Time for the LGBT Movement to Leave the Kids Alone

Forum » Beenos Trumpet » Time for the LGBT Movement to Leave the Kids Alone

Jun 10, 2019, 17:21

Yes all these sick pervs need to leave the kids alone. Doubtless Saffex, Cloudy, Sharktwit, rooitwit supporting these pervs and vilifying guys like Folau will be outraged by this suggestion. One wonders if at any point these perv supporters draw a line. always remember there are far more normal people than these pervs!


Ex The American thinker that often has great articles.


This summer, PBS Kids premiered an episode of the children's show Arthur in which a teacher, Mr. Ratburn, "marries" another male character.  Even before this premiere, PBS was already infusing the LGBT agenda into its programming.  In between its shows, a happy song about families included an image of two dadswith a baby and lyrics to that effect.

Disney and other children's stations long ago jumped onto the LGBT bandwagon with their line-up.  As a Guardian headline noted in 2016, "From Nickelodeon to Disney: Children's TV leads the way for LGBT characters," with same-sex unions featuring prominently in shows.  It is not just television, of course.  Rumors now fly that even Elsa of Frozen may be a lesbian in the Disney sequel.

In fact, if you have a preschooler or early elementary-school child nowadays, you will find same-sex sexual relationships, as well as transgender advocacy, advertised throughout your children's media and public programming.  Children's libraries promote drag queen story hours, and schools inculcate transgender ideas in kindergartners and early elementary children to the point where children in Brisbane are afraid to use the words "girl" and "boy" in a doctor's office and parents have to sue schools to stop teachers from grooming their impressionable kids.  The LGBT agenda push on young children in the West is in full swing.

Some say, "What's the big deal?  Love is love.  Why should children be scandalized by that unless their parents are bigots?"

Those who say that fail to grasp certain developmental realities about children.  Children do not care about adult identities or adults' self-actualizaton.  They care about adult romantic feelings because adult romantic feelings can lead to the creation of children.

In other words, kids care about their "being."  At some ontological level, they wonder where they came from.  They know that love between a mommy and daddy led to their existence.  Whether that love between man and woman caused a stork to show up or planted a cabbage patch with a baby in the garden is irrelevant to them.  That image of "mom" and "dad" is part of their genetic identity.

That is why children grieve so deeply over the absence of a mother or father or the rupture of a parents' union through divorce.  (This grief exists even when parents deny the reality of that grief.)

When my six-year-old niece heard that one of her aunts was getting married, she yelled, "Yay, more cousins!"  That is how young children think about marriage.  For little children, adult romantic relationships matter in that they can somehow create children.  It means more playmates, siblings, or cousins.  That is why children's movies that end with a couple marrying are followed up with sequels in which the couple has a baby.

Since same-sex relationships do not biologically lead to babies by their inherent nature, preschoolers and kindergartners who see same-sex couples calling themselves married wonder, "Why are they getting married?  Can they make babies?  If not, does that mean you can marry your friend?"

This leads to another point of confusion.  A critical aspect of child development is the same-sex friendships children form in their early years.  Children know there is a difference between the sexes.  Bonding with their same-sex peers is an important part of developing their understanding of themselves as boys and girls.

When boys and girls are friends, they sometimes "play" at marriage and parenthood.  One of my sons loved to play with dinosaurs in preschool.  Another girl who played with dinosaurs became his friend.  She announced to him that they would get married one day and have three children.  He was fine with that as long as she kept her interest in paleontology.  It was adorable.  The friendship between the boys had no such connotation because boys do not think, "I can marry another boy and create children with him one day."  It is not biologically possible.

Even with new and ethically questionable technology, the child created under the directive of a same-sex couple will be deprived of either a mother or father.  Children implicitly understand this ontological reality even if they cannot verbalize such concepts or recognize their scientific roots.

Promoting the idea of same-sex "marriage" in young children's lives thus throws needless confusion and anxiety into their developing understanding of friendship.  Pushing that on parents through schools, media, and other children's resources forces parents into conversations they may not be ready for with such young children.

Just because adult sitcoms like Modern Family imply that one of the men in a same-sex relationship merely replaces the mother role in the public mind, that does not make it true.  In fact, it is an idea that manages to be insulting to both women and homosexual men.  Throughout the years of the sitcom, the audience was supposed to pretend that a real daughter being raised by two men would never quietly pine for the absent mother.  The audience was supposed to ignore a primal wound.  Children know that a man, no matter how nurturing, is not a mother.  And since when did women allow their irreplaceable role to be so dismissed and caricatured?

I would add that children know that a woman, no matter how "masculine," is not a father.  But since the father role has already been pummeled by Western society in recent decades, the removal of the father image in lesbian "marriage" causes few to bat an eye.

And please spare me the trope about "infertile couples can't be a mom and dad, and they're still married."  A man and woman who cannot have children are still the image of "mom" and "dad" in the minds of little children.  Two men or two women can never be so.

