New York Republican candidate for governor Carl Paladino has caused a stir with his remarks he made over the weekend about homosexuality. The media have pounced on the Tea Party favorite, who they believe has no business succeeding in the state’s Republican Party, let alone in the governor’s mansion. Rick Lazio, who has proved a sore loser since Paladino squashed him in the GOP primary, has piped up that the remarks sowed “division and disrespect.” Even some conservatives seem to be sneering at the candidate – which shows how elitist and unmoored some conservatives have become. Unlike the hateful caricature the media delight in constructing, everything Carl Paladino said was not only defensible but accurate, gutsy, and verified by the most basic tenets of common sense.
(Story continues after video.)
Paladino used the speech before a friendly audience to draw a distinction between himself and his opponent, as politicians typically do. He said if the state legislature passes a bill supporting same-sex marriage, he will veto it. The position is hardly theoretical or extreme. Last December, a bill came as far as the New York state senate. After a $1 million lobbying campaign by homosexual groups and the heavy support of Governor David Paterson and New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the Democrat-controlled senate voted it down, 38-24. However, Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo supports “gay marriage” and his Attorney General office played a role in the governor’s decision to recognize the institution.
Paladino’s “controversial” remarks began when he said, unlike Andrew Cuomo, he had not marched in the Big Apple’s “gay pride parade.” He added:
My opponent did. That’s not the example we should be showing our children, and certainly not in our schools. And don’t misquote me as wanting to hurt homosexual people in any way. That would be a dastardly lie. My approach is live and let live. I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family, and I don’t want them to be brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid or successful option. It isn’t.
Have we sunk to such a level in society that we cannot admit everything Paladino said was not only correct and proper but praiseworthy?
Paladino was absolutely right that the public schools should not engage in “brainwashing” young children that homosexuality is the moral equal of heterosexuality. The public school system has no business teaching children about sexuality period, much less teaching them moral values about the relative worth of various sexual practices. (That is only considered a worthwhile term paper at Duke.) New York’s parents should be confident when they send their impressionable youth to school that they will return free to make their decisions about any sexual issue based on public health data, the design of nature, and their family’s moral code.
Unfortunately, the federal government has no interest in allowing parents to teach their children time-tested values the regime does not approve. This summer Barack Obama issued a proclamation that Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender “Americans have enriched and strengthened the fabric of our national life,” so he set aside June to “recognize the immeasurable contributions of LGBT Americans [and] renew our commitment to the struggle for equal rights.” He took his fight to the UN Human Rights Council, stating the fight for gay “marriage” was a fight for equality.
But more importantly, he has taken his fight into the public schools.
His Safe Schools Czar, Kevin Jennings, is a longtime homosexual extremist who admitted covering up an adult’s sexual contact with a 16-year-old boy in a public restroom. An unsigned article on the website of his organization Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN), admitted “The pursuit of safety and affirmation are one and the same goal.” In 1997, Jennings admitted his life had been dedicated to “promoting” homosexuality. Nearly two decades after public schools introduced Heather Has Two Mommies, the Gay Left continues to foist its values on unwary children in place of reading, science, and mathematics. As Phyllis Schlafly has long argued, this emphasis on “awareness education” has led to high school graduates who cannot read or do math at a junior high level; as she would be too modest to point out, many junior high students are capable of performing sexual acts at a high school level or above, including degrading homosexual acts performed in public lavatories. Paladino was right that this must end.
He made clear in his remarks that he is no bigot. Paladino faced the controversy on Good Morning America this morning, saying he “wanted to clearly distinguish that my feelings about homosexuality were no different than those of the Catholic Church,” which has 7.5 members in the state of New York. He added that his nephew, who works for his campaign, is homosexual, that Paladino opposes the discrimination his nephew endures, and that he would be willing to hire homosexuals in his administration; he simply opposes same-sex “marriage.”
(Story continues after video.)
He reiterated he would not participate in a “gay pride parade” based on his past experience: “I was at one in Toronto one time – we stumbled on it, my wife and I. It wasn’t pretty. It was a bunch of very extreme-type people in bikini-type outfits grinding at each other and doing these gyrations, and I certainly wouldn’t let my young children see that.” Those words are now being used against him to paint him as unhinged.
Here is a video of last year’s New York City gay pride parade:
Would any normal human being want to be exposed to this – much less to have his children exposed to these kinds of images in school? Andrew Cuomo took his children along for this year’s festivities; that was the issue Carl Paladino was addressing. Paladino was right that marching in these parades is “not the example we should be showing our children.” And the video makes clear Paladino’s description of these parades was on target, if not overly restrained.
