Sunday, May 23, 2010

Hook, Line And Stinker

In a new press release in which the Family Research Council (of Focus on the Family and James Dobson infamy) dragged an eight year old "study" out of mothballs and served it up with today's sauce, they once again misrepresent scientific data to undermine human rights and promote their own fascist agenda.

"WASHINGTON, D.C. - Family Research Council released a new analytic report today showing that women who did not grow up with their biological mother and father are much more likely to engage in homosexual conduct as adults than are women who grew up in an intact family."

"Oh, goody," Some people will be thinking. "A new study to show how nasty, immoral, un-patriotic, and hostile to "the family" gay people are. And how much of a threat they pose to "our" children!"

As somebody pointed out to me, all to rightly: "Before long, phony religious right experts will be citing this study as fact. It's best to refute the lies before they have a chance to spread." And among the things recklessly promoted in this libelous and poorly researched "study" is the claim that "Women who never attend religious worship are more than three times as likely to have homosexual relationships than are women who attend worship weekly." This is exactly the sort of thing that bigot preachers will seize upon and preach from their pulpits as "gospel truth" and "fact".

If you had to take this crap literally you would have to conclude that since the majority of people do not actually attend religious worship to have narrow-minded fantasy shoved down their throats, then the majority of the world's population would turn out as gay as a picnic basket. In fact, if there was any truth to this load of tripe, we would have been up to our arm-pits in lesbians years ago.

That, and the erroneous misconception that there are no gay people who are Christians, or that Christianity and homosexuality are mutually exclusive - a crudely disguised lie which these nice folks would love more people to fall for, like their fundamentalist dogma - hook, line and sinker.

I ask myself why do they and those who manufacture and disseminate blatant and malicious lies of this nature keep getting away with it?

And WTF is an "intact family"? La Cosa Nostra unbound?

And I would love to point out that our friends at the Family Research Council (declared a known hate group and monitored very closely by the US Southern Poverty Law Center) are the inspiration and mentors behind our very own "Family Policy Institute" based in Cape Town and run by a certain vociferous gay-hating bible-puncher called Errol Naidoo. They use the same "studies", the same sources, and say the same things, and hate the same people. Even their logos look similar. And yes, friend Naidoo has waged an all-out war on all things pink, frilly, and otherwise non-cisgender or non-heterosexist since before the adoption of our present Constitution. And the USA also has a "Christian Action Network" which makes war on sexual minorities, like the one in SA does - now how about that?

It seems to me that this culture war, which is being fought against people simply for how they are being born, is at its very core fueled by religious fanaticism and unspeakable ignorance - is based entirely on a set of manufactured lies - and people's immutable natures are being put on trial and judged by them. For example, let's take their favorite key-phrases, "the family" and "family values". What is this "the family", and where do these "family values" come from that are prized so highly by these people who would clearly murder some people in cold blood without a second thought, just for not adhering to them? Ask them, and they will claim, quite adamantly, that "God said so".

As Human beings, we are animals with roots in the animal kingdom. We have culture and society, yes - but this too had to evolve from somewhere. Most animals, whether insects, fish, reptiles or mammals are known to mate on a seasonal basis - pairing off with different mates each time, raising their offspring, and then moving on. The group of animals that choose mates for life are decidedly few by comparison, such as birds - and precious few mammals.

About those gay penguin couples at East London and Berlin zoos - remarkably, I have heard no comment from the homophobes who refuse to accept that sexuality is a natural in-born trait. I wonder why that is? Hmm.

Some species of insect, such as some fly species for example, have also demonstrated a propensity for homosexuality and gender variance. Yes, many insects also are monogamous and only mate once and for life (which should make people like James Dobson happy) - but then, strangely enough, in most cases, the unfortunate males die right after mating - or are even killed and eaten by their mates. Quite an interesting example provided by nature, don't you think? *wink*

Black-widow spiders and various other creepy-crawlies kill and eat their male suitors, so if you consider the terms "suicidal lifestyle", and "lifetime commitment" - I think certain folks take the charade about "morality" a bit far when criticising gay people.

Then there are certain species of fish and amphibian which actually change physical gender - an enlightening fact, which seems to go right over the heads of certain folks who say "If God wanted you to be a woman, he would have made you that way." Naughty fish, bad, bad! Uhuh. Yeah. Moving on.

