Posted on 03/30/2015 10:18:04 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
All analogies limp. This one is limp wristed.
It is, until you find genetic evidence, then its ambiguous. It’ll be illegal if you want to abort.
Christians have scripture that homosexuality is an “Abomination” in the eyes of God; case closed.
MLK helped give discriminating (freedom to choose) a bad name. But we as individuals have every constitutional right to choose and discriminate however we want.
The only constitutional limitation on choosing or discriminating is prohibition of STATE SEGREGATION laws against blacks (14th Amendment).
There is NO constitutional limitation on individual discrimination AT ALL.
A state can discriminate against gays or anyone else except blacks.
No.
Transvestitism is an obsession/desire/fetish. We are born naked, the desire to crossdress is not genetic. It is a compulsion contrary to societal norms.
Not all transvestites are homosexual or have desires to change sex.
Going through the other alphabet soup sexual identities, we’ve seen a number of heterosexuals who married and sired children “suddenly” awaken to announce that they never had any heterosexual tendencies and are more satisfied seeking a homosexual lifestyle (rejecting their kids, their spouse, etc.). We’ve also seen the “other” conversion, the one that homosexuals say never happens; public homosexual settling down into a heterosexual marriage/family.
“It’s fluid” they say. So are political opinions and religious beliefs. It’s not akin to skin color.
No. Next question.
In a word, NO.
Homosexuality is BEHAVIOR. Like alcoholism, a serious mental disorder.
“Race” is ancestral and has no bearing on a person’s behavior or potential.
A gay dude can screw all the women he wants. Gay is nothing more than hormones, lust, and sexual kinks pretending to be the opposite.
A black man cant make himself white. A white person cant be Asian no matter what they do.
The point here is it is not for another person to decide what another’s faith demands.
Well, every time I have to talk to some evangelistic homo, I want to race away. Is that close enough?
That is the central question, and the true reason all freedom-loving citizens -- Christian or not -- should oppose faux marriage. Should we allow the government to force us to recognize certain institutions as morally acceptable when our own beliefs, passed down through ages of history and civilization, insist they are not?
Does the government exist to define morality, or does it exist to enforce the morality defined by the people? In the case of homosexuality, it is the former, and a gross abuse of power.
sex positive agenda advocates frankly don’t care if it is genetic or not. They seek end all moral judgments over sexual pairings of ANY kind regardless of sex, age, relation, marital status, number, or species of partner(s). Genetics has nothing to do with their belief.
Stalinists lie. ALWAYS
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett
During my junior year in high school, the nuns asked about our plans for after we graduated. When I said I was going to attend State University, I noticed their disappointment. I asked my favorite nun, “Why?” She answered, “That means you’ll leave four years later a communist and an atheist!”
What a giggle we girls had over that. “How ridiculously unsophisticated these nuns are,” we thought. Then I went to the university and four years later walked out a communist and an atheist, just as my sister Katie had six years before me.
Sometime later, I was a young divorcee with a small child. At the urging of my sister, I relocated to NYC after spending years married to an American executive stationed in Southeast Asia. The marriage over, I was making a new life for my daughter and me. Katie said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.”
I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.
And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.”
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?” she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!” they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.
It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.
To me, this sounded silly. I was enduring culture shock after having been cut-off from my homeland, living in Third-World countries for years with not one trip back to the United States. I was one of those people who, upon returning to American soil, fell out of the plane blubbering with ecstasy at being home in the USA. I knelt on the ground covering it with kisses. I had learned just exactly how delicious was the land of my birth and didn’t care what anyone thought because they just hadn’t seen what I had or been where I had been. I had seen factory workers and sex-slaves chained to walls.
How could they know? Asia is beyond our ken and, as they say, utterly inscrutable, and a kind of hell I never intended to revisit. I lived there, not junketed, not visited like sweet little tourists — I’d conducted households and tried to raise a child. I had outgrown the communism of my university days and was clumsily groping my way back to God.
How could twelve American women who were the most respectable types imaginable — clean and privileged graduates of esteemed institutions: Columbia, Radcliffe, Smith, Wellesley, Vassar; the uncle of one was Secretary of War under Franklin Roosevelt — plot such a thing? Most had advanced degrees and appeared cogent, bright, reasonable and good. How did these people rationally believe they could succeed with such vicious grandiosity? And why?
