TBD on Ning
Gender: Optional
Joseph Romero, a 6 year-old Arizona boy, was diagnosed as transgender last October and is beginning his/her transition to becoming a female. When he/she reaches the age of 12, he will be given female hormones containing estrogen and plans to undergo surgery when she is an adult in order to become a full woman.
In the UK last September, a 12 year-old boy turned up at school as a girl. Over the summer holidays his parents changed his name to a female one and allowed him to don female garb and wear his hair in pigtails. The youngster is now preparing to undergo hormone treatment and surgery - and could become the world's youngest sex-swap patient in the coming years. His school has graciously provided him/her a separate toilet and changing room.
Here in the U.S., the IRS ruled earlier this month that a Massachusetts woman should be allowed to deduct the costs of her sex-change operation. And in Portland, Oregon, there is a move afoot to have the city pay for the sex-change operations of any employees that decide they are unhappy with their gender.
Hollywood is firmly on board, as they plan a new film about the world's first post-operative transsexual, starring heavyweights Nicole Kidman and Gwyneth Paltrow.
Over in Italy, the first prison for transsexuals is now open for business.
These cases represent the tip of the iceburg in the growing movement to make gender optional. When coupled with increasingly successful campaign to legitimize same sex unions via gay marriage, the result is an all out assault on the centuries old concepts of family and marriage.
Consider: On September 4, 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan signed into law the nation's first no-fault divorce law. California legislators made the case for no-fault divorce with the valid argument that no-fault divorce would remedy some very desperate situations. A woman who desired a family married to a man in an insane asylum, for example. Who wouldn't want to make her case an exception? Who wouldn't allow this woman legal divorce from a marriage that had ceased functioning? No-fault divorce was enacted to address these untenable situations. It was intended to address the exception, but instead, quickly became the rule.
No-fault divorce quickly spread across the United States. By 1985, all states had enacted no-fault divorce legislation except for New York. This policy, enacted in good faith, weakened the concept of family to the point where divorce is now the norm, not the exception.
A case can be made that the push to redefine gender roles and broaden marriage to include gays also has the potential of becoming the new norm. And while the very few legitimate cases of genuine gender confusion are indeed heart wrenching, the re-structuring of our society to accommodate them will very likely result in the destruction of traditional family and marriage.
Traditional families are the bedrock upon which our culture and society are based. And marriage is the glue that binds these families together. With twin assaults from the left on these institutions, America is facing the very real possibility of a radical reformation. A reformation that is based on the needs of a few at the expense of the majority. A reformation that has the potential to destroy two of America's most basic and trusted institutions.
The left is unrelenting in its desire to redefine society. Billing themselves as champions of the oppressed, the left has made significant progress in labeling anyone who disagrees with their agenda as being motivated by hate and ignorance. Genuine objections based on faith, history, common sense and morality are ignored as the left focuses the debate on the plight of the 'victim.' It is a successful, proven political strategy. After all, as David Horowitz points out, "The appeal to help the underdog and defend the victims resonates with all Americans."
The left has attained the moral high ground in this cultural battle. And they will continue to maintain it as long as the focus is on the supposed 'victims' and not on some very basic questions that are being left out of the equation. Namely: At what cost?
Do the feelings of the minority of gays and transsexuals trump the rights of the majority of heterosexuals? Do the feelings of 6 year-old Joseph Romero, oops, Josie Romero warrant blurring the gender roles of all citizens? Do the desires of gay couples to attain social legitimacy warrant the destruction through redefinition of the centuries old tradition of marriage? And finally, who will pay the very real costs when these social experiments fail?
These are questions that need to be addressed before the left succeeds in fashioning their brave new world. A world that caters to the feelings of the few at the expense of everyone else. A world where fealty to God and family would be replaced by political correctness and transient social experiments. A world where traditional family and marriage are considered moot and America turns into one country under men instead of God.
Pandora's Box has been opened. It remains to be seen if we can close it. Drip, drip, drip.
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
In the UK last September, a 12 year-old boy turned up at school as a girl. Over the summer holidays his parents changed his name to a female one and allowed him to don female garb and wear his hair in pigtails. The youngster is now preparing to undergo hormone treatment and surgery - and could become the world's youngest sex-swap patient in the coming years. His school has graciously provided him/her a separate toilet and changing room.
Here in the U.S., the IRS ruled earlier this month that a Massachusetts woman should be allowed to deduct the costs of her sex-change operation. And in Portland, Oregon, there is a move afoot to have the city pay for the sex-change operations of any employees that decide they are unhappy with their gender.
