Comments

Posted by Anonymous

I'll be sure to watch out for that one. My husband loves penguins so that's something he might inadvertently pick up for our kids.

My aunt is a lesbian and has adopted a daughter, so it's inevitable that my children will learn about this, but I don't want the subject "snuck in" through an innocent-looking children's book.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

I have not read this book, but it sounds like a thoughtful story, and a great introduction to a topic that is going to come up for all families.

No matter how sheltered you make your children's lives, at some point they are probably going to meet a child from an 'alternative' family with 2 moms or 2 dads. What are you going to tell you children about that child? That they are bad? That their families are 'sinning'? That they are going to go to hell? How about when your children are adults in the workplace? At some point they are going to meet a homosexual person, who might be a co-worker or a boss. I choose to talk to my children about it now, so when that happens it is not an issue in any way.

I understand the concern that some people feel this topic is being brought up too soon for their children; when their children are too young. It is the parent's job to preview any material your children are going to be exposed to. There are things I don't want my children exposed to; Sponge Bob comes readily to mind. I've been told we are the only family in America that doesn't watch Sponge Bob while we eat dinner. (LOL!) I don't approve of Sponge Bob, so my children don't watch it, nor are they allowed to read Sponge Bob books. However, I would never presume to say that Sponge Bob should be removed from the TV, movies or libraries. Some people enjoy it and feel it is okay for their kids, and it is not my place to say otherwise, just as And Tango Makes Three may not be okay by some parent's standards, that doesn't mean it should be removed!

Just for the record, my children attend Christian Sunday school, even though I myself am not a Christian. Why? Because I want my children to have choices. I want them exposed to many religions and ideas so that they can choose for themselves when they are old enough to do so. I try to teach my children acceptance for all people, or if that is not possible, at least tolerance. It saddens me that the Christian community at large seems to feel it is okay for them to criticize other religions and lifestyles. Yes, I know 'God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve', but I also know that Jesus (yes, I believe there was a Jesus-a gifted prophet and teacher) taught love for all people.

We are all the same. Trying to do what we feel is best for our children, and it makes my glad that so many people take that responsibility seriously. Thank you for allowing me to express my views.

Annette

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

Hi Annette,

I appreciate your feedback. I disagree and if you keep an open mind, you might grasp my reasoning.

First, my contention in the blog is that this book takes sex education and forces it on on the audience, who the book says should be ages 4 to 8. I remember age 8 and I was not concerned with sex. I was preoccupied with things like Pac-Man, Star Wars and whether my friends would be on my fall soccer league. Taking a child that is 8 years old and forcing this issue on them rather than letting their parents handle it is deceptive and wrong. So regardless of how I shelter my children, it is vital that I address it and not allow some book written from a different and skewed perspective. The book should be removed because it pushes an issue that most parents do not believe is right for a child that age. Forcing a child to talk about sexual issues before they reach puberty is tantamount to rape because it steals innocence and replaces it with a social agenda.

Because this book has forced the issue, I have talked about it with my children, but I have presented the facts about the harm that homosexuality does and not a social gospel of tolerance. You believe Jesus of Nazareth was a gifted prophet and teacher. Good! I do too. Would it surprise you that he endorsed the Old Testament law, part of which says that homosexuality is against the Creator's design and is therefore sin? Would it also surprise you that the New Testament also condemns homosexuals along with liars and idolaters and the sexually immoral?

Yes, Annette, we have many similarities. Like most parents, we both want to raise our children the best way we can. One very real difference however is that I actually do believe in God and I believe he has presented Jesus Christ, who claimed in John 14 that no one can come to God except through him (Jesus). His claim sounds like a pretty exclusive and narrow-minded, eh?

Jesus said you must love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind and that you must love your neighbor as yourself. Your notion of love sounds like you would be willing to let someone persist in a series of choices (also known as a lifestyle) that is harmful to themselves. Would you also let a friend string themselves out on meth? Love does not always say "yes." Sometimes love says "no," for the good of all involved.

