Gay Marriage: Had to talk about it sometime
Yep, thats right, it's time to start talking about Gay Marriage. The Benifits (yes, I think their are one or two) and the downfalls (many many many of these) I'm going to try and give you a fair and balanced opinion of how I feel about this issue. Why am I against it? Why do I think it will, slowly but surely, destroy America? What if they're in love? How will it effect that heterosexual people of America? I plan to answer all of these questions for you in this post, all with the amazingly accurate sourcing of my opinion. Before we begin this piece, let me just tell you that I am not Anti-Gay, I am not homophobic, and I do not wish for the destruction of all homosexuals in America. Homosexuallity is a choice, plain and simple, no one, and I mean NO ONE is born gay, not one single individual. You choose to be gay, and in that choice you also choose a life of immorallity, and life of sin, and a life against God. I'm not here to talk about God, or religion for that matter, that's another post my friends. I'm here to discuss Gay Marriage and why I am against it 150%. So, let's being...Shall we?
First and foremost, let's get this out in the open, homosexuallity is a sin. No two ways about it, and nothing anyone can say is going to sway me from that belief. The bible states that "man shall not lay with man as he layeth with a woman." It's that simple, homosexuallity=hell. I do not hate gays, in fact, I have several gay friends, and they know exactly where I stand, and most of them agree with the fact that they are gay by choice, not by DNA. A man loving a woman is natural, it's how we were made, even evolutionists have to admit that. If homosexuallity is natural, then why can't man give birth? If you can answer that question rationally, then I will conceed that homosexuallity is natural. Now, on to marriage.
I am against gay-marriage. Marriage isn't just a title, it isn't just a word, its an institution, its a RELIGIOUS institution. I am NOT against Civil Unions, in which case the couple can recieve all the same benifits as a married couple, they just can't say their married. It's that simple. Why is it so important for homosexuals to tell people that they are married, when many states offer civil unions? Why can't they just take what they can get? Why is the title of "married" so important to them? The original argument was that they wanted marriage in order to get the same tax and financial benifits as a heterosexual married couple...so we gave them civil unions. But that wasn't good enough was it? Just have to be married, right? Wrong, my friends, wrong. Letting gays marry would destroy American morals horribly, but we'll get into that later. It would just have bad cause and effect. Homosexuallity is against God, marriage is a religious institution, ordained by men of God, so there for it's wrong. End of story.
In the above paragraph I stated that allowing gay-marriage would cause moral destruction to America. What I mean by that is that if we allow gay-marriage, what is stopping us from allowing beastiallity? What about Pedophilia? Incest anyone? How about multiple-couple marriages? Oh wait! Even better! Let's start mixing and matching these OH SO WONDERFUL things! How about Gay-Pedophilia-Incestual-multiple-couple-marrige! Isn't that a brilliant idea! Yeah....I didn't think so either. The fact is Homosexual marriage would morally destroy America. I read a study once, on lab rats (please don't call PETA) And what happend was, they put 4 rats, 2 male, 2 female, into a closed area. The rats reproduced, and reproduced, and reproduced, like rats do. Well, pretty soon the closed area got over populated, do you know what happend with this over-population crisis? The rats turned homosexual. Almost every single one of them. Now can you guess what happend? Well...to put it bluntly...all but 4 rats died, 2 male, 2 female. If you don't find that even remotly interesting then you might need to re-read what I said. All the rats died, except for 2 male, and 2 female. If that's not even a little revelatory, I don't think there is anything else I can say to you.
I think I've made my case pretty well, and as always any and all comments are welcome. I want to hear what you have to say, that way I can see if there is anything else I can add. Thank you, and good night.
36 Comments:
"Homosexuallity is a choice, plain and simple, no one, and I mean NO ONE is born gay, not one single individual. You choose to be gay"
Who would choose to be discriminated against and hated?
"and in that choice you also choose a life of immorallity, and life of sin, and a life against God. I'm not here to talk about God, or religion for that matter, that's another post my friends."
Have you talked to god? How do you know what he/she/it thinks?
"First and foremost, let's get this out in the open, homosexuallity is a sin. No two ways about it, and nothing anyone can say is going to sway me from that belief. The bible states that "man shall not lay with man as he layeth with a woman." It's that simple, homosexuallity=hell."
I thought you were done preaching? Anyway, you need to read this.....
Dear Dr. Laura,
Thank you for doing so much to educate people regarding God's Law. I have learned a great deal from your show, and I try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. When someone tries to defend the homosexual lifestyle, for example, I simply remind him that Leviticus 18:22 clearly states it to be an abomination. End of debate.
I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the specific laws and how to best follow them.
a) When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord (Lev 1:9). The problem is my neighbors. They claim the odor is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?
b) I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?
c) I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offense.
d) Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?
e) I have a neighbor who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?
f) A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an Abomination (Lev 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?
g) Lev 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?
h) Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev 19:27. How should they die?
i) I know from Lev 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?
j) My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? (Lev 24:10-16) Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)
I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help.
Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
Your devoted disciple and adoring fan.
"If homosexuallity is natural, then why can't man give birth?"
Men can't give birth, but that's irrelevant. How do you define "natural"? All sorts of animals are gay. Check this out
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4352011/
"I am NOT against Civil Unions, in which case the couple can recieve all the same benifits as a married couple, they just can't say their married. It's that simple. Why is it so important for homosexuals to tell people that they are married, when many states offer civil unions? "
If they have all the benifits of marriage and their church performs a marriage ceremony than they are married. And only one state offers civil unions, Vermont. The federal government doesn't let it count, so it's no good for federal tax or social security benifits.
"The original argument was that they wanted marriage in order to get the same tax and financial benifits as a heterosexual married couple...so we gave them civil unions."
Actually, most of the state constitutional amendments that were passed on 11/02 banned civil unions as well. I don't see any conservative politicians supporting civil unions.
"Letting gays marry would destroy American morals horribly, but we'll get into that later. It would just have bad cause and effect. Homosexuallity is against God, marriage is a religious institution, ordained by men of God, so there for it's wrong. End of story."
I thought you were going to quit talking about god. If marriage is a religous institution, the government wouldn't have any buisness in it. And if it is a religous institution, the government should accept gay marriages performed by churches that allow them.
"What I mean by that is that if we allow gay-marriage, what is stopping us from allowing beastiallity? What about Pedophilia? Incest anyone? How about multiple-couple marriages?"
Because it's not between two consenting adults....
I don't get you "moral" types. Allowing gay marriage would encorage more people to settle down in monogamous relationships and raise children. What's wrong with that?
I think certain southern states should worry more aqbout incest and less about gays.
"Let's start mixing and matching these OH SO WONDERFUL things! How about Gay-Pedophilia-Incestual-multiple-couple-marrige! Isn't that a brilliant idea! Yeah....I didn't think so either."
Are you trying to be funny?
"If you don't find that even remotly interesting then you might need to re-read what I said. All the rats died, except for 2 male, and 2 female. If that's not even a little revelatory, I don't think there is anything else I can say to you."
I don't get it. What's so revelatory?
Are you going to respond?
Sorry about taking so long to respond, I had other things to attend to, like school, and work, sorry it was an inconvience to you.
Q: Why would anyone choose to be discriminated against and hated?
A: I'm not really sure why, in fact I have no clue why someone would choose to be hated. Maybe for attention, who knows, why don't you ask Little Richard, the man who was straight...then gay...then straight again, and the man who came out and said homosexuallity was a choice.
Q: Have you talked to God?
A: Why, yes, as a matter of fact I have, its called prayer, you should try it sometime. Now have I talked to God about Gay-marriage? No of course not, God doesn't really care about American Politics all that much. God DOES care about human morallity though. It's stated very clearly in the bible. You should try giving that a read sometime, my friend.
The Dr. Laura Letter: Ok, there is quite a bit of difference between acts of morallity and what that "letter" talks about. When you're talking about not contacting women during there period, selling your daughter into slavery, burning a sacrificial bull, slaves, working on the Sabbath, eye sight, pig skin, and stoning your relatives because of their planting habits and the clothing they wear are not even CLOSE to moral issues. Time's change, yes, but morallity doesn't, at least it shouldn't. Pushing moral bounderies are completely different then stoning your aunt for wearing a cotton/polyester mix of clothing.
That was indeed a very VERY good rebuttle, don't get me wrong, that was pretty damn good, and I almost found it difficult to debate it, I think I managed though, I at least tried.
Ok, on to the next comment rebuttle!
Q: Define Natural
A: My definition of natural is anything you are born with, any feelings or anything like that. Homosexuallity is not natural, I don't know of any one coming up and saying "Yeah, I took a blood test today and guess what? I'm gay! Just found that out today."
Q: Federal Taxes and Civil Unions
A: I am not against Civil Unions, and I think it should be left up to the state to decide on whether or not they want Civil Unions/Gay-Marriages. As for the taxes, federal taxes may not count, but you still get all the state tax benefits. Thats the best I can do with that one, not the greatest but its better then nothing
Q: Conservative Politicians Supporting Civil Unions
A: And you probably wont see to many doing it. I am a rare breed of conservative.
Q: Religious Institutions (and me talking about God Again)
A: I'll talk about God all I want, this is my blog. As for the government being involved in Gay-Marriage, again, leave it up to the states
Q: Gay Marriage Encouraging people to settle down
A: Uhhhh...wrong. Homosexuals have a horrible track record when it comes to monogomy. Why do you think so many homosexuals have HIV/AIDS?
Q: Am I trying to be Funny
A: In a way yes I was trying to be funny, but I was being 100% serious when I said that it could happen. The possibility of Gay-Pedophilia-Incestual-multiple-couple-marrige is there, no matter how much you want to deny it.
