So then, because he doesn’t want to tell a homosexual face to face that he opposes homosexual marriage, that means he now favors homosexual marriage.
And, because of the “right side of history” argument, which has become part of the homosexual marriage message, he would be ashamed to look back years from now and say that he was against homosexual marriage.
Wow, those sound like deep reasons to decide to be in favor of homosexual marriage. (sarcasm)
Unless the pervs can prove that screw came lose in their brains before they were born, I'm not buying it. Until then, these freaks are more like asylum patients than anything. Isn't it time we sent them back to the nut house so the American people and their children can live safety and in peace again?
Good people in this country can't even walk the streets safely these days, especially the innocent young boys. Parents have to hover over and protect their little loved ones every minute. If you simply believe homosexual sodomy is a mental disease (which has led to AIDS and other deadly diseases), these animals go rabid and start trying to eat your flesh. They have to be beaten off with a stick.
The critical, egregious mistake you make is calling "whatever" a "family."
The worst mistake America has ever made was to release them from the mental institutions. Behavior like this is what kept them there. The American people and their children were much safer because of it.
Giving them different drinking fountains and bathrooms is not a "racial" issue. It's a public safety issue. The segregated fountains would stop the dangerous spreading of their spit, and the private bathrooms would keep their orgies, nasty body excretions, AIDs filled used condoms, and boy rapes apart from the bathrooms used by the normal segments of society.
.
And of course the comparison with blacks. How does one put gays in the same category with an ethnic group, and ethnic group whose civil rights are specifically protected by the Constitution? In segregating blacks, the states were continuing to abide by the standards of Dred Scott, a decision of the supreme Court which the country intended to overthrow when ratifying the 14th Amendment. But the courts consistently told us that the terms of that amendment did not apply even to women. So by what logic, is it supposed to apply to a group identified only by their sexual behavior? One can respect the civil rights of prostitutes even as we outlaw their behavior. Ditto, adulterers and pedophiles.
Homos already have equal marriage rights. Homo men are free to marry any woman who will have them just like normal men are. Homo women are free to marry any man who will have them just like normal women are.
What the mean spirited militants want is a new right. Granted, this new right would apply to normal people as well as to perverts, but it is still a new right. The right to marry applies to everyone equally NOW and there is no need to create a new right.
Blacks weren’t asking for new rights. The civil rights movement was about access to existing rights.
Sorry, not a civil rights question dudes.
5.56mm
Marriage is a religious institution. If you look for the marriage records of your ancestors, you find them recorded in churches and other religious institutions. That is the ONLY place you can find them.
Marriage is about stability. The children in our country are in trouble. The ones that come from single family homes are in the biggest trouble. The children from same-sex homes crave the attention of the gender of the missing parent. They know something is missing instinctively.
Same-sex marriage is not the end-goal. I am not sure what it is, but I can guarantee if they win this one, the next step in their fight will start immediately; as it was with DADT in the military.
The media has brainwashed a majority of the country into believing the Christians and Republicans hate homosexuals. The people who saw the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day as a movement of hate were told that by the media. Show me one picture of hate expressed that day. There could be one, but I haven't seen it.
Love the sinner, hate the sin. They are attacked marriage and we are defending it peaceably.
He’s also buying the left’s definition of “love”. If he really loved his friend he would not stand aside or encourage that person’s destruction.
The fact is those who have no love in them will abandon others to whatever destructive winds blow. It’s no skin off his nose.
God's Divine plan for marriage is one man and one woman. The best thing you can say is that HE allows multiple wives. He does not require them, (Sorry Mormons and Muslims). He simply does not make an issue of it. But they are not His intention for us.
Matthew 19:8-9 8 (Jesus) said to them, “Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality,[d] and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.”
Jesus seems to be saying that some things were permitted under Old Testament law, but they were not the Lord's plan for us. When he says that if you divorce your wife and marry another you commit adultery, I think that implies that you shouldn't have another wife.
Marriage is a religious institution. If you look for the marriage records of your ancestors, you find them recorded in churches and other religious institutions. That is the ONLY place you can find them.
Marriage is about stability. The children in our country are in trouble. The ones that come from single family homes are in the biggest trouble. The children from same-sex homes crave the attention of the gender of the missing parent. They know something is missing instinctively.
Same-sex marriage is not the end-goal. I am not sure what it is, but I can guarantee if they win this one, the next step in their fight will start immediately; as it was with DADT in the military.
The media has brainwashed a majority of the country into believing the Christians and Republicans hate homosexuals. The people who saw the Chick-Fil-A appreciation day as a movement of hate were told that by the media. Show me one picture of hate expressed that day. There could be one, but I haven't seen it.
Love the sinner, hate the sin. They are attacking marriage and we are defending it peaceably.
The above is from the current feature at my Conservative Resource Center (Social Reform: Confusion or "Unintended Consequences?".)
Of course, the whole concept of "Civil Rights," is misunderstood by most of the population--no accident, since it has seldom been objectively discussed in the media. What are referred to as "Civil Rights" differ from what the Founding Fathers referred to as "Liberty," in that they flow not from the Creator, but from Legislative Acts, that actually infringe on the natural rights in one's own property or community. Rejecting the demands & values of the "Civil Rights Movement," is not the same thing as being anti-any group That is always a false argument.
William Flax
Non-violent, eh? Apparently, this writer didn't see this video. He also must've missed the graffiti on a Chick-Fil-A restaurant and all of the obscenity-filled anti-Chick-fil-A comments on the internet, too.
The Civil Rights Movement placed the burden of black suffering squarely on the plates of people all over the country who otherwise felt that they had no part in Jim Crow oppression.
