Friday, September 7, 2012

Posts Sept. 1 - Sept. 7

Blogger's Note: I know that when I started I stated I would generally refrain from commenting on the comments, but I feel a bit of an introduction is warranted on this one. You see, people like Maggie Gallagher and Brian Brown love to claim that they do not hate gays and lesbians. And this very well may be true - Brown even rallied against the Southern Poverty Law Center's decision to label the Family Research Council as a hate group. They may not be motivated by by hatred of homosexuals. However, someone recently went undercover at NOM's Ruth Institute's "It Takes a Family to Raise a Village" conference, and found some shocking things. Needless to say, there is some underlying animus amongst NOM and especially amongst its supporters.

If you asked NOM's supporters (the ones allowed to comment freely on their board, as I've well-established), gays are "needing of a psychiatrist" "immoral" and "unhealthy." Some will parse words and say that they do not hate gay people, but they hate the gay lifestyle and think that homosexuality itself is immoral. But what is the difference? It would be akin to saying "I don't hate you, I just hate your religion" (Religion is a choice, after all - much like the religious right contends of homosexuality). The thing is so many other groups, be they minority or majority identify themselves based on a behavior or set of behaviors. Suddenly the majority plays the victim card because they feel they are being unfairly characterized as having animus towards a minority simply because they "disapprove of a lifestyle."

And yet it goes so far beyond "disapproving of a lifestyle." "Gays are mentally unstable," "Gays are illogical," "Gays are just friends," "Gays dress in leather chaps" who "Look at children as products," and are people who "Want to corrupt marriage." The problem with this kind of rhetoric is that it goes far beyond merely stating one's position - it is justifying one's position with lies and stereotypes. And when one believes all of the lies and stereotypes as justifications for a particular position (one that's not based on hatred, mind you), it is not far off to call for more than simply "defending marriage." People call for gays to be put behind an electrified fence to "die off". If that is not horrible enough, these people are then applauded for their position. There are also people who want to see homosexuality criminalized

My point is that groups like NOM and its supporters are not simply motivated by the belief that "marriage is one man one woman." They fear a great cultural shift because they legitimately have animus towards homosexuals. They fear having children who will "accept homosexuality," and deliberately mischaracterize the love two men or two women have for each other as being akin to the love brothers feel for each other or sisters feel for each other. And yet none of this is hatred in their eyes. Yet the moment someone calls them out on it, that person is immediately identified as being "hateful" of someone "Defending marriage."

With all of that said, I now present comments for the week of September 1 - 7. I will do my best to upload deleted comments, however my comments are no longer being sent through the filter - they don't even appear after I send them to try and get a screencap - almost as if NOM does not think anything I say, however respectful, is worthy of their comments board, simply because it is a reasoned dissent. So I ask all of my readers (all two of them) to please help out and send submissions to and help with this ongoing project of mine. Thank you. 

From Daughter of Eve

There is no way homosexual behavior has anything to do with love. Lust? Yes. Selfish gratification? Yes. Pride--as in arrogance, yes, but nothing to do with personal dignity, or self confidence born of achievement or personal virtue.

From Fitz

Jon (writes)
"For every "loonie" on the left there is a loonie on the right."
Don't believe it.. Only under political pressure was homosexuality taken of the list of mental disorders/ The Evelyn Hooker study simply proved that you could be gay & mentally stable.....NOT that homosexuals were as mentally stable as heterosexuals on average.
Their are many, many more mentally unstable homosexuals amongst the same-sex "marriage" movement.
One can see it in the illogical and personal nature that they defend their cause..

First one from M. Jones
I am sick listening to the Democrats applaud the idea of killing babies, corruption of marriage, and promoting homosexuality while glorifying single motherhood.

The old-testament loving leviticus 
I wonder how many states will succeed [sic] from the union if Obama is reelected because of this Homosexual marriage equality nonsense.

Second one from M. Jones
Someone needs to educate Democrats, that same-sex friendships are simply not marriages, and they never will be.

Second one from Overcame SSA 
Most people are not paying attention to the DNC, and I would wager to say that most people do not know that the Democrat platform promotes homosexual "marriage."
I'm telling my Republican friends who are on the fence because they think Romney "doesn't have a plan," that I too am waiting for a plan, but what really gets me is that the Democrats are so out of touch with my social beliefs; that they believe that marriage is no longer just for men and women, but for homosexual couples.

