Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: yldstrk; duckworth; TurboZamboni; tflabo
“Let's not obsess about the gays; let's just strengthen normal marriage across the board," some say. But no, you won't be able to. Because of the new LGBT definitions of "invidious discrimination" and "hate speech," it will be increasingly impossible to organize any activity or service in support of specifically gender-normal kids, man-woman marriage or mom-dad families.

Examples of what you won't be allowed to do:

• “straight” boys’ or girls’ activity group (like Boy Scouts)
• a normal marriage-oriented dating service (like e-Harmony)
• religious wedding venue (like Methodist Ocean Grove)
• an adoption program (like Catholic Social Services)
• "straight" ethical/spiritual pastoral care (like by an Armed Forces chaplain)
• a counseling program supporting kids’ natural sex/gender identity (like NARTH)

The above examples show activities already shut down or forced to incorporate the LGBT sex/gender perspective by lawsuits or anti-discrimination laws.

Anything at all related to gender-normal child development, relationships, courtship, weddings, family-building, fertility, adoption ...if you don’t rewrite your program content to affirm the LGBT gender perspective, mark my words, they will take you to court, and shut you down.

Even many "conservatives" only find the LGBT thing mildly nonsensical. Or merely transiently obnoxious. They do NOT know the totalizing nature of the coercion we are facing.

7 posted on 08/01/2013 6:48:16 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("See something, say something.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Mrs. Don-o

nothing will make me think it is ok to act on homo impulses, it is wrong and perverted


8 posted on 08/01/2013 6:49:23 AM PDT by yldstrk (My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Your post was so spot on.

A year and a half ago, I was ambivalent about gay marriage. Not because I was pro-gay but because I felt there were other more pressing issues.

A friend urged me to attend an event put on by a group known as Minnesota For Marriage. During that event, they touched on many of the same points you made. I was immediately converted during that event. Last fall, I talked to a number of people and tried to make the same points.

I wish more people had taken the time to understand exactly what the unitended consequences were of rejecting last fall’s Marriage Amendment in in the Legislature’s approval of gay marriage earlier this year.


10 posted on 08/01/2013 7:02:26 AM PDT by MplsSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I know a lawyer who will no longer practice family law because if s/he wishes to limit that practice to non-gay clients, discipline or a discrimination suit will follow.

Therefore, the area is avoided entirely.

After all, we must seek the lowest common denominator to divide society.


16 posted on 08/01/2013 7:47:00 AM PDT by LachlanMinnesota
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson