Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Make sure to watch the video I don't think Beck is for Gay marriage but I do believe Beck is wrong and part of that is because he and others like Rush seldom report on this issue. The gays are coming to "get us". They will push even more further into schools, warping the culture, making dissent illegal, punishing soldiers and getting people fired for disagreement. It is already happenning and for what?

If schools were trying to change Math books that actually have solvable answers with a "creative Math" course where whatever a student feels the right answer should be is acceptable it may not break your bones but it would surely be something to be opposed.

Also Beck is wrong because the California ruling is an atrocity. It sets a precedent that is pure stupidity. It says that if the government doesn't offer licenses for a specific type of union that people desire then it should be forced to offer that license. There has never been an issue of "Marriage Equality" but we hear the intellectually dishonest phrase repeated everywhere. Anyone can get married to the opposite sex which is based on primarily natural intuitive human sexuality. Just because someone chooses to not marry a member of the opposite sex does not mean they are being discriminated against. The difference being here that homosexuals don't lose anything they just don't get anything.

This issue is one of honesty. It should not be debated solely as a matter of religion. It is a matter of commonsense something which those like Beck, Rush, and countless others who are fearful of the pink mafia hide from and it is cowardice.

1 posted on 08/14/2010 11:47:14 AM PDT by Maelstorm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Maelstorm
...he does not think the government "has anything to do with marriage. That is a religious rite."

Which is how I feel, and its been the case factually ever since we stopped putting people in jail for adultery and homosexuality. It is not illegal for a man to live in the same house and have sex with seven women, so is polygamy really illegal, same for homosexuals, etc. Get a state license simply adds up to paying a higher tax rate.

What heterosexuals should do if they really want to protest, is to cease apply for a state marriage license and just get married in the church. That is a refusal to acknowledge the state's right to define marriage.

If you don't think that is enough, let me ask you this: Would you be married if the state refused to give you a license, but you got married in the church without it?

2 posted on 08/14/2010 11:53:53 AM PDT by SampleMan (If all of the people currently oppressed shared a common geography, bullets would already be flying.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

If you’re not a social conservative, then you’re not a conservative.


3 posted on 08/14/2010 12:00:24 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm
US RAMS THROUGH UN APPROVAL OF HOMOSEXUAL GROUP THAT OPPOSES RELIGIOUS FREEDOM

The UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) voted this week on a US-led initiative to accredit the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission (IGLHRC). The move effectively bypassed a subsidiary committee’s decision to defer action on the group until it answered questions about its support of new homosexual ‘rights,’ which many Member States believe directly conflict with recognized rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression.

The Obama administration has been an active champion of IGLHRC's application to the UN since the June meeting of the committee on non-governmental organizations (NGOs) when US representatives insisted on an immediate vote on IGLHRC even though other committee members still had unanswered questions. In response to the US attempt to force a decision, Egypt called for a procedural "no action" motion.

Opposition to IGLHRC’s application centers around the group’s endorsement of a document called the Yogyakarta Principles, a document which calls for “sexual orientation and gender identity” to be new categories of nondiscrimination in UN human rights treaties. Among other things the Yogyakarta Principles calls for criminal penalties against those who criticize homosexuality.

http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/US_RAMS_THROUGH_UN_APPROVAL_OF_HOMOSEXUAL_GROUP_THAT_OPPOSES_RELIGIOUS_FREEDOM/31788

4 posted on 08/14/2010 12:00:56 PM PDT by massmike (...So this is what happens when OJ's jury elects the president....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Beck clearly said that everyone covers certain diverse issues. His are relating to the founding fathers. I would be bored to tears if I was forced to listen to nothing but social issues all day.


6 posted on 08/14/2010 12:05:31 PM PDT by Lazlo in PA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm
Glenn Beck is a libertarian

O'Reilly is a social conservative

social conservative + libertarian = conservative

Sarah Palin and Ronald Reagan are 100% authentic conservatives

the rest...Romney, Huckabee etc. are pretenders


10 posted on 08/14/2010 12:11:49 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan (Sarah Palin....The Thrilla from Wasilla)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

I watched the whole segment, Beck was not supporting gay marriage. In context he was saying to O’rielly it was Bill’s job to watch the culture(warrior)issues. Beck is more concerned about the historic and constitutional aspects of what is going on with progressives turning us into a socialist utopia.
I love FR but I don’t get why some here insist on denegrating the people out there doing the most good, seems very self destructive to me. No one in the spotlight can utter all the right words all the time especially in short sound bites when you are on air 15 to 20hrs a week.


12 posted on 08/14/2010 12:24:54 PM PDT by VTenigma
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

While I respect Beck on this issue he shows a lack of common sense. If he believes that this issue is nothing to be concerned about then he has not the repsect for our rights that he claims.

I have heard some even here on FR argue that Marraige in the government/public sphere should be anything that anyone wants and that true marraige between a man and woman should just be a thing that concerns churches and religion.

That is hogwash! Why not treat all issues that way then? Murder could be accpetable under certain belief systems as is proven everyday by the “ProChioce” crowd. So maybe Beck thinks that the definition of ‘murder’ should not be addressed by the government as well.

The People have a Right to DEFINE marraige using their representation and define aspects of how the public deal with human sexuality. Beck is an idiot if he thinks that the People should just let the fascist gay left-wing force their perverted morality upon us all in public.

Beck needs to wake up. So do Hannity and Limbaugh as well. They are merely ‘Useful Idiots’ of the leftwing if they continue to not understand this issue.


18 posted on 08/14/2010 12:49:31 PM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm
Libertarians seem to miss the point we are not talking religious marriage or sexual cohabitation...

We are talking about government involved in enforcing legal marriage and licensing it in effect promoting marriage...why?...