Q: What's so Revelatory?
A: Well I guess some people just don't understand simple things, so let me put this in very simple to understand terms for you: They over-populated...still with me bud? Ok good. They becames homosexual...keeping up, bro? Alright, awesome. All of the rats died, except for enough to reproduce and make a decent population...or *gasp!* start all over! Catch on?
" I'm not really sure why, in fact I have no clue why someone would choose to be hated. Maybe for attention, who knows, why don't you ask Little Richard, the man who was straight...then gay...then straight again, and the man who came out and said homosexuallity was a choice."
So one guy says it's a choice, and millions of homosexuals disagree, so you believe little richard because it fits your world view?
Look, there's no doubt that you CAN choose to engage in whatever sexual activity you want. But do you think Matthew Shepard wanted to be gay. Do you think my friend who got fag bashed every weekend in colorado wanted to be gay?
"Why, yes, as a matter of fact I have, its called prayer, you should try it sometime. Now have I talked to God about Gay-marriage? No of course not, God doesn't really care about American Politics all that much. God DOES care about human morallity though. It's stated very clearly in the bible. You should try giving that a read sometime, my friend."
I respect your religion even though I don't share it. However, I don't respect people who want to enforce their religion on me. I should be able to marry whoever the fuck I want.
And, the bible tells you to treat others how you would like to be treated. If %80 of the coutry was gay, and all the major religions were gay-only, how would you feel if gays wanted to prevent you from marrying, especially if your religion says you can marry females.
"Ok, there is quite a bit of difference between acts of morallity and what that "letter" talks about. When you're talking about not contacting women during there period, selling your daughter into slavery, burning a sacrificial bull, slaves, working on the Sabbath, eye sight, pig skin, and stoning your relatives because of their planting habits and the clothing they wear are not even CLOSE to moral issues. Time's change, yes, but morallity doesn't, at least it shouldn't. Pushing moral bounderies are completely different then stoning your aunt for wearing a cotton/polyester mix of clothing."
But the point is that the bible is outdated, any christian will admit that. And morals do evolve as culture evolves. In the fifties sex before marriage was never heard of, now very few people are virgins when they marry.
"My definition of natural is anything you are born with, any feelings or anything like that. Homosexuallity is not natural, I don't know of any one coming up and saying "Yeah, I took a blood test today and guess what? I'm gay! Just found that out today.""
I think gays are born that way though. I don't know about your gay friends in Wyoming, but here in Seattle, "blue" america, I don't know a single gay person who says they chose being gay. They all say something like, "I knew I was different as a kid, and when I discovered my sexuality it all made sence"
"I am not against Civil Unions, and I think it should be left up to the state to decide on whether or not they want Civil Unions/Gay-Marriages. As for the taxes, federal taxes may not count, but you still get all the state tax benefits. Thats the best I can do with that one, not the greatest but its better then nothing"
I think the federal government should recognize it though. I'm sure it's making it's way through the federal courts and eventually they'll have to honor them because marriage has always been a states issue.
Unfortunatly, here in washington, the state taxes are property and sales taxes. Marriage isn't any good for tax benifits, straight or gay.
"Q: Conservative Politicians Supporting Civil Unions
A: And you probably wont see to many doing it. I am a rare breed of conservative."
That's cool. You should let them know what you think....
www.rnc.org
www.wygop.org
www.congress.org
"I'll talk about God all I want, this is my blog. As for the government being involved in Gay-Marriage, again, leave it up to the states"
I know you can talk about god everwhere you please, but it honestly scares me when people use god to talk about politics. Too much effed up shit has gone down under religous rule, be it catholic, muslim, or roman dieties.
"Uhhhh...wrong. Homosexuals have a horrible track record when it comes to monogomy. Why do you think so many homosexuals have HIV/AIDS?"
That's my point though. Marriage is a monogomous institution. You are critisising gays because they are promiscus (sp?) yet you are banning them from a monogomous relationship. If more gays settled down in the suburbs with a kid (something they will do anyways) less of them will be at bathouses.
Also, allowing federal gay marriage will benifit the children being raised by gays. If you have two daddies, only one of them is your biological dad, and you get sick, your non-biological dad can't visit you, if your non-biological dad dies, you and you're remaining dad can't collect life insurance. Allowing gay marriage will HELP families, something you "moral" types are supposed to support.
I suppose it's possible to create a web of legal contracts to get almost all the thousands of marriage benifits, but you would have to hire an attorney wich would cost hundreds, instead of getting a $50 marriage lisence at the courthouse.
"In a way yes I was trying to be funny, but I was being 100% serious when I said that it could happen. The possibility of Gay-Pedophilia-Incestual-multiple-couple-marrige is there, no matter how much you want to deny it."
How?!? Explain how allowing two loving commited people to tie the knot will all of a sudden mean I can marry something with no legal standing.
Also, explain very specificly how two men marrying will change my relationship with my girlfriend.
Also, If I can marry a woman, but not a man, isn't that discrimination on the basis of sex.
And, if two really androugnous looking people named pat and sam want to marry, do they need to pull their pants down in the court room to prove they aren't both the same sex?
And, marriage has been an evolving institution for a while. If marriage was still the same as biblical times, we would own our own wife by now ion exchange for two oxen and a pig. What is wrong weith inviting more loving couples into a great institution?
"Well I guess some people just don't understand simple things, so let me put this in very simple to understand terms for you: They over-populated...still with me bud? Ok good. They becames homosexual...keeping up, bro? Alright, awesome. All of the rats died, except for enough to reproduce and make a decent population...or *gasp!* start all over! Catch on?"
The only thing that helps prove is evolution. That animals adapt to their surroundings. They knew they were overpopulated, so they quit reproducing altogether.
I suppose your trying to say homosexuality ruined their civilation or something. But every one of those rats went gay to respond to a crisis, here in humanity a minority of the population has always been gay.
Which is another reason I don't think being gay is a choice. There were gays executed by hitler. If you were a gay living under hitler, wouldn't you just change your mind and not be gay. If you were a gay in the middle ages and knew you'd be tortured, wouldn't you just change your mind?
You forget that HIV/AIDS is contracted more by blood transfusions and heterosexual sex than it is homosexual sex.
I agree with everything that this invisible man has been saying.
And HIV is just transfered easier through anal sex, not because of homosexuality. I'd say atleast half of all heterosexuals have engaged in anal sex at some point.
Homosexuality has been around for a long, long time. It's not just some new fad. Famous homosexuals throughout history included:
Alexander the Great
Michelangelo
Leonardo da Vinci
This famous European King (I'm drawing a blank for his name right now, but he had a love affair with his finance advisor I think)
Troy D. Perry, a famous Baptist preacher (his motto is: "The lord is my shepard and he knows I'm gay")
And, according to Jesus, ever law in the old testament is supposed to be ignored (i.e. not eating meat, sacraficing animals, etc.). So, why does this not include people being gay and shit.
I'm too tired to continue being coherent, sorry.
You are a dick
Are you referring to me or whitey? If you are referring to me, please tell me why i am a dick.
What negative effects has gay marriage had in Canada? Belguim? Massachusettes?
If you can't name any then we shouldn't ban it.
I'm going to assume that you are referring to me. I never said i was anti gay marriage. See, the thing is, I am all for equality across the board, including gay marriage. Sorry if my post somehow misled you to believe I was agreeing with Whitey, but I was agreeing with you. Actaully, I don't see how the content of my post can be percieved as anti gay marriage...
I was talking to whitey about canada, belguim, etc....
And I don't know who posted "you're a dick"
Wanna know what's funny, the only state with gay marriage has the lowest divorice rate. For all the talk of the "sanctity" of marriage, the highest divorice rates are in the bible belt.
Massachusetts Liberal Pride
Here's the editorial I've been waiting to read these past few months, as Shrubbie cheerfully trashes my home state. In Walking the walk on family values, William V. D'Antonio points out that
President Bush and Vice President Cheney make reference to "Massachusetts liberals" as if they were referring to people with some kind of disease. I decided it was time to do some research on these people, and here is what I found.
The state with the lowest divorce rate in the nation is Massachusetts. At latest count it had a divorce rate of 2.4 per 1,000 population, while the rate for Texas was 4.1.
Not to be obnoxiously Massachusetts-centric here,
The Associated Press, using data supplied by the US Census Bureau, found that the highest divorce rates are to be found in the Bible Belt. The AP report stated that "the divorce rates in these conservative states are roughly 50 percent above the national average of 4.2 per thousand people." The 10 Southern states with some of the highest divorce rates were Alabama, Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, and Texas. By comparison nine states in the Northeast were among those with the lowest divorce rates: Connecticut, Massachusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.
In fact,
For all the Bible Belt talk about family values, it is the people from Kerry's home state, along with their neighbors in the Northeast corridor, who live these values. Indeed, it is the "blue" states, led led by Massachusetts and Connecticut, that have been willing to invest more money over time to foster the reality of what it means to leave no children behind. And they have been among the nation's leaders in promoting a living wage as their goal in public employment. The money they have invested in their future is known more popularly as taxes; these so-called liberal people see that money is their investment to help insure a compassionate, humane society.
http://www.divorcemag.com/statistics/statsUS2.shtml
http://www.ncpa.org/pd/social/pd111999g.html
haha shit man, i love reading the crap you post. your way of thinking is obviously just a product of the environment (highly religious i presume??) you grew up in. you're not a punk because you think differently to most punk. in the whole of society you are a just sheep in wolves clothing.
Random Individual said: "haha shit man, i love reading the crap you post. your way of thinking is obviously just a product of the environment (highly religious i presume??) you grew up in. you're not a punk because you think differently to most punk. in the whole of society you are a just sheep in wolves clothing."
Man, so tolerant, so kind hearted, so willing to look at other view points. Damn I love Liberalism. Especially Punk Elitist Liberalism. If you want to debate the subject, I'm more then willing to debate you, but if you're going to come here and just throw personal insults at my "Punk Credentials" (what happened to Individuallity?) then go somewhere else and do it.
As for the other comments: I'm really busy right now, and I'm unable to hit you guys back with a comment right now, but I will try to get you guys some rebuttles as soon as possible, but with Thanksgiving and all that jive coming up its going to be difficult. I apologize, sincerely, and hopefully will be able to get back on top of things as soon as possible.
"As for the other comments: I'm really busy right now, and I'm unable to hit you guys back with a comment right now, but I will try to get you guys some rebuttles as soon as possible"
I'll be waiting.
You say that you can't get a blod test ad find out your gay. Well, Can you take a blood test to find out that you're straight?
-Phrogg, he who is too lazy to make a username
Can I get a blood test to find out if I'm black?
I'm not sure about the black one, but maybe.
-Phrogg
Being a conservative punk is an oxymoron. So is being a christian punk.
I'd like to direct you to some george carlin quotes, and a few jesuses.
“Be lame, be white, be proud! And get the #^%$ off the dance floor!” – George Carlin
“You have to stand in awe - in awe! Of the all time champion of false promises and exaggerated claims: Religion. No contest.” George Carlin (Napalm and Silly Putty)
“Religion has actually convinced people—many of them adults—that there’s an invisible man who lives in the sky and watches over everything you do, every minute of every day. And who has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do.” – George Carlin (Napalm and Silly Putty)
“White people %#$&ed up the blues.” – George Carlin (Brain Droppings)
“Spirituality: the last refuge of a failed human. Just another way of distracting yourself from who you really are.” – George Carlin (Napalm and Silly putty)
“The difference between a fag and a queer: a fag was a guy who wouldn’t go downtown with you beating up queers. Probably that Irish street macho of the era.” —George Carlin, “White Harlem”
“These guys bond and bond, and get closer and closer, until finally they’re drunk enough to say, ‘you know, I really love these guys.’ And that frightens them. So they must quickly add, ‘but I’m not a queer!’ See the dilemma? Now they have to go out of their way to prove to the world, to their buddies, and to themselves that they don’t harbor homoerotic feelings. And it’s only a short step from ‘I’m not a queer!’ to “In fact, I hate queers!’ and another short step to ‘Let’s go kill some queers.’” – George Carlin (Brain Droppings)
"He who loves father and mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he who loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me." - Jesus
"I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man's foes will be those of his own household." – a disturbed Jesus Christ
-Phrogg ( I might get an account to rebut your views, but maybe another day. )
Alright, I'm back and I have to let you nkow right off that I will not be able to hit every post with a response, there are far too many and they are far to long, I do, however, appreciate the fact that you folks come here and rebute my idea's and try to change my mind or, at the very least, question what it is that I am saying.
To the person with the "Blood testing if you're black comment" good point, don't get me wrong, but the point I was making is that homosexuality cannot be seen like the color of your skin can, thats a completely different thing all together.
Too Phrog (this may take sometime):
1: Make a point about how being a ConPunk and Christian punk is an oxymoron. Do you have a "Guide line to punk" handbook I could borrow? Did you write the laws of punk? Hah, Laws of Punk...now THAT is a strange choice of words isn't it? Last time I checked there wasn't a set code of thought, or a set code of ethics, or a set code of ANYTHING in punk. I thought punk was about individuality, and being who you are regardless of what others think about you. I thought punk was about being yourself, about free-thinking, NOT about a one way thought process. I'm a conservative, I'm a Christian, and I'm a punk. If you don't like it, too bad, cause thats who I am whether you like it or not, bud. Now if you want to make a point about the above post, go for it, by all means, and I'll reply if at all possible. But making petty cop outs and insults isn't going to get you very far, now is it?
Too the rest of you, I truely am sorry taht I can't hit you back with a reply, I really am. I hope you can accept my apologies.
I think some pretty good points have been made, and would hope whitey would talk about that rather than defend his "punk" credentials. Some of the good points include...
* Banning gay marriage hurts families. Specificly, the children of gays. http://www.365gay.com/newscon04/12/120604wvaMom.htm
* If you are for civil unions that have all the same rights as marriage, why not call it marriage? It's just a word.
* " My definition of natural is anything you are born with, any feelings or anything like that." If you ask any gay person, they will say they are born with feeling of homosexuality. Just like I'm born with feelings for women. So do you think it's natural now? And if you still think it's unnatural, should we ban eyeglasses, nylon, and artifical heart valves?
