Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Maine’s Anti-Gay Marriage Campaign Leader is Completely Insane

Timothy Kincaid

September 3rd, 2009

Mark Mutty, Executive Chairman of the Stand for Marriage coalition, made a most interesting to a reporter from the Maine Public Broadcasting Network:

As a longtime public affairs director for the diocese, Mutty views himself and the coaliton as defending the traditional definition of marriage and the role it plays in society. To redefine it by allowing same-sex couples to marry, Mutty says will lead to curriculum changes in the schools.

“And many certainly feel uncomfortable about that, and the fact that children as young as seven or eight years old are going to be taught about gay sex in some detail.”

Wait… what?!?

If Maine gets marriage equality then seven year old kids will be taught about gay sex in detail?

OK.

That’s completely and entirely irrational. Second graders aren’t taught about straight sex and heterosexuals have been getting married in Maine all year long. No one is going to be telling small children the mechanics of sex between anyone in school.

So either Mutty is a completely delusional nutcase with no cognizance of the world around him and should be put somewhere for his own safety or he’s a bald-faced liar who is seeking to demonize gay people and scare voters with claims that he himself knows to be completely bogus.

Liar or lunatic. There really aren’t any other options.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0 | TRACKBACK URL

David C.
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

Mutty is a typo for Nutty.

Yeah, crazy—like a fox.

There is one thing to keep in mind about the usual and insidious tactics employed by anti-gay activists: they always sound so “reasonable”, speaking in their low tones and elliptical language, even when they are saying completely outrageous things like this. There will be people that are looking for confirmation of their own biases against groups they know nothing about and have been traditionally taught to fear. Those so conditioned will embrace and believe what is clearly nonsensical, even a lie, to anyone without those same biases.

This is why it is essential to challenge statements like this as soon as they are made. When we let our opponents define who we are and what we stand for, we can never completely erase the effects of the lies in their characterizations of us. It is therefore essential that we actively counter such memes with the truth early and often or they will go on to defeat us.

Richard W. Fitch
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

@Mutty – If you tell a lie loud enough and often enough, even you come to believe it is truth.

Burr
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

Man I’m tired of sugarcoating it.. Screw this piece of crap excuse for a human being and the lying horse of BS he rode in on.

And yes, please call him on this verbal vomit.

Richard Rush
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

The danger of marriage equality:

“Young children who are just like putty, will be taught things thoroughly smutty.” Thus saith nutty Mark Mutty.

That was just too easy.

Dan
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

I think this is an example of “in for a penny, in for a pound.” That is, as long as you are going to lie, you might as well embellish.

It is utterly frustrating that this argument continues to be made. Marriage laws do not determine school curricula. You could have gay marriage and have a strict ban on discussing it. You could have no gay marriage and have schools freely discussing it. The two issues are determined by two separate statutory regimes. Even the Yes on 1 people implicitly acknowledge this, b/c they are not seeking to repeal Maine’s civil union law.

Further, since when do you make laws for adults based on what you want taught in schools? At various times, citizens have objected to school discussion of sex, divorce, STD prevention, yoga/meditation, environmentalism, Harry Potter, and Halloween. The solution has never been to outlaw those things in society at large in order to somehow magically prevent discussion of them in school.

This whole argument is so illogical, it amazes me that it persists. I really hope No on 1 can refute this in a concise and compelling manner.

The Lauderdale
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

“No one is going to be telling small children the mechanics of sex between anyone in school.”

Well…maybe other small children might. I doubt the teachers would be that stupid.

TomChicago
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

Based in fear, they sometimes let the fear get the best of their demeanor and they begin yammering and yipping like this. Logic is not their strong suit anyway.

Dan
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

Tim:

I just read that article and there is another little gem in it: Frank Schubert – the PR genius who engineered Prop 8 and who has now been imported to run Yes on 1 – is divorced. I had never heard this before, and it doesn’t surprise me at all that the incompetents who ran No on 8 never uncovered this information.

Of course, it doesn’t impact the arguments at all, but it is interesting that Schubert took advantage of a legal mechanism that intentionally creates motherless and/or fatherless households. Yet Mr. Mutty has never sought to repeal Maine’s divorce law.

Dave Hughes
September 3rd, 2009 | LINK

All they can think about when it comes to gay people is the sex. It’s all about the sex to them. I wonder why they are so fascinated.

Emily K
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

Dave, it’s not just the sex it is the MALE MALE sex. Lesbian sex doesn’t bother them. It’s probably not even “true” sex to them, just experimentation by confused girls – plus for many it’s probably a turn-on – so they ignore it.

Transplanted Lawyer
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

Liar or lunatic. There really aren’t any other options.

True, but these options are not mutually exclusive.

jOHN
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

He is not saying anything that hasn’t been said before. This is how they won with Prop. 8 in CA. I do not know why this was not fought with the truth last year but it worked them then will it work for them again this year….so far it is!

Penguinsaur
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

“It’s probably not even “true” sex to them, just experimentation by confused girls ”

Ugh, the many times I’ve had to listen to some straight guy who’s never met a lesbian beyond some drunk chicks making out a party proclaiming that secretly all lesbians want dick and they’ll never be ‘satisfied’ without one.

el rose
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

It is not at all irrational to surmise that public schools will advocate for gay marriage if same sex marriage is adopted in Maine. Take a look at Massachusetts! Not only has gay curricula be adopted but parents rights have been comprimised. The only option parents have is to yank the kids out and sent them to Catholic or home school. So much for tolerance!!!!