Libertarians why is it necessary for government and society's to promote marriage and not be indifferent to your cohabitation arrangement

Gay give the answerer themselves in their derogatory term for straights...Breeders

The only reason government and society's to have a justification to promote and licensing marriage is because reproduction is a fundamental requirement of any society or culture or it goes extinct....

Reproduction requirement in the reason society or culture's do not promote incestuous marriage or polygamous marriage (IE so one man does not dominate the available women for reproduction...

(Libertarians explain the justification for government interference or non promotion on the issue of incestuous marriage or polygamous marriage and how this applies to gays)

Breeders ...(IE Reproducing Couples) are a necessity for any society or culture to survive and therefor society have a justification for promoting them....

(Even to the point of declaring heterosexual couple's common law marriage...Libertarians explain the justification for government declared common law marriage and also now how it would now apply to Gay sexual cohabitation)

NonBreeders (Gay's)are not necessary society or culture survival and therefor society or culture have a right to be at best be indifferent to Gay's as they would with any other sexual cohabitation

Society and culture are not in a suicide pack... Breeders ...(IE Reproducing Couples) are a necessity and provide a service to society and culture's and society and culture's have a right to acknowledge that in some degree in it's laws

19 posted on 08/14/2010 12:51:34 PM PDT by tophat9000 (.............................. BP + BO = BS ...........................Formula for a disaster...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Sheesh, gays are not “coming to get us.” You can’t be “gotten” unless you want to be (and I am not talking about pedophilia and rape).

I agree with Beck, if that’s what he means. Marriages should not be the government’s business. Everyone can get their legal partnerships at the courthouse and their marriages by their clergy.


20 posted on 08/14/2010 12:52:32 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

I like Glenn but I’ve lost some respect for him. All these issues are tied together. You can’t support the right to life and then turn a blind eye to liberals murdering infants just because it’s inconvenient. The homosexuals control a lot of media and are ruthless in their attacks (look at what they did to Dr. Laura). I would rather see Glenn stand up to them then cave in for some reason. Does Glenn really believe that changing the fundamental definition of marriage won’t have a HUGE impact on destroying our culture and harming innocent kids?


23 posted on 08/14/2010 1:07:35 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Just a religious issue eh Beck? I guess we should go back to the old Crusade days and wage war on those attempting to subvert our most sacred sacraments then.

Beck is an idiot.


24 posted on 08/14/2010 1:08:11 PM PDT by Soothesayer9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

In contrast to Beck’s cowardice, Rush made some superb comments against the sodomite judge Vaughn Walker’s judicial activism. Rush is not afraid to say the truth regardless of the consequences.


26 posted on 08/14/2010 1:14:24 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm
I believe Glenn beck should review what scripture has to say on the subject of homosexuals and homosexual conduct in the old and new testament. Glenn is trying to project the image of a G_Dly man but when he comes out on issues like this and is equivocal, it shows his glaring shortcomings as to scripture.

Incidentally Glenn, and all, it's homosexual marriage, not “gay” marriage. Dump the politically correct brainwashing by the liberals and MSM, thank you very much!!

28 posted on 08/14/2010 1:16:01 PM PDT by Old Badger (boy do opportunities abound everywhere for Real Conservatives!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Beck made a mistake, imho. I wonder if he now regrets his response?


40 posted on 08/14/2010 1:53:05 PM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm
Society has always regarded marital love as a sacred expression of the bond between a man and a woman. It is the means by which families are created and society itself is extended into the future. In the Judeo-Christian tradition it is the means by which husband and wife participate with God in the creation of a new human life. It is for these reasons, among others, that our society has always sought to protect this unique relationship. In part the erosion of these values has given way to a celebration of forms of expression most reject. We will resist the efforts of some to obtain government endorsement of homosexuality.--Ronald Reagan, July 12, 1984.
43 posted on 08/14/2010 2:07:29 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

As far as I’m concerned, this whole “gay marriage” thing is silly. Really silly, like Monty Python silly. In fact, it reminds me of a scene from “The Life of Brian:”

Stan: It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.

Reg: But you can’t have babies.

Stan: Don’t you oppress me.

Reg: Where’s the fetus going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?

Judith: Here! I’ve got an idea: Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb - which is nobody’s fault, not even the Romans’ - but that he can have the *right* to have babies.

Francis: Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to have babies, brother... sister, sorry.

Reg: What’s the *point*?

Francis: What?

Reg: What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies, when he can’t have babies?

Francis: It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.

Reg: It’s symbolic of his struggle against reality.

Simply put, “Just because the cat had kittens in the oven, doesn’t make them bisuits!”

The leftists are trying to change the language, in order to make themselves feel better about themselves.

Mark


46 posted on 08/14/2010 3:57:53 PM PDT by MarkL (Do I really look like a guy with a plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

When it comes to religious idealogies and issues, I would take with a grain of salt anything that comes out of Becks mouth. Remember he comes from a religion that believes everyone can be a god and polygamy is the way to go.


47 posted on 08/14/2010 3:58:13 PM PDT by eak3
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Between this and his utter ignorance and occasional bashing of the Catholic Church, I am done with Glenn. He can peddle his brand of weepy, sell-out conservatism somewhere else.


51 posted on 08/14/2010 6:37:11 PM PDT by Antoninus (It's a degenerate society where dogs have more legal rights than unborn babies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

I think homosexual groups have something on the Becks and Limbaughs of the airwaves. They seem completely afraid to venture into that territory, as if the mob were watching every move they make lest they go “against the family.”


56 posted on 08/14/2010 10:39:22 PM PDT by fwdude (Anita Bryant was right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Maelstorm

Glenn Beck...occasionally cogent weirdo


69 posted on 08/18/2010 10:09:23 PM PDT by wardaddy (effed up times..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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