Posted on 12/29/2001 12:11:46 AM PST by truthandlife
A pro-family expert on the homosexual agenda says the homosexual community, a tiny minority in the United States, wants the rest of society to change.
Homosexual activists continue to boast about the number of same-sex couples living in the U.S., using statistics gleaned from the 2000 U.S. Census to intensify their demands that society embrace their agenda. But Ed Vitagliano, director of research for the American Family Association, suggests the opposite is true -- that the real numbers demonstrate just how small a sliver of the population is actually homosexual.
"Part of the strategy [of homosexual activists] is to always try to inflate their numbers," Vitagliano says. "They try to inflate the incidence of hate crimes, they try to inflate the number of homosexuals that lose their jobs because of their sexual orientation. And now with this latest brouhaha over the U.S. Census statistics, they are trying to inflate the influence that same-sex couples would have in the political arena, and the fact of the matter is that one-half of [one] percent of the people in this country are living in same-sex households."
Vitagliano says homosexual activists have been touting the recent statistics as evidence that homosexuals are a potent political force, and their agenda should be heeded. In fact, a lesbian real estate agent in Mississippi recently told the Clarion-Ledger in Jackson that if people knew "how many of us there were, there would be less hysteria and we might have some political power." But the researcher points out the census statistics do not translate in a powerful voting bloc.
"[W]e're not saying that they shouldn't have any right to participate in the political process -- they certainly do, no matter how small their group is," he says, "but they really are expecting the vast majority of people in this country to change their traditional views on morality, sexuality, marriage and family ... and that's just not going to happen."
Vitagliano says rather than looking to overturn traditional morality, legislators in every state should be looking at the devastating effects brought on by the sin of homosexuality. An AFA press release earlier this week noted that a study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology revealed that male homosexuals lose anywhere from 8 to 20 years off their life span compared to heterosexual men. According to the press release, other studies demonstrate that homosexuals suffer vastly increased rates of sexually transmitted diseases -- even apart from AIDS -- as well as dramatically higher incidence of mental health problems, and much higher rates of domestic violence between same-sex couples.
Speak of the devil, now that Virginia elected a Democrat for governor, look what's in the Richmond-Times Dispatch today.
Husbands and wives soon may not be the only people who can borrow money from Virginia's housing authority to buy homes.Surprise!Unrelated adults and nonmarried couples - including homosexuals - would become eligible for low-interest home loans under a pending proposal by the Virginia Housing Development Authority.
The authority is proposing to drop the "family rule" from its single-family home program, reversing a policy that was championed by Gov. George Allen and social conservatives opposed to government support for nontraditional households. Continue
Questions: If I, as a private individual, own a private business, then the government gets to tell me who I can and can not hire? Individuals have a right to work whatever job they want, and for whoever they want? In this scenario, how does the government not own all means of production?
Discrimination by individuals is the basis of a free society. The word has just been bastradized over the years.
You mean like straight guys can't make it in hair dressing, fashion, or interior design unless they at least pretend they are gay? Ya, that sucks. Or are you talking about being a Ranger or SEAL who loves your buddies a little too much?
Where's the discrimination? Personally, I have never seen it. Jokes or disapporval are not unfair discrimination. They are part of life if you choose to be a social oddity, like an Elvis impersonator. Give me an example of real discrimination.
From Vine's Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words:
"agape, = charity, dear, feast, love."
I agree that agape does not refer to sex, but there is no way it is "divine." In the verb form, as an example, it doesn't mean "I divinely love," it simply means "I love."
BTW, why are you posting personal attacks against me? You have a problem with your confused sexuality, or what?
I may agree that it "should not be a criterion, but if I am a private business owner, I can do whatever I want to. There is no power given to the government to regulate attitudes of people. There is no Constitutional right to work for whoever you want to. However, if you mean public jobs, then I agree.
"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press. We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."--John Swinton, Chief of Staff New York Times, 1953
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.