Because young eyes do read this column, I will not get into detail on why homosexual behavior is so destructive. I will recommend you reference the work of Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, president of the National Association for Research and Treatment of Homosexuality. I have personally spoken with him and know him to be a very positive and engaging personality.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Thank you for your comments. I enjoy hearing other people's views on subjects.

I think we are talking about a bigger issue here than homosexuality. You are talking about banning a book! This is not Nazi Germany! Just because something is offensive to some people does not mean it should be banned from everyone. I personally find the Bible to be an offensive book. Do I think it should be banned? No, and in fact we have several here in our home for our children to study and read as they wish. Would I give them access to a 'men's magazine'? Absolutely not, but I don't think those magazines should be banned. Once again, it comes down to the parent's responsibility to preview any materials their children have access to. You mentioned that this book forces the issue of homosexuality on a child. Well, only if you read it! The parent can chose what the child does and doesn't read. There are many books at the library that have content inappropriate for children, should they all be banned? Of course not.

I agree with you that forcing sexual issues on children before they are ready is inexcusable. There are many issues I won't discuss with my children until they are much older. However, when we see 2 men holding hands at the park, I think the time to discuss it is now. And I refuse to make they fearful or tell them that the men are wrong. My husband and I like to hold hands in public, and I feel everyone should have that right.

I think comparing a person being homosexual to a person being a meth addict is unfair because I don't think homosexuality is a destructive lifestyle. Yes, you hear about individuals in the lifestyle who are destructive, just as you hear about heterosexual individuals who are destructive. You can't judge an entire group on the actions of a few.

Thank you for your suggest reading, but I must politely decline. Since I do not believe in the Christian God, I really don't care what he thinks about homosexuality. I mentioned that I believe in Jesus. I believe he was a man, just a man, not the son of God and not a diety himself. I believe he tried to teach love and tolerance; lessons which have largely been lost. I have read many 'Christian' books to try and understand the philosophy, and I simply don't agree. Would you be willing to read any books about my religion, which is Wicca? I haven't found a single Christian yet willing to explore other religions, or even find out what they are about. Just for the record, I don't believe in Satan either; no Wiccan believes in Satan, and therefore can't worship him and can't be Satanists! That is the label that saddens me the most. Satanism is a branch of Christianity. Wiccans have nothing to do with either.

Again, thank you for allowing me to express my views.

Annette

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

Hi Annette,

I appreciate your willingness to dialog. I hope you will notice that I haven't deleted your comments and shut you down because you aren't a Christian.

I need to bring up a glaring inconsistency in your comments. You tell me that you will not judge people actively engaging in homosexual activity because you are not willing to judge a lifestyle to be unhealthy based on the actions and results of a few who have destroyed their lives. Yet you criticize Christians for being unwilling to examine other religions based on the actions of a few who have refused to do so. It seems like you judge in one situation and fail to do so in another.

No, this isn't Nazi Germany and thank God it isn't! If it were, we would have a man in the chancellery who uses ancient symbols as a means of deriving power, something Wicca does with specific symbols and incantations. Attempting to harness spiritual power and control it for your own will and intentions is evil. It is saying to the creator that he is not the one in charge.

I would also like to challenge your declining my suggestion to reference Nicolosi. You say that Christians are unwilling to examine other religions and yet you refuse to examine what I suggest because you don't believe in the Christian God. You challenge others with something you yourself are unwilling to do. I'm sorry, but that action is unjust and hypocritical. Nevertheless, Nicolosi is using scientific reasoning and not theological dogma as his platform. Again, I would recommend you examine his work if you're serious about this issue.

Do I think all controversial books should be banned? Of course not. We would have to start with the Bible if that were the case. However, my contention remains that the book "And Tango Makes Three" is put in the children's section of the library with the intention for children to read it and force the issue of homosexuality on an age that is not ready for it. I would have no problem with any library putting the book in the adult section, but they wouldn't do that because the book is intended for children, which is the whole point of this post.

