By Elise Ehrhard
This summer, PBS Kids premiered an episode of the children's show Arthur in which a teacher, Mr. Ratburn, "marries"
another male character. Even before this premiere, PBS was already
infusing the LGBT agenda into its programming. In between its shows, a
happy song about families included an image of two dads with a baby and lyrics to that effect.
Disney and other children's stations long ago jumped onto the LGBT bandwagon with their line-up. As a Guardian headline noted
in 2016, "From Nickelodeon to Disney: Children's TV leads the way for
LGBT characters," with same-sex unions featuring prominently in shows.
It is not just television, of course. Rumors now fly that even Elsa
of Frozen may be a lesbian in the Disney sequel.
In fact, if you have a
preschooler or early elementary-school child nowadays, you will find
same-sex sexual relationships, as well as transgender advocacy,
advertised throughout your children's media and public programming.
Children's libraries promote drag queen story hours, and schools
inculcate transgender ideas in kindergartners and early elementary
children to the point where children in Brisbane are afraid to use the words "girl" and "boy" in a doctor's office and parents have to sue schools to stop teachers from grooming their impressionable kids. The LGBT agenda push on young children in the West is in full swing.
Some say, "What's the big deal? Love is love. Why should children be scandalized by that unless their parents are bigots?"
Those who say that fail to
grasp certain developmental realities about children. Children do not
care about adult identities or adults' self-actualizaton. They care
about adult romantic feelings because adult romantic feelings can lead
to the creation of children.
In other words, kids care
about their "being." At some ontological level, they wonder where they
came from. They know that love between a mommy and daddy led to their
existence. Whether that love between man and woman caused a stork to
show up or planted a cabbage patch with a baby in the garden is
irrelevant to them. That image of "mom" and "dad" is part of their
That is why children
grieve so deeply over the absence of a mother or father or the rupture
of a parents' union through divorce. (This grief exists even when
parents deny the reality of that grief.)
When my six-year-old niece
heard that one of her aunts was getting married, she yelled, "Yay,
more cousins!" That is how young children think about marriage. For
little children, adult romantic relationships matter in that they can
somehow create children. It means more playmates, siblings, or
cousins. That is why children's movies that end with a couple marrying
are followed up with sequels in which the couple has a baby.
relationships do not biologically lead to babies by their inherent
nature, preschoolers and kindergartners who see same-sex couples
calling themselves married wonder, "Why are they getting married? Can
they make babies? If not, does that mean you can marry your friend?"
This leads to another
point of confusion. A critical aspect of child development is the
same-sex friendships children form in their early years. Children know
there is a difference between the sexes. Bonding with their same-sex
peers is an important part of developing their understanding of
themselves as boys and girls.
When boys and girls are
friends, they sometimes "play" at marriage and parenthood. One of my
sons loved to play with dinosaurs in preschool. Another girl who
played with dinosaurs became his friend. She announced to him that
they would get married one day and have three children. He was fine
with that as long as she kept her interest in paleontology. It was
adorable. The friendship between the boys had no such connotation
because boys do not think, "I can marry another boy and create children
with him one day." It is not biologically possible.
Even with new and
ethically questionable technology, the child created under the
directive of a same-sex couple will be deprived of either a mother or
father. Children implicitly understand this ontological reality even
if they cannot verbalize such concepts or recognize their scientific
Promoting the idea of
same-sex "marriage" in young children's lives thus throws needless
confusion and anxiety into their developing understanding of
friendship. Pushing that on parents through schools, media, and other
children's resources forces parents into conversations they may not be
ready for with such young children.
Just because adult sitcoms like Modern Family
imply that one of the men in a same-sex relationship merely replaces
the mother role in the public mind, that does not make it true. In
fact, it is an idea that manages to be insulting to both women and
homosexual men. Throughout the years of the sitcom, the audience was
supposed to pretend that a real daughter being raised by two men would
never quietly pine for the absent mother. The audience was supposed to
ignore a primal wound. Children know that a man, no matter how
nurturing, is not a mother. And since when did women allow their
irreplaceable role to be so dismissed and caricatured?
I would add that children
know that a woman, no matter how "masculine," is not a father. But
since the father role has already been pummeled by Western society in
recent decades, the removal of the father image in lesbian "marriage"
causes few to bat an eye.
And please spare me the
trope about "infertile couples can't be a mom and dad, and they're
still married." A man and woman who cannot have children are still the
image of "mom" and "dad" in the minds of little children. Two men or
two women can never be so.
There are solutions to the
relentless LGBT push on young children. PBS, public schools, and
public libraries are taxpayer-funded. Demand that taxpayer money not
go to such efforts, and stand your ground when the inevitable slings
and arrows fly. The media will not have your back. Conservativism,
Inc. will definitely not have your back. And the Left already hates
you with a hot passion. Speak and fight for your children's right to
innocence and healthy development anyway.
The many forces arrayed
against your efforts — corporate, social, and political — will vilify
you as a bigot and a homophobe. So what? They label so many who
disagree with them that Americans are numb to it at this point.
We need to speak clearly
and plainly. Romantic attraction between adults of the same sex is a
purely erotic concept, not an ontological one (i.e., not rooted in a
child's being). Two men pretending to be married on a kids' show,
books about two mommies in public school kindergarten classrooms, and
the general LGBT push on young children are controversial not because
of "religious differences" or "intolerance."
All of this is controversial because it is wrong to push adult sexual agendas on children, period.
Please share this.