I hope that at the DNC they bring out two guys in leather chaps to hug and kiss one another on stage. That is the "CHANGE" that Obama wants; an America that none of us recognizes.
That will seal the deal for the Republicans.

Overcame SSA seems to like appearing here
Theoretically, if we want what's best for the children, we would take all of the poor children from their poor parents and give them to rich people. It is essentially the same argument that the homosexualists [sic] make; that is, that the child's parents (real parents) do not matter.
But what's "best" for the child is not merely a function of financial or educational success and being able to function in society; there is also the huge immeasurable psychological component that comes with being connected to the people that created you and being connected to the extended family of people who share your genetic make-up. Homosexuals look at children as mere products and their parents as just manufacturers of the product. I hypothesize that this attitude comes from the same psychological disturbance that led to the homosexuality in the first place.

The recent vindication of New Family Structure Study by peer review panel is a victory for 1st Amendment right and the truth among destructiveness of gay parenting for children. The gay lifestyle is immoral, unhealthy and destructive. With the aggressive push by gay groups for adoption and acceptance gay parenting, this studies and many other show the debilitating effects on children from gay parents.

From M. Jones 
Its not just about the selfish sexual desires of adults, its the innocent children that will be forced to learn about homosexuality in schools and taught that its an acceptable life style choice. "Yes little Johnny, you too can marry your same sex friend and call that a marriage."
And last, and certainly animus-filled, OvercameSSA
Homosexuals don't need gay "marriage;" they need good psychiatrists.

Friday, August 31, 2012

Posts to close out August

A note from the blogger:

With the RNC now over and the Republican Party affirming it's opposition to gay marriage, expect to see the Democratic Party announce it's support during the DNC. 

The issue of marriage equality is a deeply divisive one, with staunch supporters on either side. Even in states where court cases and legislation has been passed in support of marriage equality, the debate still rages on. Part of the issue is that those in support of marriage equality have this misconception that those on the right must not know any gay people, for if they did, they would change their mind. Part of the issue is that those on the left believe the right to be "hateful bigots". 

The other side of the coin is that those who claim to be "defenders of traditional marriage" believe that gays are "Atheistsic perverts" who want to "corrupt marriage" and turn America into a "Sodom and Gomorroah." They also believe that gays should "welcome pedophiles" (if not believing gays are pedophiles) and that gays are "predators" who want to "steal children from their mothers and fathers." 

People locked into these beliefs will likely never reach an accord about the nature of civil marriage - for that's what most gay marriage advocates are wanting to discuss. They want to discuss civil marriage and the benefits that go along with making a lifelong commitment to a consenting adult whom they love and respect with all their heart. Unfortunately, some people on side of "traditional marriage" can't separate their religiously motivated rhetoric from the civil debate. Nay, they can't even be civil in a civil debate, as one commenter notes that "Gay marriage supporters should keep their support in the bedroom".

With that note, I bring you comments from the week in NOM. These are the people who will be voting for Romney in November, seeking to strip rights from thousands of married gay couples and destroying the families they've been building. All in the name of "marriage."


From ForTraditionalMarriage

Gays crack me up! They are intrinsically atheistic and don't care about God's definition of marriage. Their whole argument is that marriage should be based on state laws and not biblical principals.. In that case, it is a free fall. Let everyone have their cake. If a bi-sexual man/woman want an extra partner - why not? Hey, they are in the same bucket with the rest of you homosexuals. Why should they be denied their rights? Homosexuals arguing about the legality of polygamy is too funny. smdh

From M. Jones

They said it wouldn't happen and it did! The perversion extremists won't be happy until America becomes another Sodom and Gomorrah.

From Good News

You bring up a good point Jon. P(edefilia) has to be added to LGBT. LBBTP.
Each one is a sexual appetite or behavior that has been traditionally looked down upon by the larger civilization. And each one has seemingly rational arguments on why they are natural normal behavior that should be accepted in the public eye.
Why in the world should a person who hits puberty not be allowed to have sex with anyone he wants to? Nature opened the door, who are you to close it? And how can physically pleasing a child even younger than that hurt him if it is done with love and care. And more than all else, if the society would simply learn to accept it and stop putting taboo's on it, which only end up creating psychological wounds, the child would than not have a reason to have a problem with it.
The same goes for incest now that birth-control is so perfected and abortion is included in health care. So to be fair to all at hand, it should read LGBTPI; and that is not a joke.
All of these groups have seemingly rational arguments that can and or could be put forth – as the homosexual “marriage” argument. The best thing is often simply to say “no” to something, even if a good argument for that “no” cannot be articulated. The problem with homosexual “marriage” is that we have started to allow arguments to be made for it, rather than saying outright “no”. (A good seemingly good argument does not dictate truth)
Now stop your bigotry and let the P & Is in your group.

