-
Website
http://sayanythingblog.com/ -
Original page
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/younger_generations_are_more_accepting_to_gay_marriage_than_older_generatio -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
You just don't get liberty. This gay marriage issue seems to have a libertarian misunderstanding of liberty at its core. That could explain why you are pushing it. Could it be that the gay marriage issue simply provide a platform for to advance a view of liberty and conservatism absent the necessary Creator? Are you simply trying to advance the idea that liberty from an arbitrary authority is a viable political theory and should replace unalienable rights endowed by our Creator?
Bogus! Marriage is not a matter of "individual liberty"; it's a human tradition which existed before the formation of nations. Nice try at politicizing the issue, Rob.
[quote]And I'm not even sure why Republicans would want to focus on gay marriage anyway.[/quote]
It's only an issue because the fabric of our society is under multiple attacks from far left extremists. Marriage was not an issue until the homo activists started trying to hijack it for their own selfish, partisan political purposes.
That seems like salient info to me.
Yes, believing in "gay marriage" is exactly equatable to believing in Santa Claus or "The One".
Now that we know most of the GOPs are closeted gays, no one wants to hear them bloviate about it. The more vitriolic, the more apt to be a homosexual, or so the average American has been led to believe over the course of the last decade -- by the conduct of your pols. If the public didn't pick up on this, they would have learning problems.
I have yet to hear a reasonable response, from yourself or anyone on the side of redefining marriage, to the arguments for marriage posted on this site. Re-inventing liberty doesn't argue against the millenia of tradition, civilization, meaning, and religion that socities have historically accepted marriage to be. Not to mention the health and welfare issues homosexual behavior promotes.
Any evidence for this unsupported claim, little sparkie?
[quote]In other news, another ancient tradition is tyranny.[/quote]
Which is alive and well in both the White House and in the homo activist marriage-hijacking movement.
[b]With elections running 60%-70% against the hijacking of marriage by a small group of violent fascists, your claim is refuted.[/b]
Now that we know most of the GOPs are closeted gays...[/quote]
Only in your homo fantasies, little sparkie. As usual, you just make things up to get attention.
[quote]Continue to believe The Truth without consulting reality, you bloviating douche.[/quote]
Little sparkie speaking to himself in the mirror again. You're the bloviator in chief here, little sparkie. Only your little groupie sockpuppet puts out more volume of bullshit than you.
Then again after reading the book by Judge Robert Dierker I think I'm getting an idea...
Your Republican Party Platform, "Mission Statement", of 2012
Well if you say so.
On the other hand my point was what younger people believe doesn't always reflect what they believe after they get a bit more mature.
I'll try to give up my subtlety in the future.
Your lack of knowledge is not universal, little dino. I feel sorry for you; so full of hate, and separated from God by your willful ignorance.
One way is natural observation. Since the Creator created nature, and nature frowns on some behavior, it is reasonable to conclude the Creator doesn't approve of that behavior.
For instance, one way nature has responded to homosexual behavior among human beings is AIDS. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to conclude the Creator didn't design us humans for homosexuality.
I think his argument is that those rights are unalienable, whether endowed by a creator or not. In reality, rights are a human construct; protected, defended, granted, and taken away by yourself or others. Your rights are only as strong as the society you live in. I doubt the man in chains cares more about the idea of rights endowed by a creator then actual physical freedom. I've never been too keen on the stance that without recognizing a creator, people will not and cannot recognize individual rights and morals. I think that those who advance that argument reveal a profound personal weaknesses. You can't be very strong-willed or minded if the only thing that keeps you from stealing/murdering/adultering is the threat of eternal damnation and the promise of everlasting bliss. It's possible to have the view that protecting the rights, endowed by a creator or not, of others leads to a more productive, happy society. And that view still isn't incompatible with recognizing a god either.
[quote]Re-inventing liberty doesn't argue against the millenia of tradition, civilization, meaning, and religion that socities have historically accepted marriage to be. Not to mention the health and welfare issues homosexual behavior promotes.[/quote]
"Re-inventing libery", what a joke. Liberty is an ever-evolving idea that's changed continually throughout human existence. To claim that their has been on agreed-upon defintion is laughable. And tradition, civilization, etc. have also changed and evolved as well. We've thrown out many traditions and views (such as women as property, stoning adulterers and homosexuals, slavery, etc.) with each new generation. It's called progress.
