Why we are losing the 'gay marriage' battle

WorldNetDaily ^ | February 24, 2004 | Richard D. Ackerman

[Servant of the 9]

Why we are losing the 'gay marriage' battle

Because most people know in their hearts that if we give them 'gay marriage' then 'gay divorce' and 'gay alimony' will follow, and in a couple of years they will have learned their lesson and stopped asking.

The only reason most heterosexuals put up with marriage and it's risks and limitations, is children. Since most homosexuals don't adopt, 'gay marriage' is an experiment doomed to failure.

Sit back, relax, and get ready to listen to them whine.
The handful of 'gay marriages' that will continue or last will be too insignificant to bother worrying about.

So9

[tallhappy]

Naw. The Bible says don't even talk about what certain things are done.

This is an issue that can't even be talked about really. It's Catch-22.

The other side has the rhetoric and fully indoctrinated dumbed down society. It's all about "love and civil rights". Who's against love and civil rights?

[BJungNan]

Because most people know in their hearts that if we give them 'gay marriage' then 'gay divorce' and 'gay alimony' will follow, and in a couple of years they will have learned their lesson and stopped asking.

The only reason most heterosexuals put up with marriage and it's risks and limitations, is children. Since most homosexuals don't adopt, 'gay marriage' is an experiment doomed to failure.

Sit back, relax, and get ready to listen to them whine. The handful of 'gay marriages' that will continue or last will be too insignificant to bother worrying about.

Sanity comes to FR. Enjoyed your post and agree with you.

[Enterprise]

It is possible that the attempt by Governor to stop the gay marriages in Sodom Francisco will ultimately fail.

Assume for a moment that the State Supreme Court agrees that the marriages are null and void, and/or are against the law. So what? The gays and lesbians in Sodom Francisco could simply go forth as usual, with the complicity of the Mayor, other city officials, and the usual liberal religious leaders. Is the State going to come in and make massive arrests? HA! This is a made for liberal media issue. Pictures of screaming, hysterical and distraught lovers being separated from their special somethingorother. I agree, this issue is lost unless society strongly suppresses gay marriage, and we don't have the guts to do it.

[Hodar]

Great minds must think alike. I posted way back when, with the same rationale you used. If a gay couple want the fun of having a lawyer split their property, their earnings, their investments and future earnings should they 'divorce'; I say more power to them.

Then they can whine as they are making alimony payments, until thier ex- decides to remarry.

How much do you want to bet that at THAT point in time, they will argue that the gay marrage issue was a mistake, and that it should never have been permitted to happen. This too, will be the fault of those darn Conservatives; not theirs.

[2banana]

I disagree,

After "gay" marriage becomes the norm, then we will see:

Gay only scholarships
Gay set-asides for government contracts
Gay studies
Gay reparations
Gay museums (supported by your tax dollars)
Gay hiring quotas
Gay federal holidays
Gay lawsuits to destroy anything that promotes the Bible
etc.

[CygnusXI]

We are losing (or will be) because we engage in their lingo. Marriage is a defined word, with defined meaning and history. To even discuss "gay marriage" is the gateway to defeat.

Do not let another (extremely valuable) word be HIJACKED!

[StonyBurk]

In 1788 Edward Gibbon completed his "Decline and Fall of
the Roman empire" He listed five reasons for the fall.
1.Rapid increase in divorce,undermining the dignity and
sanctity of the home,which is the basis of human society.
2. higher and higher taxes.and spending of public money for
bread and circuses.#3 .the mad craze fo rpleasure;sports becoming more exciting and brutal every year. #4 the building of gigantic armaments,when the real enemy was within,the decadence of the people.#5 the decay of religion
faith fading into mere form.
And each of these ought be seen and awaken America today.

[Salman]

Gay set-asides for government contracts

This has already been proposed in Chicago, but it was never implemented. For now it's not on the table, but it will come up again.

[goldstategop]

Exactly. If we don't take marriage seriously, we can hardly begrudge gays for undermining it. We're doing a good job all on our own to make that happen.

[Dave S]

If Ackerman finds everything so negative why doesnt he just find a Kevorkian type doctor and check out.