From Chris Fox

Another attempt by gay predators to have access to children. Hijacking black civil rights or hiding behind step parenting to gain legal access to children. The community is a community of sexual predators doing their best to brainwash society with homophobic propaganda. Frank Lombard and gay icon Larry Brinkin if not caught would be joyful of these measures.

All one need do is consider the source of this bill. In 2005, Leno authored AB 849, the bill that legalized psuedo marriage. In 2007, he introduced AB 43, the deceptively named Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Protection Act, that would have allowed for same-sex marriage.
He has a history of introducing bills with deceptive names that force radical social changes on the people.
It's clear that his newest creation (SB 1476) is designed to make it easier for same-sex couples to steal children from their rightful parent(s).
He follows in the footsteps of other gay extremists who view children as nothing more than commodities to be bought, sold and stolen.

My position is the same as the GOP Platform in Oklahoma, which states: “Those promoting homosexuality or other aberrant lifestyles should not be allowed to hold responsible positions over children, which are not their own, or other vulnerable persons.” “We believe that homosexuality is not a genetic trait, but a chosen lifestyle,” argues the platform. “No adoption privileges therefore, will be afforded homosexuals.”

Richard, you are missing the point: at it's core, marriage is an opposite-sexed union. Even polygamy, which includes more than one wife, still includes the husband. SSM does not. There are actual consequences to individuals when states choose to ignore 1) fundamental distinctions between males and females and 2) the complementarity of male+female. There is nothing arbitrary about neutering marriage. The fact that, once in a while, and on a limited scale, some few same-sex unions have been codified (still not related to gay identity politics, which are fairly recent), does not make it incumbant upon our nation to eject the sexually complementarity of the opposite-sexed marriage requirement, in order to pander to sexual identity politics.
Furthermore, society's attitudes towards homosexual behavior are irrelevant to marriage eligibility, as those who choose to engage in homosexual behavior are permitted to marry. I venture to say that a cursory check in the history books would show that a few homosexual males still married females, with an eye towards perpetuating the family lineage.
Also, one who has actually read and studied the Bible would quickly discover that nowhere is there stated doctrine that says the scriptures are open to arbitrary interpretation. As for the early church performing same-sex unions, if such were the case, it is to be remembered that an apostasy from truth is also a propohesy fulfilled, in the scriptures (2Thess.) Lastly, a person versed in racially discriminative marriage laws would know that only whites were not permitted from marrying a minority; minorities were allowed to marry each other. The ban against whites marrying minorities was to keep the blood lines "pure"--another nod at the universal ties marriage has to procreation, and which SSM has no interest, being a non-procreative union.

It is pretty obvious Rich. SSM is an issue because SSM is being pushed. Polygamy, polyamory and no fault divorce are also threats to the definition of marriage, but currently, LGBT activists are using SSM as the most recent assault on the definition of marriage.

From Robert 
You have to be far away from God to not know what is true in your heart. The gay activists are making up many lies about what marriage really is. We all know what marriage is, but many people are blind and deaf they cannot see or hear God anymore they have toned Him out, and made up a fantasy world where they believe their own lies and others follow, they deceive themselves.

So-called same-sex "marriage" is bizarre and perceived to be a radical, drastic change to our society. We see homosexuals portrayed on television, but we see them as one of the many other strange groups of characters that dominate our viewing (see. e.g., Hoarders, Jerry Springer, Toddlers & Tiaras, etc...).
To take a group like that and hold it out as an American value will turn off a lot of people. It's one thing to support same-sex "marriage" as long as it is kept as a private matter or as a television amusement; but when it's held out as an ideal of sorts, expect to see a backlash against it.

Friday, August 24, 2012

Comments 8/18 - 8/24

This week, I think, requires a bit of an introduction and a conclusion. So, if you'll indulge me for a few paragraphs before I present the selection of comments...