The conservative candidate’s private moral objection to homosexuality is not only not “hate”; it reflects the official view of the religion of the vast majority of New Yorkers and Americans. The Roman Catholic Church dogmatically teaches homosexual acts constitute a “grave depravity” that is “intrinsically disordered.” Further, “Under no circumstances can they be approved…Homosexual persons are called to chastity.” This is perfectly in accord with the Scriptural view of homosexuality embraced by millions more of the nation’s Protestants – and Paladino’s audience, which consisted of Orthodox Jews. Paladino is right that his opposition to overturning a 5,000-year-old institution designed by God makes him “the values candidate,” and Cuomo’s support makes him an anti-values candidate. It also makes Cuomo a bad Catholic; Paladino would not say so, but the pope did.
Homosexuality is Not a “Successful Option”?
Traditional may be good for the soul but what about the body? What of Carl Paladino’s much-mocked statement that homosexuality is not an equally “successful option” as heterosexual family life? The data show he could not be more correct.
Homosexuals have a 50 percent higher likelihood of depression or substance abuse. They are 200 percent more likely to commit suicide than their heterosexual counterparts. Among heterosexuals, suicide levels are lowest among married people. Mental health and physical challenges are greatly elevated among the LGBT demographic. In 2006, Dr. Lars Wichstrøm conducted a national survey in Norway and published his findings in the International Journal of Eating Disorders. He found not only were eating disorders more common among homosexuals, but homosexual attraction increased the likelihood of unhealthy behavior. “Same-sex sexual experience in both genders and non-heterosexual sexual attraction among males predict future bulimic symptoms,” he wrote.
As a measure of its self-destructive mindset is evident in one mind-boggling reality: some homosexuals actually seek out partners to give them AIDS.
Whether self-inflicted or a result of rampant STDs, the homosexual life expectancy is far lower than that of heterosexuals. A study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology found homosexual and bisexual men in Canada lived 8-21 years less than heterosexuals. An American study confirmed that homosexual men die 20 years younger than other men. The Canadian study’s authors, who are committed to the gay agenda, wrote:
If the same pattern of mortality continued, we estimated that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 years would not reach their 65th birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre were experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by men in Canada in the year 1871.
1871? Remember that the next time “progressives” accuse traditional conservatives of wanting to “turn the clock back.”
Living a life of depression-laden, drama-filled bulimia before dying two decades early – often of a lingering, wasting illness – hardly sounds “successful.”
On the other hand, multiple studies have come to the irrefutable conclusion that traditional marriage – between one man and one woman – increases the life expectancy of both partners (especially the men). This reality is so accepted scientists have switched from measuring it to analyzing the reasons behind it. A RAND study recounted many theories for the longevity of married men but concluded physical factors alone could not account for the edge husbands have over their bachelor friends:
In the case of older divorced men, being outside of marriage leads to poorer health and also to shorter life. Other unmarried men, however, have higher mortality rates despite the fact that their general health levels are no worse than those of married men. Therefore, while the relatively good health of married men offers a partial explanation for their increased longevity, additional determining factors have yet to be found.
Ah, but what about economics? Surely the highly professional, unmarried homosexuals must save more money than married couples laden with several children. On the contrary, traditional marriage increases wealth as well as health. Maggie Gallagher has noted, “Married men make, by some estimates, as much as 40 percent more money than comparable single guys, even after controlling for education and job history…On the verge of retirement, the average married couple has accumulated assets worth about $410,000, compared with $167,000 for the never-married.” Studies also demonstrate married people have better mental health, lower levels of substance abuse, happier and more academically successful children, and suffer fewer incidents of violence than unmarried heterosexuals, let alone among homosexuals. By every discernible measure, married people live longer, happier, more economically (and sexually) fulfilling lives and leave behind a precious human legacy in the children they raise in God’s image.
In other words, Paladino was right: our “children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family.”
At the same time that Paladino was addressing his common sense, well-authenticated remarks, Obama’s mini-me, Valerie Jarrett addressed the national dinner of the Human Rights Campaign, a homosexual advocacy lobby, where she decried a supposed epidemic of anti-homosexual “bullying.” But looking at the media’s – and the disconnected GOP elite’s – treatment of Carl Paladino exposes who the real bullies are.