American Library Association silent as libraries ban books about ex-gays

Fox News reports that libraries are banning books about ex-gays. (H/T Andrew, 4Simpsons)

Excerpt:

Visit most public school libraries and you’ll find an array of books that address the subject of homosexuality. Many include sexually explicit content, and some even include graphic images.

But if you’re looking for a book that refers to the possibility that homosexuality can be “reversed,” a Chicago-based group says your best bet is the banned books list.

Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) says there’s an entire community of people across the world who say that their sexual orientation changed from gay to straight. But they’re not getting their message out, the group says, because libraries across the country refuse to carry literature that describes these experiences or any studies that support them.

So a book like “My Genes Made Me Do It!: A Scientific Look at Sexual Orientation” — which argues that sexuality is shaped by a variety of factors, not just biological — can’t get a spot on the school library shelf.

Neither can “You Don’t Have to Be Gay,” which describes author Jeff Konrad’s struggle to overcome his unwanted same-sex attractions.

The American Library Association refused to do anything about the book banning. This is actually predictable behavior for them – they are a left-wing advocacy group. Diversity of thought is not a real strong area for those on the secular left. They just don’t want to hear anyone who disagrees with them. And that’s exactly what you see on the university campus, with all the speech codes.

To learn more about reparative therapy for homosexuality, check out the web site of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.

Less than half of 7 to 21 year old women think marriage precedes child-bearing

The UK Telegraph reports on a survey of 1,109 British females. (H/T Andrew)

As I reported earlier, women today really do prefer big government to husbands!

Excerpt:

A ground-breaking series of studies, published next month, show liberal attitudes towards the make-up of the family, religion and cultural integration among the modern generation of girls and young women.

The survey, which questioned a representative sample of 1,109 seven to 21 year-olds across the UK, found that a third of girls in the younger age group thought they would be “grown up” by the age of 15, while 90 per cent of 16 to 21-year-olds regarded themselves as “grown up”.

Girls were generally positive about marriage but less than half thought it should come before parenthood. One in four thought it was “OK to get married several times”, rising to a third in the 16 to 21 age range.

One finding suggested that some teenagers actively plan to become single mothers. Of the girls questioned who had left schools and were unemployed, almost half (45 per cent) expected to have a baby before they were 21.

Try to keep in mind that what is best for children is a stable union of two opposite-sex, biologically-related parents that lasts from conception until they are grown up. What young women in the UK are saying is that the needs of their future children, or of society as a whole, don’t matter. Society as a whole will have to pay the social costs of out-of-wedlock children through higher taxes. I would guess that most of these women are fatherless themselves. What a tragedy!

Meanwhile, the results of the feminist plan of for anti-abstinence sex education are in: 1 in 4 teenage girls has an STD. This is another reason why I think my decisions to remain chaste and not to marry are warranted. It’s a different world tpday. My values are not the values of today’s young unmarried women. My goals are not the goals of today’s young unmarried women. And feminists are running the show now with huge amounts of taxpayer money, including a bunch from me that I needed to fund my marriage. Even if the right girl came along, how could we escape the high taxes needed to support the welfare state? Someone has to pay for all these broken homes.

Woman gets police visit after writing letter protesting gay pride parade

Great article at the UK, complete with this video. (H/T Weasel Zippers via ECM)

And here’s an excerpt from the story:

After witnessing a gay pride march, committed Christian Pauline Howe wrote to the council to complain that the event had been allowed to go ahead.

But instead of a simple acknowledgement, she received a letter warning her she might be guilty of a hate crime and that the matter had been passed to police.

[…]But Mrs Howe told the Sunday Telegraph her comments were an expression of her beliefs, not homophobia. She received a response from the council’s deputy chief executive, Bridget Buttinger, who said it was the local authority’s ‘duty… to eliminate discrimination of all kinds’.

She went on: ‘The content of your letter has been assessed as potentially being hate related because of the views you expressed towards people of a certain sexual orientation.

‘Your details and details of the contents of your letter have been recorded as such and passed to the police.’

This is actually pretty standard stuff – it happens all the time in Canada, and even in the United States. There is a conflict between the right to free speech and the right not to be offended by other people who disagree with your views.