Gay-marriage advocates are blindly endorsing gender neutrality which is uniformed communism

A few days ago I blogged about the fact that as a result of gay marriage the words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ are to be removed from legal documentation in New Zealand, which by default will mean the redefinition of all gender-based terminology.

Connect the dots: When we lose our intrinsic male-female identity we become ‘its;’ we become nothing. This is none other than stealthy annihilation of individualism and the introduction of uniformed communism where everyone is the same; where everyone dresses, thinks and speaks in perfect unison.

'Gay marriage is not going to affect us’ claim the heterosexual proponents of gay marriage, yet even before it becomes law they have been informed that it will affect legal terminology in respect to gender—so without question it is going to affect us.

However, before delving into that let’s look back at something else they said wouldn’t affect us, namely no-fault divorce. In 1969 in California under the governance of Ronald Reagan, who went on to say it was one of his biggest political mistakes, no-fault divorce was introduced. And the negative ramifications of it were not felt instantly; they took decades as will the ramifications of gay marriage. Even though the following statistics are from America they can be mirrored across the western world. In part, this is what National Affairs reported:

“In the decade and a half that followed, virtually every state in the Union followed California's lead and enacted a no-fault divorce law of its own. This legal transformation was only one of the more visible signs of the divorce revolution then sweeping the United States: From 1960 to 1980, the divorce rate more than doubled — from 9.2 divorces per 1,000 married women to 22.6 divorces per 1,000 married women. This meant that while less than 20% of couples who married in 1950 ended up divorced, about 50% of couples who married in 1970 did. And approximately half of the children born to married parents in the 1970s saw their parents part, compared to only about 11% of those born in the 1950s.

In the years since 1980, however, these trends have not continued on straight upward paths, and the story of divorce has grown increasingly complicated. In the case of divorce, as in so many others, the worst consequences of the social revolution of the 1960s and '70s are now felt disproportionately by the poor and less educated, while the wealthy elites who set off these transformations in the first place have managed to reclaim somewhat healthier and more stable habits of married life. This imbalance leaves our cultural and political elites less well attuned to the magnitude of social dysfunction in much of American society, and leaves the most vulnerable Americans — especially children living in poor and working-class communities — even worse off than they would otherwise be.”

The point here is this: no-fault divorce has not helped anyone, and we are clearly seeing the results of it in New Zealand today with solo mums, dysfunctional families, welfare, child abuse, and crime in general, etc. And ironically the very people who recognise this are within the National Party; the very party that is behind the push for gay marriage which is going to create much more social upheaval than no-fault divorce—absolutely disgraceful ignorance.

Moving on to what the National Party and its liberal cohorts are forcing on New Zealand society—namely gay marriage. The premise of gay marriage is based on equality and non-discrimination, and as mentioned above lexicon that is perceived to be discriminatory to the gay community such as ‘husband’ and ‘wife,’ etc., are to be officially removed from law books when gay-marriage becomes law. However, it is an impossibility to restrict it to legal documentation as discriminatory language applies in every aspect of society, and education by default will be the starting point.

In Massachusetts, for example, they enacted legislation that prohibited discrimination in public schools on the basis of ‘gender identity.’ The law defines gender identity as ‘a person’s gender-related identity, appearance or behaviour,’ which is not determined by ‘the person’s physiology or assigned sex at birth.’

We have already seen many schools across the western world forcing gender-neutral toilets on children, but it simply won’t stop there until every aspect of society is completely gender neutral—all because of transgenders and other gays. To say that gay marriage is not going to affect us is grossly ignorant beyond belief. It has already started; read the following article:

Fox News:

Students Who Refuse to Affirm Transgender Classmates Face Punishment

By Todd Starnes

Parents across Massachusetts are upset over new rules that would not only allow transgender students to use their restrooms of their choice – but would also punish students who refuse to affirm or support their transgender classmates.

Last week the Massachusetts Department of Education issued directives for handling transgender students – including allowing them to use the bathrooms of their choice or to play on sports teams that correspond to the gender with which they identify.

The 11-page directive also urged schools to eliminate gender-based clothing and gender-based activities – like having boys and girls line up separately to leave the classroom.

Schools will now be required to accept a student’s gender identity on face value.

“A student who says she is a girl and wishes to be regarded that way throughout the school day and throughout every, or almost every, other area of her life, should be respected and treated like a girl,” the guidelines stipulate.

According to the Dept. of Education, transgender students are those whose assigned birth sex does not match their “internalized sense of their gender.”

They said gender nonconforming students “range in the ways in which they identify as male, female, some combination of both, or neither.”

“The responsibility for determining a student’s gender identity rests with the student,” the guidelines dictate. “One’s gender identity is an innate, largely inflexible characteristic of each individual’s personality that is generally established by age four…As a result, the person best situated to determine a student’s gender identity is that student himself or herself.”

The new rules would also prevent teachers and administrators from telling parents with which gender their child identifies.

“School personnel should speak with the student first before discussing a student’s gender nonconformity or transgender status with the student’s parent or guardian,” the directive states.

The guidelines were issued at the request of the state board of education to help schools follow the 2011 anti-discrimination law protecting transgender students. Read more

Comment:

You may have noticed in the article above that they are encouraging gender-neutral clothing; no longer are they happy with words, they are now targeting how children dress and behave—they are surreptitiously turning children into uniformed communists.

In addition, if words such as ‘mother, father, son, and daughter’ etc., have to be replaced with gender-neutral terminology then it stands to reason that names will have to be gender neutral as well; boy and girl names will have to go as they will also be deemed discriminatory.

Over the next couple of decades we are going to see our society completely gutted to a point where it will no longer recognisable, and this all started because John Key encouraged a gay-marriage bill to be submitted. This societal change is going to dwarf the detrimental problems caused by no-fault divorce.

Note: Transgenders can go into any toilet they choose, but we can’t; isn’t that called discrimination?

Another hypocrisy is this: liberals are pushing for gender neutrality but are permitting transgenders to determine their gender to be female, for example. By allowing this, liberals are permitting transgenders to be non-gender neutral—the opposite of what they are promoting.