MTV’s The Real World helped remove the “ick” factor. Reeducate the young, society gets changed.
You can always make the same argument for any sin that this article makes that then gets thrown in Christian’s faces every time:
“JUDGE NOT”.....
Based on the liberal interpretation of those words, nothing anyone does should be judged by anyone, lest they be judged. But you know what; I FULLY EXPECT TO BE JUDGED BY MY CREATOR!
If you do not believe in a real God that directly intervenes in the affairs of men, you do anything you can get away with.
“So, when we wonder how it came to be that so many among us now favor same-sex marriage”
How?
50 years of liberal social engineering...attack on marriage and religion ...marginalization of traditional male values...feminism...no fault divorce ...single female headed families becoming the largest Democrat voting demographic...unrelenting 7 x 24 left wing propaganda...
Easy.
I can’t wait until polygamy becomes legal.
Even if you take religion/morality out of the equation it
just doesn’t make sense. It’s like wanting an airworthiness
certificate for a boat.
The national outcry for same sex marriage received a big boost when the US supreme Court in 1987 decided to define “marriage “ as a relationship that could receive benefits even property. That same year Steve Warren of ACT UP was published in the Advocate calling for Same Sex Marriage. and “surrender” of Orthodox Jews and Christians.And that same year the Congressional Record published another homosexual manifesto in celebration of the gay revolution ( by Jonathan Swift).
Problem is in 1969 I took as my own a Code that declares “I will Never surrender of my own free will...” Nowhere in Scripture is same sex behavior spoken of as anything other than —sinning before the Lord; fornication; abomination;
associated with prostitution; and with idol worship; it is unnatural; against God ; and I could continue but nowhere in Scripture is same sex marriage or the fraud of Civil Unions spoken of as a thing acceptable to God. In modern Science there is no Science that refutes or disproves Scripture. Sexual Orientation remains a chosen behavior-one that can and does change. There is No scientific basis for being turned from the Truth to accept the Lie. SO I can only conclude the roots of this present darkness may run deep
but this nation was established a Christian nation and the
roots of our founding religion and morality run as deep if not deeper.I can name Christians who are named among the Founders-or the First Congress— The modern myth that there were homosexuals among them is to be blunt a LIE-a beguiling LIE -nothing more.But for this cause they have suffered a great deception and have been turned from the truth to believe the LIE.
I think it is just because people know it is wrong but they are just trying to go with the flow. This herd mentality in American Society takes place when people’s moral values are diluted with a liberal moral value/idea that nothing is wrong and everything is relative.
This makes a lot of sense. Also, gay people have been talking, writing, and studying their origins, and all evidence, scientific and experiential, shows that a very high percentage of gays did not choose their orientation. They just were that way.
I think all open minded people in 2012 feel that anyone with a condition not their fault deserves our compassion. Minorities, disabled, sick, etc. That plays a part.
The difference, especially with the prejudiced, is that someone with a speech impediment or Down Syndrome is not thought of as disgusting by the judgmental. Sure, they might be mocked. But the anti-homosexuals, including some on this thread, are disgusted by what a gay person would do if he acted on his sexual interests. And this disgust propels them to say that homosexuals are “wasting oxygen” as someone has said here.
However, remember a few facts to show how wrong this condemnation is from a moral perspective. A) homosexuality does not mean the person is engaged in any kind of sex at all. Plenty of straight people are not having sex. B) G-d does not find some sins more disgusting than others. He may have one biggie, murder, but after that, the people condemning gays are no purer or “less disgusting” than anyone else. C) probably every person condemning gays, if he remembered back in his own sexual experience, would recall a time when he too followed his sexual appetites into some kind of behavior he would not be proud of. And that behavior may well appear disgusting to some.
The approach toward homosexuality that good people should consider is to realize they are here, queer (they have the orientation), and to Help them turn away from the pop culture’s encouragement toward a liberal, libertine lifestyle. Stop pulling away into gaytowns where everything goes. Help them become logical, decent conservatives.
Those who fear to speak out about problems become PC and we see how it turned out.
Homos are endowed by their creator with the same rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Nothing in the Declaration or Constitution about only those attempting Godliness enjoying America. I want as little connection as possible between the Koran, the Torah, the Gitas, and the law. Thou shall not kill, thou shall not steal, no more. No federal Christmas holiday, no El Al Iftar feast/fasts in the White House, and no religious restrictions on state-approved cohabitation, divorce, and marriage, thank you very much.
The crux, as I see it, is that the so-call homosexual rights movement is a deeply flawed but very clever ruse. Those who engage in homosexual acts are using the civil rights lever in order to force society to condone a behavior.
As far as all civil rights movements of the past are concerned, they were efforts to declare one's group as a full member of the human family deserving of the universal rights and endowed blessings of being human. We all enjoy these rights and we all share in the universal basis of these rights, i.e. our common humanity.
This shared basis of our rights is vital, because a cohesive society, a moral and ethical society, is one in which its citizens agree on what constitutes right and wrong.
In this essential regard, the so-called Homosexual movement is a radical departure. Rather than demanding rights owing to our common humanity, they insist that it is a specific behavior that defines their quest for "rights." In that every person, regardless of sexual behavior, enjoys the full endowment of rights and privileges owing to their humanity, the call for additional rights based upon exclusive behavior is nothing but a ruse.
The danger for society, if this ruse is embraced, is that it will mean that any individual can be barred from assessing any behavior as right or wrong. We will have forever lost the actual foundation of all our freedoms and rights.
