Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gay Agenda Means Less Freedom For All
GOPUSA.com ^ | May 30, 2006 | Star Parker

Posted on 05/31/2006 12:40:57 PM PDT by DBeers

Gay Agenda Means Less Freedom For All

The latest Gallup polling on attitudes regarding same-sex marriage shows a trend that should concern conservatives as well as all Americans.

From the narrow view of just the same-sex marriage issue, although the majority of Americans are still opposed to legalization, they are a lot less opposed than they were a decade ago. From the vantage point of homosexual activists, the trend certainly appears to be their friend.

Moreover, given how this debate is formulated and presented, I see a broader message emerging. I get a sense that Americans are increasingly confusing entitlement and political power with freedom and tolerance. This does not bode well for the future of a free and vibrant country.

The most recent polling shows that a strong majority of Americans oppose legal recognition of same sex marriage (58 percent) and a slight majority favor a constitutional amendment (50 percent for, 47 percent opposed). The support breaks out consistently along partly lines. Republicans favor the amendment (66 percent for) and Democrats oppose (55 percent against).

These results are about the same as they were last year. However, they have changed a lot over the last 10 years. Today 39 percent of Americans support legal recognition of same sex marriage, up from 27 percent 10 years ago and 58 percent oppose, down from 68 percent 10 years ago.

Completing the picture of what seems reasonable to call a trend, the area of the population where support for same-sex marriage is strongest and growing is among young people. Time does not seem to favor those who want to preserve tradition.

A more qualitative measure of this trend is to just listen to how the debate is cast.

A Washington Post editorial opposing the Federal Marriage Amendment accuses Republicans of "picking on gays and lesbians." According to the Post, such an amendment would "discriminate against a class of people."

Mary Cheney in her new book equates this alleged discrimination to denial of rights in the past to women and blacks and prohibitions against interracial marriage.

So, along with the trend toward increasing acceptance of the idea of same-sex marriage has been the complete obliteration of the idea that homosexuality is a type of behavior as opposed to a state of being. The discussion has long disappeared that this is about attitudes regarding this behavior and it has become almost exclusively cast as discrimination claims against gays and lesbians.

Philosophers of science point out that there is nothing we can prove. We can only disprove things. The only thing that it takes to disprove something is to find one incident where the theory doesn't work.

We have, for instance, a law of gravity. However, if we find one morning, while someone is eating their bowl of cheerios, that their spoon jumps out of their hand and flies up to the ceiling, we kiss goodbye to our law of gravity.

Now there are without question instances where individuals change their sexual behavior.

I have never heard of instance of a black person becoming white or vice versa.

Yet, somehow we have gotten to the point where it is generally accepted that being gay is a fact and not a choice.

The more we obscure where choice lies and the more we obscure where responsibility lies, we become increasingly transformed into a political entitlement society rather than a free and tolerant society.

If gay activists really wanted freedom, as opposed to advancing a particular political agenda, they would be hard at work moving government control out of areas of our society that limit their as well as everyone else's freedom.

They should be fighting for nationwide school choice, so they can send their children to schools that teach what they want. They should be fighting for private social security accounts and so they could stop complaining about discrimination in survivor benefits. They should fight for private health care accounts and getting corporations out of the benefits providing business and so they could stop complaining about discrimination in benefits toward gay couples.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Extended News; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: gaystoppo; homosexualagenda; homosexualrights; starparker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: snarks_when_bored

ROFL!! Those where the days when Murphy and Pryor rocked!


21 posted on 05/31/2006 9:03:10 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Conservatism is moderate, it is the center, it is the middle of the road)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory
Other nations hold the learned behavior as the societal position. hmmm... did not realize this -maybe a a humanist based subconscious rebellion to accepting any born status e.g. class/caste systems of yore?
22 posted on 05/31/2006 9:07:34 PM PDT by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy
Hey, Nut Cracker. What can I say? I have a PhD and have studied this in depth as I believe that if one continues to repeat the lies that one is born a homosexual they become accommodators and abettors in the propagation of the sinister homosexual agenda for this nation.

I respectfully submit that I did not "make that up."

