God Wasn't Joking
Posted on 10/22/2014 12:38:01 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
American attitudes to gay marriage have been turned on their head in the space of a single generation.
After a US Supreme Court decision this month, 30 of America’s 50 states will have gay marriage laws, which is testament to the sudden shift in attitudes towards same-sex unions in the US.
Two decades ago barely a quarter of Americans believed members of the LGBT community should enjoy equal marriage rights; now nearly two-thirds accept gay marriage.
This quantum leap cannot be explained by what sociologists call generational shift – that is older, conservative folk dying off and younger, more liberal people taking their places. Something more radical and unforeseen took place that precipitated a change in opinion that leapt across the generations.
So how did it happen?
Don’t ask, don’t tell … 1993
The title of Bill Clinton’s legislation to allow gay people to serve in the US military told its own story: the gay and lesbian community could be tolerated, but only if it kept itself to itself.
“Don’t ask don’t tell” sounds ugly now, but at the time it was a hard-fought compromise with the generals who warned that gay soldiers would cause dangerous confusion on the front lines.
That bill showed how far attitudes still had to travel. The Democrats had a “no discrimination on basis of sexual orientation” clause in their policy platform since 1980, but in practice that was far more aspiration than actuality....
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
-— Once sex was seen to be unmoored from child-bearing, the sexual organs became nothing more than every person’s private entertainment center,-—
And it was all predicted in Humanae Vitae, 45 years ago.
And finally, the last old-guard bunker to fall: the Boy Scouts, completing the cycle of government-approved sodomite corruption. For a century the Scouts were morally straight? According to whose definition of straight? So why shouldn’t adult homosexual Scout leaders share tents with teenagers in our brave new world? Don’t be a homophobe, we were told. Each child can make his or her own free choice about their gender identity, but now with helpful adult mentors to guide them along the formerly forbidden paths.
If it feels good, do it. Or have it done to you. Or even do it unto the little children. Tommy wants to become Tomasina before heading to kindergarten? Her brave new mommy agrees? A government-provided surgeon will perform the “gender reassignment” operation. And if kindergarten isn’t soon enough to put the kids on the unrepressed road to gender identification, then start them on Heather Has Two Mommies and Prince and Prince cartoon books in the government-subsidized day care centers.
Smiling experts assured us that we were merely throwing off the shackles of our repressed sexualities. Dissent is hate, and hate is not tolerated around here, mister, so shut up and get with the program. Well, I couldn’t get with the program, so I quit my public high school job. As a world history teacher, moving from a public school to a Christian academy (at less pay and fewer benefits) gave me a couple more years of insulation from the social wreckage cascading down.
I kept looking up for the big asteroid, but we didn’t need God to smite us from outer space. In the end, we smote ourselves with our hubris, believing that we were replacing God’s wisdom with our own. The proud decadence and in-your-face cultural perversions didn’t cause the Rupture, but they were surely flashing red signs warning that the end was near.
Click the pic to the full-text Free Republic thread.
You must not of read and or understood what Appy wrote it makes big time sense
I think many people have been bullied into claiming they support it because they see what can happen to you if you don’t.
We learned?
That is like saying that Africans learned to love the plantation life.
Gay marriage was passed by the voters in Maryland, Maine and Washington State, and a referendum to ban gay marriage was defeated by voters in Minnesota. Gay marriage was passed by legislatures in CT, VT, RI, NH, DC, MN, HI, NY, DE and IL. (It was also passed by the legislatures in CA and MA, but only after courts had invalidated earlier bans.)
> “Two decades ago barely a quarter of Americans believed members of the LGBT community should enjoy equal marriage rights; now nearly two-thirds accept gay marriage.”
My God, what rubbish. Americans have passed amendment after amendment, law after law setting boundaries around the definition of marriage and they have been terrorized by a judiciary that rides roughshod over the will of the people.
But traditional society will get a handle on this judiciary in the year ahead.
It is not unheard of to make up “statistics” on the spot, in support of what would be, logically, a highly unpopular issue.
Stereotyping taken to its most extreme application, and generalizations made from only very flimsy evidence, if any at all.
There is a very strong and persuasive argument for balkanizing the territory once known as “the United States of America” into separate “red” and “blue” republics. There would many, many small and sometimes isolated “blue” pockets, in the much larger and nearly contiguous “red” republic.
The “red” republic, would continue to embrace all the traditional applications of the legal code that worked so well for a couple of centuries or so before a concerted effort was made to dismantle it, while the “blue” republics could just go ahead with whatever set of cockamamie rules they wanted to govern themselves by. However, there should be a very sharp boundary enforced between the larger “red” republic, and smaller “blue” republics. Those who are dissatisfied with life in the “red” republic would be freely allowed to emigrate to any of the “blue” republics, but once moved, they would have no right of return.
For any reason.
Conversely, should there be refugees from the “blue” republics that wish to migrate to the “red” republic, only after a very stringent period of testing and demonstration of long-term future loyalty, would they be permitted to gain permanent residency in the “red” republic.
Propaganda on television, newspapers, and in schools “turned the tide”. Doesn’t mean that people are comfortable with it. They were sold a lie by propagandists. 10-20% homo statistics, experiment, straight men on sit-coms playing loveable gay pals to neurotic women, gay newsrooms pushing the gay agenda without disclosing their personal connection to the issue...
It was by the Act’s of Federal Judges overturning what American’s Voted to maintain as being between a man and a woman to define marriage - not the people but activist judges.
That’s a very real problem but I suspect it will be eased as we begin to experience “gay divorce”.
I know a lot of gay people(yes I do) who got married simply because it was trendy. That’s a bad reason to get married.
