Sounds more like . . .
Posted on 05/27/2004 7:45:59 AM PDT by Dan from Michigan
Ferndale mayor, minister plan mass gay wedding
The Associated Press
5/27/2004, 9:21 a.m. ET
FERNDALE, Mich. (AP) — Mayor Robert Porter and a minister plan to officiate at the mass wedding of up to a dozen gay couples outside City Hall next week to demonstrate support for legalizing same-sex marriage in Michigan.
Porter said he is taking part in the ceremony June 5 at the request of the Rev. Mark Bidwell of the Metropolitan Community Church of Detroit, located in Ferndale.
The mayor said he hopes his presence sends a message that gay people should be allowed to marry legally.
"A strong commitment or marriage strengthens all communities," Porter told The Daily Tribune of Royal Oak. "I think it is discriminatory that gay couples are not allowed to marry."
The ceremony is set one day before one of the state's largest gay festivals, Motor City Pride, is planned for Ferndale. The annual festival is organized by the Triangle Foundation and is expected to draw thousands.
This will help Bush in Michigan...big time...
Sounds more like . . .
Do you think MI is in play for the presidential electioon?
Nothing like using your wedding day as a political tool for a political agenda. Just lovely! How romantic!
-"A strong commitment or marriage strengthens all communities,"-
This guy can't tell the difference between a commitment and an agenda, and the only commitment/marriage experience he can talk about is the male-female kind. If the only requirement is a strong commitment, then ANYbody could get married.
Too bad we can't put these "community leaders" in an asylum where they could live out their fantasies without bothering the rest of us.
Ferndale and Royal Oak in competition for the title of "Gay Camelot of the Midwest!".....
"I think it is discriminatory that gay couples are not allowed to marry."
It sure is! Not all discrimination is bad.
Don't forget Saugatuck. Hopefully no one there will hear about this.
Of course, the data that shows that commitment between homosexual couples is quite different than that between heterosexual ones is so often conveniently forgotten. To a majority of homosexual couples, having multiple partners outside of the relationship is considered normal. This is certainly NOT a strengthening to communities.
I think it's in play. It's socially conservative with a strong populist streak.
It is not the act of marriage that is so objectionable, it is the legal precedent that would follow, making it a hate crime to express disapproval of homosexuality, dissolving the concept of separation of church and state by forcing churches to disavow their belief that practicing homosexuality is a sin. I don't think that anyone would care if homosexuals married each other, if they didn't force the acceptance of homosexuality as being morally correct on the rest of us.
That's the entire purpose of gay "marriage" - to force acceptance on the rest of us. To make everyone legally acknowledge their make believe perversion is normal.
The Ann Arbor liberals must be envious that they don't think of this first.
Homosexual Agenda Ping - I guess it's time to trot out the quotes again.
Here are the stated reasons by "mainstream" homosexual spokesladies and men for "gay" marriage - and guess what! Not once do they mention strengthening communities. (It's a little long, but well worth the read.)
From LA Times of March 12: ...
Paula Ettelbrick, a law professor who runs the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, recommends legalizing a wide variety of marriage alternatives, including polyamory, or group wedlock. An example could include a lesbian couple living with a sperm-donor father, or a network of men and women who share sexual relations.
One aim, she says, is to break the stranglehold that married heterosexual couples have on health benefits and legal rights. The other goal is to "push the parameters of sex, sexuality and family, and in the process transform the very fabric of society."
An excerpt from: In Their Own Words: The Homosexual Agenda:
"Homosexual activist Michelangelo Signorile, who writes periodically for The New York Times, summarizes the agenda in OUT magazine (Dec/Jan 1994):
"A middle ground might be to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, to demand the right to marry not as a way of adhering to society's moral codes, but rather to debunk a myth and radically alter an archaic institution... The most subversive action lesbian and gay men can undertake --and one that would perhaps benefit all of society--is to transform the notion of family entirely."
"Its the final tool with which to dismantle all sodomy statues, get education about homosexuality and AIDS into the public schools and in short to usher in a sea change in how society views and treats us."
Chris Crain, the editor of the Washington Blade has stated that all homosexual activists should fight for the legalization of same-sex marriage as a way of gaining passage of federal anti-discrimination laws that will provide homosexuals with federal protection for their chosen lifestyle.
Crain writes: "...any leader of any gay rights organization who is not prepared to throw the bulk of their efforts right now into the fight for marriage is squandering resources and doesn't deserve the position." (Washington Blade, August, 2003).
Andrew Sullivan, a homosexual activist writing in his book, Virtually Normal, says that once same-sex marriage is legalized, heterosexuals will have to develop a greater "understanding of the need for extramarital outlets between two men than between a man and a woman." He notes: "The truth is, homosexuals are not entirely normal; and to flatten their varied and complicated lives into a single, moralistic model is to miss what is essential and exhilarating about their otherness." (Sullivan, Virtually Normal, pp. 202-203)
Paula Ettelbrick, a law professor and homosexual activist has said: "Being queer is more than setting up house, sleeping with a person of the same gender, and seeking state approval for doing so. . Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family; and in the process, transforming the very fabric of society. . We must keep our eyes on the goals of providing true alternatives to marriage and of radically reordering society's view of reality." (partially quoted in "Beyond Gay Marriage," Stanley Kurtz, The Weekly Standard, August 4, 2003)
Evan Wolfson has stated: "Isn't having the law pretend that there is only one family model that works (let alone exists) a lie? . marriage is not just about procreation-indeed is not necessarily about procreation at all. "(quoted in "What Marriage Is For," by Maggie Gallagher, The Weekly Standard, August 11, 2003)
Mitchel Raphael, editor of the Canadian homosexual magazine Fab, says: "Ambiguity is a good word for the feeling among gays about marriage. I'd be for marriage if I thought gay people would challenge and change the institution and not buy into the traditional meaning of 'till death do us part' and monogamy forever. We should be Oscar Wildes and not like everyone else watching the play." (quoted in "Now Free To Marry, Canada's Gays Say, 'Do I?'" by Clifford Krauss, The New York Times, August 31, 2003)
1972 Gay Rights Platform Demands: "Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit." [Also among the demands was the elimination of all age of consent laws.]
Good old Ferndale... a long-time down town retail store is being replaced by a "non-profit group that hosts a range of programs, social and recreational activities for gays and lesbians"... 12-step programs, a prom for teens, health fairs, movies, drug- and alcohol-free nights for young people, professional referral services, support groups, and a help line.
You may now kiss the brides!
| What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda |
|
|
| Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
|
|
| Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues" |
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.