As I’ve commented elsewhere on this esteemed blog, it seems like a nonsequitor that the civil right to marry one’s loved one should be so easily taken away or denied because of what might or might not be taught in school. Should gay marriage be officially sanctioned, certainly the issue of how gays and lesbians love one another would come up in class; kids have a lot of questions, most of which should be answered, especially if they are grounded in misconceptions or stereotypes. But the teacher always sets the parameters. There is no need to get into dildos, lubricant or whatever because a) such implements are not inherent nor universal aspects of queer relationships; and b) one doesn’t get into such discussions about straight relationships, either. Questions about reproduction are another matter, but that can be discussed with respect to community standards of discretion and appropriateness.

But even that is too much for some people. As witnessed by Lynne Cheney’s extreme reaction to the nice things John Kerry said about her lesbian daughter. Some political manipulativeness may have played a part, but Lynne has had a long pattern of denial and avoidance regarding the issue of Mary’s sexuality. To even mention it is to cross a line into some terrible territory. The same can be said for the homophobes behind Yes on 36.

You said, “I am heartily tired of people who bring children into the real world and then complain that the real world didn’t just change overnight into the one they want to give to their children.”

I would add and don’t want to accept that in the real world some of those children(maybe even their own) are gay or lesbian.

Sam

Well, at least if homosexuality is taught in schools, the parents will have someone to blame, right ?

A few high-profile acts of decency aside, Smith is basically a pandering clown who excells at having his cake and eating it, too, from a political standpoint. Much like his doubtless-soon-to-be-re-re-re-elected colleague across the aisle. I’m not at all surprised to see him participating in this sort of shit.

Why must marriage ALWAYS be assumed to revolve around having children? What about those people who either choose not to or physically cannot have children? Does that nullify their marriages? Does that nullify mine, in light of choosing not to have children? I always thought marriage was about a commitment between people who love each other. Some happen to decide that raising children is an important part of what they want from life.

I support homosexuals’ rights. It is none of my business what they choose to consentually do as a result of their love for each other. I feel that love is love and is a good thing. Is hatred of homosexuals BETTER than their love for each other? I should hope not!!

I really like this letter you posted in response. If I were as eloquent in my speech, I would have probably said the same thing. Very well done. I hope this nonsense comes to an end for everyone’s sanity.