I don't find it threatening at all. Just a nuisance.
Posted on 11/12/2008 9:23:00 PM PST by TheReligiousConservative51
"Just as most older conservatives now acknowledge that they once erred in "keeping blacks in their place," they should make the same acknowledgement for gays and their right to marry, and live happy, open and contented lives in each other's arms."
"Fear that others may reject these apparently arbitrary moral boundaries, and hence question those who decreed them, and cause society to fall apart, is the reason for the conservatives' deep paranoia about the mythical "gay recruiting" and the equally mythical "gay agenda.""
(Excerpt) Read more at bidstrup.com ...
You will get to hear your pastor say: “Do you, Party A, take Party B . . . “
Stopped reading right there, the lying moron accuses us of doing what the left was always guilty of.
I don't find it threatening at all. Just a nuisance.
Why do people think that Homosexuality is a Civil Rights issue? It has pretty successfully hung its hat in the Black American Struggle, but it really doesn’t belong there.
Why is it that people with Anger Management Problems, Alcoholism, Drug Addition, or any other set of vices,(yes, I said vices) should not have special laws made for them because of their vices.
I mean special laws because Self Designated Homosexuals, as all homosexuals are, are entitled to marriage just like any other citizen. They are just not entitled to special, historically unlawful marriages. Just like Alcoholics are not entitled to rob little old ladies of their purses to get money for their next bottle. etc. You see, alcoholism is a problem that some people are ‘born with’ also.
Actually there is some discomfort with some gays who want the freedom to be bi, and don’t want to be considered “born” any certain way, but that would undermine the Civil Rights Angle, wouldn’t it.
Because their sex life is the only thing they have to talk about. It's a direct outcome of their not actually doing anything else. It is very sad, really.
'nuff said!
I’m amazed how many people are willing to eat in a restaurant with a gay chef, who serves marvelous sauces. If they would consider the homosexual act has a preoccupation with feces or ignorance thereof, and the same pervert chef now is attracted to serve them a beef crepe, would they be as willing to attend a dinner party hosted by Dr. Hannibal Lector?
Well, I liked the one where he “refutes” the view that marriage is the union between a man and a woman by asking the question, “Who says?”
Shoot. He’s got us! Let’s keep pulling the thread. WHO says rape is wrong? It’s got a hell of a lot more evolutionary benefit than gay marriage, so from the perspective of godlessness it’s a LOT more “moral” than gay marriage! WHO says murder is wrong? Don’t animals kill each other? Why shouldn’t I be able to blow my next door neighbor away for playing that crap he calls ‘music’ so loud?
WHO says marriage is between a man and a woman? Ask the question another way: when has anyone in history up to this point said that marriage was ever between a man and a man? What is the history of “gay marriage”? I came across some pro-gay articles that said “the tradition of gay marriage has been with us since the Roman Empire.” So I started looking and found a SINGLE account in Nero’s day by Seutonius.
http://cafesda.blogspot.com/2008/10/same-sex-marriage-and-roman-empire.html It isn’t exactly flattering, is it? Basically this emperor was so evil, so insane, so homicidal, and so completely depraved, that he even stooped to this kind of garbage. If this is the model for gay marriage and society, let’s put it out there: gay marriage leads to the total disaster of civilization, as evidenced by it’s first practice during the time of Nero. Nero was also a flagrant pedophile, according to Seutonius, so the least we can do is legalize the molesting of all our young boys, as well.
Restricting the definition of marriage is not “inappropriate” discrimination. As a matter of fact, the word DISCRIMINATION doesn’t even apply because there is no such thing legally, culturally, socially or linguistically as a marriage that is not between a man and a woman. Gay marriage is an invention by people of the moral caliber of Nero.
You want gay marriage? Fine. I want to kill and eat people. WHO SAYS I shouldn’t be allowed to kill and eat people? It’s certainly got more historical precedent than gay marriage, and the evidence suggests it’s less destructive for society, too.
I'll second that!
Why do gays find traditional religious and social views so deeply threatening?
The pat answer used by some homosexual proponents is that "it occurs in nature", so do rape, incest, cannibalism, and interspecies sex.
But the dirty little secret is that the sex positive agenda doesn't care about science or civilization, it seeks to end ALL moral judgements over all sexual pairings. Saying that it is "genetic" or "natural" are just to get people on board to accept it. In the end, they don't think it is any of your prudish business to comment on where they put their willies.
If you want to kill and eat people (I know you are being facitious here), then you should publicly appeal to abortionists for the “waste product”. After all, there are couples who eat the placenta (even vegans will eat it since it does not victimize animals). If it is “not” a baby, then there should be no shock or horror among the abortionists you ask.
The Sex Positive agenda as pushed by Reich, Kinsey, feminists, and socialists doesn't draw such distinctions, they want the freedom to make it with anyone "just because" with no moral restraint. They don't care how you are "born", they believe that you should "experiment" to discover the whole pornicopia of sexual experiences.
The AIDS epidemic made me rethink everything from eating out to getting in any public pools. I know AIDS is not transmitted through food handling or sitting in a hot tub but it did make me think about what a filthy act defines male homosexuality and make me want to stay out of situations where I would be exposed to the ecoli and other nasty germs that are more present in gay world.
Tree huggers should be careful. They might get splinters in delicate places.
Isn’t it interesting to see how voting is not a protected right, after all, the theater director was forced out for backing ads for a proposition that was on the ballot. We can assume he also voted for that measure.
But political beliefs are not protected from discrimination as religious beliefs, sexual beliefs, sex, and skin color are.
We've already lost some excellent words in the past, including "liberal" (political liberals of today are anything but liberal) so I would hate to lose the word "marriage" too. It's worth fighting for.
“Actually there is some discomfort with some gays who want the freedom to be bi, and don’t want to be considered “born” any certain way, but that would undermine the Civil Rights Angle, wouldn’t it.
The Sex Positive agenda as pushed by Reich, Kinsey, feminists, and socialists doesn’t draw such distinctions, they want the freedom to make it with anyone “just because” with no moral restraint. They don’t care how you are “born”, they believe that you should “experiment” to discover the whole pornicopia of sexual experiences.”
Thanks for giving me a name for that movement. “Sex Positive” agenda.
pornicopia = LOL!
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.