And the "health and welfare issues" is a load of bunk. Homosexual sex is legal so those diseases can still be spread. It's idiotic to purport that those diseases would become more wide-spread by allowing gays to have monogamous, legally-recognized relationships. I think you and I both agree that marriage is the bedrock for a strong, healthy society. Why not allow more people to marry, creating an even stabler society?
IMO, it's time for the GOP to split. The classical liberals and the moral conservatives no longer have compatible views. Rob continues to advocate for the GOP to have a consistent message, but that's an impossibility when we are ideologically opposed on many issues and unable to agree on others. In the long run, moral conservative will continue to drag this pary to the bottom. They make up a large portion of the GOP so their views shouldn't be ignored. Instead they, or we, should have a seperate party. Eventually, I think many people who vote Democrat now, would come join the classical liberals. I only worry that in the meantime, liberal Dems will have destroyed this country.
Nope. The Constitutional rights in this country are contained in the Constitution and the founding documents, and are simply a restatement of what has been bestowed on all mankind by our Creator. In the US, we choose to recognize and defend those rights for our own citizens. Other countries, not so much. The "human construct" is whether or not to recognize and protect the inalienable rights from our Creator.
Consider it morbid curiosity, (nothing more) but there's something I have to ask one of you guys, but I didn't want to get you excited. Do you guys do the oral thing before or after the anal thing? Or don't you care?
One more thing, don't shake hands with people you don't know. We appreciate it.
thanks
That isn't my position or argument. However, those who do recognize moral absolutes and a Creator are more apt to protect and defend individual liberty. Americans are proof. If this weren't the case, there would be no America and individual liberty would have never been tested. Your argument is with a straw man.
[quote]It's idiotic to purport that those diseases would become more wide-spread by allowing gays to have monogamous, legally-recognized relationships.[/quote]
Not quite as idiotic as to purport that gays will have monogomous relationships.
I got no problem with libertarians abandoning conservatism if you think liberty will be better advanced under some other atheist stripe. Just remember it is liberty endowed by our Creator that our constitution recognizes and has accomplished far more than your theories of liberty could even imagine.
that said, like many thing (drugs, abortion, prostitution) i think the repubs have been wrong about this from the start of it all. small (btw this is not anti-government as the libs are trying to spin things) wins and is best for the people. until the republicans become something other than 'liberal light', they will keep losing.
Well, we can always just defy nature and suffer the consequences, right? It seems the better choice is to not eat so much. It thought you liberals encouraged living in harmony with nature?
Yeah, because growing old and dying is unnatural.
I guess The Creator made diabetes to express His displeasure with eating too much.[/quote]
Childish, ignorant statements that reflect your own self hate more than anything else. You are not to be debated, only pitied.
There have been many people here at SAB providing massive facts and figures on the destructive nature of homosexuality and homosexual marriage; destructive to themselves, their partners, those whose lives they directly impact and society as a whole. But, the truth is that for Rob no evidence will ever suffice, he will reject anything that does not agree with his social liberal ideology. That does not mean I doubt his honesty or his conservative limited government, capitalist credentials, it does mean that like Schwartzenegger and others, IMO, Rob is socially very liberal. As long as he rejects the idea of God, he will never be able to see and reject the destructive nature of immorality that is destroying America, he is blind and deaf to the truth.
If the GOP sidesteps homosexual marriage, active or passive euthansia and illegal drugs, in order to gain power as Rob suggests, they will have lost their soul and will not be one iota different than any fiscal, national defense conservative and socially liberal Democrat and there is no reason left to vote Republican at all.
If young people are more likely to support gay marriage, mostly because of decades of liberal indoctrination (brainwashing) at our public schools, in a civilized society it is the older generation that should be 'leading" them back to the truth and rejection of that perverse lifestyele choice and theire perversion of marriage. Remember, if a person is not a liberal when young they have no heart, if they are not conservative when they mature they have no brains.
Rob is selling out the GOP with his ill advised suggestion that they dump Christian Conservative moral-spiritual issues, and it will absolutely be the death of the GOP.
It's the ignorant nonsense like this that is causing more and more people to be turned off to the GOP. News flash, the younger generation is opened minded and doesn't find it necessary to be judge people based upon trivial things like their sexual preference. The world we live in today has changed dramatically from the way it used to be and people are more opened minded than EVER.
