The problem with “not caring” what adults do is this: eventually that space where everyone is “not caring” will be filled by others who are “openly celebrating”. And since everyone has agreed to “not care”, there will be no acceptable legal or moral objection to make against those who choose to “openly celebrate” instead of “not care”.
Then once those who “openly celebrate” take over - as they will, as their position is the more active one - then it only follows that “open celebration” must be taught to young people. At this point some people might change their position from “not caring” to “caring”, but they quickly find they have no legal or moral ground to stand on, as they have given that away in their previous position. The only argument to be made is that these activities are “harmful”, but if they are “harmful”, why would everyone originally chosen to “not care”?
It’s a weird trap. The initial position seems so tempting, because it is the libertarian one, and yet, the truth is most people never really did “not care”. They just didn’t care that much, because it was two strangers in private. But everyone should have played it out. Did it ever make sense that society would say something should be “openly celebrated” and yet also “kept away from the kids”? How were they ever going to have gays and trans and queers and fluids put into mainstream movies and TV shows and yet NONE expose it to the kids? We legalize every sexual fetish and kink and say these things cannot be shamed, and then expect those people to keep it secret and in their bedroom? That was never going to work.
We have to understand that what we accept for the adults, goes to the kids. What we accept as adults, becomes the culture that shapes the kids.
The problem with “not caring” what adults do is this: eventually that space where everyone is “not caring” will be filled by others who are “openly celebrating”. And since everyone has agreed to “not care”, there will be no acceptable legal or moral objection to make against those who choose to “openly celebrate” instead of “not care”.
Then once those who “openly celebrate” take over - as they will, as their position is the more active one - then it only follows that “open celebration” must be taught to young people. At this point some people might change their position from “not caring” to “caring”, but they quickly find they have no legal or moral ground to stand on, as they have given that away in their previous position. The only argument to be made is that these activities are “harmful”, but if they are “harmful”, why would everyone originally chosen to “not care”?
It’s a weird trap. The initial position seems so tempting, because it is the libertarian one, and yet, the truth is most people never really did “not care”. They just didn’t care that much, because it was two strangers in private. But everyone should have played it out. Did it ever make sense that society would say something should be “openly celebrated” and yet also “kept away from the kids”? How were they ever going to have gays and trans and queers and fluids put into mainstream movies and TV shows and yet NONE expose it to the kids? We legalize every sexual fetish and kink and say these things cannot be shamed, and then expect those people to keep it secret and in their bedroom? That was never going to work.
We have to understand that what we accept for the adults, goes to the kids. What we accept as adults, becomes the culture that shapes the kids.