Brian Brown recently called for civility while on CNN. He did this in response to the SPLC standing by it's labeling of the FRC as a "hate group." Clearly, Mr. Brown believes that type of rhetoric is harmful to the overall discussion of the purpose of marriage in this country and whether or not marriage should be extended to same-sex couples nationwide as it has been in Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, New York. and Iowa (pending in Washington and Maryland). It is with this call for civility in mind that I present this week's comments from Brian's organization's blog. 

This one comes from M. Jones 

Sadly in the marriage corruption movement, there is just no room for family values in the politics of sexual identity.

Here's one from Jeff 

The whole point of everything (as i stated many times before) is that gay people want "special rights" over eveyone else / they want to redefine the term 'marriage into their sick & twisted view / they want us who oppose them to accept their sick & perverted lifestyle & force little kids in school to be taught to accept their perverted lifestyle / they want those who speak out against them to be considered "hate speech" & put in prison just like in Europe. they'll stop at nothing to spread their sick & perverted agenda.

Savage and his gang want to be hated, because they use it to appear as victims, and they need to be hated in order to qualify for higher scrutiny judicial review when they go to court.
It was supposedly a journalism lecture, announced as such. The people responsible are the educators who set this program up, for award winning students. They must be held responsible, not out of hate, but out of professionalism.
We know their tactics...

Seems to me what marriage corruption supporters rail against isn't the actual physical bullying at the hands of autherntic Christians, but the bullying one internalizes when they are reminded of how their depravity is viewed in the context of nature and natures God whenever they happen upon authentic Christians.
Christianity and sexual depravity are incompatible with one another. It is in knowing that authentic Christians can never accept their proclivity as moral that sends these heathen over the edge.
You shine the light on the Devil and the Devil is going to scream.”

John B., a mistake was made. You and your male partner should never have been granted a marriage license in the first place, as your relationship doesn't include all of the factors that make marriage a unique relationship. DOMA is right to recognize only male/female public unions as marriage, for the sake of any laws regarding marriage. Other loving male/male relationships are not recognized as marriages, such as brothers, or fathers/sons, though they are as loving and commited as your relationship with your friend. If not all states treat your relationship as a marriage, it is not because you have a same-sex attraction. It is not because you engage in homosexual behavior. It is not because you subscribe to the gay political identity. It is because states recognize marriage as a male-female union, and your relationship doesn't include a female. the D.C. area has caused a lot of confusion by treating same-sex relationships the same as married opposite-sex relationships. That is regrettable, and we'll work to correct that mistake, by working to repeal the choices made by a few to neuter marriage.
As for those who have treated you with violence or threats of physical harm, that is, of course, reprehensible. I am truly sorry to hear of that.
Blog author comment: At least DoE says that violence and threats of physical harm are reprehensible. It is somewhat ironic given the threats of emotional harm DoE makes in the same comment by working to take away his marriage.
I think pedophilia and homosexuality are similar in that they are mental disorders in which people have sexual attractions to people with whom they are unable to procreate. The natural order of things is that people are sexually attracted to people in which sex serves its reproductive purpose.
That's not hatred. Yes, acts committed on children by pedophiles are vile, but no one is comparing the acts of pedophiles with the acts committed by homosexuals; just the disordered mental states.
This is a straw man argument promoted by homosexuals to get a knee-jerk emotional reaction.

In recent news, scientists discovered that homosexuals and their disillusioned activist supporters only use 5 percent of their brains rather than ten.

I feel sorry for a poor kid in that home that is being lied to about the importance of mothers. I wonder if the poor kid will have experience the horrific outcome of same sex parenting that Regenerus found in his research.

Many ssm supporters in academy have the warm-fuzzies for polygamy, and the ACLU supports it. If LGBTs really believe that their relationships are special enough to be placed alone on the marriage pedestal with conjugal unions, then they are sorely mistaken, short-sighted, and manipulated by the elites who have loftier goals in mind, i.e. the recognition and support of all families, with a move away from the privileging of sexual relationships. SSM is a way station to that goal.
Do read the comments under the article. Bruce does a great job handling the SSMers there.

Speaking of children where was the child? Why didn't the reporter ask if the child misses his mommy?

And to close out, Daughter of Eve, again 

"But to Dan, what you and I care about is all lies designed to hurt him and other gay people."

