A Warning from Canada: Same-Sex Marriage Erodes Fundamental Rights (转载)# Parenting - 为人父母
n*h
1 楼
I am one of six adult children of gay parents who recently filed amicus
briefs with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to respect the authority
of citizens to keep the original definition of marriage: a union between one
man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, so that children may know
and may be raised by their biological parents. I also live in Canada, where
same-sex marriage was federally mandated in 2005.
I am the daughter of a gay father who died of AIDS. I described my
experiences in my book: Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting.
Over fifty adult children who were raised by LGBT parents have communicated
with me and share my concerns about same-sex marriage and parenting. Many of
us struggle with our own sexuality and sense of gender because of the
influences in our household environments growing up.
We have great compassion for people who struggle with their sexuality and
gender identity—not animosity. And we love our parents. Yet, when we go
public with our stories, we often face ostracism, silencing, and threats.
I want to warn America to expect severe erosion of First Amendment freedoms
if the US Supreme Court mandates same-sex marriage. The consequences have
played out in Canada for ten years now, and they are truly Orwellian in
nature and scope.
Canada’s Lessons
In Canada, freedoms of speech, press, religion, and association have
suffered greatly due to government pressure. The debate over same-sex
marriage that is taking place in the United States could not legally exist
in Canada today. Because of legal restrictions on speech, if you say or
write anything considered “homophobic” (including, by definition, anything
questioning same-sex marriage), you could face discipline, termination of
employment, or prosecution by the government.
Why do police prosecute speech under the guise of eliminating “hate speech
” when there are existing legal remedies and criminal protections against
slander, defamation, threats, and assault that equally apply to all
Americans? Hate-crime-like policies using the terms “sexual orientation”
and “gender identity” create unequal protections in law, whereby protected
groups receive more legal protection than other groups.
Having witnessed how mob hysteria in Indiana caused the legislature to back-
track on a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, many Americans are beginning
to understand that some activists on the Left want to usher in state control
over every institution and freedom. In this scheme, personal autonomy and
freedom of expression become nothing more than pipe dreams, and children
become commodified.
Children are not commodities that can be justifiably severed from their
natural parentage and traded between unrelated adults. Children in same-sex
households will often deny their grief and pretend they don’t miss a
biological parent, feeling pressured to speak positively due to the politics
surrounding LGBT households. However, when children lose either of their
biological parents because of death, divorce, adoption, or artificial
reproductive technology, they experience a painful void. It is the same for
us when our gay parent brings his or her same-sex partner(s) into our lives.
Their partner(s) can never replace our missing biological parent.
The State as Ultimate Arbiter of Parenthood
Over and over, we are told that “permitting same-sex couples access to the
designation of marriage will not deprive anyone of any rights.” That is a
lie.
When same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada in 2005, parenting was
immediately redefined. Canada’s gay marriage law, Bill C-38, included a
provision to erase the term “natural parent” and replace it across the
board with gender-neutral “legal parent” in federal law. Now all children
only have “legal parents,” as defined by the state. By legally erasing
biological parenthood in this way, the state ignores children’s foremost
right: their immutable, intrinsic yearning to know and be raised by their
own biological parents.
Mothers and fathers bring unique and complementary gifts to their children.
Contrary to the logic of same-sex marriage, the gender of parents matters
for the healthy development of children. We know, for example, that the
majority of incarcerated men did not have their fathers in the home. Fathers
by their nature secure identity, instill direction, provide discipline,
boundaries, and risk-taking adventures, and set lifelong examples for
children. But fathers cannot nurture children in the womb or give birth to
and breast-feed babies. Mothers nurture children in unique and beneficial
ways that cannot be duplicated by fathers.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that men and women are
anatomically, biologically, physiologically, psychologically, hormonally,
and neurologically different from each other. These unique differences
provide lifelong benefits to children that cannot be duplicated by same-
gender “legal” parents acting out different gender roles or attempting to
substitute for the missing male or female role model in the home.
In effect, same-sex marriage not only deprives children of their own rights
to natural parentage, it gives the state the power to override the autonomy
of biological parents, which means parental rights are usurped by the
government.
Hate Tribunals Are Coming
In Canada, it is considered discriminatory to say that marriage is between a
man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his or her
biological married parents. It is not just politically incorrect in Canada
to say so; you can be saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal
fees, fined, and forced to take sensitivity training.
Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a
complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these
organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed
in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified
under “sexual orientation.” It takes only one complaint against a person
to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands
of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private
residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking
for hate speech.
The plaintiff making the complaint has his legal fees completely paid for by
the government. Not so the defendant. Even if the defendant is found
innocent, he cannot recover his legal costs. If he is found guilty, he must
pay fines to the person(s) who brought forth the complaint.
If your beliefs, values, and political opinions are different from the state
’s, you risk losing your professional license, job, or business, and even
your children. Look no further than the Lev Tahor Sect, an Orthodox Jewish
sect. Many members, who had been involved in a bitter custody battle with
child protection services, began leaving Chatham, Ontario, for Guatemala in
March 2014, to escape prosecution for their religious faith, which
conflicted with the Province’s guidelines for religious education. Of the
two hundred sect members, only half a dozen families remain in Chatham.
Parents can expect state interference when it comes to moral values,
parenting, and education—and not just in school. The state has access into
your home to supervise you as the parent, to judge your suitability. And if
the state doesn’t like what you are teaching your children, the state will
attempt to remove them from your home.
Teachers cannot make comments in their social networks, write letters to
editors, publicly debate, or vote according to their own conscience on their
own time. They can be disciplined or lose any chance of tenure. They can be
required at a bureaucrat’s whim to take re-education classes or
sensitivity training, or be fired for thinking politically incorrect
thoughts.
When same-sex marriage was created in Canada, gender-neutral language became
legally mandated. Newspeak proclaims that it is discriminatory to assume a
human being is male or female, or heterosexual. So, to be inclusive, special
non-gender-specific language is being used in media, government, workplaces
, and especially schools to avoid appearing ignorant, homophobic, or
discriminatory. A special curriculum is being used in many schools to teach
students how to use proper gender-neutral language. Unbeknownst to many
parents, use of gender terms to describe husband and wife, father and mother
, Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, and “he” and “she” is being steadily
eradicated in Canadian schools.
Which Is More Important: Sexual Autonomy or the First Amendment?
Recently, an American professor who was anonymously interviewed for the
American Conservative questioned whether sexual autonomy is going to cost
you your freedoms: “We are now at the point, he said, at which it is
legitimate to ask if sexual autonomy is more important than the First
Amendment?”
Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian citizens were
supposed to have been guaranteed: (1) freedom of conscience and religion; (2
) freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of
the press and other media of communication; (3) freedom of peaceful assembly
; and (4) freedom of association. In reality, all of these freedoms have
been curtailed with the legalization of same-sex marriage.
Wedding planners, rental halls, bed and breakfast owners, florists,
photographers, and bakers have already seen their freedoms eroded,
conscience rights ignored, and religious freedoms trampled in Canada. But
this is not just about the wedding industry. Anybody who owns a business may
not legally permit his or her conscience to inform business practices or
decisions if those decisions are not in line with the tribunals’ decisions
and the government’s sexual orientation and gender identity non-
discrimination laws. In the end, this means that the state basically
dictates whether and how citizens may express themselves.
Freedom to assemble and speak freely about man-woman marriage, family, and
sexuality is now restricted. Most faith communities have become “
politically correct” to avoid fines and loss of charitable status. Canadian
media are restricted by the Canadian Radio, Television, and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), which is similar to the FCC. If the
media air anything considered discriminatory, broadcasting licenses can be
revoked, and “human rights bodies” can charge fines and restrict future
airings.
An example of legally curtailed speech regarding homosexuality in Canada
involves the case of Bill Whatcott, who was arrested for hate speech in
April 2014 after distributing pamphlets that were critical of homosexuality.
Whether or not you agree with what he says, you should be aghast at this
state-sanctioned gagging. Books, DVDs, and other materials can also be
confiscated at the Canadian border if the materials are deemed “hateful.”
Americans need to prepare for the same sort of surveillance-society in
America if the Supreme Court rules to ban marriage as a male-female
institution. It means that no matter what you believe, the government will
be free to regulate your speech, your writing, your associations, and
whether or not you may express your conscience. Americans also need to
understand that the endgame for some in the LGBT rights movement involves
centralized state power—and the end of First Amendment freedoms.
Dawn Stefanowicz is an internationally recognized speaker and author. She is
a member of the Testimonial Committee of the International Children’s
Rights Institute. Her book, Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual
Parenting, is available at http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org. Dawn, a full-time licensed accountant, is married and has two teenaged children.
Print Friendly
briefs with the US Supreme Court, asking the Court to respect the authority
of citizens to keep the original definition of marriage: a union between one
man and one woman to the exclusion of all others, so that children may know
and may be raised by their biological parents. I also live in Canada, where
same-sex marriage was federally mandated in 2005.
