Then a formalized union between homosexuals can be called a "buggerage" instead of a "marriage". 
Posted on 07/14/2004 7:05:42 PM PDT by Polycarp IV
Seems a review was in order...
thanks for posting
ARGGGHHH! Don't let the enemy define the language ... "homosexual marriage" is an oxymoron. Marriage is an inherently man+woman covenant. There is "marriage", and there is institutionalised buggery.
of interest
I guess some of us really were sluts in college.
What can WE DO ?
1. Wouldn't permitting homosexuals to marry tend to decrease their participation in the promiscuous and dangerous behaviors described?
2. There is nothing in the report to suggest that homosexual marriages between women are dangerous, or that homosexual women are more promiscuous or engage in more dangerous behaviors than heterosexual women. In fact, my understanding is that HIV is least likely to be spread among homosexual women.
Why do you and your niece imply that Peter being the first Pope means your marriage is invalid? I assume you are a "practicing Catholic"? If so, isn't it a rule in your church that you have to be married by a priest? I don't quite get your question.
I, too, have been studying about the origin of civil marriage. I am learning that in European culture, marriage was not a "civil union" until sometime in the late Middle Ages. Before that, most families arranged their children's marriages and the ceremony was purely private and religious.
Does anybody here have definitive knowledge about the history of "civil marriage"?
Why? If they are merely exercising a ritual what difference would it make to their lifestyle.?
Lesbians show similar patterns of high venereal disease incidence relative to the general population. They are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis, twice as likely to have had genital warts, four times as likely to have had scabies, seven times more likely to have had infection from vaginal contact, 29 times more likely to have had oral infection from vaginal contact and 12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact. ("Medical Aspects of Homosexuality," Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality, 1985, Jaffe and Keewhan, et al.)
That's it guys - your safest sex will be with a homosexual woman!
Ignore your liberal-atheist-former-Catholic niece OK? Love her, pray for her, respect her as a person made in the image and likeness of God, but ignore anything she says about Faith and God and especially Catholicism.
I'm pretty sure nobody will argue with that line.
I know a lot of people who believe themselves to be homosexual. After getting to know these people, I don't believe most of them really are. There are other things at play. At any rate, I think it is VERY sad that by their behavior, these very talented individuals are cutting their lives so short. To just throw away what God has freely given is just not right.
This is something I read on another post that applies here...........
As I reflect on the present situation, an interesting parallel springs to mind. When I went to teach in the Papua New Guinea highlands over twenty years ago with Australian Volunteers Abroad (our equivalent of the U.S. Peace Corps), a rare and dreaded disease called kuru was finally being eradicated. As far as I remember, no cure was ever found for kuru: it was 100% fatal, and as in the case of AIDS, its victims took a year or so to die. How then was it conquered? Well, scientists finally tracked down its cause: it came from a germ transmitted by cannibalism. This tribe in the Eastern Highlands had the custom of eating dead relatives' flesh as a sign of spiritual union with them.
When this discovery was made, do you suppose that the Papua New Guinea public authorities and Churches embarked on a great drive to promote 'safe cannibalism'? Were efforts redoubled and vast sums of money raised to come up with an anti-kuru serum which would allow the cannibals to enjoy their traditional life-style in safety? Were those who urged the eradication of cannibalism condemned on all sides as 'fascists,' enemies of religious liberty, bent on "imposing their moral code" on others? Were those dying in mission hospitals as a result of their cannibalistic meals treated as heroic martyrs, with parades and Masses celebrated to honour them?
No, there were no such antics in New Guinea. The obvious, sensible course was followed: government and missions combined to denounce cannibalism with renewed vigour as an immoral activity and a grave threat to public health. In short, it was branded as anti-social behaviour. Today cannibalism - and with it, kuru - have vanished from the Eastern Highlands because one single message, loud and clear, was given to those tribesmen: eating people is wrong - and deadly dangerous!
If today's secularized societies were morally sane, instead of debilitated by the ceaseless propaganda of the immensely powerful and well-funded homosexual network, an equally loud and clear message would be coming through from all those responsible for educating the public on this matter: anal intercourse (whether with a man or a woman) is wrong and deadly dangerous! (This practice is responsible for over 90% of all AIDS cases).
9 posted on 07/06/2004 10:31:36 PM EDT by narses (If you want ON or OFF my Catholic Ping List email me. +)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
I came across this in a thread about a year ago I think.
Inoohr_org_index.htm This essay was printed in the February 15, 1987 issue of the homosexual
newspaper Gay Community News by Michael Swift, and was reprinted in the February 15-21
1987 Congressional Record. EXCERPT
We shall sodomize your sons, emblems of your feeble masculinity, of you shallow dreams and vulgar lies. We shall seduce them in your schools, in your dormitories, in your gymnasiums, in your locker rooms, in your sports arenas, in your seminaries, in your youth groups, in your movie theater bathrooms, in your army bunkhouses, in your truck stops, in your all-male clubs, in your houses of Congress, wherever men are with men together.
Your sons shall become our minions and do our bidding. They will be recast in our image. They will come to crave and adore us.
Women, you cry for freedom. You say you are no longer satisfied with men; they make you unhappy. We, connoisseurs of the masculine face, the masculine physique, shall take your men from you then. We will amuse them; we will instruct them; we will embrace them when they weep.
If you dare to cry faggot, fairy, queer, at us, we will stab you in your cowardly hearts and defile your dead, puny bodies.
There will be no compromises. We are not middle-class weaklings. Highly intelligent, we are the natural aristocrats of the human race, and steely-minded aristocrats never settle for less. Those who oppose us will be exiled. We shall raise vast, private armies, as Mishima did, to defeat you.
We shall conquer the world because warriors inspired by and banded together by homosexual love and honor are as invincible as were the ancient Greek soldiers. The family unit spawning ground of lies, betrayals, mediocrity, hypocrisy, and violence will be abolished. The family unit, which only dampens imagination and curbs free will, must be eliminated. Perfect boys will be conceived and grown in the genetic laboratory. They will be bonded together in a communal setting, under the control and instruction of homosexual savants.
We shall be victorious because we are fueled with the ferocious bitterness of the oppressed who have been forced to play seemingly bit parts in your dumb, heterosexual
shows throughout the ages. We too are capable of firing guns and manning the barricades of the ultimate revolution.
Tremble, hetero swine, when we appear before you without our masks!
Then a formalized union between homosexuals can be called a "buggerage" instead of a "marriage".
I'm not prejudiced...my 1911 doesn't care whether you wear a mask or not.
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.