23 posted on 06/01/2006 8:52:26 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy (For English, Press One. (Tookie, you won the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes. Oh, too late.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: bpjam

Everything in your #14 is true. Only the guilty will object.


24 posted on 06/01/2006 8:54:15 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy (For English, Press One. (Tookie, you won the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes. Oh, too late.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy
It is natural for them to pursue happiness in accordance with that.

What happiness is there in taking a rollercoaster to hell?

How can something so nasty, foul, sinful and unsanitary be natural?

Look how far the perverted class has taken their desire for same-sex activity. Just a few months ago we read of an animal farm just outside San Francisco where sick people paid money in order to have sex with animals of their same sex.

One of them died when he was falling in love with a horse! The details of how he ended up dead is absolutely enough to make you puke.

25 posted on 06/01/2006 8:59:22 AM PDT by FerdieMurphy (For English, Press One. (Tookie, you won the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes. Oh, too late.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: DBeers
Completing the picture of what seems reasonable to call a trend, the area of the population where support for same-sex marriage is strongest and growing is among young people. Time does not seem to favor those who want to preserve tradition.

You mean the same young people who are recent products of the public school system? The public school system that conservatives allowed to fester as a vampire's coffin of liberalism by not killing the Department of Education and instead throwing money at it?
26 posted on 06/01/2006 8:59:22 AM PDT by Old_Mil (http://www.constitutionparty.org - Forging a Rebirth of Freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FerdieMurphy
If one continues to repeat the lies that one is born a homosexual they become accommodators and abettors in the propagation of the sinister homosexual agenda for this nation.

I didn't argue that "one is born a homosexual." I mentioned genetics, pre- and post- birth environmental factors. I didn't deny that in marginal cases an individual can be drawn one way or the other. But it is painfully obvious that most male homosexuals just are that way.

Whatever you have personally studied in depth probably has a lot of truth in it that I would agree with. However, any body of "knowledge" about human behavior is subject to glaring errors. I've known many psychiatrists and physicians, and even though I probably find fault in what their official societies proclaim, it just is not true that most look at the causes of homosexuality as having totally to do with an "acquired taste," and on that score I agree with them.

27 posted on 06/01/2006 10:45:56 AM PDT by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: NutCrackerBoy

Well, at least we agree that homosexuals are not born perverted.


28 posted on 06/01/2006 12:34:13 PM PDT by FerdieMurphy (For English, Press One. (Tookie, you won the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes. Oh, too late.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: durasell
If they are ugly, they have a harder time. Its gotta really suck to be fat or ugly and gay since you are mocked even in gay bars. Hey, even Kinsey, one of the biggest gay lobbyists in history, said that gays have something like 6 partners for each partner hetero's have.

Do you straight friends complain about not getting any? Typically, its not something lesbians or straight women would say openly but being a gay guy is pretty much mostly about having sex. Otherwise, you aren't gay. The idea that the majority of gay men are dying to get married is a laugher. Compare virtually any medium and you will find the extreme characteristics on the side of gay men will be way off the charts compared to straight men.

29 posted on 06/01/2006 6:23:47 PM PDT by bpjam (If we take 12M Mexicans, they have to take Kennedy & McCain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: bpjam

Mostly everyone I know is complaining about "not getting any." Everyone is too busy working and making money. But that's a whole different topic of discussion.

I don't believe the gay guys I know are particularly ugly -- though I can't really judge. Some are self-proclaimed computer geeks, so that might have something to do with it.

But it's tough out there for both straight and gay guys. You reach a "certain age" and the random hook-ups become less enjoyable.


30 posted on 06/01/2006 6:51:40 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: durasell

you know, there is a conservative singles site. something like conservativesingles.com or something. Maybe you should try there?


31 posted on 06/01/2006 11:03:53 PM PDT by bpjam (If we take 12M Mexicans, they have to take Kennedy & McCain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bpjam

That wasn't my point, but thanks anyway.


My point was that the gay thing you describe is like the straight thing in many ways. For instance, it's fine to date a string of models, actresses and dancers at age 25. But if you're still doing it at 35+ there's a problem.


32 posted on 06/01/2006 11:57:15 PM PDT by durasell (!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson