Till Death Do Them Part: The Deadly Consequences of Homosexual Unions

CatholicCitizens.org ^ | Dr. Brian Kopp

[Polycarp IV]

HOME | ABOUT US | PRESS | EVENTS | PEOPLE | ISSUES | NEWSLETTER | CONTACT US | SEARCH
		Till Death Do Them Part: The Deadly Consequences of Homosexual Unions 12/5/2003 8:59:00 PM By Dr. Brian Kopp A large body of scientific evidence suggests that homosexual marriage is a defective counterfeit of traditional marriage and that it poses a clear and present danger to the health of the community. The political and social goals of homosexual activists include: * Acceptance of homosexual partnerships on an equal footing with heterosexual marriages (this would extend to insurance benefits, family leave, adoption, etc.)--i.e. a redefinition of family. Special "minority class" status for homosexuals and bisexuals. Repeal of all laws concerning private consensual adult sexual behavior (e.g. sodomy) and elimination of all consent laws, including those involving age of consent for minors. * Requiring "anti-homophobia training" in law enforcement, education, health care, etc. * Forcing schools to teach acceptance of homosexuality and to set up "support services" for homosexuals. Permitting and encouraging homosexuals to take roles as counselors in education, scouting, churches, youth groups, Big Brothers/Big Sisters, etc. * However, homosexuality is neither normal nor benign. Rather, it is a lethal behavioral addiction. The defining features of male homosexuality consist of a variety of dangerous behaviors, including extreme promiscuity, a higher incidence of pedophilia and sexual abuse, and same-gender sex. The average gay man has over 50 lifetime partners, while as many as 83% reported having over 50 partners in their lifetime. By contrast, average sex partners per year for all adult Americans is 1; the average American claims 4 lifetime sexual partners. While 83% of heterosexuals are monogamous, only 2% of homosexuals claim to be monogamous. Child molestation and pedophilia occur far more commonly among homosexuals than among heterosexuals on a per capita basis. Since 98-99% of the population is heterosexual, it is technically correct to say that most molestations are done by heterosexuals. However, homosexuals comprise only a small percentage (1 to 2%) of the population, yet account for about one-third of the total number of child sex offenses. Three kinds of scientific evidence point to the proportion of homosexual molestation: 1) survey reports of molestation in the general population, 2) surveys of those caught and convicted of molestation, and 3) what homosexuals themselves have reported. These three lines of evidence suggest that the 1%-to-3% of adults who practice homosexuality account for between a fifth and a third of all child molestation. Studies have indicated that 60% or more of practicing homosexuals first encountered homosexuality as young people who were approached by an older, often adult, homosexual; 73% admitted having sex with boys. Sex among homosexual males typically includes: oral and anal sex; rimming (mouth-to anus contact); fisting (insertion of the hand and arm into the rectum); golden showers (urination); insertion of objects such as bottles, flashlights, and even gerbils into the rectum; sadomasochism (beatings with whips, chains, etc.); and other practices. The Gay Report, one of the largest surveys ever conducted of homosexual sex practices, by two homosexual researchers, reported that 99% engaged in oral sex; 91% had anal intercourse; 83% engaged in rimming; 22% had done fisting; 23% admitted to participating in golden showers; 76% admitted to public or group sex; 73% admitted having sex with boys; and 4% admitted to eating feces. There are lethal medical consequences of engaging in these defining features of male homosexual behavior. These various behaviors cause trauma to the rectum; contribute to the spread of AIDS; increase incidences of oral and anal cancer; and result in serious infections due to the ingestion of fecal matter. Anal intercourse tears the rectal lining of the receptive partner, regardless of whether a condom is worn, and the subsequent contact with fecal matter leads to a host of diseases. Other diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows: Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpes simplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species, Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"], Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreign bodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitrite burns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). Increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex--not to mention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so often accompany a homosexual lifestyle. A 1998 study suggested that a homosexual lifestyle, on the average, shortens one’s lifespan by roughly 20 years. It is more deadly than smoking, alcoholism, or drug addiction. This is tragic, when it is known that homosexuality can be prevented, in many cases, or substantially healed in adulthood when there is sufficient motivation and help. Society has a vested interest in prohibiting behavior that endangers the health or safety of the community. Because of this, homosexual liaisons have historically been forbidden by law. Homosexuals contend that their relationships are the equivalent of marriage between a man and woman. They demand that society dignify and approve of their partnerships by giving them legal status as 'marriages.' They further argue that homosexuals should be allowed to become foster parents or adopt children. The best scientific evidence suggests that putting society's stamp of approval on homosexual partnerships would harm society in general and homosexuals in particular, the very individuals some contend