You take great pains to separate your religion of Wicca from Satanism and to associate Satanism with Christianity. Since both Wicca and Satanism do not have a clearly and widely adopted creed such as the Nicene creed for Christians, it's difficult for a Christian to address these issues without lumping one in with the other sometimes. Wicca and Satanism borrow symbols from each other and certain belief structures, such as using spirits for power. Additionally, there are also both Wiccans and Satanists who disavow any belief in the Christian God. Do you see how confusing this can get?

Rather than attack your faith in Wicca, I will address the position of Jesus Christ. You claim that he was not God, yet Jesus himself did make that claim, even at his trial. Annette, you must deal with the position of Jesus Christ. In his claims of being the Christ, the Son of God, he was either a liar or a crazy man or he actually was who he said he was. He went to his death when he could have easily told the Roman authorities what they wanted to hear so they would let him go. He was no liar. Additionally, at his trial, he seemed lucid enough to set Pilate reeling with questions like "What is truth?" So he doesn't appear to be crazy. There's only one alternative left. He must have been who he said he was. The apostles preached about Jesus and the gospels were published within the lifetimes of many who lived in and around Jerusalem at the time of Jesus. If they were liars, they would have been exposed by their peers. They weren't. In fact, many of them died for saying they believed in Jesus as the only one and true God. Incidentally, Rome would have had no problem adding Jesus to the pantheon of Gods. The fact that Christians said Jesus was the only true God was the reason they were martyred. These men Jesus called were changed by him. They weren't ne'er-do-wells, but hardened fishermen, tax collectors and doctors. They came out of the established society to follow a man who walked on water, fed thousands with a boy's lunch, and raised men like Lazarus from the dead. He changed their lives, just like he has changed mine.

Annette, Christians do not have it all together. I am the first one to admit that I sin and I fail to measure up. That's the beauty of Jesus Christ: he came to buy me back from the sin that ruled my life. He continues to work on me and make me a new person. I accept that I am not who I should be. Yet God loves me as I am, as he loves you as you are, and he loves me too much to let me stay where I am.

People who practice homosexuality are no less or more human than I am. We all suffer the same broken relationships, the same pain and the same evil that is in this world. What they choose to do about it defines not only who they are, but who they love and who they will serve. I can think of no better lover and no better lord than Jesus Christ, who gave his life up for me that I might enjoy a relationship with him, cleansed and free to be who he made me to be.

I will close my comments with the Nicene Creed...

We believe in one God,
the Father, the Almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all that is, seen and unseen.

We believe in one Lord, Jesus Christ,
the only Son of God,
eternally begotten of the Father,
God from God, Light from Light,
true God from true God,
begotten, not made,
of one Being with the Father.
Through him all things were made.
For us and for our salvation
he came down from heaven:
by the power of the Holy Spirit
he became incarnate from the Virgin Mary,
and was made man.
For our sake he was crucified under Pontius Pilate;
he suffered death and was buried.
On the third day he rose again
in accordance with the Scriptures;
he ascended into heaven
and is seated at the right hand of the Father.
He will come again in glory to judge the living and the dead,
and his kingdom will have no end.

We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Lord, the giver of life,
who proceeds from the Father and the Son.
With the Father and the Son he is worshiped and glorified.
He has spoken through the Prophets.
We believe in one holy catholic (small c) and apostolic Church.
We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins.
We look for the resurrection of the dead,
and the life of the world to come. Amen.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Sorry, but I have to disagree with your view on "And Tango Makes Three". First, if you didn't realize what the story was about before you started reading it to your children, you are to blame for exposing your children to the "sin" of homosexuality. Most teachers preview material before they present it to their students to make sure it is age appropriate. Your notion that the book promotes sex education to 4-8 year olds is off base - but if that is indeed what you believe, then you failed in not previewing it and "exposing" your children to "sex education." Second, asking your library and bookseller to ban the book smacks of the religious right following in the footsteps of Nazi Germany - let's ban that with which we do not agree and then it will all go away and EVERYONE will be like us. That mentality certainly got Hitler a nice audience with his Creator, didn't it? The intolerance that is displayed in that mindset will again bring us back to a time in history when the Crusades disposed of those who weren't Christians and other times in the course of world history when genocide was common place because of differences. Third, it seems interesting that a pair of male penguins took something that was going to otherwise die and gave it the love and care it needed to reach the potential God intended for it. The book doesn't say that Tango ended up being a lesbian - God forbid that happening! That really equates to the fact that children who are raised in "alternative" homes - as many of the religious right like to say - do not, themselves, turn out to be gay or lesbian. As Roosevelt said, "The only fear we have is fear itself." Fear of that which we have no true knowledge of, or understanding of, drives us to hate. And hate is not a "family" value - and certainly shouldn't be a value taught or instilled in a "Christian" home. Pray that your children are not gay or lesbian because, if what you write is true, they will lose the unconditional love of their parents - and that, my friend, IS a sin.

