A must read. These scientific facts on this thread show why allowing same-sex marriage would be disastrous for America.
As well, these facts show how allowing same-sex marriage would affect you, and America. Use them to rebut someone when they ask you how allowing same-sex marriage could possibly affect you, and to show them why we need a constitutioanl amend banning same-sex marriage... because of these facts,and because we can't trust the courts to do what is right.
Thanks Coleus.
federal judges who try to usurp the power of the people from the states will find themselves to be "endangered species"
The Second Amendment was written to protect us from TYRANNICAL Govts --- especially if our own fell that way.
WOW. GROSS.
Point 11 is the most telling. To ask the government to license so-called "gay marriage" is to ask the government to legislate on our emotions. Let 'em do that and the next thing you know they'll be taxing them. They already legislate (unconstitutionally) hate. We want 'em to legislate love, too?
Earlier this evening I was speaking to a therapist friend of mine. She does research for a professor friend of hers. Right now the professor is writing a book about homosexual relationships and how there is zero, zilch, nada scientific research backing up the claim that homosexuality is in your genes. It gets its beginnings in ailing parent-child relationships.
I wish I could give the transcript of our conversation - it was incredibly interesting. She's supposed to be sending me some links to the research. All the more info to refute the claim that "I was born this way."
Well, my thought on this is not too scientific.
1. Fudge-packers focus on pleasure, not procreation. Thus, sodomites create disease, death and higher insurance premiums, because it would be discriminatory to charge AIDS patients higher rates than normal, relatively healthy people.
2. Gays cannot mate. They are not made to do so. 'Sexual relations' refers to two sexes. Since gays and carpet-munchers are of the same sex, they are not relating over two sexes. They cannot procreate and are the inverse of natural. They cannot reproduce and raise families, which is the base of procreation. Thus, they cannot marry, unless we accept one definition of marriage being the selfish hedonism of mutual pleasure in another of the same sex.
If the left would read Blackstone, Coke, Littleton, Wilson or any other legal giant, they would find that marriage is a contract between a man and a woman AND the state. The "state" is a party to the contract because governments are instituted to secure inalienable rights. Marriage is the institution designed to secure the rights of children; responsibility is delegated to the two people responsible for bringing the child into existence: one man and one woman. Absent the possibility of children, the "state" has no reason to be a party to the contract.
This is also the fundamental basis other sexual morals. Sex outside of marriage risks producing fatherless offspring. This, however, can be rectified by a subsequent marriage. Adultery risks producing fatherless offspring without the possibility of rectification. Intentionally depriving a child of a father is amoral. The prisons are full of criminal who have been deprived of a father and the evil they have wrought on society is immense.
The response from the leftists: "don't replace the constitution with the bible." Morons
God gave us rules to live by, I am willing toi accept the word of the LORD on this.
To sum it up.
Queers Suck.
What We Can Do To Help Defeat the "Gay" Agenda |
|
Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
|
Myth and Reality about Homosexuality--Sexual Orientation Section, Guide to Family Issues" |
Bookmark for later printing.
bump
Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1) |
Homosexual Keyword Search |
This is an issue that conservatives need to be more vigilant on. Too many conservatives retreat to the Bible when confronted by often hateful opposition when they suggest something is wrong with homosexuality in general. Just today I heard an otherwise conservative talkshow host defend a Gay Straight Alliance in Harrisonburg VA and equating it with Civil rights clubs. The key to winning this debate is to place things in perspective provide the facts and keep one's passion in check because what "they" want is the argument to deteriorate into a clash of passions where they get to appear like the helpless victim just wanting equal rights and you the hateful bigot. They are using children now and public schools to forward an agenda which is based upon the false idea that some how kids are born gay which anyone who has reviewed the scientific evidence would know that such assumptions are not supported at all by any conclusive studies to date. It is a hard battle to fight and it is not surprising that many conservatives choose to put their heads in the sand because they can not take the heat on this often times uncomfortable issue.
Well done. The homosexual activists have been trying to keep these truths from the public for a long time.
Forgot to ping the list with my last post...
The promiscuous gay men might SAY they want gay marriage, as a banner to "fight for," but the truth is, none of them would actually want to take on the debts of one of their partners. After the initial boom, those kind of gays will not marry.
Gays and lesbians in long-term committed relationships are as monogamous as heterosexuals, with the gay men being slightly LESS monogamous than straight married men, and lesbians being more monogamous than straight married women.
Your average gay, the one you might see at work tomorrow or on the train and not know he is gay, is much like you and does not have any agenda for ruining your life, values, and conservative institutions. I know some conservative gays who are AGAINST gay marriage.
I used to think that gay marriage would be taking away from thousands of years of civilization. I have changed my mind. It would not. It wouldn't change much at all. There are heteros who certainly trash the institution of marriage all the time, in many different ways, and there are good, solid gay citizens whose unions would remain personal and would allow them to enter the world of decent family values instead of being forced onto the fringe of society, where mores are naturally more loose.
Flame away.
INTREP