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

Skip to comments.

First Rush, then Coulter, and Now Glenn Beck ... What’s Happening?
Life Site News ^ | NEW YORK, August 12, 2010 | Commentary by John-Henry Westen

Posted on 08/14/2010 4:09:18 AM PDT by GonzoII

Friday August 13, 2010


First Rush, then Coulter, and Now Glenn Beck ... What’s Happening?

Commentary by John-Henry Westen

NEW YORK, August 12, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Appearing on The O’Reilly Factor yesterday, famed conservative Fox News host Glenn Beck may have shocked many Americans by noting that he was not very concerned about homosexual 'marriage.'

O’Reilly asked Beck, “Do you believe that gay marriage is a threat to the country in any way?” Beck replied, “No, I don't,” adding sarcastically, “Will the gays come and get us?” 

After being pressed again on the question, Beck said, “I believe -- I believe what Thomas Jefferson said. If it neither breaks my leg nor picks my pocket, what difference is it to me?”  Showing his own surprise, O’Reilly remarked, “Okay, so you don't. That's interesting. Because I don't think a lot of people understand that about you.”

The Glenn Beck revelation comes on the heels of two other startling announcements by conservative celebrity pundits in the last couple of weeks.  Earlier this week it was announced that conservative pundit Ann Coulter would headline a fundraiser for the homosexual activist group within the Republican Party, GOProud.  And on July 29, although his position had been revealed before, talk radio host Rush Limbaugh again came out in favor of homosexual civil unions, while being opposed to same-sex ‘marriage.’

To be fair, it must be pointed out that Beck said he was looking at the ‘big picture’ and promoting faith, the answer to all such things.  Moreover, he added that he was okay with gay ‘marriage’ with a caveat.  “As long as we are not going down the road of Canada, where it now is a problem for churches to have free speech. If they can still say, hey, we oppose it,” he said.

But even to have suggested, as strongly as he did, that he was not opposed to gay ‘marriage’ is detrimental and demonstrates a ‘small picture’ approach.

Beck seems like a good guy. He’s thoughtful.  He’s right on many matters in the culture war.  For instance, when O’Reilly followed up and asked if Beck thought abortion threatened the United States, Beck replied dramatically in the affirmative.  “Abortion is killing, it’s killing, you’re killing someone,” he said.

So I thought it’d be worth it to calmly and persuasively share concerns with Beck on his approach.  He may not read my email, but I’m sure if enough pro-family folks were to get the message to him, he’d reconsider his outlook.

Here’s Beck’s email:

And here’s the gist of what I wrote:

Laws teach people what is right and wrong and thus homosexual acts will implicitly be given the stamp of approval where such legal recognition is granted.  The young will be given the false impression that this behavior is safe and acceptable, or even good.

Society has a duty to legally recognize and support married couples since they are, through procreation, the source for the continuation of human life and thus society itself.  Homosexual couples cannot properly procreate and thus have no such claim to societal recognition.

The question is not so much about marriage, but about homosexual acts.  The acts are harmful to the individuals who engage in them. They are harmful physically, emotionally and spiritually. 

With regard to persons engaged in such behavior or identifying with it, there must never be unjust discrimination.  All gay bashing, name-calling and the like should be condemned.  However, there must be discrimination on this front, a just discrimination, to preserve societal recognition for marriage between one man and one woman. 

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081315.html


Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: anncoulter; beck4romney; bugzapper; coulter4romney; gagdadbob; gaymarriage; glennbeck; homocon; homosexualagenda; logcabinrepublican; moralabsolutes; onecosmos; prager; prop8; romney; romneymarriage; rushlimbaugh; samesexmarriage; sinissin; victorkilo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 841-857 next last
To: BobS

I’m not sure why people are bringing up Rush on this issue, the past week he has been raking that judge in California over the coals. Albeit, he doesn’t give three hours every day to the issue, but he hasn’t ignored it either.


201 posted on 08/14/2010 7:38:30 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 200 | View Replies]

To: Global2010

I don’t want to stone anyone. I don’t care what they do in the privacy of their abodes. I DON’T want to give them special rights based on abnormal behavior. I don’t want to make their aberrant behavior normal through the force of government.


202 posted on 08/14/2010 7:39:44 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 196 | View Replies]

To: Mercat

To coin a phrase, ditto. Governing and adjudicating against the will of the people is the biggest offense in all this.


203 posted on 08/14/2010 7:40:39 AM PDT by ShandaLear (The price of Obamacare? 30 pieces of silver.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Global2010

That’s the homosexual agenda.


204 posted on 08/14/2010 7:40:58 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Oh and add babies out of wedlock.

Long term shackers want everything those who have a civil union license couple have.

But yet they say whats a peice of paper, it will destroy what we have, we don’t need to have a church ceremony God knows we love each other, but yet they want the same rights as a married couple.


205 posted on 08/14/2010 7:41:04 AM PDT by Global2010 (Congratulations to Dware for the FR Mussel Eating Fundraiser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

I just came to an epiphany. These people aren’t pro-gay marriage. They are actually part of Fred Phelps little bandwagon and what they want is gay marriage so Big Brother can have a list of all the gay people and they can go get them.

Right now the law doesn’t ask if you are gay, with gay marriage, it will slap a big purple triangle on all gay couples on government records.


206 posted on 08/14/2010 7:42:08 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 198 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

There is a FOURTH area which the “Progressives” are seeking to destroy and that is the “Traditional nuclear family”. Mr. Beck has totally ignored this area of their attack, therefore he can omit dealing with homosexuals, homosexual “marriage”, polygamy, etc.


