech is a toxic workplace then you might have a problem. It's not all that complicated.

The authors rant for another few paragraphs about non-existent speech suppression and indulge in some flag waving. Eventually we end up here:
If LGBT advocates were really concerned about “singling [transgender children] out from their peers,” as HRC insisted the South Dakota bill does, they would not push these children into pre-puberty cross-sex hormones and demand that parents encourage them to dress and act abnormally. 
And there you have it. The physicians and mental health professionals who work with the children are irrelevant. Oh no. It is the Human Rights Campaign that pushes children into aberrant behavior.
They benefit from not only expanding the number of gender-confused children so they can multiply their legal beachheads, but also from instantly politicizing each child’s case to prevent families from privately dealing with these conflicts in a manner that may provide wholeness by coming to peace with the biological sex of the child in question, as the vast majority of successful transgender-child cases do.
So HRC is creating more transgender children who are simply confused and HRC is doing so for the benefit of HRC. Again it is as if these kids are not being treated by knowledgeable physicians and therapists. The intended inference is that HRC is somehow manufacturing transgender children. Furthermore, I am unaware of HRC politicizing any child's gender identity. Moreover, they (and I) would be quite content not to have any litigation related to this issue. That would be the case if this tiny minority of children were treated fairly.

Remarkably claiming that this is all anti-science:
The HRC seeks to make expressing all of the above beliefs illegal. Here’s the kicker: that ultimately includes any statement in which you would recognize the biological reality of your own body.

The LGBT agenda is nothing less than a war on reality. Essentially, it requires that everybody get with a legal package deal that insists human beings are neither male nor female. The transgender piece of it absolutely requires this. Remember, it’s based on the premise that your “gender” (which is a linguistic, not scientific, term) is arbitrarily “assigned at birth,” never a fact of physical reality, such as the basic truth that all human beings, except the tiny percentage with genetic anomalies, have either XX or XY chromosomes imprinted on every single cell of their bodies.
I suspect that the American Psychiatric Association has a pretty good handle on the science. They explain:
Sex is assigned at birth, refers to one’s biological status as either male or female, and is associated primarily with physical attributes such as chromosomes, hormone prevalence, and external and internal anatomy. Gender refers to the socially constructed roles, behaviors, activities, and attributes that a given society considers appropriate for boys and men or girls and women. These influence the ways that people act, interact, and feel about themselves. While aspects of biological sex are similar across different cultures, aspects of gender may differ.
The reality  is that gender identity may differ from gender and that is a scientific fact. Eventually they bring out the prop de rigueur (I told you this is a kitchen sink piece):
Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen laid out the whole strategy for the LGBT agenda in their 1989 book “After the Ball.” They prescribed a hardcore propaganda and marketing campaign that utilized depth psychology. It’s classic thought reform, which can be applied to get people to believe anything, no matter how implausible.
The problem of course is that no one seems to have read what anti-gay activists contend is the homosexual agenda. In all likelihood Morabito and Pullmann haven't read it either. They are just quoting someone else quoting someone else. After going on for several paragraphs about the evil agenda presented in a book that nobody would even know about were it not for anti-gay nut jobs, this nonsense finally concludes:
This latest attack against the First Amendment is unquestionably another act of war against freedom of conscience and expression. That makes it a campaign against human rights. By killing freedom of religion and speech, it also kills freedom of association. It stunts our growth because it causes people to become more polarized and fearful about sharing perspectives. That’s perfect for a centralized surveillance state. But it’s tragic for true human friendship and love.
All that huh? What this is really all about is where transgender children can pee. That pretty much sums it up.

1 “I am now a member of a steadfastly traditionalist, and therefore isolated, Anglo-Catholic parish in the Episcopal Church's Diocese of Washington, D.C.”

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please be civil and do NOT link to anti-gay sites!

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.