Thursday, July 6, 2017

The maniacal Michael Brown - "Yes, Gay Activists Are After Your Children"

Michael Brown
There is nothing new in claiming that gay people are predators of children. That was the original meaning of The Homosexual Agenda©. The assertion defines bigotry and Michael Brown is most certainly a bigot. Thursday Mr. Brown asserts (with intentionally conflicting language) that gay people seek to grow the community by molesting children.
But while the “seduction instead of reproduction” statement is an ugly and unfair exaggeration, what cannot be denied is this: The homosexual movement seeks to grow by the indoctrination of our children, from toddlers to preschoolers, and from elementary school to college. LGBT activism thrives on indoctrination.
So after conceding that claiming that gay people are child predators is “ugly and unfair,” Brown asserts that gay people are child predators. Using the word “grow” Brown asserts that sexual orientation can be influenced by others and that is just moronic. More importantly, it is utterly lacking in evidence.

Disfavored minority groups are often falsely accused of being a threat to vulnerable people. Throughout the Arab world there is the widespread belief that Jews murder children to use their blood in various religious rituals. Black men have been accused of being obsessed with a predisposition to rape white women and gay men have been portrayed as determined to rape young boys. A twist on the gay smear is that being molested causes boys to become gay. None of these things are true. There is no evidence to support any of that.
It is true that some gay adults actively seduce underage children, using school-based GSAs (Genders & Sexualities Alliance) and other means to lure them in, as groups like Mass Resistance have clearly documented.
Actually, that is a lie. Even Mr. Brown should be ashamed of suggesting that Mass Resistance (a Massachusetts hate group) is authoritative. Moreover GSA stands for Gay-Straight Alliance, not “Genders & Sexualities Alliance.” Where he got that from is anyone's guess. Or was he trying to be sarcastic? His constituency doesn't get sarcasm (but mine does).
But most of the important work is done by indoctrination. It is planned, it is systematic, and it is effective.

At a 2015 teacher's conference in Canada, lesbian kindergarten teacher Pam Strong explained "how she uses her classroom to convince children as young as 4 to accept homosexual relationships."

She said, "With [the principal's] encouragement, we decided that I would go from class to class and talk about what 'gay' means, what does 'LGBTQ' mean, what do 'I' mean."

She also read the gay book King and King to these little ones, and when she got to the part about the two princes being "married," one of the little boys suddenly shouted out: "They can't do that! They can't get married. They're two boys."
I gather that Mr. Brown claims that giving children an understanding of sexual orientation will turn them gay. That is the intended inference. Where is the e v i d e n c e? Where is the research that supports that spectacularly stupid claim?

There is, indeed, an effort to accurately educate children about sexual orientation. Unfortunately it has become necessary to refute the superstitious bigotry of people like Brown with  unbiased scientific truth. If nothing else, children should know that sexual orientation is not a choice and that gay people do not pose a threat to them. It seems a good idea to prevent children from becoming unhinged bigots — like Mr. Brown. Training children to be sane, rational critical thinkers doesn't turn them gay. It makes them better adults.
… in England, as far back as 2006, the National Union of Teachers (NUT) stated, “It is particularly important to begin to make 3-to-5-year-olds aware of the range of families that exist in the U.K. today, families with one mum, one mum and dad, two mums, two dads, grandparents, adoptive parents, guardians etc.”
What the hell is wrong with that? Those different family structures do exist. Does Brown think that some good interest is served by hiding the reality? Where is the sense in that?
And already in 2005, Kevin Jennings, then the Executive Director of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Educational Network), noted that, in 1995, "fewer than a hundred gay-straight alliances existed," whereas in 2005, "nearly 3,000 schools have GSAs or other student clubs that deal with LGBT issues."
Again, gay people exist. What interest is served through friction between gay and straight kids? GSAs reduce stress and conflict. Doing so indisputably improves the educational environment.
Today, there are more than 900 GSAs registered in California alone, with younger and younger kids being exposed to them. That means that your 12-year-old daughter can come out to her peers and her gay teachers at school without your knowledge. And this interaction and affirmation can go on for years, again, without your knowledge.
There is some truth to that. However, if your kid has to hide her sexuality from you, she doesn't trust you. This also undercuts much of Brown's diatribe. He concedes that disapproving parents have gay kids. Need I list some of the ultra-conservative Christians with gay children (starting with the late Phyllis Schlafly)? What does that say about sexual orientation? Is Mr. Brown wed to the notion that if the kid came out to her parents instead of the GSA that might in some way change her sexuality? Where is the evidence to support that?
It's up to us as parents and educators and pastors and leaders and young people and old people to fight fire with fire, to get more involved in our schools, to get our message out and to indoctrinate kids with the truth.

We can teach them to be loving and kind to everyone, especially those who seem different, without teaching them to affirm that which is contrary to God's design and plan.

And whatever we do, we best do it on our knees, crying out for divine intervention. Without that, this ship has long since sailed.
The real threat to children are imbeciles like Mr. Brown who seek to intentionally dumb-down kids in order to make the world conform to their ancient chronicles. Doing so confuses children. It deteriorates their trust in quality science. It diminishes their respect for the scientific method and it makes them antagonists to some of their fellow students. It reinforces the false notion that people who are different are evil and threatening.

Brown can offer sophistry about being kind to others. His message, however, is one of hate, distrust and bigotry.

May I digress?

34% of our population reject Evolution entirely. About half of those believe that scientists are divided on the issue (98% to 99% of scientists believe in Evolution). About 30% of our population are Young Earth Creationists believing that the universe was created in six 24-hour days less than 10,000 years ago. That stupendous lack of critical thinking starts somewhere. It is a distraction to accomplishing greater things that a third of our citizenry are unable to differentiate between faith and reality.

It is safe to say that no child who ultimately falls into that one-third will ever create a great advance in science or medicine. While there are some exceptions in general their careers will be hampered. Not because they are conservative Christians but because of the lack of disciplined critical thinking.

Some parents are fine with that. They believe that their reward for piety is a life after death in paradise. Most parents, however, want unlimited opportunities for their children. If they connects the dots of intellectual discipline they realize that it is a very good thing for children to be educated about LGBT people. Aside from the harmony and respect for others it is a step towards intellectual independence.

People like Mr. Brown loathe intellectual independence. They want children to color inside the lines drawn by a literal interpretation of those ancient chronicles. So I ask again; Who is the real threat to children?
— — —
Another year or so will pass before I write about Michael Brown again. At some point people are so unglued that it becomes pointless. Mr. Brown's life's work speaks for itself. I certainly do not want to be responsible for increasing his relevance.

Related content:

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.