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

It is with some regret that I'm closing this post to responses. It's not that I discourage input or differing points of view. However, I realize that I will spend all of my time defending my points instead of truly enjoying blogging. A very vocal minority disagree with me, which I half-expected. I'm glad that they've taken the time to read my writings, but sad that they are so vitriolic and that they resort to name-calling, such as comparing me to Hitler, which seems to be the left's favorite thing to do with people they don't agree with.

However, I will address these last comments before I close it out. To the person who posted previously, if you were really a part of the community here, you would use a profile and not take your shots from the anonymity you hide behind. That aside, you speak from ignorance instead of looking to deal with the core issue. Here's a few of the problems I see with your comments:

First, it is not possible for me to read every book in the library. Can I read every book before my kids devour them? Unfortunately no. My children can read hundreds of pages in a day if we let them. While the parents are responsible for making informed decisions about what their children read, it's unreasonable to expect a parent to turn every page with their children. If you were a parent, you would know this. There is a trust relationship parents of highly literate children have with specific authors and specific series, such as Beverly Cleary and her Ramona books. Are there issues that come up? Sure. But that's the springboard to dive into age-appropriate discussions on a topic.

Second, comparing me to Hitler makes light of the true evil Hitler perpetrated. Anyone who does not agree with the left gets branded in this way and it's a little tedious and very disrespectful to those who suffered under his evil. You also inaccurately drew the conclusion that because Hitler wanted everyone to be like him that he got "a nice audience with his Creator." Why don't you look in the history books? Hitler died because he believed he could start a war of aggression to rule "today Europe and tomorrow the world." He invaded Poland and was eventually smashed by those who felt Fascism was not the way to go. His decision to kill all Jews, Christians, homosexuals and "non-Aryans" was simply a gross evil that he indulged in, a way of blaming the wrong people for Germany's problems, not the true cause of his demise.

Do I think I need to rid the world of all differences? That's preposterous and not worth a response. By the way, the medeval Crusades were a successful attempt to seize Jerusalem, not eliminate non-Christians.

On the other hand, I do believe the axiom that all that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing. Homosexuality is naturally wrong. By that, I mean that homosexuals are engaging in behavior that is not part of natural design. The result of their relationship does not naturally produce children as they do in general with heterosexual couples. That others want to expose children to something that is naturally wrong like homosexuality is evil. A homosexual lifestyle is sexually oriented and as I said before, forcing a child to talk about sexual issues before they reach puberty is tantamount to rape because it steals innocence and replaces it with a social agenda. You should know this.

Third, you again speak from ignorance in saying that a penguin would die if Silo and Roy didn't adopt them. You give zoologists far too little credit. But even if this were true, you argue that one evil should be perpetrated that good may result. I think China might have an over-population problem. Should we go to war to help them thin them out a little? Of course not. An evil performed for the good of others is still evil. Placing a penguin or a human with a pair of males or females denies them the benefit of having the strengths of both sexes raising them. That is evil.

Finally, for your last comments, I know that if one of my children decides to wade into a lifestyle I don't agree with, I will continue to love them and pray for them. It will break my heart, but I will continue to love them. That was the calling that I accepted when I became a parent. Will I endorse what they do? No. You equate love of the person with the love of the actions of the person. That's a serious mistake. On the other hand, if I fail to point out that homosexuals have a higher rate of STD's, death, and depression, that is failing to love my children because I would be allowing them to choose a lifestyle that would increase their likelihood of suffering these problems.