[shrinkermd]

The problem is two-fold. First, homosexuals are trying to prove they are "normal." This has been an ongoing effort for many years. In 1976 the Board of Directors of the American Psychiatric Associaton declared homosexuality "normal." They did so without consulting or having their members vote. Both statistically and biologically homosexuality is not "normal." About 4% or males and 2% of females are active homosexuals. In respect to biology leaving out procreation, just contemplate how they misuse the mouth and rectum as sexual organs.

The second problem is many (but not all) homosexuals have an antipathy to Christian doctrine on homosexuality. This takes the form of direct attacks such as Gore Vidal epitomizes ("Christianity worships a sky God") and direct attacks on the underpinnings of Christian churches including attacks on the sacrement of marriage.

A more characteristic facet of male homosexuality is the bath house. The Washington Monthly published a daring and seldom cited article on this subject. See: http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0211.farley.html.

A final issue, infrequently addressed is the wide variation in what we call "homosexuality." Many homosexuals have males as their sexual or love object but have strong male identification. Others, have strong feminine identification and are frequently those that are designated by the average person as "homosexual." Finally, like any other human trait, sexuality occurs on a continum. In respect to homosexuality some are 100% oriented towards homosexuality while others are 30% or less.

For all the above reasons, efforts to deal with "homosexual marriage" are prone to fritter away into moral or legal discussions not based on a factual understanding of what is and what is not homosexuality. There is also no real understanding of the goals of homosexuals in demanding the right to marry "like everyone else."

[mel]

Absolutely, if it wasn't for children, there is now way I would have gotten married. You got it right there. But, you have to admit there are many people who do get married and never have children for some reason or another. But, for me no way. I am female, if I was a guy I can imagine there would even more reason not to get married unless family was a primary motivating factor. As my grandma would say why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free.

[mel]

And another thing, I think that with the turnover rate and infidelity among homosexuals the legal ramifications would soon become highly visible.

[amordei]

Most importantly, removal of tax-exempt status for any Church which refuses gay marriages.

[Cold Heat]

The gay marriage problem is symptomatic of a far reaching seed change in what our "rights system" is based on and how it works to adjust to social changes and needs.

I witnessed, not long ago, a city attorney explaining Constitutional rights to a Boy Scout for a merit badge.

As I was listening to the conversation, I was shocked when I heard the attorney say the following............

"Our constitution guarantees the rights of every individual. It guarantees that if even one individual is hurt or damaged by a law, that person can ask to have it changed through the courts. This means that even if only one single person desires a change, it must be done. That is the law!"

I was stunned. I was upset. I was angry.

But I could not do a damn thing about it.

This is the crux of the problem, as I see and understand it. It can be summarized as the end of majority rule and the beginning of chaos, IMHO.

The individuals right are indeed recognized by the Constitution, but one persons petty needs do not outweigh those of the majority in every case, or even in many cases as the attorney apparently believes and espouses. The individual cannot be allowed to co-opt the wishes of the majority every time! The attorney is a lifelong activist democrat, BTW.

This is why I have come down on the side of a Constitutional amendment on gay marriage and why I now think that other amendment may well be needed to hold the line against this trend.

[sr4402]

...in a couple of years they will have learned their lesson and stopped asking.

Nope, you don't know the activism then. They want to be recognized in our eyes. A failure of such 'marriages' would only push them to change society further. Restrictions on the freedom of speech, who can be legislators and the abolition of churches will surely follow.

It is a brave new world you propose and a pray that the Lord would grant repentance from this abomination.

From logic alone, you know that rapes of young boys would surely increase. Is one more acceptable? Men and Women are wooed from their marriages. Is it OK that more children will loose their mommies and daddies?

The Lord spare us from what is proposed.

[Revolting cat!]

We are losing (or will be) because we engage in their lingo.

Zaktly! We are losing it because who in their right mind would speak out against "gaiety", just as who in their right mind would oppose "choice"! The lessons of Orwell's Politics and the English Language have not been learned. The cluelessness at the power of language and how the Left manipulates it to defeat the Right time and time again is simply astounding! So, enjoy your gaiety and choices folks, 'coz you ain't winning!

[Theophilus]

The Divine sacrament of marriage is under no threat but the state sanction of marriage is a corpse and the gays are merely defacing it.