There is nothing you really can do about it, Brian, except to pray for him and continue to hold up the standard of real marriage. The real problem lies in the fact that in his heart of hearts, he doesn't know God's love for him, and can't love himself. So he projects his own sense of worthlessness onto others, desperately looking for validation from others, when the real source of love and validation is through Charity, or the pure love of Christ. Once he feels that in his life, he'll be able to find the good in others, and even feel love for them. That's as miraculous as parting the red sea--but miracles like that happen every day.

UPDATE: Here's one more from M. Jones

My heart aches for that poor little child of God who is without a mother and then subject to indoctrination, early sexualization and brain washing. it is always the innocents who suffer, and to walk away without being able to do anything about it, what a sad tragedy.

So Brian believes it is wrong to call a group hateful. However, it is apparently okay to ask an adopted child if he misses his mother, as well as wondering if the child will suffer similarly to the children of a discredited study. It is not hateful at all to suggest that the child is then subject to brainwashing, just by virtue of being raised by two gay men. It is also okay to conflate gay marriage with polygamy and pedophilia, and call homosexuality "perverted, sick and twisted." It is also okay to suggest that a married gay man's love for his husband is the same as the love a father feels for his son; judging that gay man as "projecting a sense of worthlessness onto others" is equally "loving" (here loving meaning not hateful), because he "wants to be hated".

Repeatedly referring to gay marriage supporters as "marriage corruption" supporters is not hateful at all, nor is suggesting that homosexuals "use only 5 percent of their brain", since homosexuals "are mentally disordered." 

While Brian might want to call for civility in the ongoing marriage debate, perhaps he should look to his own side first before accusing marriage equality advocates of being uncivil. 

Friday, August 17, 2012

Deleted Posts, Pt. 1

One of the other features I'd like to add to this blog are comments that have been deleted by NOM's filters, to illustrate what NOM does NOT allow on it's filter. There are only two so far, as I started taking screencaps of comments I have made that have been deleted. If you have any comments you have made that have been deleted, please feel free to email me at Please keep your comments submissions respectful. I will post an update of deleted posts once a week.

Also, I know I have not been adding screen caps so far of NOM's comments, instead opting for permalinking them and transcribing them. If I find this to be problematic (i.e. NOM starts deleting comments I am posting here) then I will begin to screencap them to add to the blog.

First, from the blog post :

Next, from the blog post:

If you will notice, I have done my best to be respectful of others in my posts. However, NOM's moderators have deemed my posts inappropriate while deeming comments like "gays have worn out their welcome. Time to go back in the closet" to stand.

As well as absurd comments like: The ultimate goal isn't marriage--it is anarchy such that families will be so fragmented they will have to depend on the government, at which point the power hungry can unburden us of all our liberties, and make us slaves, as has been done in other Marxist/communist countries. " 

Comments 8/8 to 8/17

A brief note on this week's comments: most of them come from posts related to the tragic shooting of the guard at the FRC this week, as NOM has devoted numerous, frequently commented posts to the matter. I NEVER condone violence against ANYONE on either side of the debate, and condemn all violent actions taken against people for merely supporting a position in a debate. Please do not think I am attempting to capitalize on the tragedy; this post is only intended to reflect what comments NOM posters have made on the posts from NOM blog.

From Sophianova:
Shouldn't a bisexual person be allowed to legally marry two people, one man and one woman?

From Daughter of Eve:

It's not incumbant on NOM to promote morally bankrupt false marriage paradigms, or to promote the rationally indefensible.