* You still haven't told us the negative effects it has had in The Netherlands, Belguim, Canada, etc. If there are no negative effects, whats wrong with it?
* If you can choose to be straight or gay, why didn't the gays in nazi germany just choose to be straight?
* If gays were in charge of government, religion, and the media, how would you feel about them preventing straight marriage? Even if your church allowed straight marriage? Do you know the golden rule?
* Cultures evolve. That includes marriage. If marriage were static I would own my wife in exchange for 2 oxen. Since marriage evolves, why not allow more loving, commited, couples to enter the institution?
* Explain how allowing two loving commited people to tie the knot will all of a sudden mean I can marry something with no legal standing.
* If I can marry a woman but not a man, isn't that discrimination based on sex? I mean, the only thing preventing me from marriage is a penis?
* If two androgynous people want to marry, Pat and Sam, do they need to pull their pants down in the courthouse just to prove they're not the same sex? What about hermaphrodites? Can they marry either sex, or can they not marry anybody?
Anyway, I'll be waiting....
*YAWN*
Still waiting...
I have never claimed that these people were wrong, I simply stated that I disagree with them. They do bring up good points, don't get me wrong, the points they bring are damned good, but things such as legalizing beastiality and incest after gay marriage is legalized, isn't going to happen over night, these changes take times. There was a time when premarital sex was almost punishable by disownment, then in the 60's we blurred that line, and it was ok to have sex before you were married, you were just kids, kids do crazy thing. It didn't happen over night, but it did happen. If we keep blurring the lines of morallity, morallity will disappear, and we will live in a country of adultry, drug abuse, abortion, and crime. This is my opinion, I have never stated them to be fact, but it's what I believe, and there will be very little you can do to make me change these beliefs.
They bring up great points. That's why almost every court to hear the issue has agreed that gay marriage should happen...
About beastiality, how will it happen? You can't just say, "this is going to happen" and expect people to believe you. If I said,
'if republicans rule the country, aliens will attack us!!!', would that convience you to vote democrat?
If every culture since the greeks has had homosexuality, how come beastiality isn't legal yet?
Also, I don't think anyone is "blurring the lines of morality", we are changing our views of morality, something every culture does.
You're entitled to your opinion, even if you're wrong. But until you're a dictator, you don't have the right to enforece your opinion on others. What gives you the right to tell a child with two dads, "Sorry kid, but if your parents get married, people will be able to marry dogs and cats."
I'm sure you're aware that you can change your opinion when new information is given to you. As a matter of fact, if you don't change your opinion when you recieve new information, somethings wrong.
Even though I'm a liberal and I disagree with most of what you say, I must say your blog must get more responses than any blog I've ever seen.
"Homosexuallity is a choice, plain and simple, no one, and I mean NO ONE is born gay, not one single individual."
When did you make the choice to be heterosexual?
Heterosexuallity IS natural, homosexuallity is not. If homosexuallity were a natural occuring thing, then there would be a hell of a lot more homosexuals, wouldn't there? Every human being is born heterosexual, and rought about 10% of the population makes the choice to be homosexual, its that simple. You may not agree with me, and I'm going to go out on a limb and just ASSUME that you don't, but regardless of that, this is how I feel about the subject. Homosexuallity is a choice, plain and simple.
"Heterosexuallity IS natural, homosexuallity is not"
So should we ban eyeglasses, polyester, and electronics?
"Homosexuallity is a choice, plain and simple."
Who wants to get executed by Nazi's? I guess homo's in Nazi Germany.
Who wants to be beaten and harrased? I guess homo's in "red" states.
Look, you can believe in anything you want, including invisible superheroes who are only offended by butt-fucking when it's two men. But when you need to abandon all logic and rationality in order to believe something, such as large numbers of people wanting to be executed by nazis, then it's time to call into queston you're beliefs.
This PBS station now inform you that just because the majority of people are a certain way doesn't mean the others are different by choice. Given that logic, you chose to be a guy instead of a woman.
You need to learn that arguments based on assertions are not persuasive. You have placed your thesis on the 5 yard line and expect to take it from there to the end zone.
The gay people in your high school are no doubt sitting pretty and no one harasses them at all, right? That's why they made that 'choice,' because it's just soooo easy being gay.
Do you like Brussels sprouts? No? Let me ask you to go ahead and 'decide' to like them. How long is that going to last? Want to get married to one?
But let's assume for the sake of ragument that you are right, and people choose to be gay. OK then, since it's natural to be born straight, why are some people born disposed to choose to be gay? Your thesis vanishes up inside itself with a little slurping noise.
Whitey,
What would it take to convince you to change you're mind? If you are blinded by ideology and will never change you're mind let me know now.
I'll tell you that I would be convinced of your position if I believed gay marriage would harm children. However, gay marriage would help children, specificly, the children raised by gay parents.