Hollywood is firmly on board, as they plan a new film about the world's first post-operative transsexual, starring heavyweights Nicole Kidman and Gwyneth Paltrow.
Over in Italy, the first prison for transsexuals is now open for business.
These cases represent the tip of the iceburg in the growing movement to make gender optional. When coupled with increasingly successful campaign to legitimize same sex unions via gay marriage, the result is an all out assault on the centuries old concepts of family and marriage.
Consider: On September 4, 1969, California Governor Ronald Reagan signed into law the nation's first no-fault divorce law. California legislators made the case for no-fault divorce with the valid argument that no-fault divorce would remedy some very desperate situations. A woman who desired a family married to a man in an insane asylum, for example. Who wouldn't want to make her case an exception? Who wouldn't allow this woman legal divorce from a marriage that had ceased functioning? No-fault divorce was enacted to address these untenable situations. It was intended to address the exception, but instead, quickly became the rule.
No-fault divorce quickly spread across the United States. By 1985, all states had enacted no-fault divorce legislation except for New York. This policy, enacted in good faith, weakened the concept of family to the point where divorce is now the norm, not the exception.
A case can be made that the push to redefine gender roles and broaden marriage to include gays also has the potential of becoming the new norm. And while the very few legitimate cases of genuine gender confusion are indeed heart wrenching, the re-structuring of our society to accommodate them will very likely result in the destruction of traditional family and marriage.
Traditional families are the bedrock upon which our culture and society are based. And marriage is the glue that binds these families together. With twin assaults from the left on these institutions, America is facing the very real possibility of a radical reformation. A reformation that is based on the needs of a few at the expense of the majority. A reformation that has the potential to destroy two of America's most basic and trusted institutions.
The left is unrelenting in its desire to redefine society. Billing themselves as champions of the oppressed, the left has made significant progress in labeling anyone who disagrees with their agenda as being motivated by hate and ignorance. Genuine objections based on faith, history, common sense and morality are ignored as the left focuses the debate on the plight of the 'victim.' It is a successful, proven political strategy. After all, as David Horowitz points out, "The appeal to help the underdog and defend the victims resonates with all Americans."
The left has attained the moral high ground in this cultural battle. And they will continue to maintain it as long as the focus is on the supposed 'victims' and not on some very basic questions that are being left out of the equation. Namely: At what cost?
Do the feelings of the minority of gays and transsexuals trump the rights of the majority of heterosexuals? Do the feelings of 6 year-old Joseph Romero, oops, Josie Romero warrant blurring the gender roles of all citizens? Do the desires of gay couples to attain social legitimacy warrant the destruction through redefinition of the centuries old tradition of marriage? And finally, who will pay the very real costs when these social experiments fail?
These are questions that need to be addressed before the left succeeds in fashioning their brave new world. A world that caters to the feelings of the few at the expense of everyone else. A world where fealty to God and family would be replaced by political correctness and transient social experiments. A world where traditional family and marriage are considered moot and America turns into one country under men instead of God.
Pandora's Box has been opened. It remains to be seen if we can close it. Drip, drip, drip.
Nancy Morgan is a columnist and news editor for RightBias.com
She lives in South Carolina
Views: 16
Tags: culture, gay, gender, marriage, transsexual
Comment
-
Comment by Nancy Morgan on February 13, 2010 at 11:24am
-
I agree with you guys. Any POV of view that doesn't coincide with your own is necessarily bad. And instead of rebutting the facts or opinions, its ever so much easier to slime the author. And pickle, you hit the nail on the head. You should just ignore my posts. After all, you have successfully profiled me as hate filled and a bigot. And if you continue reading my posts, why, someone might just ask you to back up your assertions with facts instead of emotion. Your magical thinking might be challenged and your ability to see what is in my heart might just turn out to be a mirror of your own.
Toby, you make a good point. Thank you for addressing the issues. I agree that nothing is black or white and that there are always two sides to every issue. I do need to be reminded of that, which is why I post my articles and try to provoke debate. So far, that's the only food for thought I've gotten from this thread.
-
Comment by P.A. on February 13, 2010 at 10:25am
-
I honestly think we should all just ignore anything MS Morgan writes. We know it will be filled with hate and ignorance so lets just let her live in whatever fantasy world she lives in and not interact with her.
-
Comment by D. D. Olson on February 13, 2010 at 6:22am
-
The best book I've read on this subject is She's Not There : A Life in Two Genders by Jennifer Finney Boylan. It helped me to understand why someone would take such a drastic step. I also helped me to understand the difference between "orientation" and "identity".
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Aggie.
Powered by
You need to be a member of TBD to add comments!
Join TBD