I think that as our understanding of what it means to be a parent evolves and our understanding of how damaging homophobia is evolves, we must consider the possibility that opponents of Same Sex Marriage are, by teaching their children homophobia, abusing them, and ought to have their children taken from them.
I’m going to lay out some of the best arguments for taking the children of SSM opponents from them and placing them in foster homes, or, preferably, with SSM proponents. I understand that this conversation may be painful for opponents of Same Sex Marriage to participate in, but I’d like to encourage them to participate civilly, while encouraging SSM proponents to recognize that this argument (that SSM opponents are engaging in constant child abuse),while true, is likely to be painful for them. One thing I do want to be really clear on is that any conversation must be civil, and anyone engaging in uncivil behavior will be banned. This isn’t going to be about name calling. This is going to be about what horrible parents SSM opponents are, and how they deserve to lose their children.
The Purpose of Parenting
I think we must begin by examining the purpose of parenting. SSM opponents like to talk a lot about instilling ‘values’ in their kids, and though they’d like us to think that values have something to do with the purpose of parenting, historically that’s simply not true. Many creatures parent their young, not just humans, and yet we cannot speak meaningfully to a chipmunk, cat, tarantula, or seagull instilling ‘values’ in their young. In fact, the entire language of values is a modern-day attempt to redefine parenting away from what it’s meant for literally millions of years.
So if parenting isn’t about values what is it about? Quite simply, parenting is about preparing children for the future and preparing children to join the world. This is true no matter the era, culture, or even species of the parent. So if parenting is about preparing children for the future, does teaching your children homophobia do that? It’s clear that the answer is no.
Acceptance of SSM is on the rise. Acceptance of GLBT Americans is on the rise. If only people under the age of 30 voted, Same Sex Marriage would be legal in all but 12 states. Check it out:
Additionally, earlier this year marks the first time that a majority of Americans favor legal Same Sex Marriage:
Thus, if parenting consists of preparing your children for the world to come, it is not clear that Same Sex Marriage opponents are actually parenting. By teaching intolerance, they’re preparing their children for a world that simply has either has stopped existing or is soon going to. Thus, the entire concept of opponents of Same Sex Marriage parenting children is logically impossible. They may ape some of the forms, and I have no doubt that they believe that they love their ‘children,’ but whatever they think they’re doing, they’re not parenting.
Loving Your Children
One thing that almost everyone can agree is a component of parenting is treating your children with love. Across most animals, and certainly across mammals, there is an emotional aspect to parenting, a part that’s about the affection and love for your children.
And yet, by opposing Same Sex Marriage, the opponents are standing up to block a loving relationship. If they don’t believe that love is necessary in a healthy marriage (and indeed, many of them believe that GLBT individuals ought to enter sham, loveless straight-seeming-marriages just to preserve the form), I don’t think it’s unreasonable to consider whether or not these people are truly able to love at all. And if, in fact, they’re unable to love, isn’t it better for everyone if their children are taken from them and placed with people who are at least capable of giving them the love they need?
Opposing SSM is Sexually Creepy
Something that’s struck me for years about Same Sex Marriage Opponents is that they don’t particularly seem to grasp the concept of consent. Over and over again I see arguments about how same-sex marriage is inherently damaging, and about how it stunts the full emotional growth of the participants … without acknowledgment that nobody is in a same sex marriage nonconsensually.
You see the same thing when it comes to their attitude about non-heterosexual sexual activity. Many opponents of SSM have historically favored the criminalization of sodomy or voted for those who did, like former President George W. Bush, who campaigned on it. Once again, we see a lack of understanding of the importance of consent as a moral calculus.
Furthermore, opposition to Same Sex Marriage seems to illustrate an unhealthy obsession with- and desire to control the- sexual activity of strangers. Considering this, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to consider whether Same Sex Marriage opponents can be trusted around children. Now, I’m not saying that we can assume that all opponents of SSM molest their children. Of course, that’s not true. I don’t think we can ignore the question, though … I mean, here’s a group of people who seem to want to control the sexuality of strangers and don’t have any understanding of consent. It’s not unreasonable to ask how they might conduct themselves sexually towards those who are unable of consent.
And it’s not unreasonable to make sure that we play it safe by removing their children from a potentially abusive situation.
Now, I respect that this conversation could be painful for opponents of Same Sex Marriage to participate in. After all, we’re talking about taking their children from them because they’re unfit to care for them. Still, like I said, I think it’s important to have the conversation, and I think we can have it civilly.
And yes. Of course this is satire.
(Post edited thanks to Gin-and-Whiskey’s feedback)