From OvercameSSA

If FRC should be labeled as a hate organization, then I think the Huffington Post should be labeled as a hate organization.
One of the issues that homosexuals deem to be "hateful" is the comparison of pedophilia to homosexuality. Well, as a heterosexual, I find the comparison of homosexuality to heterosexuality to be hateful. Heterosexuality involves the use of sexual organs for their intended purpose that leads to the creation of children and the perpetuation of the species. Homosexuality involves always involves the use of sexual organs that never lead to procreation. Comparing people who act in a procreative manner to those who act only in a non-procreating manner is hateful.
Homosexuals obviously hate heterosexuals and their propensity to procreate.
SPLC has blood on its hands.
It is a true "hate group".
It is finished, and deservedly so.
All credibility gone.
When you publish a hate group list, and it turns out those are the groups getting shot at by crazies, you are toast.
Ciao Southern Poverty Lie Center.
Glad to see NOM shining a light on the dark places. Of course the SPLC is terse-- they promote darkness. Has anyone clued them in that one of the leading causes of poverty is due to fatherless homes? SSM is govt. endorsed fatherlessness, w/ negative consequences that transcend the sexual identities of adults. Their scorn is misdirected. But then, they are clearly a front for sexual identity politics. They don't care about the actual causes or solutions to poverty.
We not only read them with an open mind, we have rejected yours from an informed conscience, Rich.
Your problem consists in attempting to describe opinions with which you do not agree as "hate speech".
I happen to believe in the First Amendment, and could care less whether your side wishes to attempt to run its utterly discredited "bigot" meme up the flagpole, despite its having lost you thirty three straight elections.
The real issue is here is a tendency among some in the gay rights movement to encourage acts of violence against supporters of traditional marriage.
@loving -
Both pedophilia and homosexuality involve a mental crossing of the wires, as it were. We call on pedophiles to resist their disordered urges, and it is reasonable to call on homosexuals to do the same.
Male homosexuality and the natural promiscuity of males is a formula for the spread of STDs; this is fact. Some men who commit sodomy with other males also have sex with women, spreading STDs such as HIV/AIDS to the heterosexual community. This is all very dangerous behavior and we should be encouraging research to prevent and/or cure same-sex attraction, not celebrate it.
If Jake's idea of "hate speech" includes the truthful statement that same sex attraction is objectively disordered, then we are going to be at loggerheads.
Same sex attraction *is* objectively disordered.
Terrorism and hate crimes begin when one starts advocating, or practicing, shooting the victims of a given disorder.
Free speech includes the right to tell the truth about the homosexual disorder.
How trite... After the massively successful Chik-Fil-A Buy-cott...some gay dude gets all jazzed up and buys twelve sandwiches and takes his gun to FRC..
Why...because the FRC is a "hate group"..
Every time Chik-Fil-A was in the news they would mention that donation and the fact that SPLC had labeled it a "hate group"
So this gay guy was given license to shot up the FRC because there in the same list with the KKK..
And its as simple and obvious as that..
It is the particular form of child abuse involving indoctrination in homosexualist anti values that is most relevant.
The recent piece on Canadian enforced mind-control role playing exercises for pupils, involving "six genders", is an example of this sort of child abuse.
Under gay "marriage" laws, neither children nor parents would have the slightest legal recourse.
Same sex "marriage" must be defeated.
For the sake of our children.
@DN, you are a piece a work! Gays will do anything to push their agenda. Fortunately, their strategy is failing. Chick Fil A awakened the dragon; gays have worn out their welcome. Time to go back in the closet. BTW, why don't you stop buying gas since a lot of the oil come from hate mongering countries.
How long before the shooter is invited to the White House?
A night to honor him for his courage in the fight for equality and dignity. Sitting at the table will be Dan Savage, Hillary Clinton, Obama and a room full of invited LGBT members
(and their backers and instigators) proud to have come so far and fought so hard.
No I am not okay with it. I am okay with a country trying to discourage homosexual habit forming behavior or confusion to the 80 to 98 percent of their children who where not born that way but who can be taught that way.
And the death penalty is a mechanism of state law, it is not arbitrary violence. Meaning that the eventual criminal would not be killed, assassinated, but would be executed. And no I would not be okay with it. But I do understand the policy of putting such a law into place whether it was to be used or not. Though I do find it excessive and not necessary. And apparently Uganda also feels it is not necessary to put such a law into place. Though the talk of it is helpful to them in keep their country from becoming a honeymoon getaway place for Western *cautelaged couples.
More than all else I am okay with a country refusing to take away the only word that uniquely names the committed man-woman union.
* same-sex committed union.