The same "older generation" that opposes gay marriage are stuck with a mindset that is 40 years old. These are the same people that fought to keeps blacks using separate bathrooms and wish they could still legally beat their wives.
Everyday thousands of children are born into liberal families and in 18 years when they can vote most of the older right wing generation will have died off. Along with that there are millions of children and teens that are growing up in a world that is becoming ever more open minded. On top of that most of the children that are born to conservative parents will be so heavily influenced by the liberal majority of Americans that the conservative brain washing won't stick.
Bottom line is the younger generation is growing in numbers and the older generation is dying away. The numbers don't lie, as every year passes there are more younger liberal voters. Fighting gay marriage is an uphill battle the GOP has no chance of winning in the long run.
The bottom line of the issue (though a book could easily be written about the intellectual argument against gay marriage), is that males and females are fundamentally different, whether you're talking hormonally, psychologically, or physiologically. Those differences are profound enough to warrant that unions between one man and one woman should receive unique status.
I will be the first one to sign on the dotted line for ensuring the rights of gays to enter into civil unions or common law relationships whereupon their rights to power of attorney, inheritance directives, end of life issues, etc., are proscribed. But if laws are written that equate gay marriage with heterosexual marriage, then it will become illegal to differentiate between the two in legal cases (a tautology, I know, but it's important enough to hammer home). The problem arises when groups, such as adoption agencies, will be prohibited from taking homo/hetero status of a relationship into account when making placement decisions, or other decisions relevant to their operation. Take the example of Catholic Children's Charities, which [b]DID [/b]place children with homosexual adoptive parents, but simply gave priority to heterosexual couples. When Massachusetts legalized gay marriage, CCC had the choice to either quit the adoption business altogether, or stop accounting for homo/hetero status in their applications.
There are many other areas where distinctions between homo/hetero couples make sense, but there are also many where it doesn't make sense at all (see above examples for starters), but this comment is long enough as it is.
If you think that males and females are fundamentally the same, then gay marriage makes sense, and I can respect the intellectual honesty of your position, even if I thoroughly disagree with your premise and its logical conclusion. But if you agree that they're fundamentally different, then you may want to reconsider the logic you apply to that premise, and the resultant conclusion.
It's not very open minded to ignore the context of this debate and only hear what you wish to. The debate is about what marriage is and has been for milleniums, not about whether or not people think homosexuality is right or wrong. Many conservatives, myself included have said that homosexuals should create their own social contract and call it whatever they would like, but it isn't a marriage. It think it fitting that those who prefer to think all morality is relative to imagine their own covenant and call it something uniquely homosexual. Their a pretty creative bunch. Come up with something. It doesn't make sense to me that a bunch of relative moralists would demand that the institution of marriage given its history and religious nature be changed to include what they want to do, unless, of course, they just can't stand that anything in society reflect anything that offends relativists.
Unlike you, little dino, the Creator doesn't lie. He did allow the Dems to cause this economic disaster and then make it worse through Obama's insane economic policies, so that the American people have the opportunity to wake up and eliminate the contagion of extreme left wing politics, though.
A barber and a minister were walking down the street. The barber complained about why God allowed this and that to happen and how that proved He was either unconcerned or didn't exist. Just then the minister saw a man across the street that had long, dirty and wild hair and he said to the barber, "Being a barber, how can you let that man walk around looking like that?" The barber protested, "It's not my fault, if he would come to me I would wash it, cut it and make it look really great!" "Exactly," the minister replied, "if men would come to God, He would clean up their lives and care for them. But, they need to come to Him by their own choice. Just as you would not force that man into your shop, God is a gentleman and would never force anyone to come to Him."
Bad things happen because we human beings cannot restrain ourselves from sin and very few go to God for His Help, for His plan for their lives. Those people (terrorists) on those planes on 9/11 served a false and murderous man-made god and following him rather than Almighty God, they decided to murder for their god. Those people on those planes and elsewhere that died that day who were Christian, instantly entered into life everlasting with Jesus, knowing perfect peace and joy forever. Those without Christ had many opportunities to find Him and His salvation before that fateful day, but they chose against Him.