If I believed gay marriage would ruin society, I would oppose it. However, I havn't heard a convincing argment for that, other than "gay marriage wil ruin society because I said so"
Thought these were funny and relevant....
12 Reasons gay marriage will ruin society
Homosexuality is not natural, much like eyeglasses, polyester, and birth control are not natural.
Heterosexual marriages are valid because they produce children. Infertile couples and old people cannot get legally married because the world needs more children.
Obviously gay parents will raise gay children because straight parents only raise straight children.
Straight marriage will be less meaningful, since Britney Spears's 55-hour just-for-fun marriage was meaningful.
Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and it hasn't changed at all: women are property, Blacks can't marry Whites, and divorce is illegal.
Gay marriage should be decided by the people, not the courts, because the majority-elected legislatures, not courts, have historically protected the rights of minorities.
Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are always imposed on the entire country. That's why we only have one religion in America.
Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people makes you tall.
Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage license.
Children can never succeed without both male and female role models at home. That's why single parents are forbidden to raise children.
Gay marriage will change the foundation of society. Heterosexual marriage has been around for a long time, and we could never adapt to new social norms because we haven't adapted to cars or longer lifespans.
Civil unions, providing most of the same benefits as marriage with a different name are better, because a "separate but equal" institution is always constitutional. Separate schools for African-Americans worked just as well as separate marriages will for gays & lesbians.
And, Where it my gay apocolypse...
Where Is My Gay Apocalypse?
Over 3,500 gay marriages and, what, no hellfire? I was promised hellfire. And riots. What gives?
By Mark Morford, SF Gate Columnist
I have been waiting patiently.
I have been staring with great anticipation out the window of my flat here in the heart of San Francisco, sighing heavily, waiting for the riots and the plagues and the screaming monkeys and the blistering rain of inescapable hellfire. I have my camera all ready and everything.
There has been nothing. I see only some lovely trees and a stunning blue sky and my neighbor walking by with her pair of matching chow chows as a pained-looking woman struggles to parallel park her SUV. Same old, same old.
And this is San Francisco, gay-marriage HQ, Sodom-and-Gomorrahville, debauchery central. We are supposed to be careening off the nice, safe road of social acceptability right now, welcoming chaos, exploding into a fiery hellmist of our own sick godless depravity and dropping off the disgusted planet any minute now.
Where is my raging apocalypse? This is what I want to know. Where is the social meltdown? The moral depravity? I was promised an apocalypse, dammit. What am I supposed to do with all these tubs of margarine and confetti and kazoos?
There have been more than 3,500 gay-marriage ceremonies in San Francisco so far. Hundreds more are just now kicking up a storm in Oregon and in beautifully rebellious little burgs around New York state. And, yet, nothing. No chaos. No reign of terror. Not even a lousy heat wave. Sigh.
Some homosexual couples have been married for more than three weeks now, living in utter godless sin as they drive their cars and shop and laugh and cry and go to work and pay their taxes and wonder about their dreams. Lightning has not struck them dead. The Hellmouth has not opened wide its gaping maw, hankering for some of the City's trademark Sourdough o' Sin. I am dumbfounded.
After all, gay marriage is supposed to ruin the nation, is it not? Induce actual rioting and civil unrest and shirtless anarchy as millions of stupefied citizens pray to a bloody pulverized Mel Gibson-y Jesus for redemption, as they suddenly begin questioning whether ogling the Pottery Barn catalog for more than 10 minutes might mean they're gay.
"It's anarchy," some guy named Rick Forcier, of the Washington state chapter of the Christian Coalition, actually whined. "We seem to have lost the rule of law. It's very frightening when every community decides what laws they will obey." Why, yes, Rick. It's total anarchy. Just look at all the screaming and the bloodshed and the gunfire. Run and hide, Rick. The gay people in love are coming. And they've got tattoos and funny haircuts and want to get married and celebrate their love and be left alone. Hide the children.
This was -- and still is -- very much the right-wing sentiment. It was almost a guarantee: Same-sex marriage spelled the instantaneous end of all that is good and righteous and edible. Insurrection was imminent, apocalypse nigh. You could see it in their eyes -- they could hardly wait.
Hell, even Governator Arnie went on "Meet the Press" recently and proclaimed, semicoherently, that he was actually worried about the riots and deadly mayhem should S.F. continue with its brazen lawlessness. And look. Nothing. Not a peep. Not a single rabid spitting demon to be seen. Unless you count Lynne Cheney. Which you never, ever should.
I believe I have been misled. I was told repeatedly in extra-glowing terminology by multiple raging Bible-quoting drones that The Good Book expressly forbids gay marriage and gay sex, and to engage in either spells imminent doom and instant social bedlam and there are specific verses all about it.
Is this true? Are there actual verses decrying gay marriage? Are they anything like those other Biblical verses, about the rules and regulations surrounding marriage that are making the rounds on the Net right now? Real verses. Actual verses. Verses o' sanctimonious fun. Have you seen them?
