根據2008年性別平等教育法修訂的國中小課綱，教育部原定於2011年9月開始採用《認識同志—教育資源手冊》、《我們可以這樣教性別》、《性別好好教》等中小學教師手冊作為性平教育的教學參考材料。不過這三本教師手冊卻因為「真愛聯盟」的積極聯署掀起社會爭議，在立法院及時喊停，決議暫緩納入教學，另舉行八場公聽會，待廣納社會大眾及專家學者意見再行規劃。這個發展引起教材支持者一片譁然，尤其在真愛聯盟的基督教背景揭露後，支持者群起攻擊真愛聯盟以真愛為名，行歧視之實，受美國基督教右派遺毒，企圖以國家機器維護自己保守而極端的宗教觀。如果說基督教人口在台灣僅佔10%，是為少數，那麼何以這個人口所擁抱的價值觀──特別是圍繞核心家庭的價值觀──可以動員大眾，影響性平國策的執行？在自詡多元、民主、自由、開放、同志友善的台灣社會，為什麼所謂「極端保守」的訴求得以成功的「誤導」這麼多民眾呢？本文跳脫教材支持者對真愛聯盟「保守而極端」的控訴，嘗試梳理其組織與社會脈絡，探究其一夫一妻「家庭觀」在台灣社會裡的位置與效用，進而指出家庭和國家在公民社會中持續打造的辯證關係。;Based on the Grade 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines established in 2008, aiming at “eliminating sexual discrimination and upholding social pluralism,” the Ministry of Education of Taiwan had planned on distributing three teachers’ manuals for gender equity education to elementary and junior high schools in August 2011. However, believing that these gay-friendly teaching materials may confuse teenagers’ sexual identification and even induce their carnal desires, the True Love Alliance, later revealed to be a de facto Christian organization, successfully suspended the distribution through a series of high-profiled petitions to members of the Legislative Yuan and the Ministry of Education. After a series of eight public hearings, antagonism between supporters and opponents to gay-friendly materials grew even more intense, and the issue of gender equity education remains unsettled. If Christians make up only 10% of Taiwan’s population and is obviously in the minority, then how are we to understand the phenomenon that a small group of “religious extremists” (as described by the supporters of gender equity education) could mobilize the public to the extent that the implementation of a national policy was interrupted? If liberality, equality, progressivism and openness to homosexuals are said to have become core values in Taiwan, then why would the pleas of the True Love Alliance be so easily embraced by the officials and the public? This thesis will contend that the True Love Alliance‘s success cannot be simply dismissed by relegating them to religious conservatism or extremism, as the gay-friendly groups have tended to do. Instead, an examination of how the Alliance could recruit massive public support through invoking family values articulated through the subject position of “the parent” will reveal crucial aspects of the Taiwanese society where the dialectics between family and nation in the civil society of 2010s Taiwan is actively under construction.
