This is an earthquake issue. This will change our state forever. Because the immediate consequence, if gay marriage goes through, is that K-12 little children will be forced to learn that homosexuality is normal, natural and perhaps they should try it.
– Michele Bachmann
“Perhaps they should try it?”
Well, suppose they did. Suppose, say, that a heterosexual junior in high school became bi-curious one semester due to a lecture on homosexuality in his or her sex education class, and gave it a shot? For the sake of argument, let’s say they engaged in protected sex with a classmate.
What would be the most likely outcomes of a bi-curious youth experimenting with his or her sexuality?
Not the worse outcomes. Because the worse usually doesn’t happen. If you want to go by worse outcomes, please first explain why anyone should get married or drive a car, because the worse outcomes of marriage and driving are arguably murder by your spouse, and death by accident. So, let’s go with likely outcomes.
_________________________
(H/T: Cognitive Dissenter)
Americans are weird when it comes to sex. The US Supremes just issued a decision protecting the First Amendment rights of the creators of violent video games marketed to children. But consensual sex is a whole different matter.
Thus, a 12-year-old cannot view pornagraphic images of a nude woman. However, he can get extra points if he tortures, rapes, kills, and dismembers her.
“Pornographic” I mean. I need to proofread.
It says volumes when our culture normalizes violence, but still sees consensual sex between adults as taboo. I’m still trying to make sense of it.
There’s nothing like the sacred free speech rights of corporations to guarantee that non-exploitative products valuable to individuals, the family, and society are marketed to 12 year olds, CD. Makes me proud.
IMO, teaching teenagers to drive is far scarier than teaching them about gay marriage.
I love that thought!
The likely result would be a little bit less hate in the world.
I would hope so.
There they go again. The Religious Right just loves to scapegoat LGBTs as their boogeyman.
But why? What is it about the Religious Right that drives them bonkers over LGBT’s?
I can’t get past the idea that it’s repression.
Indeed! It certainly is.
LGBTs do not acknowledge the gender binary that form the backbone of fundamentalist life. Many fundamentalists have a vision of the family built on a hierarchy of the husband having authority over the wife and children. LGBTs, feminists, and enlightened men do not form relationships that look like that, and thus they are seen as threats.
At least that’s my theory.
Your theory makes a lot of sense to me, Ahab. Thank you.
If sex wasn’t tied to reproductive and economic rights, as it traditionally is in ‘traditional’ marriage, then what would sex be? Bi-curious kids would have a chance to find out.
Sex would be knocked off of its altar and maybe just be a powerful drive for physical release and emotional connectiveness. It may become a healthy part of a person’s life, like exercise.
But -then who gets the reproductive and economic control?
I’m confused. Are you saying bi-curious kids cannot currently experiment with their sexuality because sex is frequently associated by some people with reproductive and economic rights?
No, I’m saying that bi-curious kids would find themselves necessarily out of the binary that Ahab points out that is the justification for giving economic and reproductive control to certain partners in the sexual experience. They have a greater chance to break the myths about sex that are set up by traditional religious and social conditioning just by the fact that they are ‘breaking the rules’.
Thanks for the clarification! That’s a good point.