So, in this twisted piece of logic, the writer thinks the two issues are related.
The result is what we are living through now, a sort of "gay bubble" not unlike economic bubbles, such as the housing bubble or tech stock bubble or political bubbles like the one for the One, Bubble Head Obama.
Sooner or later we figure it out and the bubble pops. (Addios, BHO!)
For the gay bubble, the Chick-Fil-A dust up is an aneurysm, likely fatal.
Blacks fought for the right to vote, to eat in the same restaurants and to sit where-ever they wanted buses trains, public transportation ... among other things. Their cause was just...
There is not ONE restaurant in the United States that will not serve gays, there is NOT ONE place in the United States that has 'separate but equal' schools, libraries, drinking fountains, hotels, etc... It's all a lie.
What gays want is for marriage to become meaningless. If two men can marry - why not three men? Or one man and 18 wives?
Blacks were discriminated against wrongly - so why can't a man marry his dog? That's what liberals think of as 'logic'?
The argument will come down to what 'groups' can marry and at that point marriage will be destroyed. We have the right to object. Conservatives have 'human rights' too..
Gays can create domestic partnerships - and if they put enough thought into it, who knows, maybe some straights will switch over to 'domestic partnerships... there are options. One option they can't have is to destroy the best most natural way to raise children and to keep a society strong... a man, women and children as a family...
This guy isn’t a conservative. He’s a leftist in the traditional sense of the word and uses their arguements with delightful abandon. That alone should leave this moron out of any serious debate let alone allowing him to claim to be a conservative. Anyone who compares homosexual activism as equivalent to black civil rights has lost their minds. Blacks had restricted voting rights, they had restrictions on use of public facilities buses etc not just private ones they sufferred discrimination simply because of their race not anything related to their character or personal choice. A person who doesn’t understand this really just isn’t very intelligent. They are one of the left’s pavlov dogs who have been brainwashed/pinkwashed into an emotive mess of intectually dishonest goo.
There is nothing peaceful about the lgbt movement. Ask those who supported prop 8, the businesses that were vandalized, the individuals who lost their jobs, the churches which were defaced by homosexual supporters and their ilk. The magnitude of bad behavior from Homosexuals dwarfed any by prop any by prop 8 supporters but almost zero attention was paid to it. No one focused on the concerted organized effort at intimiate ad bully Prop 8 supporters. Instead the press lifts up every Christian fauxps or gay attack or suicide into a national quandry. That is the propaganda war we face.
This has nothing to do with liberty. Gays have the exact same liberty that every America does. None of us have a right to a blank check marriage license from the government.
The other night there was a show covering objectsexuals who have personal sexual relationships with cars and such. Do we grant marriage licenses and confer licenses for any possible sexual/emotional arrangement a person desires because that that is the lgbtqia (they keep adding letters) argument. Also they are working to shut down allowing those who have unwanted sexual desires help. As much as a third or more of “gay” men trace their sexual desires to sexual abuse as a child. The lgbtq community would have these individuals be forced to affirm their unwanted desires that were perpetrated on them as innocent children. It doesn’t matter that it is exactly these type of individuals that are at greater risk of continuing a cycle of abuse. Al of that doesn’t matter because all that matters is the political myth which is no more founded in fact than global warming.
I feel simultaneously angry and sad for this guy. He is a victim of a culture and politics gone mad and a fuzzy thinking that has become the norm for many. That he doesn’t realize that what the left was doing to Chickfila was just a taste of the PC orwellian future that awaits which has nothing at all to do with his gay friends. I have gay friends but I also know their histories which is why I will never support his idea of the gayutopian future because at its very core is a lie.
Here’s the same guy on Climate Change same leftists spew different issue. He’s not even a Rhino hes just a leftist.
My argument against gay marriage has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with survival of the species.
In a long ago undergrad anthropology class, we looked at beliefs held by different cultures and found that may of the beliefs and customs from the cultures were attributed to a deity by the culture, but were really quite practical for survival of the culture at the time and place of the social group. An example, not eating pork. Without modern cooking methods, pork was full of nasty things that could kill you. A ban on eating pork meant fewer people getting sick and dying and better survival of the species.
Now, looking at homosexual marriage (I refuse to ay gay because all of the homosexual I have know were not happy people, but were all suffering in some way). Marriage being between one man and one woman, or even one man and many women leads to babies and babies mean the species has a good chance of surviving, at least for one more generation. That’s why even the Greeks, who had a big thing for young boys, still married women to bear their children. That’s why marriage has always been between men and women, it is the only way to encourage reproduction and guarantee survival of the species.
Marriage between one man and one man or between one woman and one woman is like non-alcoholic beer. There’s a resemblance between the copy and the original, but only the original gets the job done.
And for those who will argue what about marriages with no chance of reproduction because of age of the woman or defect in one of the partners aren’t seeing the forest through the trees. The very act of encouraging men and women to marry and to have sexual relations benefits the entire culture, even if some of the members will not be able to reproduce.
So, encouraging a practice which has a negative effect on the chances of that culture’s continuation is just plain suicide for that culture (as is kill off the young of the species, but I’ve already pontificated enough for today).
>> He is buying into the whole ridiculous “gay rights = civil rights” argument
Forcing individuals to sanction and support homosexual behavior is not a “civil right” — it’s oppression.
Perhaps you can look into the eyes of people you care for and respect and explain that providing their children with the full legal protection of an official family would threaten something...
_____________________________________
Perhaps you can imagine that TWO MEN or TWO WOMEN can biologically produce children but I cant...
Theres still that old fashioned birds and the bees thingy
Way back to Bible times..