I dismissed it as academic-lounge air-castle-building. I continued with my new life in New York while my sister became famous publishing her books, featured on the cover of “Time Magazine.” “Time” called her “the Karl Marx of the Women’s Movement.” This was because her book laid out a course in Marxism 101 for women. Her thesis: The family is a den of slavery with the man as the Bourgeoisie and the woman and children as the Proletariat. The only hope for women’s “liberation” (communism’s favorite word for leading minions into inextricable slavery; “liberation,” and much like “collective” – please run from it, run for your life) was this new “Women’s Movement.” Her books captivated the academic classes and soon “Women’s Studies” courses were installed in colleges in a steady wave across the nation with Kate Millett books as required reading.
Imagine this: a girl of seventeen or eighteen at the kitchen table with Mom studying the syllabus for her first year of college and there’s a class called “Women’s Studies.” “Hmmm, this could be interesting,” says Mom. “Maybe you could get something out of this.”
Seems innocuous to her. How could she suspect this is a class in which her innocent daughter will be taught that her father is a villain? Her mother is a fool who allowed a man to enslave her into barbaric practices like monogamy and family life and motherhood, which is a waste of her talents. She mustn’t follow in her mother’s footsteps. That would be submitting to life as a mindless drone for some domineering man, the oppressor, who has mesmerized her with tricks like romantic love. Never be lured into this chicanery, she will be taught. Although men are no damned good, she should use them for her own orgasmic gratification; sleep with as many men as possible in order to keep herself unattached and free. There’s hardly a seventeen-year-old girl without a grudge from high school against a Jimmy or Jason who broke her heart. Boys are learning, too, and they can be careless during high school, that torment of courting dances for both sexes.
By the time Women’s Studies professors finish with your daughter, she will be a shell of the innocent girl you knew, who’s soon convinced that although she should be flopping down with every boy she fancies, she should not, by any means, get pregnant. And so, as a practitioner of promiscuity, she becomes a wizard of prevention techniques, especially abortion.
The goal of Women’s Liberation is to wear each female down to losing all empathy for boys, men or babies. The tenderest aspects of her soul are roughened into a rock pile of cynicism, where she will think nothing of murdering her baby in the warm protective nest of her little-girl womb. She will be taught that she, in order to free herself, must become an outlaw. This is only reasonable because all Western law, since Magna Carta and even before, is a concoction of the evil white man whose true purpose is to press her into slavery.
Be an outlaw! Rebel! Be defiant! (Think Madonna, Lady Gaga, Lois Lerner, Elizabeth Warren.) “All women are prostitutes,” she will be told. You’re either really smart and use sex by being promiscuous for your own pleasures and development as a full free human being “just like men” or you can be a professional prostitute, a viable business for women, which is “empowering” or you can be duped like your mother and prostitute yourself to one man exclusively whereby you fall under the heavy thumb of “the oppressor.” All wives are just “one-man whores.”
She is to be heartless in this. No sentimental stuff about courting. No empathy for either boy or baby. She has a life to live and no one is to get in her way. And if the boy or man doesn’t “get it” then no sex for him; “making love” becomes “having sex.” “I’m not ‘having sex’ with any jerk who doesn’t believe I can kill his son or daughter at my whim. He has no say in it because it’s my body!” (Strange logic as who has ever heard of a body with two heads, two hearts, four arms, four feet?)...
Homosexuality is a perversion.
It has nothing to do with race except maybe when queers run track.
We’re not to “okay” homosexuality” as something that is “confirmed okay” per the Bible. God makes it clear that it’s not. It’s one of many sins of the world that we’re in today. We don’t condone any of those sins ... all of which have been with us from the beginning of time ... right after Adam and Eve.
There is only one time that this will be addressed in our world, and that is on the Coming of the Messiah of Israel. Until that time, and until his coming One-World Government, we won’t see the end of all these sins, and their rampant spread!
We await the coming of the Messiah of Israel and his One-World Government for a truly righteous rule in the world!
The most concise and brilliant statement I've ever read on the topic.
For the amoral liberal, the government exists to define morality and take the place of God. It is that simple.
How can lifestyle be a genetic difference? How can clothing choice? How can who you have sex with and how be anything but a choice? Logic has to be thrown out the window to ascribe homosexuality to the same category as race.
Ask most Blacks...
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.