I am the daughter of a gay father who died of AIDS. I described my
experiences in my book: Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual Parenting.
Over fifty adult children who were raised by LGBT parents have communicated
with me and share my concerns about same-sex marriage and parenting. Many of
us struggle with our own sexuality and sense of gender because of the
influences in our household environments growing up.
We have great compassion for people who struggle with their sexuality and
gender identity—not animosity. And we love our parents. Yet, when we go
public with our stories, we often face ostracism, silencing, and threats.
I want to warn America to expect severe erosion of First Amendment freedoms
if the US Supreme Court mandates same-sex marriage. The consequences have
played out in Canada for ten years now, and they are truly Orwellian in
nature and scope.
Canada’s Lessons
In Canada, freedoms of speech, press, religion, and association have
suffered greatly due to government pressure. The debate over same-sex
marriage that is taking place in the United States could not legally exist
in Canada today. Because of legal restrictions on speech, if you say or
write anything considered “homophobic” (including, by definition, anything
questioning same-sex marriage), you could face discipline, termination of
employment, or prosecution by the government.
Why do police prosecute speech under the guise of eliminating “hate speech
” when there are existing legal remedies and criminal protections against
slander, defamation, threats, and assault that equally apply to all
Americans? Hate-crime-like policies using the terms “sexual orientation”
and “gender identity” create unequal protections in law, whereby protected
groups receive more legal protection than other groups.
Having witnessed how mob hysteria in Indiana caused the legislature to back-
track on a Religious Freedom Restoration Act, many Americans are beginning
to understand that some activists on the Left want to usher in state control
over every institution and freedom. In this scheme, personal autonomy and
freedom of expression become nothing more than pipe dreams, and children
become commodified.
Children are not commodities that can be justifiably severed from their
natural parentage and traded between unrelated adults. Children in same-sex
households will often deny their grief and pretend they don’t miss a
biological parent, feeling pressured to speak positively due to the politics
surrounding LGBT households. However, when children lose either of their
biological parents because of death, divorce, adoption, or artificial
reproductive technology, they experience a painful void. It is the same for
us when our gay parent brings his or her same-sex partner(s) into our lives.
Their partner(s) can never replace our missing biological parent.
The State as Ultimate Arbiter of Parenthood
Over and over, we are told that “permitting same-sex couples access to the
designation of marriage will not deprive anyone of any rights.” That is a
lie.
When same-sex marriage was legalized in Canada in 2005, parenting was
immediately redefined. Canada’s gay marriage law, Bill C-38, included a
provision to erase the term “natural parent” and replace it across the
board with gender-neutral “legal parent” in federal law. Now all children
only have “legal parents,” as defined by the state. By legally erasing
biological parenthood in this way, the state ignores children’s foremost
right: their immutable, intrinsic yearning to know and be raised by their
own biological parents.
Mothers and fathers bring unique and complementary gifts to their children.
Contrary to the logic of same-sex marriage, the gender of parents matters
for the healthy development of children. We know, for example, that the
majority of incarcerated men did not have their fathers in the home. Fathers
by their nature secure identity, instill direction, provide discipline,
boundaries, and risk-taking adventures, and set lifelong examples for
children. But fathers cannot nurture children in the womb or give birth to
and breast-feed babies. Mothers nurture children in unique and beneficial
ways that cannot be duplicated by fathers.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to know that men and women are
anatomically, biologically, physiologically, psychologically, hormonally,
and neurologically different from each other. These unique differences
provide lifelong benefits to children that cannot be duplicated by same-
gender “legal” parents acting out different gender roles or attempting to
substitute for the missing male or female role model in the home.
In effect, same-sex marriage not only deprives children of their own rights
to natural parentage, it gives the state the power to override the autonomy
of biological parents, which means parental rights are usurped by the
government.
Hate Tribunals Are Coming
In Canada, it is considered discriminatory to say that marriage is between a
man and a woman or that every child should know and be raised by his or her
biological married parents. It is not just politically incorrect in Canada
to say so; you can be saddled with tens of thousands of dollars in legal
fees, fined, and forced to take sensitivity training.
Anyone who is offended by something you have said or written can make a
complaint to the Human Rights Commissions and Tribunals. In Canada, these
organizations police speech, penalizing citizens for any expression deemed
in opposition to particular sexual behaviors or protected groups identified
under “sexual orientation.” It takes only one complaint against a person
to be brought before the tribunal, costing the defendant tens of thousands
of dollars in legal fees. The commissions have the power to enter private
residences and remove all items pertinent to their investigations, checking
for hate speech.