Maybe going back in the closet is a little excessive Carlos. But demanding that it be kept in the bedroom (or in the home) would be more than reasonable.
Keep it out of the streets, out of the schools, out of the entertainment industry and out of our children's heads. If not, than it becomes understandable that talk of putting it back in the closet comes up.
Carlos, homosexuality IS a choice. Same-sex ATTRACTION may not be a choice, but sexual behavior is always a choice. To say otherwise is to abdicate personal responsiblity for personal choices. If the FRC is taking the position that homosexuality is a choice, they are correct and accurate. To condemn them for telling the truth is to stick one's head in the sand, and invite undesrieable consequences.
@Daughter of Eve, homosexuality is a choice. It has been scientifically proven there is no gay gene. Gays have tried to bully the scientific community to prove otherwise. The sexual act is what labels a person gay./homosexual. Gays try to argue it is not all about sex, but we know the truth. It is all about sexual freedom, rebellion, and promiscuity. It is a choice to want to perform a perverted act, just like pedophilia. Sexual behavior is not a civil right.
Self- hating, freedom- oppressing militant gays with guns= Scary.
Browse on over to to read how the tolerance mob are showing their true rotten colors yet again.
Gays are not born that way. They chose the lifestyle, which involves immoral sexual behavior and promiscuity. If they are attracted to the same sex, they can abstain and/or seek professional help. Pedophiles also state they were born that way. Does that give them the right to abuse children. Where will it end. smdh
Well said, Fitz. The ultimate goal isn't marriage--it is anarchy such that families will be so fragmented they will have to depend on the government, at which point the power hungry can unburden us of all our liberties, and make us slaves, as has been done in other Marxist/communist countries. North Korea, anyone?
The SPLC and those that support that corrupt and despicable organization have blood on their hands for being the true hate peddlers in this day and age.
Sad news but this isn't surprising. Considering how desperate and unhinged the hard core homosexual movement has become these types of events will only increase as time goes by.
The shooter will get what he deserves. In prison gays are considered scum. There is no debate and philosophical discussions on homosexuality. You either a man or a sweet bun. Oh well... I guess the next big cause for gays will be advocating for separate prisons.
Time to call a spade a spade and call the Democratic Party a hate group bent on fomenting such extremism and violence.
Remember they once endorsed the OWS rejects and their violent rhetoric
Spunky @ 103:
1) The FRC has published numerous publications that accuse homosexuals of being pedophiles, an accusation that is known to be false. Tony Perkins defended these accusations on national television by misrepresenting studies on pedophilia.
2) Peter Sprigg, an FRC fellow, believes homosexuality should be criminalized, something he had no problem sharing on national TV.
I said:
Spunky, I don't see the hate for people who BEHAVE BADLY in these statements. For example, I don't like to be around people who smoke, does not mean I hate those people who spoke.
Point 1, T
ony is factually correct linking homosexuality with pedophilia, and is one of the KEY reasons why the Boy Scouts of America has just recently affirmed their BAN on homosexuality members despite the increase LGBT opposition.
Point 2., you make in your comment: "Peter Sprigg, an FRC fellow, believes homosexuality should be criminalized, something he had no problem sharing on national TV".
Peter Spigg "consensus" on immoral behavior compare to the same assessment made about pedephilia back in the day, is the same. This is not hate speeh,he made a legislative proposition to voters as part of governing our society, clearly legal and appropriate. Poligamy, and pot followed the same consciece view and legal process in the effort to protect the population at large.
Viewing Peter perspective when it comes to the health risk involve in homosexuality, I agree with him that homosexuality should be criminalized( should have happen a long time ago), and the shooting incident at the FRC only strengthens this proposal.
However, if Peter had said he wanted to take the life of those who participate in sodomy, that would be consider "hate speech" and promoting violence. The LGBT then would have a rare legit argument to go after him...

The difference, Jake, is that minorities were really being denied rights, while those with same-sex attractions, or those who engage in homosexual behavior, or those who ascribe to the sexual political identity called "gay" are not actually denied any rights. One can't logically conflate "gay" with "same-sex." Apples and oranges.

Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Comments from 8/1 thu 8/7

All comments will be posted in full with relevant parts highlighted.

