Mark Robinson (Lt. Governor – North Carolina) Comment
This is why Republicans lose, not because of Mr. Robinson, but because many on the left don’t believe anyone to the right of the aisle can separate perceived beliefs with governance. Think of it this way, what if someone said, fat people are filthy. Being fat is a personal preference (in most cases), but how many fat people are going to vote for a candidate that makes such a proclamation. None, and it won’t make any difference to insist fat people will be treated the same. A stupid, insensitive comment was made that stereotyped a demographic. The fact Mr. Robinson is blind to the damage of the comment is why the left so often wins.
What happened to evaluating people based on the content of their character, instead of grouping them by stereotype.
I was very impressed by Mr. Robinson’s impassioned speech about fire arms possession. He made this speech a few (? -1) years ago prior to his election to Lt. Governor. In short, his plea was for the average citizen and their rights, why isn’t the city council defending all of the law abiding folks. It was short, to the point and reiterated a point I believe is often lost, most people obey the law but are often the population that is penalized as laws are created meant to deter criminals.
This time, I think he was dead wrong.
Last week, a comment he made at his church (I’m not sure when, months ago?) was brought up for scrutiny:
“There is no reason anybody, anywhere in America should be telling any child about transgenderism, homosexuality or any of that filth,” Robinson said to applause from the congregation. “And yes, I called it filth. And if you don’t like it that I called it filth, come see me about it.”
Words matter and to try to put this statement into context fails at every level. He has reiterated his belief and stands by the words. His religious beliefs run contrary to State law, but instead of a separation of church and state, how about we call it a separation of job verses ideology. Can a person perform a job that contradicts that person’s belief (be it religion, ideology or any other moniker)? Some say yes, others have made it clear, they can’t do it (the KY clerk who wouldn’t issue marriage licenses to gay couples). He insists that he can.
His concern appears focused on public school time being used to explain sexuality. He indicates public schools are struggling (my word, not his) to teach basic skills and until they can get a better handle on teaching the basics, transgenderism (and others) should be tabled. He continues:
“Those are adult topics that should stay in an adult place. They have no business around children,” he said. “Homosexuality is not a culture. Homosexuality is a sexual preference, and sexual preferences, I believe, do not need to be discussed in our schools.”
Like it or not, sex education needs to be taught in schools. Children need real information about sex education and while many parents may be uncomfortable with their seventh grader learning about procreation, its euphemisms, sexually transmitted disease and other pertinent facts – such as homosexuals are productive and engaged members of society, the bottom line is, a significant portion of young people (yes, seventh graders) are already engaged. Sex education, very much like drug awareness, is far more productive if knowledge is gained prior to engagement. Should students be made aware of “sexual preferences”? Issue the facts, it doesn’t need to be acceptance, rejection, or any preference. On a separate issue, but certainly on topic, other information that came out recently involved a mom reading excerpts from a book available to children (4th grade…as I recall). These books were available at the public school library and were “approved” by someone. The excerpts I heard sounded like pedophilia. The school board “cut her mic” to stop her reading from the book as the language was deemed too graphic for the school board meeting. Too graphic for the school board meeting, but fine for kids. That is just stupid.