New Kids Book depicts Santa as Gay With a Husband

[Armoured]

This book promotes homosexuality. Something we are not allowed to do here. What other reason would it be?

How is acknowledging the fact that homosexuals exist "promoting" anything?

 

[Michie]

Yeah when you take a beloved Saint turned into Santa Clause and market it to kids, I call that promotion.

How is acknowledging the fact that homosexuals exist "promoting" anything?

 

[Armoured]

Yeah when you take a beloved Saint turned into Santa Clause and market it to kids, I call that promotion.

I can't see it. How do you figure?

 

[Michie]

I just told you.

 

[Armoured]

I just told you.

Not really. I don't see how re imagining an imaginary figure as something that some people simply are is "promoting" anything.

 

[Ave Maria]

Then why is it a problem with Mr. and Mr. Claus? Seems kind of double standard-y.

I don't like the depiction of Santa Clause being "married" to a "Mr. Clause" because it is an attempt to normalize "gay marriage" which is not actually marriage at all. Books like these are attempts to normalize same-sex "marriage" which is most certainly not normal. It is an aberration and a deformation of the Truth which is that marriage is a sacred and sacramental union between one man and one woman for life. Those who write books such as these are only seeking to normalize that which is gravely immoral and a real perversion of what marriage actually is.

 

[Armoured]

I don't like the depiction of Santa Clause being "married" to a "Mr. Clause" because it is an attempt to normalize "gay marriage" which is not actually marriage at all. Books like these are attempts to normalize same-sex "marriage" which is most certainly not normal. It is an aberration and a deformation of the Truth which is that marriage is a sacred and sacramental union between one man and one woman for life. Those who write books such as these are only seeking to normalize that which is gravely immoral and a real perversion of what marriage actually is.

And you're welcome to your opinion. There are people who disagree with you, and I guess they might like this book. Until such time as you can actually suggest any meaningful, empirical harm caused by this book or similar, I suggest you don't buy it, and leave those who want to to get on with it. That's my plan.

 

[Wolseley]

Well, my own stance regarding "Santa Claus" is that he is a fictional character, no more or no less than any other fictional characters, such as Superman, Charlie Brown and Snoopy, the Transformers, or the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Has no more bearing on Nicholas of Myra or the celebration of Christ's Nativity than Frosty the Snowman or Heat Miser.

That having been said, however, the "Santa Claus" story is a harmless enough tale, meant, I think, primarily for little, little children, say, under the age of six or so.

Why someone would choose to take this particular venue to make it into a book such as described is a question worth pondering. I can think of only two reasons: one, the author is either trying to make a fast buck or goad people (as has been mentioned); or two, he actually has an agenda to plant a seed in the minds of small youngsters with the hope that it will grow into something that can be later trained in a certain direction by means of further social engineering.

The first motive is in poor taste; the second is despicable. Exposing children to this sort of trash is not much different from exposing them to porn or explicit violence. Tiny kids should be protected from the deviancy and abnormality the world has to offer, not have it shoved in their faces before they're ready for it.

Now, there are those who may say that's an over-reaction; and perhaps it is. But at the very least, if somebody has an agenda they want to push, fine; that's their Constitutional right. But isn't there already enough ugliness in the world without taking a sweet, harmless children's story and using it as a vehicle to rob children of their innocence and joy? The must know that adults aren't manipulated that easily, so they target children, and try to undermine all viewpoints save the ones they're pushing with their agenda.....which is nothing less than disgusting and reprehensible.

Homosexual activists and recruiters should go peddle their dope somewhere else. Leave the children alone. Let them have their innocence and their childhood intact, without trying to pervert them.

 

[Armoured]

Well, my own stance regarding "Santa Claus" is that he is a fictional character, no more or no less than any other fictional characters, such as Superman, Charlie Brown and Snoopy, the Transformers, or the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Has no more bearing on Nicholas of Myra or the celebration of Christ's Nativity than Frosty the Snowman or Heat Miser.

absolutely

That having been said, however, the "Santa Claus" story is a harmless enough tale, meant, I think, primarily for little, little children, say, under the age of six or so.

Why someone would choose to take this particular venue to make it into a book such as described is a question worth pondering. I can think of only two reasons: one, the author is either trying to make a fast buck or goad people (as has been mentioned); or two, he actually has an agenda to plant a seed in the minds of small youngsters with the hope that it will grow into something that can be later trained in a certain direction by means of further social engineering.

3rd option, it's intended to make children in families with homosexual members feel OK about themselves.

 

[Ave Maria]

And you're welcome to your opinion. There are people who disagree with you, and I guess they might like this book. Until such time as you can actually suggest any meaningful, empirical harm caused by this book or similar, I suggest you don't buy it, and leave those who want to to get on with it. That's my plan.

I have already told you what harm it is causing. It is normalizing that which is a perversion of the Truth.

 

[prodromos]

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke

 

[Armoured]

I have already told you what harm it is causing. It is normalizing that which is a perversion of the Truth.

That sounds very scary. Can you show any empirical real world harm?

 

[Armoured]

"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke

Ditto

 

[Greyy]

How is acknowledging the fact that homosexuals exist "promoting" anything?

That homosexuals "exist" is not a fact. That people label themselves as homosexuals is.

 

[Armoured]

That homosexuals "exist" is not a fact. That people label themselves as homosexuals is.

Riiiiiiight?

 

[Ave Maria]

Well, Armoured, I say this respectfully but I do not wish to continue in an endless and what I perceive to be as, futile, debate. God bless you.

 

[Armoured]

Well, Armoured, I say this respectfully but I do not wish to continue in an endless and what I perceive to be as, futile, debate. God bless you.

Ok. God bless you too.

 

[Genersis]

That homosexuals "exist" is not a fact. That people label themselves as homosexuals is.

If you want to go down the "labels are meaningless" rabbit hole, then the same could be said of any quality not obvious at face value.
What makes Christians/conservatives/engineers/cyclists exist, but not homosexuals?

 

[Sword of the Lord]

It's April 21st, 2017 and people still indulge the provocateurs.