Marriage entangles a lot of things. This is particularly true of people prone to bad choices in life. Your lover’s $40k in credit card debt is now your $40k in credit card debt. If he finances a car, that debt belongs to you now.
One of my college friends wants to get married RIGHT NOW but his partner refuses because he has a ton of family property. And he sees no reason to get married.
Consider this from: “THE CONSERVATIVE REFORMATION AND ITS THEOLOGY as represented in the Augsburg Confession and in the history and literature of the Evangelical Lutheran Church” by Charles P. Krauth, D.D. (1871). [Note date]
"But the practical result of this principle is one on which there is no need of speculating; it works in one unvarying way. When error is admitted into the Church, it will be found that the stages of its progress are always three.
It begins by asking toleration. Its friends say to the majority: You need not be afraid of us; we are few and weak; only let us alone; we shall not disturb the faith of others. The Church has her standards of doctrine; of course we shall never interfere with them; we only ask for ourselves to be spared interference with our private opinions.
Indulged in this for a time, error goes on to assert equal rights. Truth and error are two balancing forces. The Church shall do nothing which looks like deciding between them; that would be partiality. It is bigotry to assert any superior right for the truth. We are to agree to differ and any favoring of the truth, because it is truth, is partisanship. What the friends of truth and error hold in common is fundamental. Anything on which they differ is “ipso facto” non-essential. Anybody who makes account of such a thing is a disturber of the peace of the church. Truth and error are two co-ordinate powers, and the great secret of church-statesmanship is to preserve the balance between them.
From this point error soon goes on to its natural end, which is to assert supremacy. Truth started with tolerating; it comes to be merely tolerated and that only for a time. Error claims a preference for its judgments on all disputed points. It puts men into position, not as at first in spite of their departure from the Church’s faith, but in consequence of it. Their recommendation is that they repudiate that faith, and position is given them to teach others to repudiate it, and make them skillful in combating it." (pp. 195-196)
>> Yep. Communist Goal #1. You can’t create a “new man” if you still have traditional families and belief in God.
Marxist Feminism’s Ruined Lives
Frontpagemag.com ^ | 9-2-2014 | Mallory Millett
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3200158/posts
...Katie (Millet) said, “Come to New York. We’re making revolution! Some of us are starting the National Organization of Women and you can be part of it.”
I hadn’t seen her for years. Although she had tormented me when we were youngsters, those memories were faint after my Asian traumas and the break-up of my marriage. I foolishly mistook her for sanctuary in a storm. With so much time and distance between us, I had forgotten her emotional instability.
And so began my period as an unwitting witness to history. I stayed with Kate and her lovable Japanese husband, Fumio, in a dilapidated loft on The Bowery as she finished her first book, a PhD thesis for Columbia University, “Sexual Politics.”
It was 1969. Kate invited me to join her for a gathering at the home of her friend, Lila Karp. They called the assemblage a “consciousness-raising-group,” a typical communist exercise, something practiced in Maoist China. We gathered at a large table as the chairperson opened the meeting with a back-and-forth recitation, like a Litany, a type of prayer done in Catholic Church. But now it was Marxism, the Church of the Left, mimicking religious practice:
“Why are we here today?” she asked.
“To make revolution,” they answered.
“What kind of revolution?” she replied.
“The Cultural Revolution,” they chanted.
“And how do we make Cultural Revolution?” she demanded.
“By destroying the American family!” they answered.
“How do we destroy the family?” she came back.
“By destroying the American Patriarch,” they cried exuberantly.
“And how do we destroy the American Patriarch?” she replied.
“By taking away his power!”
“How do we do that?”
“By destroying monogamy!” they shouted.
“How can we destroy monogamy?”
Their answer left me dumbstruck, breathless, disbelieving my ears. Was I on planet earth? Who were these people?
“By promoting promiscuity, eroticism, prostitution and homosexuality!” they resounded.
They proceeded with a long discussion on how to advance these goals by establishing The National Organization of Women. It was clear they desired nothing less than the utter deconstruction of Western society. The upshot was that the only way to do this was “to invade every American institution. Every one must be permeated with ‘The Revolution’”: The media, the educational system, universities, high schools, K-12, school boards, etc.; then, the judiciary, the legislatures, the executive branches and even the library system.
It fell on my ears as a ludicrous scheme, as if they were a band of highly imaginative children planning a Brinks robbery; a lark trumped up on a snowy night amongst a group of spoiled brats over booze and hashish.
Sounds good to me! I’m tired of constantly having to divine the truth from their lies.
I second that! It means the nation rejects God. It means the nation rejects the holy institution that was founded by God. It means the nation holds up fallacy as co-equal with truth. . .and thus, truth, henceforth, will be unrecognizable and devalued. . .the human conscience will disengage from truth and humans will behave, not as animals, but as vile monsters. unrecognizable by the laws of nature and of nature's God. We will see hell on earth, as a result. . .
Luther on polygamy:
“A man is not
absolutely forbidden to have more than one wife ; I could
not prevent it, but certainly I should not counsel it... Yet I would not raise the
question but only say, that, should it come before the
sheriff, it would be right to answer that we do not reject the
example of the Patriarchs, as though they were not right in
doing what they did, as the Manicheans say.”
It came through deception, intimidation, name-calling, reversal of principles, redefinition of terms and disallowing the expression of one side of the debate by labeling it out-of-bounds.
Shock, intimidate, bully while you get your black robed rulers in place for the last punch.
It’s a total lie. Opposition to queer “marriage” among the general population is as strong as it ever was. The elites only present the story they want you to believe. One of the Left’s favorite tricks is to present their deformed agenda as a fait accompli, a historical inevitability.
It’s not. Never has been.
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.