I will pray for you, my anonymous commenter. You obviously feel this issue very passionately to say what you did. Examine the facts before you jump all over someone else, okay?

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Good post. I would've looked a little deeper into the kidnapping aspect (what levels won't the gay agenda stoop to?) of the thing and the fact that this gay couple would've been missing the best that God had intended for them, just like their human counter parts, without another perverted human being helping them out.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

I just had another thought. Who says the two were gay? Is it possible that they were simply very close friends? I'm not up to speed on the real story of what's happening at the zoo, but isn't it possible that some desperate to justify their actioins gay rights activists are unjustly calling the two penguins gay? The other side of the story is how the penguins really think. Like the morning they woke up to find an egg in the nest. "Stupid humans," said one, "they've stolen a kid from from someone." "What should we do?" asked the other. "We should give it back, but I don't know who it belongs to. I guess we'll have to let it hatch, and if no one claims it, we're going to have to raise it. I can't believe those gay humans expect us to act as foolishly as they do in sinning against God." "Well," responded the other, "maybe if you hadn't mistaken that rock for a lost egg, they wouldn't be thinking we've lost our minds like them."

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

But you’re offending me.

This is by no means about sex. It simply about love and you’re turning it into something that’s its not. Accepting homosexuality isn't going to lead to accepting more then two in a couple. No matter what, gay, straight or whatever, we're all human beings. If two human beings love each other, then it's a beautiful thing. No matter what. Honestly, it may be two men, or two women, but that’s not how I view it. It's not "two men are in love" or "two woman are in love", it's "two people are in love". I have very strong feelings about homosexuality. And I'm sorry, but maybe you’re the one who should look at this with an open mind. Homosexuality may be shunned by your religion, and you may be touchy about it, but people are going to accept homosexuality. Homosexuals are not going to go away just because you don't want them here. They're not going to hide the fact that their homosexual just because you think it's "indecent". In my opinion, that’s like asking someone to stop being Japanese or to stop having green eyes. They can't exactly help it. If they love someone, let them love someone. It's rare enough as it is, people don't have to make it impossible.
This isn't forcing sex talk on children. And weather you like it or not, their going to hear about it weather you like it or not.
Sorry, I don't mean to butt in, but I'm a good friend of a man named Andrew and his boyfriend, and this just bothers me.

Hazel

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

You'll notice that Annette and Hazel have many of the same arguments in their comments. You should know that I have found Annette and Hazel to be the same person. She has been banned from this blog because she lied about her identity.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

AOL has created a little hype today on this book. While researching the title I found your site through a search engine. The posts on AOL are incredibly off the charts. Your blog seems to be a pretty level headed dialogue on the most part. If nothing else, Tango, Roi and Silo have taught me a thing or two about the way humans interact when they are not in agreement. Peace.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Axa

Personally, I do not believe the book And Tango Makes Three is forcing anything on children. They are children -- what are they going to understand about homosexuality at the age of eight?

I find that this belief system is hard to follow. At the age of eight, children can read books about girls and boys together, but two boys or two girls is out of the question?

I don't understand that logic. It seems to me that you're trying to shelter your kids from the concept of homosexuality, which presents to me the red flag that you are narrow-minded and can't handle letting your children make their own choice about it.

I say this to you because my mother tried very hard to do the same thing with me. However, I have never found a problem with homosexuality, and I believe that it was wrong for my mother to try to force her beliefs on me.

For me, I think that you should take a moment to consider that you're forcing your beliefs on your children just as much as that book is trying to "force" the issue of homosexuality on your children. What is the difference there?

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

Thanks for your comments. I will answer your questions, put in italics.

Personally, I do not believe the book And Tango Makes Three is forcing anything on children. They are children -- what are they going to understand about homosexuality at the age of eight?

You can ask the same question about any number of “big subjects.” When my son was six, I asked him if he understood what death was. He gave the right answer. Children intuitively understand a great deal, more than we give them credit for. This can apply to many more things, including human sexuality and gender roles.

I find that this belief system is hard to follow. At the age of eight, children can read books about girls and boys together, but two boys or two girls is out of the question?