I cannot answer every possible false charge against God, but it is important to realize we sinful human beings in rejecting Him set the stage for the evil that comes our way and it is all our doing, not God's. He would love to meet our needs and our heart's desires, if we would just choose to come to Him, He wants to pour out His love in our lives; but the very best Christian still rebels against God and we live in a world of rebellion against Him. We sow the seeds of sin and reap the consequences of our own decisions and then blame God for our sufferings. Hardly fair of us!
Example, a man smokes two packs of cigarettes a day for 40 years, then gets lung cancer and then he blames God for the lung cancer. He did it to himself, he made that choice and yet he dares blame God!
No man will enter into Perdition's Flames because God sent them there or wanted them to go there, every one will have made that freewill choice in this life by rejecting His free Salvation in Jesus. You are pardoned by Jesus death, burial and resurrection; but a pardon is not a pardon unless it is accepted by the guity party.
This is willful ignorance, bordering on [i]impenetrable stupidity.[/i]
For one, Rob has already made it abundantly clear that he is no Conservative, but an Atheist Libertarian. What moral authority does he have in advising the GOP to do anything, one way or the other?
Second, the GOP has been hammered in recent elections, not for being too Conservative, but because they were acting like Democrat-Lites -- essentially the people we sent to Washington to counter Democrats, instead of holding the Conservative line, like they campaigned, became part of the problem, spending like drunken sailors, growing a bloated governmental apparatus and sought to force social engineering on America, such as Amnesty for Aliens and the North American Union.
Chaffee, McCain and their ilk, were rejected because they were RINO's. The only glimmer of hope to come out of the 2008 election cycle was Sarah Palin, who had more testosterone than the other three men on the Pres/VP ticket combined.
The problem is not that the GOP is too Conservative -- [b]the problem is that they [i]aren't[/i] Conservative.[/b]
Third, asking young kids what they believe in now as an indicator of what we should do in the future is like using an interview with Beavis and Butthead to direct national policy.
Kids today have been subjected to a non-stop school, college and MSM indoctrination that Gay-is-Cool, while anything to the contrary has been suppressed and indeed, punished.
Forth, since the Clinton administration, we are -- or should be -- very familiar with push-polling to develop some artificial bang wagon appeal, while ignoring the state-after-state rejection of so-called [i]Gay Marriage.[/i]
Consider this source:
[quote]From CNN Deputy Political Director Paul Steinhauser
(CNN) -- A new national poll suggests that a majority of Americans ....[/quote]
Oh yes, that paragon of fair and balanced news reporting.
Did you happen to observe how the CNN reporter covered the TEA Party demonstration not so long ago?
Are we going to repeat this exercise in stupidity, like we just did in the last 450-plus response thread?
Keep ignoring the arguments and making believe as if they have never been presented.
Rob, fuck up you [i]own[/i] Party's Party line. Leave the GOP alone, since you seem to share so little in common with it, and instead join Arlen Spector and Jim Jeffords with your other fellow travelers.
[b]YEP![/b]
Let alone what the definition is. Remember Rob is not "conservative light", he is an atheist, like myself. If there is no god, there is no reason to oppose Homosexuality. Its that simple. Because this is a country where we are free to practice what ever religious beliefs we choose, the gov. should have no say in what the definition of a religious institution should be.
End of story. That doesn't mean we have to comprise our views on abortion, war, torture, taxes, or anything of that nature. It just means we would be consistent with our own views for once.
But please, keep hanging on to the McCain's of the world... because that obviously has been working for the GOP.
Now, I guess my question for you is, because Rob is an Atheist, does that invalidate his marriage? Does his vows count less because he is a heathen to all you religious types?
Bill,
Just one little problem. There not only is a Creator, but the Creator is the source of the very liberty our Constitution secures and protects. See, in order to get your way here you're going to have to hold another constitutional convenetion and redefine liberty to fit your opinion.
Another problem is that unalienable rights from our Creator are what made liberty a reality in America and have proven themselves extremely useful to our society making America the envy of the world. France went with a much lighter stance on rights and look where they are today.
It's that simple.
[quote]Now, I guess my question for you is, because Rob is an Atheist, does that invalidate his marriage? Does his vows count less because he is a heathen to all you religious types?[/quote]
Let's see. This is a tough one.
NO!
Marriage is between a man and a woman.
It's that simple Bill.
It doesn't matter if you don't believe in God. God still believes in you. A lot of atheists change their minds.
