Wednesday, March 6, 2019

They create the need for what they hate

Laurie Higgins
Laurie Higgins, Illinois Family Institute - Unknown date
Image: Interframe Media
Illinois Family Institute is a hate group. An IFI employee, Laurie Higgins, is one of the reasons that IFI is considered a hate group. Wednesday, Higgins writes: Illinois Lawmakers Advance K-12 “LGBT” Indoctrination Bill.
From idiotic projection:
“Progressives,” also known as cultural regressives, have long had their sights on the hearts, minds, and bodies of other people’s children. Now that they control Big Government schools, regressives can control the ideas to which children are exposed. And boy, oh, boy are regressive Illinois lawmakers going for broke—morally speaking. They’ve already achieved fiscal bankruptcy.
Higgins just claimed that gay people are predisposed to be child molesters. I think that she is confusing gay people with the perverted priests who prey on children and are overwhelmingly heterosexual. In my experience, people who make such claims have no positive interest in anything. They compensate for their own shortcomings by denigrating others.
To the absurd:
Regressives in the ethical swamp known as Springfield are stampeding forward to impose the “LGBT” indoctrination bill regardless of whether it makes Orthodox Jewish, Muslim, theologically orthodox Christian, or secular conservative kids feel “unsafe” or whether it deeply offends those children’s parents. To heck with inclusivity. It’s the leftist low way or the highway.
I hate to break it to Ms. Higgins but LGBT people do exist and knowledge of their existence poses no threat or insult to sane, rational individuals. In fact there are LGBT persons among “Orthodox Jewish, Muslim and theologically orthodox Christian” adherents. Furthermore, LGBT people have made considerable contributions to the arts, science, business and every form of human endeavor. An LGBT person even runs the world's largest company. Imagine that.

The notion that knowledge about LGBT people poses a danger to the safety of anyone is preposterous. Asserting that theory would seemingly require the arguer to have a significant personality disorder expressing itself, in part, as extreme paranoia.

It only becomes necessary to highlight the contributions of LGBT people because of people like Ms. Higgins. They are intent on marginalizing people they disapprove of. They do not disapprove of LGBT people for any rational reason. They do so because of slavish devotion to ancient texts written by ancient people.
If passed, this bill (HB 246)—which was created by three homosexual activist organizations—will require all students in k-12 public schools to be taught about the “roles and contributions” of homosexuals and opposite-sex impersonators and that textbooks purchased include discussions of the roles and contributions of homosexuals and opposite-sex impersonators. A quick, thoughtless skim of the bill might lead someone to think it’s innocuous. Critical analysis and deeper reflection—not the strengths of Springfield swamp creatures—expose the noxiousness of the bill.
“Opposite-sex impersonators” are called drag queens and they are really quite harmless. Higgins is presumably referring to transgender people who are not impersonating anyone. They are simply affirming their gender to mitigate the effects of a rare medical condition called gender dysphoria. Attempting to pass off this bigotry as some form of critical thinking is laughable.
Huh?
The notion that homosexuality is the ontological flipside of and morally equivalent to heterosexuality is an arguable, leftist assumption—not an inarguable, objective fact. Others believe homosexuality represents a disordering of the sex drive. Government schools—supported by the hard-earned money of all taxpayers—have no ethical or pedagogical obligation or right to base curricular decisions on arguable, controversial assumptions—not even assumptions leftists really, really, really believe are true.
The above is a sophomoric effort to redefine the thoughts of others with whom Ms. Higgins disagrees. Those “others” she refers to (who believe that gay people are disordered) are neurotic Vatican prelates. That is a religious determination, not something based on science.

She is also flat-out incorrect. It is an “inarguable, objective fact” that the overwhelming consensus of science is that sexual orientation and gender identity are continua and that every intersection of the two represents a natural variation of human sexuality. Thus, homosexuality is not the natural flipside to anything.

There is nothing controversial about sexual diversity. It is a fact of life over which no one has any control. Two of the most common determinants of what we think is true are religion and science. Religion is a belief system based on faith. Science is based on evidence. When the two are in competition most intelligent people rely on evidence. This is not something assignable to political ideology; liberals or conservatives. Rather, curious people capable of critical thinking are more likely to seek out and then accept evidence over faith.

As for the obligations of public schools, they have an opportunity to undo the damage done by illogical and prejudiced people. Moreover, a certain percentage of students are LGBT and a certain percentage of parents whose children are not LGBT are LGBT themselves. Our public schools have a tradition of not only serving minorities but educating people about minorities who are sometimes disfavored due to prejudice.

Anti-Semitism is based on religious belief. So are racism (in part), sexism (in part) and Islamophobia. In no small measure, schools teach kids evaluative skills and that sometimes scares the living crap out of religious conservatives. Their schools teach kids not how to think things through but what to think.
In order to teach all children in grades k-12 about the roles and contributions of homosexuals and cross-dressers, lawmakers and school leaders must have first determined that there is nothing morally questionable about homosexuality and cross-sex impersonation. To prove that’s the case, ask yourselves if Illinois lawmakers would pass a bill that requires schools to teach about the roles and contributions of polyamorists, polygamists, kin-lovers, or zoophiles.
The comparison is intellectually ridiculous. Being gay or trans are involuntary states of who we are as people. Polygamy and so on are choices that people make, some of which are not even lawful. There is nothing immoral about any variant of sexual orientation or gender identity. We are in the 21st century. We know that now just as we know that Copernicus was correct and a million other things. We now know that witches do not exist just as we know that smoking causes cancer.

If Higgins becomes ill she is likely to demand the very best medical treatment based on the best available medical science. Yet when medical science overwhelming concludes things that she doesn't like about human sexuality she is making a moral judgment about both the science and the scientists.
Repeating a stupid argument doesn't make it intelligent:
… Surely, there are some kids who experience unchosen, powerful, and persistent sexual attraction for multiple people at the same time, or for a relative, or for animals. Why wouldn’t lawmakers require that the contributions of polyamorists, kin-lovers, and zoophiles be taught and that their sexual proclivities/identities be positively affirmed? Is the reason that they’re judgmental, puritanical, non-inclusive, intolerant, or hateful bigots?
The basic premise is false. I'll not repeat myself.
And again:
Homosexual and “trans” activists reading this are likely to be at this very moment consumed by anger that derives from the kind of “judgmentalism,” “intolerance,” “hatred,” and “bigotry” of which they constantly accuse conservatives. Leftists become apoplectic when homosexuality and cross-sex identification are compared to the “sexual minorities” of polyamory, kin-loving, and zoophilia—”sexual minorities” that they view as morally offensive. Leftists are unwilling to grant to others the right to object to positive teaching about homosexuality and cross-sex identification on the same grounds that they—leftists—object to positive teaching about polyamory, polygamy, consensual incest, or zoophilia.
I am not apoplectic. Actually, I am sardonically amused. It is an idiotic comparison for reasons already stated. Higgins, however, is in good company. Mark Christopher Sevier, the Tennessee lawyer who was disbarred for mental instability, indulges in a similar effort — seeking equality for “objectifiles.” He wants to know why he cannot marry his laptop. There is a point when arguments become so moronic, so nonsensical that they are without merit per se.
… is improving self-images and promoting acceptance of homosexuality and the “trans” ideology the task of government employees charged with educating other people’s children?
Yup. And being transgender is not an ideology. Claiming otherwise is a religious belief (and confusion) in contrast to medical science. Laurie Higgins cannot help herself.
… why aren’t “progressives” pushing a bill that would require curricula to teach … [you know what follows]?
I'll not repeat myself.
She is wearing me out:
Now we’re getting to the dark heart of the matter. Leftists aren’t concerned centrally or solely with acceptance of persons. They’re centrally concerned with fostering approval of particular sex-related behaviors—not all sex-related behaviors—just the ones they have concluded are moral.
Wrong. This has nothing to do with behavior. Nor is it related to religious opprobrium based on ancient texts.
Far from finished she at least gets to the point:
They want to use cultural contributions as a means to transform the feelings and moral beliefs of students about homosexuality and cross-sex identification. Homosexual and “trans” activists know that if positive contributions are associated with homosexuality or cross-sex impersonation, the good feelings students have about contributions will transfer to homosexuality and opposite-sex impersonation.
In other words, learning about LGBT people will cause kids to choose to be LGBT. Wrong. Sexuality is not a choice and it sure as shit isn't contagious.
More of the same:
Springfield swamp creatures want to infect all Illinois children with a diseased sexuality ideology via indoctrination centers identified as schools. Cunning, perhaps even demonic, wouldn’t you say, to get parents to pay for the blighted indoctrination of their own children?
If there is indoctrination going on it is towards kindness and consideration. Perhaps if Laurie Higgins had a decent education she would not be so angry, bitter and bigoted. She didn't and she is.

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.