Priya Lynn
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

Interesting Penquinsaur, I always found it hard to believe heterosexual women were attracted to men. I felt that women are so beautiful compared to ment that secretly all heterosexual women were lesbians.

Jerry Sloan
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

As stated elswhere this is nothing new, from the days of Anita Bryant and Save Our Children the lies have been the same and we have not adequately responded to them.

The No on 8 campaign director told the Sacramento Stonewall Democratic Club immediately after the election he was suprised the Yes campaign used kids against us — duh!

Washingon and Maine SSM supporters should be prepared for an onslaught of lies about all the ways SSM will affect children AND actively refute them.

----
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

Loving v. Virginia led to schools showing interracial pornography to children!

David C.
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

It is not at all irrational to surmise that public schools will advocate for gay marriage if same sex marriage is adopted in Maine.—el rose

No school anywhere has “advocated” for gay marriage. They have rightfully kept pace with the social norms in those states where marriage equality is the law by teaching children that there are legitimate, state recognized families with two members of the same sex heading them. That is not the same as “advocating for gay marriage”. It is teaching respect for others, including alternative family structures and classmates that may be part of those families.

Irrespective of what parents believe about marriage equality, if the state permits same sex marriage, school children in state funded schools should be taught that such families exist and must be respected. If the parents of some children do not want their children to respect the legal relationships of others, they can move their children out of state-funded schools and into a school that teaches something they approve of. No parental rights are compromised.

People have got to learn to keep their prejudices out of the classroom, and that goes for both sides of the debate. School children will grow up into a world with many things all around them and they must have the skills to cope and make rational, lawful, and respectful decisions about their behavior.

Jarred
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

David C: I agree with you. I’d add, however, that it’s not just about teaching respect. It’s also about teaching reality. Parents don’t have to like that there are same-sex couples or families based on them. But that doesn’t change the fact that there are same-sex couples and families based on them. And their children are likely going to run across them at some point or another. So a responsible teacher is quite possibly going to make them aware of that so they are prepared for it.

But then, I often get the impression that the real problem is that some parents don’t want their children to deal with reality.

Richard W. Fitch
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

“Loving v. Virginia led to schools showing interracial pornography to children!” – Anonymous
If you mean by ‘pornographic’, pictures of mixed-race couples in romantic poses, ….well…. Otherwise, please post some proof of any *truly* pornographic material ever being used in public school classrooms.

Rebecca
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

Parental rights have been compromised? Well, with wingnuts “parental rights” is always a dogwhistle for the “right” to beat one’s children, so: how does marriage equality change that?

TJMcFisty
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

“But then, I often get the impression that the real problem is that some parents don’t want their children to deal with reality.”

I’ll extend that to say that they don’t want kids dealing with reality cuz the parents sure don’t either. Kids get a dose–>have questions–>talk to Mom and Dad who don’t want to deal with it unless it’s to yell at gay people about how awful we are for making them think about us.

It’s really just about the parents. Not kids. They’re the buffer.

Jason D
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

“It is not at all irrational to surmise that public schools will advocate for gay marriage if same sex marriage is adopted in Maine.Take a look at Massachusetts!”

We have been, and there’s been nothing to report.

Part of any responsible education is to teach children that x,y,z exist. Parents can certainly teach children what their families moral beliefs are about x,y,z but it would be unprofessional and inappropriate for a teacher to omit facts because those facts might make a parent upset — especially when one of the classmates might be an x,y,z family.

If you’re referring to the lunatic who demanded that his children not be exposed to anything related to homosexuality at all, from teachers, OR STUDENTS — then that parent was over the line, and delt with appropriately.

If you don’t want your kids to learn about gay people, you should probably move to a place where there aren’t any.

Ben in Oakland
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

This is for you, El Rose.

In Canada, a bunch of parents just lost a court case. They didn’t want a history of religion class to include information about other faiths, bbecause the kids might question the Christianist beliefs of their parents.

Here’s some good ones,.

I don’t want my kids to learn that 2/3 of the 7 billion people on the planet think the christian story is nonsense.

I’m a vegetairan, i don’t want my kids to learn that people not only eat meat, but they think it is a good idea.

I’m a racist. I don’t want my kids to learn that black people have civil rights, let alone might be equal.

And on and on and on. your paranoia and stupidity is no reason to pass it on to innocent children.

Ben in Oakland
September 4th, 2009 | LINK

BTW, I also think the marriage equality people should be publicizing his remarks and clearly labelling the stupidity and bigotry they so clearly are.

----
September 5th, 2009 | LINK

“If you mean by ‘pornographic’, pictures of mixed-race couples in romantic poses, ….well…. Otherwise, please post some proof of any *truly* pornographic material ever being used in public school classrooms.”

Do you know what “sarcasm” is?

Penguinsaur
September 5th, 2009 | LINK

“Do you know what “sarcasm” is?”

No, now get crackin on that interracial porn for us to watch.

that_chris_guy
September 6th, 2009 | LINK

Lie #200,737 from the religious right. But I’m sure THIS time, some religious leader will call them out on it.

…Aaaaaaany time now…

William
September 6th, 2009 | LINK

“If you don’t want your kids to learn about gay people, you should probably move to a place where there aren’t any.”

A very sage suggestion, Jason D. I wonder which planet that would be.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.