End of story.[/quote]
Riiiight.
Just like Gore's assertion that [b]the debate is over[/b] as to man-caused Global Warming.
Rather than repeat the oft-repeated citations to the numerous diseases and dangerous practices that accompany homosexuality, as well as the fact that Homosexual Rights always come at the cost of suppressing and eliminating the Religious and Moral beliefs of the other 98 percent of society, I'll just refer you back to [url=http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/the_time_has_come_the_gop_needs_to_end_its_opposition_to_gay_marriage/]the original Tard-a-Rama[/url], with those citations. You can always just click on the icon in my sig-line for additional information.
First and foremost, there are two kinds of marriage: the first is religious and the second, civil.
Religions, within certain boundaries, are allowed to define their own parameters to marriages celebrated within the religious context. As we have seen my governmental raids into religious sects (premature and ill-founded, so it seemed) even religion cannot run afoul of State limitations on what might comprise valid marriages.
They have to be of opposite sex (except for those cases where the runaway judiciary has asserted control over the People) they must not be too closely related, there must be consent, the parties must be of age, and so forth.
Civil ceremonies don't rely on the religious aspects. You can go to the clerk of the court or before a justice of the peace, or even a Vegas drive-through and you can get married.
But the State involvement in marriage has several purposes. For one, there is a compelling State interest in a stable population (replacing itself, like they aren't doing in Japan and some parts of Europe) and raising young citizens in the context of a stable, loving environment where the children, in turn, will become productive and stable citizens.
But the government in recent years, since [url=http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/the_left_hates_the_nuclear_family_---_why/]much of the policy has been hijacked by rabid Leftists and Feminists[/url] (but I repeat myself) has had a damaging impact on the institution of marriage, both religious and civil, and in turn, on society itself.
What homosexuals do isn't marriage.
Even the vast majority of homosexuals that attempt some sort of stability in their relationships don't endure beyond 3 years. Eventually, close to 100 percent of homosexual relationships end up in infidelity. That's far worse than what happens in heterosexual marriages. ([url=http://www.menstuff.org/issues/byissue/infidelitystats.html]22 percent of married men have strayed at least once during their married lives and 14 percent of married women have had affairs at least once during their married lives[/url])
Nor is there the ability to procreate. Even if homosexuals are to adopt, homosexuality often accompanies a raft of other psychoses and self-destructive behaviors, not to mention the astronomically-higher incidence of serious and fatal diseases. Homosexual males die, on average, about 20 years before similarly-situated heterosexual males.
It's those nasty anal hijinks that usually do them in.
Wedded to this (no pun intended) is the orders-of-magnitude greater propensity to commit sexual assault against children.
To say that the reasons against homosexuality end at religious or moral judgment is an absolute lie.
Religious and moral objections against homosexual marriage are a starting point, however. They should not be ignored in a nation that is largely Judeo-Christian.
And if DocDave says so, by gosh, so it is. It doesn't matter how stupid the words are coming out of his mouth, he believes it after all, and that's the most important thing.
This picture illustrates how "in your face" and thuggish the right has become.
[IMG]http://i425.photobucket.com/albums/pp339/Hannitized2/get_image.jpg[/IMG]
[quote]FILE - This April 28, 2009 file photo shows gay rights advocate Matthew Arnold-Lloyd of Albany, N.Y., right, meeting nose to nose with an unidentified man opposed to gay marriage during a rally outside the Capitol in Albany, N.Y. Gay marriage legalization in several states and the public's growing acceptance of same-sex unions have Democrats sensing political opportunity and some Republicans re-evaluating their party's hard-line opposition to an issue that long has rallied its base. (AP Photo/Mike Groll, File)
2009 May 2nd[/quote]
You post this drivel like its something to be proud of.
This just means they have been the victims of an intensive brainwashing campaign by the Mainstream Media for their entire short lives.
Oh NO! Not the MAINSTREAM MEDIA!!!!!!
You post this drivel like its something to be proud of.
This just means they have been the victims of an intensive brainwashing campaign by the Mainstream Media for their entire short lives.[/quote]
There's a reason Leftards and Statists have always sought to control the education and indoctrination of children.
From Soviet, Cuban and Red Chinese Young Pioneers, the Nazi Hitler Youth and Orwells' Youth Brigades, young minds are easily shaped and indeed perverted into tools of the State.