I don't understand that logic. It seems to me that you're trying to shelter your kids from the concept of homosexuality, which presents to me the red flag that you are narrow-minded and can't handle letting your children make their own choice about it.

You need to ask yourself this question: why is there a legal age for certain behaviors? Why is it wrong for children to get drunk or to smoke, to vote or to get married? What’s the reason behind these laws? The common belief is that children are not mature enough to handle such questions put to them. If I believe my children are not able to make decisions on this level, does that make me narrow minded?

I say this to you because my mother tried very hard to do the same thing with me. However, I have never found a problem with homosexuality, and I believe that it was wrong for my mother to try to force her beliefs on me.

For me, I think that you should take a moment to consider that you're forcing your beliefs on your children just as much as that book is trying to "force" the issue of homosexuality on your children. What is the difference there?

You are missing the point. Good parents force their beliefs on their children because they care about their well being. For example, I believe it’s dangerous to chase a ball into the street. I believe it’s wrong to place a child molester in charge of a day care. I have a duty as a parent to protect my children from what I believe it is harmful both to them and to society. I would have the same reaction to book for children that advocates mercy killings or encourages theft. Murder, theft and homosexuality all have negative implications for society as well as for the individual. If theft was legal, our freedoms would greatly be curtailed because no one would trust anyone else with their property. By sanctioning homosexuality, our nation is stating that men and women are the same and interchangeable when, in fact, men and women are very different and contribute unique and vital elements to the development of children. It sends the wrong message about our roles in one of the three core platforms of society, the family.

If a husband or a wife faces a terminal illness, it is common and almost expected that they give their spouse permission to remarry after they’re gone. It’s not just so the spouse will have a chance at happiness again. It’s because the husband or wife wants their children to grow up inside a balanced home with both a motherly and a fatherly influence. You sound young from what you wrote, so I don’t expect you to understand this until you face this question yourself. Parents intuitively understand what is good for their children.

What troubles me about your comments is that you seem to think that a child has the same reasoning capacity and decision-making ability as an adult. If we were to follow that line of reasoning, children should be summoned for jury duty, vote and be able to hold power of attorney for loved ones in the hospital.

Human sexuality is an important issue for people to discuss both in the government and on a family level. But what is considered acceptable behavior under human sexuality needs to be addressed at an age-appropriate level. When my children are a little older, we will talk about the issue and the reasons for and against sanctioning such behavior. But to attempt to normalize such behavior starting at the age of four as the book suggests is wrong.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Axa

There is a quite a large difference between sheltering your kids from homosexuality and sheltering them from being hit by a bus.

From that stand-point, is it your belief that the homosexual population is out to corrupt your children?

And what of children who come from a family with two of the same sexes? Are you saying that child won't be raised as well because they have two mothers or two fathers? I think that a same-sex couple has the capability of raising a morally upright child, just as a man and woman can do. Do you believe that because that child is being raised by two members of the same sex that the child will grow up corrupt?

I understand exactly what you are saying, but I still do not agree. Age is not an issue with my beliefs, and I find your assumption rude. When it comes to the topic of sexuality, I will allow my children to make their own decisions and I won't tell them that it is right or that it is wrong.

That is not the kind of sheltering that I believe a child should have. I understand your concern over your child's safety, but I highly doubt that the homosexual population is out to hurt anyone's children.

