July 13, 2017

Why I won't attend my city's gay pride parade

Gay pride parade 2016 (Steinbach, Manitoba)
By Hendrik van der Breggen
July 13, 2017

Why I won't attend my city's gay pride parade: Because the reasons against outweigh the reasons for

Concerning Steinbach's upcoming gay pride parade (July 15), let's look at some pros and cons. I think the cons (reasons against) outweigh the pros (reasons in favour).

On the pro side: Gay pride parades attempt to show love and respect to persons who identify as LGBTQ, plus challenge and draw attention to unfair discrimination and bullying. Gay pride parades are an exercise of freedom of speech.

Another pro (“pro”): We should celebrate, i.e., be proud of and affirm, the (assumed/ alleged) truth and goodness of the various gender identities and expressions thereof: homosexuality, bisexuality, transgender, etc.

Many well-meaning folks stop here and expect citizens (and government officials) to support gay pride parades.

But opposing reasons should be considered, too.

First, a clarification: One can be against discrimination and bullying plus favour love, freedom, equality, respect for all, and—at the same time—not agree with the celebration of LGBTQ as an ideology (set of ideas and ideals about sexuality and its expression). Disagreement doesn't equal hate.

Okay, what are some cons/ counter-considerations concerning gay pride parades? Here are seven.

1. Many persons (including me) hold moral/ religious beliefs that limit the appropriate expression of sexual intimacy to one man and one woman in marriage. These persons (e.g., many Christians, Jews, Muslims, Sikhs, etc.) hold such beliefs to be true, i.e., not a mere matter of opinion. These people count, too.

Significantly, in a pluralist society that values diversity, such beliefs are legitimate to hold. So, in so far as a pride parade celebrates or affirms behaviour one thinks is wrong, to that extent the moral/ religious belief—whether opponents agree or not—is a legitimate reason against attending (or supporting or endorsing) such parades.

(And the right to free speech of paraders is not infringed upon by those who disagree with the parade when they don't attend the parade.)

2. There are serious public health reasons for questioning the wisdom of celebrating and encouraging sexual expression outside the one-man-one-woman-united-in-marriage paradigm for sexual intimacy.

Psychiatrist-physician Miriam Grossman: Compared to the general heterosexual population, persons who identify as gay, lesbian, or bisexual report “more high risk sexual behaviors, higher rates of infection with HIV, syphilis, and gonorrhea, and more mental health problems [anxiety, depression, suicidal thoughts].”

Significantly, Grossman adds, these disparities also occur in more accepting, gay-friendly societies (e.g., The Netherlands), so can't be blamed wholly on cultural attitudes.

See Dr. Grossman's book You're Teaching My Child What?: A Physician Exposes the Lies of Sex Ed and How They Harm Your Child. (This book is recommended by Nicholas Cummings, a former president of the American Psychological Association.)

3. LGBTQ ideology typically encourages redefining marriage from (a) the union of a man and woman who can (at least in principle) reproduce sexually via their union and nurture their biological children to (b) a union of, say, two adults regardless of sexual noncomplementarity.

However, according to researcher Ryan T. Anderson, reliable studies from social sciences strongly suggest parenting by married biological parents—i.e., biological mother and biological father—is ideal for well-being of children. The redefinition of marriage (along with divorce and single parenting) takes society another step away from this ideal.

See Ryan T. Anderson's lecture at Stanford University: What Is Marriage? (56 minute video). See too the Q&A (36 minute video). Anderson also sets out and develops three negative consequences of same-sex marriage in this 23 minute video presentation. (The subsequent 34 minute Q&A is important, too.)

4. Stepping away from sexual complementarity also increases demand for reproductive technology.

In Vitro Fertilization may become normalized and its problems exacerbated. IVF creates leftover frozen human embryos, i.e., human beings; often requires “selective termination, i.e., abortion of unwanted implantations/ fetuses; exploits women as surrogates and egg suppliers; threatens to turn children into commodities; plus threatens to abolish children's biologically-based moral right to know and be raised by both biological parents.

See my column Think, for baby's sake.

5. Transgender ideology is problematic, too. See my column Transgender ideology.

6. Recent history shows that LGBTQ ideologues tend to be extremely intolerant toward dissenters.

Last year's Steinbach parade spokesperson said those who disagree don't have a right to their opinion (a threat to free speech, surely), plus she shamed politicians who respectfully disagree with LGBTQ ideologues for not "representing" them (a threat to freedom of conscience, surely).

Moreover, local LGBTQ activists are attempting to use the force of law to promote LGBTQ ideology in public schools (in the academic curriculum of young children), in spite of what dissenting parents think. Also, Canada's recent passing of Bill C16, a.k.a. Transgender Rights Bill, threatens to compel speech (see my C16 and Forcing Your Religion and my Bill C16 is incoherent—and that's a concern).

More broadly, various businesses—bakers, florists, photographers, farmers—and private schools—e.g., Trinity Western University law school—are facing serious legal and financial difficulties because of LGBTQ activism. For example, one baker is facing a fine of $137,000.00 U.S. for not baking a same-sex wedding cake! Wow.

(Personal note: Because I have carefully critiqued LGBTQ matters over the past several years, some LGBTQ supporters have made public calls for me not only to be fired from my current place of employment but also to be stripped of my PhD. That's in addition to lots of name-calling. A growing LGBTQ understanding of "tolerance" of dissenters seems to be this: if you can't beat them with respectful use of reason and evidence, crush their ability to make a living.)

In other words, LGBTQ ideology—marching under rainbow flags and chanting ambiguous slogans about “diversity", “tolerance", and “love is love"—has a distinctly undemocratic, fascist flavor.

7. Arguments in favour of LGBTQ matters tend to be seriously flawed from the point of view of truth and logic. Space doesn't permit me to discuss those arguments here, so please see my relevant articles. For starters, see Untangling LGBTQ arguments (plus see below, especially my replies to critics).

Surely, truth-seeking responsible citizens are justified in refusing to support an ideology that is often based on (and even promotes) faulty reasoning.

My conclusion: When it comes to gay pride parades, I think the cons outweigh the pros. Thus I will not attend Steinbach's upcoming parade.

Nevertheless, I will show respect (and gentleness) to those who disagree with me, as I hope they will to me.

(Hendrik van der Breggen, PhD, is associate professor of philosophy at Providence University College. The views expressed in this column do not always reflect the views of Providence.)

Note to critics: Please read at least a few of my (relevant) suggested readings before commenting. Thanks.

Resources for people who have unwanted same-sex sexual attractions

Online resources, for starters: 
The following books are helpful too: 

 Suggested readings: Other Apologia columns on related matters

 Homosexuality (general) 
 Homosexuality (non-religious criticisms) 
 Homosexuality (and Bible) 
 Same-sex marriage 
 Replies to my critics 

Note to critics (again): Please read at least a few of my (relevant) suggested readings before commenting. Thanks.

No comments: