Posted on 10/10/2010 4:35:29 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
Carl Paladino says it’s not okay to be gay.
"There is nothing to be proud of in being a dysfunctional homosexual," the Republican gubernatorial candidate told a small Hasidic group at K’hal Adas Kasho synagogue in Williamsburg today.
"That's not how god created us, and that's not the example that we should be showing our children."
Paladino, who has made his opposition to the gay marriage and "the homosexual agenda" clear, went much further yesterday, to say children "would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family" than being gay."
"And I don't want them to be brainwashed into thinking that homosexuality is an equally valid and successful option," he said. "It isn't."
The speech came just days after the suicide of a gay Rutgers student and an anti-gay gang attack in the Bronx.
His Democratic opponent, Andrew Cuomo, blasted the remarks as "stunning homophobia and a glaring disregard for basic equality."
A campaign spokesman said "These comments along with other views he has espoused make it clear that he is way out of the mainstream a
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
Actually, polygyny is permitted by Divine Law. The only law against it is civil law, which is of course to be followed so long as it is the law. And the idea that polygyny is permitted doesn't mean it's for everybody. There are all sorts of considerations such as can the husband provide equal time, affection, and sustenance for each wife, etc.
Polyandry, on the other hand, is strictly forbidden and cannot be legalized by any state. Perhaps that is the tack the libs will take.
If you have something, just print it.
I don't know what Mr Paladino's finances are for his campaign. But The Mayor and Mr.K would know. The Mayor works with Paladino on his campaign.
He has focused on the insane taxing and spending that goes on in Albany. This time, he was speaking to a group of Hasidic Jews. They vote according to their common beliefs and they vote in large groups. From the comments I have read on the Yeshiva World News website, they like Paladino both for his desire to take a baseball bat to the state’s corruption and his frank statements about issues such as gay marriage.
I admire Paladino for his guts and gusto. It’s refreshing and bold. It is, IMO, what the people really want from their leaders rather than the PC baloney that has kept us in chains for too long. New York is not just the cesspool called Manhattan, so he may just have a chance to win the governorship.
Exactly what Hasidic Jews think of homosexuals, how they came by their opinion (assuming there is one), what its relevance is in the governors’ race, I dunno. You say Paladino is a gutsy guy but you say he was telling Hasidic Jews what they want to hear. Sounds like the same old thing to me.
(And by the way: what would Paladino do as governor to end the gay “dysfunction?” Barbed wire? And what if he decides something you do is dysfunctional? He has this claim on an expertise in what is dysfunctional because he__________—??)
It’s a big state, Glock. As they used to say, “Between here and Albany there’s a lot of farms.”
In the beginning, God made them male and female, and a man shall leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.
There is no example of healthy polygamy anywhere in scripture.
The laws of G-d are not nonsense.
I'll concede that The Lord has tolerated polygyny at times, but that's not where the "plural marriage" crowd is headed ... think multiple men and multiple women, an amorphous combination of polygyny and polyandry.
Once that is "acceptable", folding in the family (dog|cat|sheep|goat|llama|whatever) won't seem such a stretch.
I wasn’t addressing the rightness or wrongness of Paladino’s statement at all. I was only speaking to the guy who said it’s up to the pyschos to decide. That’s why I replied to that particular comment, not to the first comment in the thread.
I have no idea whether it will help or hurt Paladino. I can see valid arguments both ways. Your position is certainly plausible.
I just wasn’t speaking to that question
at
all.
:-)
My principal objection to Paladino is that he made a remark that can’t possibly help him gets votes and seems to claim expertise that he doesn’t have, as far as I know. The second flaw here is commonly found in the utterances of leftie candidates/politicos but not often a transgression made on the conservative side of the aisle.
Financials? We need donations, Cuomo has 20 million and we are spending Carls money. Problem is he said, I don’t need the money.. That meant his paycheck which he will donate to charity, he didn’t mean no donations.
It IS a public policy position: as Governor, would he sign a homosexual “marriage” bill into law?
The answer is HELL NO!
Still doesn't change the fact that polygyny is permitted.
There is no example of healthy polygamy anywhere in scripture.
We're not talking examples. We're talking Halakhah. And Halakhah permits (does not call for, does not require, but permits) a man to have as many wives as he can responsibly provide for (though the King of Israel is limited to eighteen). Furthermore the civil laws in most nations limiting a man to one wife at a time are perfectly legitimate provided they aren't erroneously attributed to G-d Himself (which would be a case of "adding to the Torah").
Either G-d's Laws are permanent and unchanging or you might as well be a liberal. To insist that polygyny is forbidden while insisting that the law against homosexuality is permanent is nothing but speciousness and hypocrisy.
I know you’re busy. Thanks for the response.
Does his campaign have a website?
Thanks.
I agree. It's so easy for some FReepers who don't know anyone who was born gay to insult and be cruel about it. I liken being born gay to being born with autism or Downs or any other disability. People cannot help being gay. Let them live their lives, and encourage them to live both modestly and conservatively.
There are FReepers who have little children who prefer the toys and clothing of the opposite sex, and it is nothing that the family did wrong. If Paladino is going to call gays dysfunctional, I hope he will please also call those with Down Syndrome dysfunctional, and then his definition will at least fit.
Once that is "acceptable", folding in the family (dog|cat|sheep|goat|llama|whatever) won't seem such a stretch.
In other words, "free love," a very old leftist concept much beloved by old lefties from the nineteenth century, and a concept very far removed from Halakhic polygyny.
It's against the law to have more than one wife in most countries today. And as I said, so long as that stringency isn't attributed to G-d Himself it is quite legitimate and we are bound to obey it.
It's also not a good idea to have sex outside of marriage, and it's also a sin. Do you think our candidates should start making a point of campaigning on that? Is now the time for that to?
Come on, seriously. Do you want to win elections? The economy sucks. In places like NY and Delaware you stick the economy and jobs - not get into a bunch of social/moral arguments that damage any chance to actually win an election. What Paladino did here was just dumb. What works in Georgia or Alabama will not work in New York. You have to pick and chose your battles and use some common sense.
The temptation to commit buggery is better equated to the temptation to commit rape, robbery, or murder. It is a temptation to commit a gross violation of Natural Law and revealed Divine Law. Down Syndrome is indeed a dysfunction, but it is a mere biological dysfunction. Faggotry, like rape, robbery, and murder are far worse: they are moral dysfunctions.
No and no, because *liberals* are disfunctional.
The law against homosexuality is permanent because Acts 15 declared all sexual immorality unacceptable permanently.
Polygamy is against God’s intent because Jesus affirmed monogamy as the ideal of creation. This is evident in the prohibitions against polygamy imposed on all church leaders.
Further evidence is the failure of scripture to provide even one positive example of a polygamous family.
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.