Replies

I think the reason why the GOP has never used the issue of marriage as powerfully as it could be used to break the stranglehold of Democrats over minorities is because behind the scenes many wanted to lose on this issue as it seems with many issues. Its almost as if many in GOP leadership see their role as that of easing the path to the same destination that the left is heading.

Gay marriage is the product of the same warped folks who gave us radical feminism, environmental radicalism, and the result of the free love big government generation. If you believe in gay marriage you must believe homosexuality is good and just as good as heterosexual behavior. It is not and it should not be encouraged. Sexual disease spreads like wildfire in the homosexual community especially among homosexual men largely driven by sodomy and rampant many times anonymous sexual promiscuous behavior that exceeds the most sexually active heterosexual by several orders of magnitude. Many new and drug resistant forms of stds are incubating within the crucible of the homosexual community. It was not an accident that AIDS first expressed itself in the gay community. It doesn’t mean we have to be hateful of course but not believing in the warping the whole of culture to radical sexual and diseased gaycentricism is not hate. Hate is ignoring the negatives and allowing the young to be deceived to their detriment and putting children in the hands of those that in many cases will be more likely to abuse them.

Homosexuality as with sexual behavior in general is largely a choice in all but rare cases where a persons conscious control is abridged but human beings in that state are more animal than person and its not as if we should make their behavior a model for good society. Twin studies as well as others show that environment plays the dominate role though this is downplayed and of course there are things that predispose people to not just homosexuality but the whole spectrum of sexual deviance but even in cases where women are masculinized through physical disorder there are those that manage to live happy productive lives in normal heterosexual relationships. (Gay Is Not All in the Genes http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2008/06/30-01.html) Do I believe someone should be forced to conform to heterosexual norms. No but they should have to live within the heterosexual dominated society with the assumption that heterosexuality is the biologically correct and desired mode of sexuality. The idea that a fringe sexual behavior be elevated even if there is a degree of inborn component is dangerous because those same arguments can be made for pedophilia, rape, and other things that are now considered sexual crimes. The truth is there is certainly not just one manifestation of “homosexual” and given the number of homosexuals that move quietly in and out of the heterosexual lifestyle many qualify more as bisexual than exclusively homosexual. This of course doesn’t fit the destructive gay propaganda which has used the concept of being “born this way” as a slogan to breach the lines of what are normally reasoned people.

The idea is that if they are born that way then how can they be denied gravitating to their biological natural state? That phrase alone should reveal the illogic and danger of the whole concept. Human beings if you are to accept the secular point of view are no more than animals.
What then is the biological natural state of the human animal? Civilization if you assume the secular view is the product of human beings suppressing and controlling their natural state for the benefit of all. Accepting the secular view the natural human state for sexuality would be closer to rape in the initial encounter than anything close to dating. One doesn’t have to observe many animals to realize this. Sure primates have a gentle side but the wild ones can just as soon rip your arm off as do tricks for bananas.

Why is heterosexuality inherently superior? Its simple. The superiority is in the potential to produce children. Sure there are the childless but they are the exception though because of disastrous left wing ideas whole genetic linages are disappearing because of delayed reproduction of the so called “best and brightest”. A secularist as well as the religious should be alarmed at this because those that do not reproduce in a secular point of view cease to exist. The single Mom on welfare is more fit from a Darwinian perspective than the CEO Woman who never has a baby. I often wonder if this is not the goal. That an elite group desires that the world be populated primarily with a permanent underclass that is not only environmentally constrained by poverty but also starting out genetically disadvantaged through the self culling of the “best and the brightest”.

I had a friend that proposed such an idea concerning the priest hood that it had an effect of removing those with a genetic advantage for mental capacity from the gene pool lessening competition for feudal lords etc. I do not entirely buy this idea but whether purposely or not or genetic or not the effect is the same. If the “best and brightest” do not reproduce while those who are not the brightest have the equivalent of litters its not hard to see what the end result will be.

That said homosexuality by its very nature requires greater government involvement to function especially in the mode of marriage/reproduction. The idea of a sperm bank becomes essential. Children have donors rather than fathers or Mothers that have clear biological links to their offspring.
This automatically places kids at more risk of abuse. Non biological parents are far more likely to abuse their step children. This is a well documented phenomenon called the
Cinderella effect. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinderella_effect)

Added to this mix is the fact that homosexual men/bisexual men especially report having suffered child abuse at rates far higher than heterosexual men. (Department of Epidemiology, UCLA School of Public Health Study http://www.midus.wisc.edu/findings/pdfs/138.pdf) These two things alone should be big red flags for danger of promoting gay marriage, gay adoption especially given the fact that those that are abused are more prone to risky behavior both sexual and drug related as well as having higher propensity towards acting out violently.
(http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/brain-and-behavior/articles/2010/07/21/risky-behavior-drug-use-among-some-gay-men-linked-to-childhood-abuse)

This at a minimum suggests a very strict policy should be enforced concerning anyone who has been abused having access to foster children or being allowed to adopt them regardless of orientation but given the much higher incidence of reported child abuse homosexuality/bisexuality should set off immediate red flags that should have to be resolved before even considering allowing gay men to adopt or foster. Already children have been allowed to stay in gay foster, adoptive situations even after indicators of abuse were evident because of political correctness. (Gay couple left free to abuse boys - because social workers feared being branded homophobic http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-480151/Gay-couple-left-free-abuse-boys—social-workers-feared-branded-homophobic.html)

Thomas Sowell summed this issue up very well when he stated “The ‘Notion of gay marriage’ is product of sloppy thinking” but I would add it is also the product of a culture of denial and a modern mythology. The left is expert in preying on the heart strings of people in order to get them to believe and accept horrors. When the issue was abortion they raised the specter of women dying in back alleys even though the number so small as to make one wonder why it was even an issue.

“The last full year before Roe 1972, the federal Centers for Disease Control reported that 39 women died due to illegal abortion. (The death total for all abortions, including legal ones, was 88.)”

They’ve tried with Global Warming to do the same thing by vastly inflating numbers to effect “change” to save the world even though he contribution of human beings to environmental CO2 is extremely small as is the total environmental CO2 while totally ignoring the fact that CO2 levels have been several times what they are today in the past and warm periods have occurred long before industrialized man. I hope you see the pattern here.

Now we have same sex marriage, the next step in dumbing down deviance and norming homosexuality. We have the left primary as well as some useful idiots on the right that have bought into what is essentially propaganda meant to transform society once again with little consideration of whether it is good or not. They raise the specter of oppressed homosexuals who just were trying to be themselves. It doesn’t matter that studies show that more than half of those identifying as homosexual are almost certainly environmental and any even greater number of women. It doesn’t matter the role that child abuse appears to have in forming the homosexual orientation of many homosexual men. It doesn’t matter that male homosexual activity is far more prone to disease and is acting as an incubator for drug resistant sexual disease and that curbing the rampant risky behavior within the gay community has been largely a non starter. None of this matters and that is the what is wrong with the whole idea of SSM. It is enshrining the exception which will then be used to suppress the rule. The idea that everyone will be forced to publicly affirm what is essentially a private sexual behavior or else is a tyranny of the most weird and pernicious kind.