I don't believe that homosexuality has any sort of negative implication on society, but I suppose that comes from how a person views the subject. In my opinion, homosexuals are just as much human beings as the heterosexual population, and that a homosexual is equally as capable of raising a child as a heterosexual. I think that the issue lies in the parent's actual ability and competence to raise a child, not in their sexuality.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Dude, if you are so concerned about what your children read, why didn’t you read you read said book to make sure it was appropriate? It’s a kids book. It should take under 5 minutes. Have you never heard the term “never judge a book by its cover”? Just because it has pretty colors doesn’t mean its what you want your kids to hear. Some people obviously don’t mind their kids reading this, because it got published and is being bought. A few things annoyed me about your rant: 1) “this book has been insidiously and deceitfully placed in libraries across America to re-educate young children to accept all families as valid, whether they have two mommies, two daddies, three daddies or three mommies and two daddies. It is deceptively normal and intentionally aimed at children whose primary concern should be Legos and dolls.” That’s crap and you know it. It’s not some anti-hetero conspiracy planned out by the gays. Someone thought it would make a cute story, and guess what? It did. Just because you want to shelter your children until they’re in college is your deal. Some people don’t care if their children form their own opinions about things. And “this book has been insidiously and deceitfully placed in libraries across America”? You do know libraries research what books they are ordering before they order them, don’t you? 2) “This book made me angry because it forced a questionable sexual practice on my children” Tell me, does everything that is someway related to homosexuality completely about sex? Is there no such thing as a platonic relationship between two unrelated people of the same gender? Turn on the Discovery Channel every once in a while. It is very common to find two animals of the same gender raising young together. So, while you may not like it if it were humans, it is nothing out of the ordinary for penguins. 3) If your 9 year old was “damaged” because of two fictional penguins of the same gender, in a platonic relationship mind you, then you really need to re-evaluate your parenting skills.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

"I am appalled that Simon and Schuster thinks my children are ready for sex."

What does sex have to do with anything? I have not read this book, but it sounds to me like it's about relationships, love, and family. Not sex.

And as the daughter of a lesbian couple, I strongly encourage you to re-evaluate your opinions on homosexual couples.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Daughter of the lesbian couple again, I had another thought.

"Because young eyes do read this column, I will not get into detail on why homosexual behavior is so destructive."

I'm curious about your perspective. Not the perspective of the man you suggest reading from, but your perspective. Since you won't give detail here, I'd appreciate an email with your opinions, if you have the time and are willing. My email address is sobifnaked[at]gmail.com. Thank you.

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

If you have read this far down the incredibly long comments on this post, first of all, congratulations! You have more patience than most people, including me. Second, you have probably noticed some recurring themes in what those commenting have said. For example, “Most teachers preview material before they present it to their students to make sure it is age appropriate,” and, “why didn’t you read you read said book to make sure it was appropriate?” I won’t respond to comments that simply reiterate a previous point, regardless of its validity. On a post like this, it’s ridiculous for someone to make demands on my time without first reading and thinking through what others have said. Future comments that repeat previous points will be deleted. Readers don’t need to wade through regurgitations.

Additionally, you may notice that several of that people commenting have done so anonymously. By anonymous, I mean not being a member of HSB or leaving their name and e-mail for me and others to address their points. As I’ve said in previous posts and an FAQ on this site, anonymous comments aren’t taken very seriously here or anywhere. Therefore, I will not respond to further anonymous comments on this post. I have better things to do than carry on conversations with imaginary voices, at least that’s what the doctors keep telling me.

Furthermore, in case anyone is wondering, these anonymous comments typically condemn my moral judgments about a book while making judgments against me according to their own morality. These people making the comments don’t actually come right out and say, “You’re wrong and here’s why,” but what I’ve said obviously offends their own sense of morality enough for them to let me know about it. It’s not about who is making decisions about morality, but who is making the correct decisions about morality. Therefore, when it comes to making the correct decisions about morality, a 5,000 year-old religious text that correlates well with my own experiences with the spiritual and the supernatural like the Bible carries a great deal more weight with me than another peers’ sense of morality.

As supporters of the book are so fond of mentioning, And Tango Makes Three does not make mention of homosexuality by name. Yet these same supporters are hard pressed to explain why the book is supported by nearly every pro-homosexual group that exists. It’s because it agrees with their agenda of exposing children early and frequently to the homosexual lifestyle. This is an effort to make that behavior more acceptable to future generations, and I don’t agree with it. If you don’t understand why by now, you haven’t read my post or my responses to the other comments.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Nory

I can't help it that I'm not a member of HSB, but I did at least leave my email.

So here: Hi, my name is Nory. I'm the daughter of a lesbian couple, and I'm curious about your perspective on why homosexual relationships are destructive. Since you cannot give reason here because of young eyes, I would very much appreciate if you would send me an email at sobifnaked[at]gmail.com with those reasons.