would be helped. A large body of scientific evidence suggests that homosexual marriage is a defective counterfeit of traditional marriage and that it poses a clear and present danger to the health of the community. Traditional marriage improves the health of its participants, has the lowest rate of domestic violence, prolongs life, and is the best context in which to raise children. Homosexual coupling undermines its participants' health, has the highest rate of domestic violence, shortens life, and is a poor environment in which to raise children. Christians have a moral obligation to fight the homosexual agenda and protect the institution of marriage. The CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH recently published a statement, "CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING PROPOSALS TO GIVE LEGAL RECOGNITION TO UNIONS BETWEEN HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS." According to this statement, "Those who would move from tolerance to the legitimization of specific rights for cohabiting homosexual persons need to be reminded that the approval or legalization of evil is something far different from the toleration of evil. In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty…" "…The principles of respect and non-discrimination cannot be invoked to support legal recognition of homosexual unions. Differentiating between persons or refusing social recognition or benefits is unacceptable only when it is contrary to justice. The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to forms of cohabitation that are not and cannot be marital is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it." "…When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic law-maker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral." "…Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity." ### In HOMOSEXUALITY AND HOPE: STATEMENT OF THE CATHOLIC MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, SAME-SEX ATTRACTION AS A SYMPTOM notes, Individuals experience same-sex attractions for different reasons. While there are similarities in the patterns of development, each individual has a unique, personal history. In the histories of persons who experience same-sex attraction, one frequently finds one or more of the following: · Alienation from the father in early childhood because the father was perceived as hostile or distant, violent or alcoholic (Apperson 1968[17]; Bene 1965[18]; Bieber 1962[19]; Fisher 1996[20]; Pillard 1988[21]; Sipova 1983[22]) · Mother was overprotective (boys) (Bieber, T. 1971[23]; Bieber 1962[24]; Snortum 1969[25]) · Mother was needy and demanding (boys) (Fitzgibbons 1999[26]) · Mother emotionally unavailable (girls) (Bradley 1997[27]; Eisenbud 1982[28]) · Parents failed to encourage same-sex identification (Zucker 1995[29]) · Lack of rough and tumble play (boys) (Friedman 1980[30]; Hadden 1967a [31]) · Failure to identify with same/sex peers (Hockenberry 1987[32]; Whitman 1977[33]) · Dislike of team sports (boys) (Thompson 1973[34]) · Lack of hand/eye coordination and resultant teasing by peers (boys) (Bailey 1993[35]; Fitzgibbons 1999[36]; Newman 1976[37]) · Sexual abuse or rape (Beitchman 1991[38]; Bradley 1997[39]; Engel 1981[40]; Finkelhor 1984; Gundlach 1967[41]) · Social phobia or extreme shyness (Golwyn 1993[42]) · Parental loss through death or divorce (Zucker 1995) · Separation from parent during critical developmental stages (Zucker 1995) In some cases, same-sex attraction or activity occurs in a patient with other psychological diagnosis, such as: · major depression (Fergusson 1999[43]) · suicidal ideation (Herrell 1999) · generalized anxiety disorder · substance abuse · conduct disorder in adolescents · borderline personality disorder (Parris 1993[44]; Zubenko 1987[45]) · schizophrenia (Gonsiorek 1982) [46] · pathological narcissism (Bychowski 1954[47]; Kaplan 1967[48]) In a few cases, homosexual behavior appears later in life as a response to a trauma such as abortion, (Berger 1994[49]; de Beauvoir 1953) or profound loneliness (Fitzgibbons 1999). SAME-SEX ATTRACTION IS PREVENTABLE If the emotional and developmental needs of each child are properly met by both family and peers, the development of same-sex attraction is very unlikely. Children need affection, praise and acceptance by each parent, by siblings and by peers. Such social and family situations, however, are not always easily established and the needs of children are not always readily identifiable. Some parents may be struggling with their own trials and be unable to provide the attention and support their children require. Sometimes parents work very hard but the particular personality of the child makes support and nurture more difficult. Some parents see incipient signs, seek professional assistance and advice, and are given inadequate, and in some cases, erroneous advice. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual IV (APA 1994[50]) of the American Psychiatric Association has defined Gender Identity Disorder (GID) in children as a strong, persistent cross gender identification, a discomfort with one's own sex, and a preference for cross sex roles in play or in fantasies. Some researchers (Friedman 1988, Phillips, 1992[51]) have identified another less pronounced syndrome in boys -- chronic feelings of unmasculinity. These boys, while not engaging in any cross sex play or fantasies, feel profoundly inadequate in their masculinity and have an almost phobic reaction to rough and tumble play in early childhood often accompanied by a strong dislike of team sports. Several studies have shown that children with Gender Identity Disorder and boys with chronic juvenile unmasculinity are at-risk for same-sex attraction in adolescence. (Newman 1976; Zucker 1995; Harry 1989[52]) Early identification (Hadden 1967[53]) and