Homosexual behavior is, at best, a dysfunctional behavior. It is in conflict with natural law and self evident truths. Society must maintain its right to frown upon behavior not in the interest of society as well as to extol behavior that strengthens society. That a society would move to protect marriage as defined is in the interest of society and does not violate the rights of anyone!
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda or moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
[ Add keyword moral absolutes to flag FR articles to this ping list ]
The very first sentence is a gross misinterpretation of recent history.
In an environment where the immature believe as a matter of faith that history, indeed the world, began when they reached pubescence it is natural that this should happen. And their voices are considered as valuable and useful as those of people who who are older, have experienced at least a bit of historical perspective, and who actually know what they're talking about.
One needs only to consider the relatively brief period of what I call pervert activism. It began in the late 70s. That's only 35 years ago, but forever, for anyone under 40.
No one is likely to bother going back and actually looking at the debate in the press and the media. The actual progression leading to today's absurd assertions is all there.
Societies have been riddled with perversion forever. It was held in check with explicit borders demanded by all civilized societies for millennia. Certainly for the last hundreds of years in western civilization. But there were costs attached. Practitioners were shunned, could lose their standing in society and even their jobs.
The crack in the dam began with a plea for tolerance.
Once society yielded an inch, it was only a matter of time for the dam to break.
Of course, once the dam broke, it had huge negative effects on all of society. The closet contingent that had previously existed, now aimed at power, negatively affecting not only the tiny pervert segment, but all of society, including, of course, heterosexual behavior.
The results speak for themselves.
What remains to be seen is simply if there is any "going back." Although the number of deviants is still relatively small, their influence is overwhelming, they have infiltrated every source of power, politically as well as socially.
The only thing I look forward to with amusement are federal laws, with serious penalties, for calling them perverts, and choosing to disassociate ourselves from them in any way we choose.
Enforcing that would be amusing.
I have never been to a gay wedding of any kind, nor do I ever expect to. It would be like going to a unicorn or fairy "marriage."
Marriage always has been, and will continue to be, in my universe, between men and women. Anything else continues to be a damaging perversion.
But now, you can't really distinguish the Church from the world.
For me logically the ultimate extent of individualism possible is true anarchy. That is to say to be bound by the laws of nature alone, not other men.
Such laws of nature do not permit the possibility of a marriage between two people of the same sex. It is therefore an act of self-delusion for the State to claim to recognize the existence of a union.
Regrettably this is a delusion that marks the beginning of the end for the institution itself. At least insofar as the institution is recognized by the State. For it is exactly this delusion that makes the State recognized and instituted institution meaningless. Unless you would argue that it merely the desire of the State that we all pair up for long (not permanent) terms, if that be the case then I would ask for what purpose does the State desire that we pair up indiscriminately for the long term? It is clearly not for the purpose of reproduction and family… Such a purpose could not biologically be served by two or more people of the same sex.
Nor is the purpose of “marriages” as they have long asserted it to be about “love”, we know form history marriages historically had little to do with love. Just as we know presently the idea of the State requiring a license for anyone to love anyone else is abhorrent to our sensibilities.
It is upon this lack of function that the institution of marriage as the State defines it must collapse.
But it is also upon this reasoning that it can and will be resurrected as it was historically and religiously defined by the Church. Believe it or not life and family must go on…
To this end we should reposition ourselves and our churches to take over the institution of marriage from the State. We will need to organize a parallel system of marriage certificates and documentations. (In order to prevent polygamy) that should be honored by all churches of as many denominations as possible provided each marriage meets the minimal of requirements.
This will require an organization of our greater denominations as well as open commutation channels with the other faiths be they Protestant, Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, and even Muslim. We all share basically the same concept of marriage, and therefore we should all agree to recognize each others marriages.
Each Church/ synagogue /temple/mosque will establish a standard macro for the contracts in their jurisdiction to handle the legal side of marriage. (Wills, property rights, visitation, ect..) They will assist in the reestablishment of theses legal recognitions anyone who has a recognized and legitimate Holy marriage certificate from any other political jurisdiction.
God doesn’t like the practice of homosexuality and the marriage of same sex.
As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. – Mathew 24:37
As what was in the “days of Noah? Check what the Jewish teaching is. Can this be true?
Read more: How same-sex marriage points to end of the world http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64769#ixzz1Fs3KFTIO
“The moral divide in this nation is now seen most clearly in the distance between those for whom marriage is exclusively heterosexual and thus a settled issue and, on the other hand, those who honestly see the legalization of same-sex marriage as a moral mandate required by justice.”
How about those of us who see it from a different perspective?
I don’t view it in those sorts of terms. The marriage that we’re talking about here is what the state defines as “marriage.” Frankly, I don’t care if the state defines “marriage” as between two men and a blind goat named Bob. What matters is how it’s defined by the church. And that definition has stayed the same.
Those who are going to marry in the religious sense have a choice as to whether to obtain a license or not. You don’t need a license to get married in the religious sense. If you’re going to make the (unwise) choice to get your religious marriage ratified by the state, then you get to play by the rules and definitions they lay out.
Exact steps, in my view: 1. discrimination laws protecting sexual orientation pass in business and media capitals and college towns. These remake or wipe out conservative institutions.
2. Unregulated internet pornography swamps the moral sense of young people.
Now perhaps these steps are a reflection of historical tendencies, but if either one could have been halted I think we'd be in a different position today.
I like this guy’s formulation of the concept of “moral autonomy.” What the right has failed to do is to counter the left’s bleeding-heart sanctimonies like “homophobia” and “hate speech” with powerful sound bytes of our own, such as “reproductively challenged”, “arrested sexual development”, etc.