POSTED ON MAY 30, 2012:
Love Letters, hate mail
Forms of Marriage
At a very crowded pro-family demonstration which took place in Madrid, one of the placards read, "Pedro y Antonio, no son matrimonio" [Pedro and Antonio make no married couple], but those who support the gender ideology insist on calling two same-sex persons, whether two men or two women, a married couple. They defend that marriage is a merely social convention, much like a varnish somehow covering sexual relationships between opposite-sex people.
In reality, marriage has been defended throughout history as the origin of life and a guarantee of human survival over the generations. But there is still another significant aspect concerning children's education. A well-constituted family is the natural environment where children develop their own personality, acquire key habits for living with others, and feel loved for what they are (sons and daughters, brothers and sisters), rather than for what they do or for what they have.
The gender ideology stumbles upon the evidence that men and women are biologically different. A boy is different from a girl. The differences that appear from birth and become stressed in puberty and adolescence have been scientifically studied by differential psychology. A further transcendental fact should be added--while married couples made up of a man and a woman usually bear children, two gays or two lesbians can never have offspring. Let's remember that, in the animal world, the result of a mare and a donkey is a young mule. Well then, male and female mules are sterile and so unable to produce young.
Male and female sexuality is not optional; it is determined by biology. Neglecting this fact inevitably leads to serious legal, moral and psychological conflict, also involving children adopted by same-sex people.
How has this ideology emerged? The first feminism arose in the French Revolution, seeking equal rights for men and women. But the next claim was equality of male and female roles. Maternity, marriage and family have come to be rejected. In 1949, Simone de Beauvoir encouraged women to free themselves from the restrictions associated with their nature and recommended the transfer of children's education to society, lesbian relationships, and the practice of abortion.
It is not the first time that evidence has been neglected, and there have always been Quixotes calling windmills giants, and inns castles.
Most people break the law and speed as well, but that doesn't mean we should get rid of speeding laws and trying to enforce them for we realize that though many of us speed on occasion, if more and more of us do it and more and more of the time, then things will become dangerous. Food has similar comparisons to sex in many ways. For example, there are rules for how to prepare, handle, eat, what to eat, where to eat, etc. for several reasons. We may want to eat what we want when we want it, and there are natural, biological reasons that compell us to want certain foods, but we can kill ourselves by eating too much of certain, very yummy indeed, foods too often.
Also, we try to be as safe and sanitary as we can with our food, from growing it, to processing it, to cooking and cleaning it in restaurants and in our own homes, handling it, storing it, etc. etc. The occasional lapse along the way will indeed happen and may not cause much harm, but if too many do so too often, then you will have serious problems. You do the best you can so that when the "lapses" happen, any harm or potential harm is far less. And too, nobody imagined AIDS at one time. One would be terribly remiss to think that there are not other diseases out there in the world, waiting for the right environment, that could make AIDS look like a difficult to get, walk in the park.
Do we really want to open ourselves up to that? Also, just as we are finding out about our food, sanitation, and health concerns, old once easy to treat bacterial diseases are becoming more resistant to our antibiotics. Those old monogamy rules didn't just come out of thin air. No not all "old ways/rules" are always right, but we still might want to listen to at least some of the likely reasons for why this social rule, or those like it, were in place. Again, the occasional digressions in an environment that keeps pushing for more moderation or "controll" may not result in anything bad happening (think speeding for instance), BUT don't let that fool you into thinking that more is ok, for if more and more people do it, more and more often without regulation, then your asking for trouble and may end up hurting a lot of innocent people.
Cut the Idiot Loose
I have read the UTW for many years and it is my primary source for entertainment information. I have also enjoyed your movie reviewers and other entertaining articles as well. However, I would like to mention one of your regular contributors have passed beyond hilarity to the point of absurdity. Your political writer is an idiot. We may live in the crotch of the conservative bible belt but Tulsa is an urban area full of educated people who don't buy into the junk he posts. The articles I have read from him recently are echos of the trash news reported on Fox and I had a much higher opinion of your publication till he came along.
Do us all a favor and cut the guy loose. Writers of his caliber have more success posting to political op ed websites that hold no news credibility.Thanks!
URL for this story: http://www.urbantulsa.comhttp://www.urbantulsa.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oid%3A49725