proper professional intervention, if supported by parents, can often overcome the gender identity disorder. (Rekers 1974[54]; Newman 1976) Unfortunately, many parents who report these concerns to their pediatricians are told not to worry about them. In some cases the symptoms and parental concerns may appear to lessen when the child enters the second or third grade, but unless adequately dealt with, the symptoms may reappear at puberty as intense, same-sex attraction. This attraction appears to be the result of a failure to identify positively with one's own sex. It is important that those involved in child care and education become aware of the signs of gender identity disorder and chronic juvenile unmasculinity and have access the resources available to find appropriate help for these children. (Bradley 1998; Brown 1963[55]; Acosta 1975[56]) Once convinced that same-sex attraction is not a genetically determined disorder, one is able to hope for prevention and a therapeutic model to greatly mitigate, if not eliminate, same-sex attractions. AT-RISK, NOT PREDESTINED While a number of studies have shown that children who have been sexually abused, children exhibiting the symptoms of GID, and boys with chronic juvenile unmasculinity are at risk for same-sex attractions in adolescence and adulthood, it is important to note that a significant percentage of these children do not become homosexually active as adults. (Green 1985[57]; Bradley 1998) For some, negative childhood experiences are overcome by later positive interactions. Some make a conscious decision to turn away from temptation. The presence and the power of God's grace, while not always measurable, cannot be discounted as a factor in helping an at-risk individual turn away from same-sex attraction. The labeling of an adolescent, or worse a child, as unchangeably "homosexual" does the individual a grave disservice. Such adolescents or children can, with appropriate, positive intervention, be given proper guidance to deal with early emotional traumas. THERAPY Those promoting the idea that sexual orientation is immutable frequently quote from a published discussion between Dr. C.C. Tripp and Dr. Lawrence Hatterer in which Dr. Tripp stated: "... there is not a single recorded instance of a change in homosexual orientation which has been validated by outside judges or testing. Kinsey wasn't able to find one. And neither Dr. Pomeroy nor I have been able to find such a patient. We would be happy to have one from Dr. Hatterer." (Tripp & Hatterer 1971) They fail to reference Dr. Hatterer response: "I have 'cured' many homosexuals, Dr. Tripp. Dr. Pomeroy or any other researcher may examine my work because it is all documented on 10 years of tape recordings. Many of these 'cured' (I prefer to use the word 'changed') patients have married, had families and live happy lives. It is a destructive myth that 'once a homosexual, always a homosexual." It has made and will make millions more committed homosexuals. What is more, not only have I but many other reputable psychiatrists (Dr. Samuel B. Hadden, Dr. Lionel Ovesey, Dr. Charles Socarides, Dr. Harold Lief, Dr. Irving Bieber, and others) have reported their successful treatments of the treatable homosexual." (Tripp & Hatterer 1971) A number of therapists have written extensively on the positive results of therapy for same-sex attraction. Tripp chose to ignore the large body of literature on treatment and surveys of therapists. Reviews of treatment for unwanted same-sex attractions show that it is as successful as treatment for similar psychological problems: about 30% experience a freedom from symptoms and another 30% experience improvement. (Bieber 1962[58]; Clippinger 1974[59]; Fine 1987[60]; Kaye 1967[61]; MacIntosh 1994[62]; Marmor 1965[63]; Nicolosi 1998[64]; Rogers 1976[65]; Satinover 1996[66]; Throckmorton[67]; West [68]) Reports from individual therapists have been equally positive. (Barnhouse 1977[69]; Bergler 1962[70]; Bieber 1979[71]; Cappon 1960[72]; Caprio 1954[73]; Ellis 1956[74]; Hadden 1958[75]; Hadden 1967b[76]; Hadfield 1958[77]; Hatterer 1970[78]; Kronemeyer 1989[79]) This is only a representative sampling of the therapists who report successful results in the treatment of persons experiencing same-sex attraction. There are also numerous autobiographical reports from men and women who once believed themselves to be unchangeably bound by same-sex attractions and behaviors. Many of these men and women (Exodus 1990-2000[80]) now describe themselves as free of same-sex attraction, fantasy, and behavior. Most of these individuals found freedom through participation in religion based support groups, although some also had recourse to therapists. Unfortunately, a number of influential persons and professional groups ignore this evidence (APA 1997[81]; Herek 1991[82]) and there seems to be a concerted effort on the part of "homosexual apologists" to deny the effectiveness of treatment of same-sex attraction or claim that such treatment is harmful. Barnhouse expressed wonderment at these efforts: "The distortion of reality inherent in the denials by homosexual apologists that the condition is curable is so immense that one wonders what motivates it." (Barnhouse 1977) Robert Spitzer, M.D., the renowned Columbia University psychiatric researcher, who was directly involved in the 1973 decision to remove homosexuality from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental disorders, has recently become involved with research the possibility of change. Dr. Spitzer stated in an interview: "I am convinced that many people have made substantial changes toward becoming heterosexual...I think that's news... I came to this study skeptical. I now claim that these changes can be sustained." (NARTH 2000). E-mail this article to a friend | Printer friendly format