There, no longer anonymous. Could you address my posts now? =)

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

Check your e-mail, please, Nory.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Gwyne Bahler

Actually, there is no animal species on earth that is entirely heterosexual. Homosexuality exists in nature as a pervasive and lasting reality. On a purely biological level, the idea that homosexuality is "not right" is completely absurd. "Not right" implies a moral choice, when nature is proving that it is simply a fact of life.

I think it's wonderful what this book is teaching children. Children are faced with realities beyond "legos and dolls" every day. When they encounter the real world with it's controversies, instead of bringing more fear-born hate and ignorance and separatism into it, perhaps they will be able to bring openmindedness and love. I have no children, but as soon as I read about the controversy surrounding this book I purchased it immediately. Hopefully, by the time I have children, it will no longer be a radical and questionable thing to be honest and open with children about the world they live in.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Mary in LA

Stay far away from "Happy Feet"! It's a heavy-handed piece of eco-propaganda. Even the Village Voice movie reviewer had this to say (I hope the link comes through!)
---begin quote---
"...the wee ones may start to notice something's amiss when the movie's theme goes from "be yourself" to "we must regulate the overfishing of the Antarctic oceans." No, for real. "
---end quote---
http://www.villagevoice.com/film/0646,harper,75042,20.html

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

My husband and I were disgusted when our five year old kindergarten daughter came home from school one day with "And Tango Makes Three" book. You are right in that the book is very deceptive and you don't know what you are in for until you get to the 7th or 8th page. I found myself apologizing to my daughter and getting up to share this with my husband. Needless to say, he was very upset as well. We plan to discuss this with our daughter's teacher, librarian, and school principal. I think every parent in this school should be made aware that their child has access to this book in the young readers section of the school library.

• Permanent Link

Posted by SteveWalden

A lot of folks find my blog because of this one post. It's currently ranked as Google's third entry when you look up "And Tango Makes Three" or some variation.

I never thought it would go this far. I end up with either activists who are intent on making sure that the first thing babies know after coming out of the womb is that homosexuality is natural and good or I get parents who are legitimately concerned about a book that presses an adult-themed topic on their younger children.

I am against the book not because I'm against homosexuality. I'm against the book because it forces children to contemplate something that they shouldn't be concerned about. It is in the same vein as showing children video of Saddam Hussein being hanged for his crimes or showing them video of the Kurds he gassed in the 80's. Children shouldn't be pulled into the debate over homosexuality. They need to mature to where they can sort through these complex issues and use reasoning and logic. Such reasoning and logic is to a large extent beyond the intended age group for the book, not to mention that it is obviously one-sided.

A few days ago, an anonymous individual commented on this post and raised some questions. I deleted the comments because they were essentially a rehash of Annette's comments above and I didn't feel like directing them to the same stuff yet again. I'm not interested in covering the same ground over and over again. Additionally, anonymous comments have little weight with me. For more information on why I feel this way, view "What happened to my comment?" in the FAQ section at right.

Thank you for taking the time to read through all of these comments. It shows you're interested in something that confronts all parents and that you want to think through why some people have issues with this book. I hope you've found the post and comments helpful. Yet, given the circumstances, future anonymous comments and comments that raise issues already addressed may be deleted. I'm not trying to be harsh; I'm trying to keep things relevant and brief, two aspects of the better blogs out there.

• Permanent Link

Posted by Anonymous

Hi Steve,

My name is Laura and I really wanted to say that I am so happy to have found this blog because I am one of the parents in Shiloh, IL who is so much for the rights of parents to be able to teach our children about sensitive subject matter in our time, not the public school's time. I do not homeschool my kids, but did contemplate it last year before the issue of innappropriate books on our libraries' shelves came about. I am definitely not against homosexuality as I have many friends and some family that are, but I do believe that as a parent I should be able to decide when I am ready to introduce that subject matter (and others) to my kids. Thank you again for your viewpoints and feel free to email me directly at lfbean2001@charter.net

• Permanent Link