Posted on 03/01/2006 12:01:59 PM PST by Jim Robinson
Whose children will be allowed to participate in the White House’s annual Easter Egg Roll on April 17? Not the sons and daughters of gay parents, if the Christian right gets its way.
In November, when the Family Pride Coalition, a D.C.-based gay rights advocacy group, invited its members to participate in one of the “great traditions of our country” the religious right sprang into action. The Institute on Religion and Democracy, a religious think tank, accused the Family Pride Coalition of trying to “exploit a children’s event for political purposes.” Even the White House has weighed in.
~~snip~~
The Christian right blogosphere is afire, condemning the presence of gay parents on the White House lawn as “nearly terrorist threats from the homo lobby.” One post suggests that “White House psychologists” should be deployed to help the children of gay parents and implies that they are molested in their homes. Another wishes the gays “good luck,” reminding readers that “the Secret Service carries automatic weapons.”
Such posts are, of course, “those of the individual posters” to http://www.FreeRepublic.com, “and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of … its operators.” The site claims 200,000 registered members, known as “Freepers,” and a daily readership of “tens of thousands.” Free Republic, founded in 1996, has been embraced by right-wing social conservatives as the online water cooler for “patriots” who are “biased toward God, country, family, liberty and freedom.”
Or at least liberty and freedom for some. “These lowlife scum should just be mowed down like terrorists,” writes one good Christian.
(Excerpt) Read more at inthesetimes.com ...
The "arguments" - and I use that word loosely - are getting pretty funny. I wonder if he'll wake up tomorrow morning and realize how incredibly transparent and pathetic he is.
I wonder if he'll wake up tomorrow morning and realize how incredibly transparent and pathetic he is.
The ~2% figure was admitted as evidence within a Friend of the Court brief filed with the U.S. Supreme Court on March 26, 2003 in the Lawrence v. Texas, known as the Texas sodomy case. In this case, homosexual activists were arguing to have the Texas law against sodomy declared unconstitutional by the Court.In footnote 42 on page 16 of this legal brief, 31 homosexual and pro-homosexual groups admitted the following: “The most widely accepted study of sexual practices in the United States is the National Health and Social Life Survey (NHSLS). The NHSLS found that 2.8% of the male, and 1.4% of the female, population identify themselves as gay, lesbian, or bisexual. See Laumann, et al, The Social Organization of Sex: Sexual Practices in the United States (1994). This amounts to nearly 4 million openly gay men and 2 million women who identify as lesbian.”
Note that the homosexual agenda supporters could only infer homosexual 'status' based upon a "widely accepted study of sexual practices"
The 2% declaration in addition to how the percentage was inferred concurs with reality and flies in the face of homosexual activist propoganda. In reality there are a number of individuals who 'feel' they would like to engage in homosexual activity and there are a number of individuals who choose to engage in homosexual activity... These individuals are only innately human beings -they are not sexual actors upon the leftist stage due special status because they choose to read from a homosexual script...
Really makes one wonder how it is that human beings could be categorized innately and objectively by the unique sexual practices they can subjectively claim they are predisposed to or can subjectively choose or not choose to engage in... --very odd the homosexual 'rights' premise being touted by whatever percentage happen to engage in whatever chosen sexual activity...
And again, the homosexual infected community is grossly overrepresented in the serial killers list too. Seems that many other mental illnesses track with homosexuality
Is it hatred to want to see someone healed of a mental disorder that destroys their life, leaves them mostly unhappy and prone to other mental illnesses, robs them of 20 years (or so) of their life, greatly increases the odds of them committing crimes and eventually condemns them to hell or is it hatred to enable them to remain diseased?
I think the worst enemy those afflicted with Same-sex Attraction Disorder have is the homosexual enablers.
A couple of hours after posting on this thread, I got home from work, turned on 1010 WINS news radio (NYC), and was treated to the latest story of heterosexual child molestation, which I must say reaches a new peak of sorts. Female day care center work is arrested for the sexual abuse and rape of a FOUR-year-old boy in her care (they're actually charging her with "rape", though I'm not quite sure what the technical definition of that involves, when talking about an adult woman and a pre-school boy). She admits it happens but says it's the little boy's' fault because he came on to her!!! Pity the public defender that gets assigned to this woman.
" At least there will be more places to hide the eggs this year."
Just so you know. Laughing so hard that your triple shot
esspreso comes out your nose IS quite a bit different
than just milk (the last time I did it, in third grade).
Rabbits don't mate for life. So you're probably just seeing the Easter Bunny between matings
Yes, it is relevant for one important reason, anyone with a criminal record is barred from adopting children.
I don't believe that the statistics I saw went into the criminal background of the molester. It was limited to numbers of boys molested by men, number of boys molested by women and the same sort of info for girls.
Since it was a record of what happened instead of a projection of what might happen, prior criminal history didn't enter in to it.
Paul you bring up a very good point. Background of adoptive parents.
The winnowing process to find adoptive parents is very thorough (more so in some states than others) It involves finding every trait or habit that could be hazardous to a child and eliminating the prospective parents until they fix that shortcoming. Everything from smoking to having a less than spotless house will eliminate someone from contention. Being overweight, having insufficient earnings, too many divorces, mental illnes etc will all prevent people from being able to adopt.
So, having the mental disease known generally as homosexuality should also eliminate people from being able to adopt. It's just not healthy for the kids. Regardless of if the prosepctive parents have a criminal history or not, the statistics warn against placing kids with sodomites
she should be executed. painfully. The child will bear the scars of the attack for a long, long time, if he gets over it at all.
There was one selfish lesbian couple who plotted to deliberately conceive biologically deaf children (one if not both of the women were deaf).
I think that the first child was a boy and the second was a girl. Perhaps they REALLY REALLY wanted a deaf daughter (and adoption wasn't good enough or not an option).
PBS and others have done documentaries on them.
The children are just a tool in their self-made world.
"Jesus confirmed the entire body of scripture."
Even some of the archaic laws of the Olde Testament? If so, there are lots of adulterers on this planet (and rebellious teenagers) who should be killed, according to OT law!!
Yes, but please explain the pink, baby blue, and yellow eggs he carries around in the basket. If I saw any man doing such things I would have serious questions regarding their sexual orientation. =)
Well that's probably because there are no women in the men prisons where those studies were taken.
You need to recheck your information, people are not barred from adopting on those standands. For example, the insufficient earnings (unless the person is jobless) is incorrect concerning the states gives adopted parents a monthly check to up raise the adopted children.
NAMBLA types should be ecstatic then, they could raise a house full of "victims" on the taxpayer dime.
"I disagree. I'd rather have a kid in a state-run orphanage (or better yet, in a religious orphanage) than in the home of a homosexual. The first is not an ideal situation. The second is child abuse."
Actually, either will result in serious personality problems under current evangelistic-atheist state policies.
A correctly formed personality requires a moral system. An atheistic child is an atheistic child. One will produce a liberal mindset, and the other will produce a robot socialist, IMO. They can still adjust, but will never really awaken to full adulthood. Either will be equally deadly to the child's spirit.
Our government needs to get completely out of the child-rearing and adoption biz, and hand it over to people who view children as something other than mind-slaves.
Agreed. A young mind should not be presented with too many conundrums. Same reason a child really shouldn't be plopped in front of a television until they are able to tell reality from make-believe. Leads to delusional thought processes (liberalism, FRinstance).
Yes but you'll need to read the rest of the story. It will do you good.
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.