[Elsie]

You'll note that any instances of a 'key' in the OT, it was VERY visible.

Just WHEN did JESUS ever display a 'key'?

Where (and who) would HE have GOTTEN it from?

[ClaimToFame]

When he gave the key to Peter?

[ClaimToFame]

The vice-regent of the House of David wore around his neck a pouch containing a key which represented his position of authority. The vice-regent held full plenary authority in the king's absence.

[Aquinasfan]

If that is so, just WHERE is that 'key' today?

Here.

Jesus didn't physically hand Peter a key, as far as we know. But the meaning of the key is clear, and would have been understood by the Apostles, who were Jews. The key of the earthly house of David was a type for the keys of the Kingdom (the eternal House of David).

Notice that in Isaiah 22 the position of the king's vice-regent is described as an office. And the events in Isaiah 22 describe Shebna being deposed from his office and being replaced by Eliakim. Similarly, Peter was succeeded by Linus

[Elsie]

Like the sign on Truman's desk said: "The buck stops here", Christ is the final sacrifice, the ONE who will ALWAYS sit on David's Throne.

---

2 Chronicles 21:7
  Nevertheless, because of the covenant the LORD had made with David, the LORD was not willing to destroy the house of David. He had promised to maintain a lamp for him and his descendants forever.

 

1 Kings 2:1-4

 1.  When the time drew near for David to die, he gave a charge to Solomon his son.
 2.  "I am about to go the way of all the earth," he said. "So be strong, show yourself a man,
 3.  and observe what the LORD your God requires: Walk in his ways, and keep his decrees and commands, his laws and requirements, as written in the Law of Moses, so that you may prosper in all you do and wherever you go,
 4.  and that the LORD may keep his promise to me: `If your descendants watch how they live, and if they walk faithfully before me with all their heart and soul, you will never fail to have a man on the throne of Israel.'

 

1 Kings 8:22-26
 22.  Then Solomon stood before the altar of the LORD in front of the whole assembly of Israel, spread out his hands toward heaven
 23.  and said:   "O LORD, God of Israel, there is no God like you in heaven above or on earth below--you who keep your covenant of love with your servants who continue wholeheartedly in your way.
 24.  You have kept your promise to your servant David my father; with your mouth you have promised and with your hand you have fulfilled it--as it is today.
 25.  "Now LORD, God of Israel, keep for your servant David my father the promises you made to him when you said, `You shall never fail to have a man to sit before me on the throne of Israel, if only your sons are careful in all they do to walk before me as you have done.'
 26.  And now, O God of Israel, let your word that you promised your servant David my father come true.