Like this: "Marriage shall not impede a man's right to take multiple concubines in addition to his wife or wives." (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21).
Or maybe: "A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be stoned to death." (Deut 22:13-21) Isn't that cute? Isn't quoting Bible verse fun? Ask your local pastor about that one.
Or how about: "If a married man dies without children, his brother shall marry the widow. If he refuses to marry his brother's widow or deliberately does not give her children, he shall pay a fine of one shoe and be otherwise punished in a manner to be determined by law." (Gen. 38:6-10; Deut 25:5-10). Hey, it's right there, in the Bible. So it must be true.
Is it worth showing those verses to the happily sanctimonious and sneering Christian homophobes who are protesting outside S.F. City Hall right now, telling the gay couples what depraved hell-bound sinners they all are? Nah. Why spoil their whiny apocalyptic wet dreams? Live and let live, I always say.
(Oh, and while we're at it, God also really hates shrimp. Maybe you didn't know. Shrimp are evil, as are all shrimp eaters. Clams, too. Hey, it's in the Bible. You can look it up. Why the Right is attacking homosexuals in love and not, say, Red Lobster, remains a mystery.)
So, here we are. Approaching a full month after the first of S.F.'s marriage ceremonies, and nothing. The universe is smiling madly. The world is shrugging. Anonymous supporters from all over the nation have sent flowers to hundreds of loving gay and lesbian couples. As of this writing, there is no scathing hellfire. No fanged demons of destruction (Lynne Cheney excepted). No meltdown whatsoever. I would know, right? I mean, wouldn't the power go out, or something?
Maybe it's still to come. Maybe total screaming misery and unspeakable sociocultural collapse coupled with wanton bestiality and incest and the giving away of free anal beads to innocent teenagers takes more than a month. Maybe I'm just a little impatient.
Maybe Satan is taking his sweet time to marshal his leather-clad armies, watching as other U.S. cities get in on the gay-marriage act, listening as mayors and governors all chime in their support and say what's the big deal. Maybe Beelzebub is waiting for a big moment so as to really leverage the coming news flash, the special report, the sudden activation of the Emergency Broadcast System. Something like:
"This just in: Earthquakes rocked the globe today as giant fire-breathing bees of death swarmed the countryside, feasting on fat white heterosexual babies mostly from Texas and Colorado Springs and Utah and Idaho, as the institution of hetero marriage careened around the mad vortex of space-time like a savage drunken pinball high on black-tar heroin, just like the Christian Right predicted.
"Horrors bled into the streets, terrorists were spawned by the thousand, presidents openly lied so as to lead a nation into bloody violent unwinnable wars, thousands of Catholic priests sexually molested tens of thousands of children over a 50-year period without the slightest punishment, the environment teetered on the brink due to heartless government rollbacks as air quality and water quality and food sources were ravaged in the name of corporate profiteering, the economy crumbled like Jenna Bush after her 10th beer bong as hate and fear and bogus Orange Alerts ruled the land."
Oh wait. That was all before the gay-marriage thing. My bad
You make very good points, Drew, very good points indeed...but it'd be nice if you would make points that are of YOUR opinion, not some journalists. So I guess what I'm trying to say is, whoever you copied that from, makes very good points. I acknowledge that the person who made these points is very educated in this area, far more then myself, and that the person who made these points is also very intelligent, and is deserving of my respect. I will not try to refute any of the points made above, simply because they are simply opinion, much like what I have to say about this very touchy and polarizing issue. One suggestion I would like to make is next time you post something on my website, you should try and post something that is your own, and comes from your own mind. [sarcasm] I'm so glad there are open minded Leftists such as yourself out their, who make all there own decisions, and don't rely on other peoples opinions to form there own. [/sarcasm] Have a nice day, sir.
Lighten up, Whitey.
I've made plenty of my own opinions known on this board and many other places on the web. However, it doesn't seem to have gotten through to you.
If you're so open minded, why don't you let us know what would make you change your mind. If you would never change your mind, you're a fool.
Anyway, I want to apologize to the authors of 12 Reasons Gay Marriage will ruin society, as I didn't give them credit for their list. You can find out more about them here...
http://grove.ufl.edu/~ggsa/events/gaymarriage.php
Dear Whitey,
Do you think that all Americans believe in the Bible? Did you know that many American believe in no religion, no God and therefore do not follow the mumbo-jumbo of Christianity?
You know what i think? The whole God thing...it's made up. Remember your own words...Question everything. Do not conform. So if I don't belive in your God, am i less American?
Gay is not a choice. But so what if it was? Is your God going to be mad at me for making this choice? That doesn't seem to bother me much, since I am not Christian and never will be, much like millions of other Americans.
Please post some proof of the existence of God on your blog.
Thank u ;-) look at this emo boy one over this blog:
http://www.emo--boys.info
Post a Comment
<< Home