[quote]"[b][i]Nearly all children nowadays were horrible. What was worst of all was that by means of such organizations as the Spies they were systematically turned into ungovernable little savages, and yet this produced in them no tendency whatever to rebel against the discipline of the Party. On the contrary, they adored the Party and everything connected with it... All their ferocity was turned outwards, against the enemies of the State, against foreigners, traitors, saboteurs, thought-criminals. It was almost normal for people over thirty to be frightened of their own children[/i][/b]."
- George Orwell, [b][url=http://classiclit.about.com/od/nineteeneightyfour/a/aa_1984quotes.htm]1984[/url][/b], Book 1, Chapter 2[/quote]
...
[quote]"[b][i]When an opponent declares, 'I will not come over to your side,' I calmly say, 'Your child belongs to us already...What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community[/i][/b]."
-- Adolf Hitler, November 6, 1933[/quote]
No one bars from conturds from teaching. They'd just rather be fucking other people out of money in "business" careers than teaching.
You're a relic. A has-been. Gay people won this battle a loooonnng time ago. You're like one of those Japanese soldiers found in the Phillipine jungle 20 years after the end of the war who still think it's going on.
I thought this was America and not Communist China,Cuba or North Korea.
I don't support gay marriage. Straight is different than gay marriage because there is a male and female energy there that can't be replicated on any level. It is a spark of the divinity that completes itself from the male essence and female essence of oneness.Gay marriage can't create that different gender duality because it doesn't exist. Gay marriage is different type of energy. Secondly, it takes a sperm from a man and an egg from woman to make child thorough the act of sexual intercourse. That is biology and a fact of nature. Test tubes and artificial insemination won't even close what happens in nature. Gays and lesbians can get angry over what I said. Nature has it said a long time ago. However, I do believe in Gays and Lesbians should be treated as human beings. I don't think we should get all up in arms because a different opinion is expressed.
True enough. You should include sunday school and boy scouts in that list.
Poker,
So Christianity in the last century or so, has committed the same level atrocities as your buddies listed here?
[IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/34e2uqu.gif[/IMG]
Do you comprehend the enormity of the crimes committed by Statists regimes and the sheer stupidity of your statement?
On the objections to homosexuality and gay marriage:
1) "It's unnatural." A lot of things are unnatural. Clothes are unnatural. Margarine is unnatural. It doesn't make it wrong. There is no connection between what is natural and what is right. And how do you judge what's "natural" in sex anyway? You've never seen two male dogs go at it?
2) "They can't procreate." So birth control is out, too? Sex serves more purposes than procreation. Recreational sex, and certainly sex that expresses love, don't hurt anybody if practiced safely and can both be positive experiences.
3) "God says it's wrong." Plenty of churches see it differently. Whose beliefs do we follow? And since when do we make laws "regarding an institution of religion?"
4) "What about AIDS?" AIDS affects everyone. It first jumped to humans via a gay man, so for a long time it was confined to the gay community because, guess what, gays don't have sex with a lot of straight people. But go to Africa and tell the thousands upon thousands of afflicted heterosexuals there that they're gay. This is a hurtful and frankly stupid idea.
5) "Gays are more likely to be emotionally unstable/pedophiles/Nazis/etc." I don't know where these supposed figures are coming from, but here's my personal experience. I know gay people. I know lots of them. Believe it or not, they're very normal. They're in loving, committed, life-long relationships. So IF these figures of yours are statistically accurate, here's my suggestion: it could be that what drives those people to unspeakable acts is fear, self-loathing and secrecy thrust upon them by repressive social attitudes that have forced them to grow up believing their nature is sinful or grotesque. I really believe that if people who felt negatively about homosexuality just got to really know some really cool gay people, we wouldn't have such a debate on our hands.
I know some people here are pro-civil union but anti-gay marriage, and if you're willing to accept that gay people have the right to do what they want in their own lives and have benefits equal to marriage for them and their partners, but are simply concerned about maintaining the definition of "marriage" for religious or personal reasons, I can respect your viewpoint. But I think what it will boil down to is a battle at the polls. Gay people feel that an inability to get married is separate but equal treatment, i.e. inherently unequal. And I agree, and that's why we're willing to fight for it. Not to bring down marriage or the family or the nation, none of which will happen should gay marriage find widespread acceptance someday, but just because equal treatment is American, and when we get past the religious, misinformed, or gut reflex objections to homosexuality we will see that there is no justifiable reason not to embrace that in this case.