 

1 Kings 9:3-8
 3.  The LORD said to him:   "I have heard the prayer and plea you have made before me; I have consecrated this temple, which you have built, by putting my Name there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.
 4.  "As for you, if you walk before me in integrity of heart and uprightness, as David your father did, and do all I command and observe my decrees and laws,
 5.  I will establish your royal throne over Israel forever, as I promised David your father when I said, `You shall never fail to have a man on the throne of Israel.'
 6.  "But if you  or your sons turn away from me and do not observe the commands and decrees I have given you  and go off to serve other gods and worship them,
 7.  then I will cut off Israel from the land I have given them and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. Israel will then become a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples.
 8.  And though this temple is now imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and will scoff and say, `Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?'

 

2 Chronicles 7:11-22
 11.  When Solomon had finished the temple of the LORD and the royal palace, and had succeeded in carrying out all he had in mind to do in the temple of the LORD and in his own palace,
 12.  the LORD appeared to him at night and said:   "I have heard your prayer and have chosen this place for myself as a temple for sacrifices.
 13.  "When I shut up the heavens so that there is no rain, or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people,
 14.  if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
 15.  Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place.
 16.  I have chosen and consecrated this temple so that my Name may be there forever. My eyes and my heart will always be there.
 17.  "As for you, if you walk before me as David your father did, and do all I command, and observe my decrees and laws,
 18.  I will establish your royal throne, as I covenanted with David your father when I said, `You shall never fail to have a man to rule over Israel.'
 19.  "But if you  turn away and forsake the decrees and commands I have given you  and go off to serve other gods and worship them,
 20.  then I will uproot Israel from my land, which I have given them, and will reject this temple I have consecrated for my Name. I will make it a byword and an object of ridicule among all peoples.
 21.  And though this temple is now so imposing, all who pass by will be appalled and say, `Why has the LORD done such a thing to this land and to this temple?'
 22.  People will answer, `Because they have forsaken the LORD, the God of their fathers, who brought them out of Egypt, and have embraced other gods, worshiping and serving them--that is why he brought all this disaster on them.'"

 

Psalms 89:18-37

 19.  Once you spoke in a vision, to your faithful people you said: "I have bestowed strength on a warrior; I have exalted a young man from among the people.
 20.  I have found David my servant; with my sacred oil I have anointed him.
 21.  My hand will sustain him; surely my arm will strengthen him.
 22.  No enemy will subject him to tribute; no wicked man will oppress him.
 23.  I will crush his foes before him and strike down his adversaries.
 24.  My faithful love will be with him, and through my name his horn  will be exalted.
 25.  I will set his hand over the sea, his right hand over the rivers.
 26.  He will call out to me, `You are my Father, my God, the Rock my Savior.'
 27.  I will also appoint him my firstborn, the most exalted of the kings of the earth.
 28.  I will maintain my love to him forever, and my covenant with him will never fail.
 29.  I will establish his line forever, his throne as long as the heavens endure.
 30.  "If his sons forsake my law and do not follow my statutes,
 31.  if they violate my decrees and fail to keep my commands,
 32.  I will punish their sin with the rod, their iniquity with flogging;
 33.  but I will not take my love from him, nor will I ever betray my faithfulness.
 34.  I will not violate my covenant or alter what my lips have uttered.
 35.  Once for all, I have sworn by my holiness-- and I will not lie to David--
 36.  that his line will continue forever and his throne endure before me like the sun;
 37.  it will be established forever like the moon, the faithful witness in the sky." Selah

 

Jeremiah 33:17-18
 17.  For this is what the LORD says: `David will never fail to have a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel,
 18.  nor will the priests, who are Levites, ever fail to have a man to stand before me continually to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to present sacrifices.'"

---

There is only ONE person who fits these statements: the man Christ Jesus.

[Aquinasfan]

Like the sign on Truman's desk said: "The buck stops here", Christ is the final sacrifice, the ONE who will ALWAYS sit on David's Throne.

8-)

No one's questioning that.