There are solutions to the relentless LGBT push on young children.  PBS, public schools, and public libraries are taxpayer-funded.  Demand that taxpayer money not go to such efforts, and stand your ground when the inevitable slings and arrows fly.  The media will not have your back.  Conservativism, Inc. will definitely not have your back.  And the Left already hates you with a hot passion.  Speak and fight for your children's right to innocence and healthy development anyway.

The many forces arrayed against your efforts — corporate, social, and political — will vilify you as a bigot and a homophobe.  So what?  They label so many who disagree with them that Americans are numb to it at this point.(Yup there freaks hate normalcy!!)

We need to speak clearly and plainly.  Romantic attraction between adults of the same sex is a purely erotic concept, not an ontological one (i.e., not rooted in a child's being).  Two men pretending to be married on a kids' show, books about two mommies in public school kindergarten classrooms, and the general LGBT push on young children are controversial not because of "religious differences" or "intolerance."  All of this is controversial because it is wrong to push adult sexual agendas on children, period.

Jun 10, 2019, 18:15

How do you find the time to read all this stuff. You are totally obssessed, or is it a local church network where you email each other this stuff continually during the course of the day? 


How can one person be following so much of this- where do you find time to do the other day to day stuff in your life? 

Jun 10, 2019, 18:28

Beeno is tetired.:D

Jun 10, 2019, 19:22

Sharkbok I suppose you being so chronically ignorant must find me quite amazing as to what I post. :D

So where does a perv supporter like you draw the line Sharktwit. Are you into pedophilia as well?

Jun 10, 2019, 20:32

Goodness, Baboon-ou sure does refer to paedophilia very often in his posts.


Then again, Baboon-ou does belong to the religion known for molesting little kids.

Anyone else starting to suspect we might have a sicko in our midst? I'm starting to realise why Baboon-ou is so desperate to have someone who died for his sins.

Jun 10, 2019, 21:46

rooitwit God hates pedophilia. Try and get the basics right, you sound as demented as sharktwit.

So where do you draw the line rooiperv. You support the gays but do you support pedophilia. Just want to to know the extent of your perversion. 

Thanks

Jun 10, 2019, 22:45

God seems to endorse it in the Bible




What the Bible says about Pedophilia

The Bible has nothing to say against pedophilia.

It does have some passages that seem to approve of it, however. For example:

It's OK to have sex with "women children" that are obtained in war.

And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, Avenge the children of Israel of the Midianites ... And they warred against the Midianites, as the LORD commanded Moses; and they slew all the males ... And the children of Israel took all the women of Midian captives, and their little ones ... And Moses was wroth with the officers ... And Moses said unto them, Have ye saved all the women alive? ... Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves. Numbers 31:1-18
When thou comest nigh unto a city to fight against it ... And when the LORD thy God hath delivered it into thine hands, thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the little ones, and the cattle, and all that is in the city, even all the spoil thereof, shalt thou take unto thyself. Deuteronomy 20:10-14
How shall we do for wives for them that remain, seeing we have sworn by the LORD that we will not give them of our daughters to wives? ... And the congregation sent thither twelve thousand men of the valiantest, and commanded them, saying, Go and smite the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead with the edge of the sword, with the women and the children. And this is the thing that ye shall do, Ye shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that hath lain by man. And they found among the inhabitants of Jabeshgilead four hundred young virgins, that had known no man by lying with any male: and they brought them unto the camp to Shiloh. Judges 21:7-11
Go and lie in wait in the vineyards; And see, and, behold, if the daughters of Shiloh come out to dance in dances, then come ye out of the vineyards, and catch you every man his wife of the daughters of Shiloh ... And the children of Benjamin did so, and took them wives, according to their number, of them that danced, whom they caught. Judges 21:20-23

It's OK to sell your daughter (no mention is made of age) to a man for him to use as a sex slave.

if a man sell his daughter to be a maidservant ... If she please not her master, who hath betrothed her to himself, then shall he let her be redeemed ... If he take him another wife; her food, her raiment, and her duty of marriage, shall he not diminish. Exodus 21:7-10

---
Some really barbaric primitive stuff. Sounds like the Koran....

Jun 11, 2019, 07:26

Shut your stinking trap Baboon-ou, you disgusting liar. I was talking about you, not to you. Get someone to explain the difference to you and stop yapping at me. 


Stick to blabbering on and on about paedophiles all day you sick little excuse for a man. There's safety in numbers, right?

Yuck. I feel dirty even having to speak to this repulsive, cowardly little liar.

