Australian Academic confuses traditional marriage arguments as homophobic
This article is written by an academic K. Brroks who says:
"Reacting to Labor’s reasons for blocking the plebiscite, primarily that it would fuel toxic debates potentially damaging the mental health of young people coming to terms with their sexuality, Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull maintained that only a small minority would be “intemperate” and “cruel” about same-sex marriage. Turnbull’s wilfully ignorant insistence that the debate wasn’t going to become nasty would be offensive if he wasn’t right. It passed that milestone long ago."
Karen Brooks then states the following; "The level of malice aimed at the LGBTQI community and the manner of crimes and social engineering of which they and their advocates are being accused, that’s what. It’s malevolent, misleading, and designed to cause maximum personal and cultural damage, often by representing opinion as facts or deliberately distorting actuality. They almost weekly bombard journalists, politicians and business leaders with noxious, awful emails, develop social media campaigns, erect sites, and pay for advertising that peddles false information about same-sex marriage and homosexuality."
Any evidence for this rant? Cultural damage? Opinions as facts - yet Brooks appears to be expressing strong opinions without facts! Perhaps her definition of "false information" differs from others.
Karen Brooks then states the following; "The level of malice aimed at the LGBTQI community and the manner of crimes and social engineering of which they and their advocates are being accused, that’s what. It’s malevolent, misleading, and designed to cause maximum personal and cultural damage, often by representing opinion as facts or deliberately distorting actuality. They almost weekly bombard journalists, politicians and business leaders with noxious, awful emails, develop social media campaigns, erect sites, and pay for advertising that peddles false information about same-sex marriage and homosexuality."
Any evidence for this rant? Cultural damage? Opinions as facts - yet Brooks appears to be expressing strong opinions without facts! Perhaps her definition of "false information" differs from others.
Brooks then argues that Christians who believe homosexuality is a sin should be forced to provide wedding services, ministers, churches to homosexuals and lesbians to celebrate their disordered lifestyles. To not to do so - is homophobic!
Brooks then ignores the risk of children being raised without a father or a mother and simply says straight families also abuse and neglect their kids, therefore it is okay for gays to raise kids and be neglected and experimented on by marriage equality. Faulty logic!!
Unfortunately, Brooks then ignores comments by some extreme homosexual groups who support and want paedophilia to be decriminalized and celebrated. Traditional marriage supporters point to these horrid statements not to defame or conflate - but to identify there are some in the homosexual camp who are already making these statements.
But this is too much for Brooks, when this is raised by traditional marriage advocates..."In a disgraceful and defamatory sleight of hand, they conflate paedophilia with homosexuality. These kinds of falsehoods prove the “debate” isn’t just about same-sex marriage, but an excuse to push an extreme anti-gay agenda. It’s lexical gay bashing."
It is sad when facts are raised - hate slogans emerge!
Brroks says: "Then there’s the oft-repeated shibboleths about homosexuality: it’s a lifestyle, a “choice” What? If homosexuality was a choice, in this era of intolerance and fear mongering, I doubt anyone would “choose” to be gay."
Now Brooks ignores an APA recent statement and John Hopkins statements that the 'born gay' thesis is wrong but to be replaced and understood now as gender choice fluidity (worse concept). John Hopkins psychology unit leader has stated there is no such thing as sexual orientation and that love is being confused by lust.
Now we get into a very troubling area. The various marriage equality groups, one from Ireland etc., are doing the very thing she states is not happening ...but is made up...really?
Now we get into a very troubling area. The various marriage equality groups, one from Ireland etc., are doing the very thing she states is not happening ...but is made up...really?
An email sent to hundreds of people by a man last week was, like the others mentioned, filled with sentiments designed to humiliate, offend and even intimidate the gay community and its supporters. It starts by lashing out at “homosexual lobbyists” who “have forced the whole thing onto the public using tactics like “overwhelm the opposition” on social media, name/shame/boycott opponents in business...”
Brooks then quotes: "The writer then goes on to accuse “movies, music, sitcoms, studies, media, school, universities, sporting activities”, and even the church, of “emotional manipulation to make it (homosexuality) look normal and pretend that is scientifically/historically/politically/economically advantageous.”
The vice president of the USA has stated thet Will & Grave a TV sitcom changed US citizens views on homosexuality more than any other show. Lady Gaga "Born this way" TV News and magazine only ever promote and celebrate those coming out, with Q&A the biggest offender!
Brook then objects to the following statements. "Warning that allowing same-sex marriage is simply the tip of the iceberg that will see society tumble into an abyss where “our children are being groomed into homosexual behaviour”, and “gender fluidity” will become the norm, the author then takes aim at the “thought police on patrol all the time to ‘catch out’ supposed homophobes”.
Perhaps she has forgotton the Labor party introduction of "easy no-fault divorce and remarriage". Perhaps she has forgotten the tail end of the 1960's revolution is the majority avoid marriage and move in and out of "living together." Are not children influenced by the morals of their parents?
Finally Brooks calls any contrary views as simply homophobic. Really?