The point is, the position of the vice-regent of the House of David really existed. It's clearly mentioned in Isaiah 22. A real key of the House of David existed. It was held by the vice-regent of the House of David.

Scripture also tells us that Jesus holds the key of the House of David (Rev 3:7), and that He gave the keys of the vice-regency to Peter who, as the vice-regent of the eternal King of the House of David, acts as Christ's earthly representative in His absence, just as the vice-regent of the House of David did in the king's absence in the Old Testament.

This is all Scriptural.

[Elsie]

 

NIV Matthew 16:13-23

 

When Jesus came to the region of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, "Who do people say the Son of Man is?" 

 

They replied, "Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets."  

 

"But what about you?" he asked. "Who do you say I am?" 

Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." 

Jesus replied, "Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.  And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it. 

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be  bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven." 

Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ. 

From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.

 

 
Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him. "Never, Lord!" he said. "This shall never happen to you!" 

 Jesus turned and said to Peter, "Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men."

---

 

Since there is no 'real' key; but merely a 'virtual' one (or set: the Scripture says, "KEYS") what shall we make of the fact that Jesus was talking to ALL the disciples here; and impetuous PETER jumps in with an answer, the question becomes:

 

"To whom is the

you spoken about refer?"

 

Is it ONLY to Peter; or is it to ALL of them?

[iconoclast]

WORD HISTORY: An iconoclast can be unpleasant company, but at least the modern iconoclast only attacks such things as ideas and institutions.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

A very thorough and well written article! Excellent work!

[longtermmemmory]

Somebody needts to get to the writers and urge everyone to define homosexuality as strictly recreational sex.

The homosexuals are trying to define the issue of LAW as based on "love". (like a pedophile "loves")

The law has no provision of love.

As far as the law is concerned homosexual sex is ONLY abour recreational sex as NOTHING is produced from it.

Recreational sex is about the individual.
Marital sex is about society. Socety rewards the insitution not the individual.

[Laura Lee]

Dear "Claim," I suggest you do not allow her to focus on the rights of adults in this argument. Keep the discussion focused on the rights and needs of children. Ask her if society has an obligation to protect and educate children. She will of course say yes.

Ask her: if she had been given a choice in childhood, would she have preferred to grow up with a father and mother, or two mothers, (or two fathers). She will probably qualify her answer by criticizing two-parent families, saying that two loving gays often make better parents than a male and female who treat the kids badly.

Don't let her distract you from your core point: Children BY NATURE (God-given) yearn for the love and guidance of a male and a female parent.

Children need to see father and mother interacting, negotiating, working out differences, loving and having fun together. That is very life-affirming for them. Children come into this world as the result of both their father and their mother. They need to learn about themselves by living with, learning from, and observing both their parents. It is a matter of self-identity.

Little boys need their fathers in their lives as well as their mothers. A little girl needs her mother as well as her dad. It is a crime to bring a child into this world just for your own selfish needs. Parents have to be grown up, capable of sacrificing themselves and their needs for the sake of their children. Sometimes fathers and mothers help each other grow up in the process of parenting the children.

In the truest sense, homosexuals are not good role models for children. They are not engaging in the healthiest type of relationship, they are not loving in a way that can expand the human race. Their love can never create new life. It is at root narcissistic and needy.

All Americans have the same rights: to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. They are protected by the same Bill of Rights, the same Constitution. But homosexuals want SPECIAL rights. They want an unhealthy, non-normal union to be ENDORSED BY THE STATE. They are demanding to be "blessed" by the society in which they live. But homosexuals simply cannot have the blessing of society without taking away the blessing from the next generations.

We would be saying to all young people: Homosexuality is exactly equal to heterosexuality. That is a lie. It is harmful to children to lie to them.

Tell your niece that if she ever does get married and have kids, she will gain an entirely different perspective on this issue. To me, this issue revolves around the responsibility of adults to children.

The Constitution requires the federal government to provide for the general welfare. To allow homosexual "marriage" would be hurting the general welfare by creating confusing and misleading "equality." Children would be forced to learn in school that homosexuals are exactly equal to heterosexuals, that they themselves might grow up and want to marry someone of the same sex. They will be forced to believe that this is wonderful! Children will be force-fed this lie, and more and more confusion and mental illness will be the result.