Jun 11, 2019, 09:34

Your knowledge about the ancient cultures whose writings you presume to follow is sadly lacking Beeno. Here is a perfect illustration of the folly of trying to take a moral high ground on the basis of these ancient middle-eastern traditions and religions:

But that a girl of three years old is fit for marriage, is maintained very plainly in the Jewish writings; particularly, in Emek Hamelech, in the following passage, ‘our blessed sags, of blessed memory, say, that a female is not fit for marriage, ‘till she is arrived at the Age of three years and one day.’ The Talmud supports these Sages here, in the part entitled Avoda Sara. And the Sanhedrin says, A daughter, who is of the age of three years and one day, is, by being bedded with a Man, lawfully married.”

Johann Buxtorf, Johann Andreas Eisenmenger, John Peter Stehelin
Rabinical Literature: Or, the Traditions of the Jews, Contained in Their Talmud and Other Mystical Writings

Girls were often betrothed before puberty and married as soon as they reached puberty. Age was not a factor, as long as the parents gave permission. We don't even have to go that far back. Girls were wed as young as 12 years old in medieval times.

Thankfully times have changed from this primitive nonsense and girls can now at least have a childhood instead of becoming a child bearing vehicle as soon as they hit puberty. Not applicable to areas where fundamentalists rule, of course. Look at the poor Islamic girls of 9 years old being wedded to dirty old bearded Islamic men. This is what the world would have looked like if we still lived according to the traditions of the ancient middle eastern religions.

Jun 11, 2019, 10:00

Yes Pakie it is a horrible thought to think that very young girls being married to fat old guys with beards. 

I have no interest whatsoever about what the Sanhedrin says. It was the Sanhedrin who handed over Jesus to Pilate on charges of Blasphemy. I also have no interest whatsoever in the writings of Jewish sages etc. The only source is the Bible. 

God called Israel to be nation and to walk in holiness before him. The surrounding peoples were far gone sacrificing children to the demon God Molloch much as what is happening today with the demonic murder of children by the progressives. 

Trouble is today children are becoming prey  again. Decent, sane people must fight this evil. 

Unfortunately people like the frothing rooitwit are no help. Their sympathies lie with the homosexual. One wonders where they draw the line. Attempts are underway to normalize pedophilia. What stance with pervs like rooitwit take one wonders.

Part of the problem has been the terrible silence of the majority. However that is thankfully changing. 

Jesus said it would be better for people causing children to stumble to have a millstone put around their neck and thrown into the sea than to cause any of these little ones to stumble. The children, and indeed the unborn, MUST be protected. 

It is clear the more people depart from the ways of God the more depraved they become. Children in drag, infanticide, pedophilia. What a disgrace!! AND all the pervs can do is get into a complete froth because a guy like Folau warns them from scripture!

The Day of Judgement will be a terrible shock to them. Now is the time to repent. 


Jun 11, 2019, 10:27

Here from the Daily Express UK showing attempts to normalize pedophilia. Beeno just warning the oaks these pervs are on the march and need to be stopped. This is no time to be countenacing the perv foibles of rooitwvt, shark twit and co. Wouldn't it be nice if rooitwit and co could reassure everyone their perversion stops with pedophilia. Surely they can rise to the occasion!

Can't prove sex with children does them harm' says Labour-linked NCCL

PIE members were lobbying NCCL officials for the age of consent to be reduced and campaigning for “paedophile love”.

Their view that children were not harmed by having sex with adults appears to have been adopted by those at the top of the civil liberties group.

Today we publish extracts from an NCCL report written for the Criminal Law Revision Committee in 1976 when Mrs Hewitt was general secretary.

It says: “Where both partners are aged 10 or over, but under 14, a consenting sexual act should not be an offence. As the age of consent is arbitrary, we propose an overlap of two years on either side of 14.

“Childhood sexual experiences, willingly engaged in, with an adult result in no identifiable damage.

“The Criminal Law Commission should be prepared to accept the evidence from follow-up research on child ‘victims’ which show there is little subsequent effect after a child has been ‘molested’.

The real need is a change in the attitude which assumes that all cases of paedophilia result in lasting damage.

“The present legal penalties are too high and reinforce the misinformation and prejudice. The duty of the court should be to inquire into all the relevant circumstances with the intention, not of meting out severe punishment, but of determining the best solution in the interests of both child and paedophile.”

EVIDENCE has emerged that the views of the Paedophile Information Exchange influenced policy-making at the National Council for Civil Liberties when it was run by former Labour Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt.


Jun 11, 2019, 19:10

Yes Beenz, articles like these plus the fact that prominent comedians seem to think it's OK to make jokes about it...barriers being broken down bit, by bit...the Grand Canyon didn't appear overnight...

We are slowly but surely being conditioned towards an agenda. It's clear as daylight if yo care to look...but then one needs to accept a few universal truths...not easy for some...they want proof.


Jun 11, 2019, 20:11

Exactly so Draad. Especially since the zombie class don't want to know. You have to bash them over the head! Get right in their faces. 

 
You need to Log in to reply.
Back to top