The plaintiff making the complaint has his legal fees completely paid for by
the government. Not so the defendant. Even if the defendant is found
innocent, he cannot recover his legal costs. If he is found guilty, he must
pay fines to the person(s) who brought forth the complaint.
If your beliefs, values, and political opinions are different from the state
’s, you risk losing your professional license, job, or business, and even
your children. Look no further than the Lev Tahor Sect, an Orthodox Jewish
sect. Many members, who had been involved in a bitter custody battle with
child protection services, began leaving Chatham, Ontario, for Guatemala in
March 2014, to escape prosecution for their religious faith, which
conflicted with the Province’s guidelines for religious education. Of the
two hundred sect members, only half a dozen families remain in Chatham.
Parents can expect state interference when it comes to moral values,
parenting, and education—and not just in school. The state has access into
your home to supervise you as the parent, to judge your suitability. And if
the state doesn’t like what you are teaching your children, the state will
attempt to remove them from your home.
Teachers cannot make comments in their social networks, write letters to
editors, publicly debate, or vote according to their own conscience on their
own time. They can be disciplined or lose any chance of tenure. They can be
required at a bureaucrat’s whim to take re-education classes or
sensitivity training, or be fired for thinking politically incorrect
thoughts.
When same-sex marriage was created in Canada, gender-neutral language became
legally mandated. Newspeak proclaims that it is discriminatory to assume a
human being is male or female, or heterosexual. So, to be inclusive, special
non-gender-specific language is being used in media, government, workplaces
, and especially schools to avoid appearing ignorant, homophobic, or
discriminatory. A special curriculum is being used in many schools to teach
students how to use proper gender-neutral language. Unbeknownst to many
parents, use of gender terms to describe husband and wife, father and mother
, Mother’s Day and Father’s Day, and “he” and “she” is being steadily
eradicated in Canadian schools.
Which Is More Important: Sexual Autonomy or the First Amendment?
Recently, an American professor who was anonymously interviewed for the
American Conservative questioned whether sexual autonomy is going to cost
you your freedoms: “We are now at the point, he said, at which it is
legitimate to ask if sexual autonomy is more important than the First
Amendment?”
Under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Canadian citizens were
supposed to have been guaranteed: (1) freedom of conscience and religion; (2
) freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of
the press and other media of communication; (3) freedom of peaceful assembly
; and (4) freedom of association. In reality, all of these freedoms have
been curtailed with the legalization of same-sex marriage.
Wedding planners, rental halls, bed and breakfast owners, florists,
photographers, and bakers have already seen their freedoms eroded,
conscience rights ignored, and religious freedoms trampled in Canada. But
this is not just about the wedding industry. Anybody who owns a business may
not legally permit his or her conscience to inform business practices or
decisions if those decisions are not in line with the tribunals’ decisions
and the government’s sexual orientation and gender identity non-
discrimination laws. In the end, this means that the state basically
dictates whether and how citizens may express themselves.
Freedom to assemble and speak freely about man-woman marriage, family, and
sexuality is now restricted. Most faith communities have become “
politically correct” to avoid fines and loss of charitable status. Canadian
media are restricted by the Canadian Radio, Television, and
Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), which is similar to the FCC. If the
media air anything considered discriminatory, broadcasting licenses can be
revoked, and “human rights bodies” can charge fines and restrict future
airings.
An example of legally curtailed speech regarding homosexuality in Canada
involves the case of Bill Whatcott, who was arrested for hate speech in
April 2014 after distributing pamphlets that were critical of homosexuality.
Whether or not you agree with what he says, you should be aghast at this
state-sanctioned gagging. Books, DVDs, and other materials can also be
confiscated at the Canadian border if the materials are deemed “hateful.”
Americans need to prepare for the same sort of surveillance-society in
America if the Supreme Court rules to ban marriage as a male-female
institution. It means that no matter what you believe, the government will
be free to regulate your speech, your writing, your associations, and
whether or not you may express your conscience. Americans also need to
understand that the endgame for some in the LGBT rights movement involves
centralized state power—and the end of First Amendment freedoms.
Dawn Stefanowicz is an internationally recognized speaker and author. She is
a member of the Testimonial Committee of the International Children’s
Rights Institute. Her book, Out From Under: The Impact of Homosexual
Parenting, is available at http://www.dawnstefanowicz.org. Dawn, a full-time licensed accountant, is married and has two teenaged children.
Print Friendly