Final point: I do think history is on our side. 20 years ago we were fighting for civil unions. These days I feel like civil unions are a given and marriage is where the new trenches are being dug. We'll see, and I don't think it will be quick, but I do think gay marriage will someday be legal here.
Hello TruthMatters,
So is that an [i]Austrine Joey?[/i]
You should know the nature of the conflict here. For Conservatives and Christians, this is a purely defensive matter. We are trying to preserve what it is to have a marriage, to have a family and to freely exercise our religion. No one has been advocating doing violence to homosexuals.
But as you have noticed, the Left and that subset of the Left, homosexuals, are engaged in a war of aggression against Western society in General and Christianity in particular.
Others may find it odd that I am not a particularly religious man, yet have great respect for religion and for those who strive to live their lives according to Judeo-Christian values.
The Left is wielding homosexuality as a cudgel against society, couched in terms of victimology, which is in itself a huge lie. They whine plaintively for tolerance, but in truth --- as you've noticed -- will viciously attack anyone who resists them. No dissent will be tolerated.
Recent examples abound -- Miss California, even though she couched her response in the gentlest sort of way, came under a blistering homosexual attack and her shot at the crown was torpedoed in retribution. A young 12-year old boy makes a simple YOUTUBE video stating that Homosexuality is Wrong and is hounded off the internet by thousands of venomous attacks against him. A lone Christian lady, holding a cross, representing her support for Proposition 8 in California, is attacked by homosexuals. They assault her, tear the cross from her hands and furiously stomp it to bits.
Later, homosexual activists make it their business to visit retribution upon anyone they find who supported Proposition 8.
In schools, in universities and in the workplace, teachers, administrators and bureaucrats are punishing children, teens, and young adults with failure or expulsion if they resist the pro-homosexual party line.
Those in the workplace who voice concerns against new corporate sensitivity policies find themselves terminated with extreme prejudice.
Churches are invaded and services disrupted by homosexuals, furious at the Christian resistance to their efforts.
This is a war on society, whether society is aware of it or not. Homosexuality is incompatible with freedom. They have shown that to us in many ways.
Their agenda, and not just their lifestyle, is dangerous and if implemented, will be destructive, if not fatal, to Greater Society.
The lessons of Babylon, Greece, Rome, Sodom and Gomorrah have shown this to be true.
There is absolutely no comparison of any kind. No, not even bias, as homosexuals enjoy a host of "special" legislation that advance them solely because of their sexual preferences.
People of color do not choose to act like people of color, homosexuals, even if you buy into the bilge about being
"born gay," which is absolute nonsense, still homosexuals "choose" to engage in homosexual relationships. It is a lifestyle choice, skin pigmentation is not a lifestyle choice!
An alcoholic they say is born with a gene predisposing them to acoholism, but we expect them to resist this urge or suffer the consequences of their actions, including the shame of alcoholism. Child molestors have a strong desire to molest children, but we demand they resist those urges or else. Thus, homosexuals may be born with a predisposition towards homosexuality, but considering the harm it does to them, their partners and society, they should not be allowed to highjack Christian marriage and they should suffer the shame that their perversee lifestyle deserves.
[quote]just as racism lingers, so will homophobia[/quote]
Yes, falsely called homophobia is being replaced by virulent Christophobia and Aleutheophobia!
I think you are correct, but nothing under God's heaven will ever make it right or moral. If 99.99999% of all Americans not only agree to gay marriage, but homosexuality as being normal, evil is not subject to the polls, it is evil because it is evil and America will pay the price in its fall from world power!
2009 May 2nd[/quote]
Look at L'il Kahuna's picture (above) again.
Just a very little image analysis will show who the aggressor is.
Homosexuals / Leftards do not use US flags. They wave pre-made signs (because very often they are funded, supported and therefore more organized) or they wave their abomination of the rainbow.
The individual on the right is leaning forward, pushing the flag and into the man on the left's face.
This is in keeping with their behavior, attacking old ladies, seeking retribution against Prop 8 backers and invading churches.
I told you -- polesmokers are insane and aggressive.