In The Language Of Love, a young man is supposed to be concentrating on his French exam, but his thoughts are elsewhere, which he tells us about while he delivers a monologue to camera. It’s smart and somewhat moving, as the lad segues from French through to his best friend and his feelings for him. That inevitably causes him to wonder what being gay means and how to negotiate life as a young gay man.
The short is the result of Fresh Ink, a development program for emerging playwrights from the Australian Theatre for Young People. 17-year-old writer/performer Kim Ho was one of the winners of the 2012 monologue competition, Love Bytes, and he’s now been assisted in turning his three-minute entry, Transcendence, into The Language Of Love.
Commenting on the Fresh Ink website, Ho says, “Homosexuality is still a sensitive topic, and I immediately felt pressured to write something that was candid but not disrespectful to the LGBT community. I wanted to write something that would make me cry just like the stunning It’s Time advertisement for marriage equality, something that would resonate with people no matter what their sexuality.”
Take a look at the short above and a ‘making of…’ below.
Same-sex marriage is an injustice, an insult to the noble faculty of reason, and an absolute mockery of: the Laws of Nature, civil society, and the preservation and perfection of mankind.
The broken families which same-sex marriages purposely create are necessarily vicious toward those naturally occurring consanguineous obligations between family members from which nations, sociability, and benevolence have naturally emanated.
Children are not pets one purchases from rescue shelters(adoption clinics) and puppy mills(insemination and surrogacy). Children are human beings endowed with a natural desire to be procreated from an engendered act of love between a husband and a wife. Same-sex marriage is adulterous by nature and thereby destructive to not only children, but to our civilization.
Same-sex marriage proponents demand “Marriage Equality”, yet, in return, they offer less-than-equal protection of the child’s happiness than can be afforded by the presence of both biological parents.
Same-sex proponents profess that it is love which gives the right to join the institution of marriage, yet, in doing so, they selfishly violate the principle loving objective of this noble institution; to protect a child’s Natural Right to be raised by both biological parents.
Same-sex marriage is not justice in the eyes of a child. Same-sex marriage is an abuse of power, a tyrannical subversion of the fundamental principles of marriage and the duties which it enjoins; contrary to the nature and state of man, same-sex marriage is merely the unwarranted whims of an ignorant and selfish generation whose conduct is nothing less that an embarrassment to the dignity of mankind.
Here are two truths regarding marriage: (1) A man creating a family with another man is not equal to creating a family with a woman, and (2) denying children parents of both genders at home is an objective evil. Kids need and yearn for both.
In fine, same-sex marriage is an unnatural extravagance which the supporters most ignorantly claim to be a “right”.
“No one has a right to do that which, if everybody did it, would destroy society.” —Immanuel Kant
So, Jean-Jacques BurlyMankini,
I’m disappointed you seem to have nothing better to do than surf the internet for websites with gay content and vent your frustration for no apparent reason. It depresses me that you feel it necessary to spend so long wording your response to what was only ever intended to be a moving story. Please don’t get me wrong; I respect your right to have an opinion, and you seem to have put a lot of thought into structuring your argument (them topic sentences – my english teacher would love you – well, maybe not as you are homophobic, but still). The use of quotation was particularly impressive. Well done.
“Allow me to retort.” –Jules Winnfield
Immanuel Kant, whose logic you so admire, was an 18th Century philosopher who came up with a theory of Categorical Imperatives – an absolute, non-negotiable moral law that stands up regardless of context and circumstance (thank you Google). This means that he advocates a world where there is only black and white and no shades of grey. Similarly, you believe that there is heterosexuality and a “mockery… of the perfection of mankind.”
But surely if we lived in a world where everyone denied people that love each other to love each other, that would destroy society too. I can’t get over the idea that you are letting ‘logic’ frame your judgement. Humans are not perfect as you make them out to be. We hurt others, we say rude things, we kill, we eat other animals. We’re mean bastards, with an infinite capacity for cruelty. But on the other end of the spectrum we also have an infinite capacity for loving one another. I am rambling on because I strongly believe that the way forward is not to adhere to the words of one crazy guy who thought we shouldn’t do stuff unless everyone else is doing it. If Einstein thought like that? Or Thomas Edison? Winston Churchill, Neil Armstrong, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King (or Martin Luther for that matter), Lincoln, Sartre, Picasso? And what about Stephen Fry, Sir Ian McKellen, Elton John, Ellen DeGeneres? These people were all brave enough to do something different.
So hear me out. There’s a lot of hate in this world; everyone knows that. People go around spouting their inane comments all over sites like these. They believe we should try and quell anything that is different. But just ask yourself – if 5,999,999,999 people were homophobes and other person admitted they were gay, is it morally wrong for the majority to ostracise and punish? But even though there is no straightforward solution to this issue, there are people sharing love instead of suffering. There are those who open their minds and their hearts to people who wish to live a different way to them, who accept that every person is equal despite race, gender, sexual preference. There are people who take the step that others never will.
I dare you to do the same.