![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Dec. 2nd, 2004 03:02 pm
(no subject)
Rep. Gerald Allen, R-Cottondale: Complete Fuckwit. This nimrod wants to ban any book with gay characters from libraries, including university libraries. Granted, his bill would affect only Alabama, but ... hello?
(I left the ungrammatical method of title delineation alone because I'm quoting directly; somone else can go on about how pathetic it is that both a reporter and an editor screwed that up.)
So, because there's a gay character, works of amazing insight and clarity will be disregarded in the public arena? Excuse me? Hello? Look, Mr. Allen. You don't see the rest of the world voting to burn your bibles and ban them from my hotel rooms, do you?
What's more, this is absolutely blatant discrimination. Substitute any other group -- even Christian -- for Gay, and you see how heinous his plan really is.
Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.
Ok, I'm all for a pro-abstinence campaign; I think people should (for the most part) wait longer than they typically do before engaging in sexual behavior. But dammit, I want said campaign to contain fact, not ridiculous nonsense.
I agree with this guy (quoted from the article):
Both links courtesy of![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
wicked_wish
Allen said no state funds should be used to pay for materials that foster homosexuality. He said that would include nonfiction books that suggest homosexuality is acceptable and fiction novels with gay characters. While that would ban books like "Heather has Two Mommies," it could also include classic and popular novels with gay characters such as "The Color Purple," "The Picture of Dorian Gray" and "Brideshead Revisted."
(I left the ungrammatical method of title delineation alone because I'm quoting directly; somone else can go on about how pathetic it is that both a reporter and an editor screwed that up.)
So, because there's a gay character, works of amazing insight and clarity will be disregarded in the public arena? Excuse me? Hello? Look, Mr. Allen. You don't see the rest of the world voting to burn your bibles and ban them from my hotel rooms, do you?
What's more, this is absolutely blatant discrimination. Substitute any other group -- even Christian -- for Gay, and you see how heinous his plan really is.
Many American youngsters participating in federally funded abstinence-only programs have been taught over the past three years that abortion can lead to sterility and suicide, that half the gay male teenagers in the United States have tested positive for the AIDS virus, and that touching a person's genitals "can result in pregnancy," a congressional staff analysis has found.
Ok, I'm all for a pro-abstinence campaign; I think people should (for the most part) wait longer than they typically do before engaging in sexual behavior. But dammit, I want said campaign to contain fact, not ridiculous nonsense.
I agree with this guy (quoted from the article):
"I have no objection talking about abstinence as a surefire way to prevent unwanted pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases," Waxman said. "I don't think we ought to lie to our children about science. Something is seriously wrong when federal tax dollars are being used to mislead kids about basic health facts."
Both links courtesy of
wicked_wish