207 posted on 08/14/2010 7:43:25 AM PDT by Jmouse007 (Heavenly Father, deliver us from evil and from those perpetuating it, in Jesus name, amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Global2010
You see good wholesome God Loving people where NORMAL thinking people see aberrant behavior and illegal actions in a public setting and have a problem people calling it like it is.
208 posted on 08/14/2010 7:43:43 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: InternetTuffGuy

“Same with bigamy and polygamy (that latter, apparently okay with God of the OT).”

Don’t leave out slavery, incest, murder and genocide.


209 posted on 08/14/2010 7:46:13 AM PDT by Bob J
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

Comment #210 Removed by Moderator

To: Global2010
Oh and add babies out of wedlock.

What about babies out of wedlock? Are you saying that the father shouldn't support what he wrought?

Long term shackers want everything those who have a civil union license couple have.

Again that's the gays.

But yet they say whats a peice of paper, it will destroy what we have, we don’t need to have a church ceremony God knows we love each other, but yet they want the same rights as a married couple.

God never designed a union for two of the same. It is against God and against nature. God will punish unrepentant sin. Two of a kind cannot have children because it is an UNNATURAL "union". It produces nothing. It is void. It's only purpose is hedonism and selfishness.

211 posted on 08/14/2010 7:46:32 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

It’s unbelievanle how shallow and self-centered some people are......when they claim that same-sex marriage (which is about same-ness, not diversity) won’t affect their marriage.....

In fact, it will effect the institution of marriage mand confuse and confound children...

If marriage is everything, then it is nothing

and if it’s everything, they why have marriage at all—and just let people do what they want?

Marriage is about law and order and has both a pubolic and private purpose....

Ann Coulter has never been married, whereas Rush Limbaugh has been married and divorced at least 3 or 4 times.....

Glen Beck likes to talk about his alcholism and quote the Bible like an unhinged idiot (we’re talking context here, not trashing the Bible).....and considers himself to be “libertarian”.

But this is a shallow libertarianism........because how exactly is the government staying OUT of peoples; business or private sex lives by giving marriage license to homosexual couples....

Marriage was meant to regulate homosexuality....like we regulate cigarettes and alcohol (admittedly not a perfect analogy).....because it potentially is a destructive force and was to be channelled into a more constructive and procreative one...whereas,

like meth, cocaine , or heroin.....homosexual couplings and sex were seen as destructive of public and private ends (no pun intended)-—and thus were banned or a best tolerated....

I guess Rush and Ann and Beck havr bought into the “gender studies” idea that we have at least 4 genders (male, female, gay and lesbian) instead of just two sexes....

Because if you don’t buy the “gender” garbage and believe in only two sexes and different kinds of sexual behavior.....then you don’t buy into the “discrimination” argument.

Everybody can get married under just one definition of marriage...so-called gays and lesbians aren’t being discriminated against, it’s just that they don’t WANT to get married under the current defintion of marriage and the social purpose it was meant to serve....

So they are free to remain single, just as much as somebody who doesn’t marry because they don’t want to be tied down and want to be a bachelor or bachlorette forever.....


212 posted on 08/14/2010 7:47:40 AM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mnehring

I’m more inclined to think they are bleeding heart liberals on social issues with no common sense.


213 posted on 08/14/2010 7:47:42 AM PDT by DJ MacWoW (If Bam is the answer, the question was stupid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: DJ MacWoW

Gays can’t force Father into their political correctness.

He is very outspoken, like it or not. : )


214 posted on 08/14/2010 7:49:01 AM PDT by Global2010 (Congratulations to Dware for the FR Mussel Eating Fundraiser.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 168 | View Replies]

To: Global2010
But, you said they're God Loving individuals, how about you show me where there are God Loving individuals in that community?
215 posted on 08/14/2010 7:51:14 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: Global2010

God also said that it is a perversion and is wrong.
But you keep pushing gay marriage.


216 posted on 08/14/2010 7:52:02 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: GonzoII

Problem is, Glen, it will pick your pocket when your children run off and marry, then divorce, and your estate gets dissipated among people who have no blood relation to you whatsoever, and don’t recognize the validity of your family.


217 posted on 08/14/2010 7:53:32 AM PDT by GVnana (I'm a Mama Grizzly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf9

coorect that.....”marriage was meant to regulate HETEROSEXUALIY as a potential destructive force”....whereas homosexuality was to be banned as ONLY a destructive force....if people want us to change the law and persuade us otherwise, then fine...but judicial coercion is wrong....

and why not just have NO marriage....It seems to me that courts could say “either everytbody gets married or nobody does”, thus they strike down marriage laws and nobody can.....at least that leaves it to the people instead of having judges abuse their power and just change the definition of marriage....


218 posted on 08/14/2010 7:55:15 AM PDT by Beowulf9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies]

To: Beowulf9

They already left it to the people in Prop 8, the people voted against the gay agenda.


219 posted on 08/14/2010 7:56:23 AM PDT by Darksheare (I shook hands with Sheryl Crow and all I got was Typhus and a single sheet of toilet paper.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: massmike
"Glenn Beck: gay agenda not a threat.."

Tell that to the photographer that was sued because she wouldn’t photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony.

..Or tell it to THIS guy who was fired because some lesbian felt “offended”.......

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09d/vadala/index.html

******************************

Exactly right. Thank you.

220 posted on 08/14/2010 7:56:50 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 181 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 181-200201-220221-240 ... 841-857 next 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