From Leo: Christ,
First of all, who cares!!!! NOM and its supporters are fighting to preserve marriage and to persuade others not to buy into SSM politics. You as the opposition do not concern us. This is not a political fight; NOM is not a political organization. This is not a hate group but we are not looking out for the wellbeing of those who participate in homosexuality. Myself and others are working on the premise that SSM/homosexuality is wrong and should not be seen as something worthy of a debate for obvious reason, the idea brings nothing to the table(to society) but destruction. Personally, for one to argue that NOM is being hypocritical because it picks winners and losers is the same as saying that marriage is not a superior institution over same sex marriage (which came into existence only a few years ago). This notion is coming from a person who is either gay or a sympathizers/gay advocate, viewing this life and death type of issue like a game. Real marriage, heterosexual relationships are serious issues with serious consequences if not kept in checked. Man/woman coupling is not symbolic of a lifestyle but a life necessity... The LGBT culture deals with behavioral issues and sexual disorders or gender confusion, which is part of life that is abnormal or out of balanced. I’m not making this stuff up just do the research!
Christ, whether you are gay or a gay sympathizer, you’re giving the practice of sodomy way too much value when it doesn’t deserve any! Talk about fair, it’s unfair that we even NEED NOM and other organizations to protect and defend what is fundamental and unique (marriage between man/woman) to society…
Now, for the record, CFA is a Christian own business and has been since the beginning, their views and opposition on gay marriage is obvious to any intelligent person; Starbucks and those other businesses who are sympathetic to homosexuals to the extent of promoting that life style to their predominant heterosexual clients without their permission or sensitive to the values of their base consumers. This behavior by those companies are simply wrong and NOM is in the right to call them out on it, which is the basis for their boycotts against these companies and clearly legal. On the other hand, CFA is right to cater to its base while being “tolerant” of those who identify themselves as so-call ”gay”. Christ, you probably want to avoid having a real debate here over what is fair and what isn’t, or which side is being ethical or not. Again, for the record, there is a culture war in the US, who said war must be played fair?

The revolution that has been upon us for a long time is now coming to fruition under Obama, champion of all things that are anti-Christian. The incrementalism of this revolution leaves the facade of America standing but cunningly strips it of all meaning. Those who call for tolerance are the most intolerant. Tolerance to them is submission, capitulation, and accommodation with the world which Christians can never do. Even as this public skirmish was waged, Obama and his allies are in our schools with curriculum that calls for kindergartners to be told that same sex marriage is equal to one man and one woman, to indoctrinate children by the fourth grade that feelings for the same sex is a natural expression and by the eighth grade to be given material to...choose their own gender. The family, as prescribed since the dawn of man, is now the enemy of the leviathan and all who worship at the altar of secularism and hedonism. When a Christian hesitates to express his beliefs for fear of offending the world, those who would destroy free expression have won.

Satan will never win out over God...never.
He may think he is in the lead, but he's going down.
Christians, stand strong. Let God's love shine through like a beacon.
I've been told many times "10% of the population is gay"...well that means 90% of the population is not.

Gay extremists have been bullying society for far too long and inventing a lot of fairy-tales about how they are always victimized. They twist everything to make themselves look like the victims. Hooray that at last the silent majority is rousing itself to tell the nutcases to shut the hell up! The truth is that endless hate and intolerance are being spread by gay fanatics who want to take over the whole world.
This Smith guy on the video did NOT just express a personal opinion, he insulted, harangued and abused an innocent woman in an appalling manner. I am glad he was sacked and I hope that Anthony Piccola will also be sacked for crawling and grovelling to the gay bullies.
This factor will decide the next Presidential election and true marriage WILL WIN.
First they encourage kids to question their orientation in public schools, then they make it illegal to get therapy for what's been forced on them.
Makes perfect sense to the insane.
Nice job, NOM.
The mask is slipping, more and more.
The homosexualist radicals are at war with parents, with marriage, with families, and most disturbing of all, with children.
Simply can't let these deceivers win.

Homosexuality doesn't make sense, MGC.
Certainly there are very few absurdities ever concocted in all of human history, that make less sense than gay "marriage".
JC -
Only a man and a woman can create a child; despite what homosexuals would like to believe, that's a fact and it is a big deal worthy of special attention by the government and society.
Sure, there are those who believe this is purely a religious issue, but there is a secular purpose that true marriage serves that so-called same-sex "marriage" cannot: the union of a mom and a dad with their offspring.
In fact, every same-sex couple who adopts a child, adopts a child who was taken away from one or both if his/her parents: the very opposite of what marriage is designed to encourage!
Every time fair-minded people have agreed to civil unions for same-sex couples we've been betrayed. That civil union has been used as a legal argument for redefining marriage.
The opposition argues that real married couples adopt children, too. That's true, sometimes they do. But that adoption places the child in a home with a man and a woman, which is the best environment for that child.
Overcame is correct that when you see a same-sex couple in possession of a child, that child has been removed from the ideal environment or manufactured with the premeditated intent of depriving that child of a mother or a father. 100% of the time.
Getting back to the topic, the opposition despises 1A and they ought to just come out and say it. It stands squarely in the way of the socialist state they wish to create. Never question they'd abolish it if they could.