How about those lions? The big cats serve a prime example of the patriarchy, where a small group of males has the services of a harem of females. And yes, even there, there have been cases of documented homosexuality among males and females. (And they thought "Pride" was a new thing?) Let's not forget the herd system, in which multiple animals basically make up one "family" or blood-line, which continue to interbreed into perpetuity. And how about the species where the father will kill it's own off-spring if the mother does not leave and go into hiding with them? Hmm. Perhaps like some Human fathers, Dad is afraid the kids would have been gay? Yup, a real inspiration in terms of morality, the natural family.

Apes and chimpanzees have societies with well-defined roles - which all too often, are "aped" ('scuse the pun) by their younger, less hairy, clothing-wearing Human relatives. Scientists recently demonstrated that chimpanzees bribe other chimpanzees for sexual favors with gifts and offers of food - proving the earliest most basic form of prostitution known to us. (Surprisingly, I haven't seen any articles from evangelists about the issue of potentially millions more souls to save, swinging from trees in the few remaining jungles around the world.) Even chimpanzees are not immune to being naturally gay or even bisexual. Chimpanzees were also recently shown using improvised tools, such as twigs and branches - and even rocks to perform certain tasks. Some apes, such as gorillas are known to use objects as weapons.

Let's recap, the ability to make and use tools, ordered society, ability to reason and to communicate and an innate ability to use these skills to make bribes and to make war. Are we really so sure that these apes are really such under-developed "animals"? They sound very Human to me. All they need to start doing now is inventing religions and polluting the planet.

And yes, suddenly human-kind came along and is expected by some to not have developed along similar lines? Suddenly a "family unit" consisting of a married-for-life, monogamous, heterosexual only, male and female couple, with children - is claimed to be the only legitimate form of family in existence. Despite the fact that NOWHERE in nature does this "perfect family" concept of theirs exist at all.

Isn't funny that in some far-distant time, some people came along and suggested that exclusive heterosexual monogamy for life, (aka marriage) is the "only right and proper" thing to do? It seems to me that the concept of the modern family is indeed more of a modern concept than anything else. Think about it, polygamy was a biblical standard - a man's wealth and power was judged by how many wives he had. Marriage was not a declaration of love, it was an expression of male dominion, control and ownership of property - which brings me to the point that modern marriage is a relic and descendant of this patriarchal system of status, power and control - which has been panel-beaten, refurbished over the past few decades - and is now being reapplied to the 21st century by people with a very narrow-minded view of the world.

Marriage, hmm - and "the family". It seems to me this is a manufactured principle, which largely flies in the face of nature - especially when viewed in the context of free will, freedom of choice and expression - and the lack of any evidence to show that not adhering to this artificial feature of Human society would cause any more harm than has been over the past 3 or 4000 years by those who made the rules - and flaunt the manner in which they themselves break them on a piece-meal basis.

Apparently not even they are all heterosexual - or even monogamous - and yes, even the most pious "God-fearing" and gay-hating bible-thumpers are often unmasked as raging pedophiles and adulterers (and not to mention, hypocrites). How often do we see news about these religious fundamentalists who come tumbling out of the closet?Yet another one of these gay-hating, bible-bashing "ex-gay" bull-shitters tumbled out last week, to the accompaniment of howls of laughter. (Read here, how an "ex-gay" poster-boy recently was caught out on holiday with a gay prostitute.)

Don't you also find it ironic that these are the people that want to teach us about marriage? Oh, I'm learning all right.

I'm not saying that everything that exists in nature is good and that it is bad to have morals. What I am saying is that when people go to the trouble of inventing morals, and choosing "morals" to live by - or to start waving fingers in other people's faces about their morals, they should understand that "moral standards" should make sense, and not contradict nature - and human nature - in such a way as to be unreasonable, unrealistic - and just plain vindictive.

I understand the USA has a law protecting freedom of expression and freedom of speech - and with good reason - but it's about time the USA also had a law against spreading malicious, harmful lies and committing fraud which claims innocent lives. After all, they have laws protecting freedom of expression, and yet walking up to someone you hate and punching them on the nose is still considered assault.

The American people should bear in mind that in most things, its culture, opinions (and "research" such as this) get spread around the world by people who agree with them.

If you analyze any given bigot group in South Africa for example, nine times out of ten, you will find ties and links to US churches, groups and homophobic leadership figures. A favorite is their published material - such as this "study".

Bigot groups in many countries, including South Africa, look to the West and especially the USA for material, guidance and "scientific research" to back them up.

I think it is time the US started taking responsibility for being the most influential society on Earth, and limiting the harm groups such as the Family Research Council can do to people around the world.

No comments:

Post a Comment