Gays In The Military

[Pumpkin Eater]

So that's upbringing, not skin tone

 

Yes. It's cultural. It has nothing to do with skin color.

[heckofajobbrownie]

It's religious more than cultural.

[heckofajobbrownie]

And where are your polls? and tell us what they are saying again. Your polls dont always tell the truth and not everyone lives in LA where it is widely excepted like you.

 

If you were to go out in public and ask 100 random people if they feel like gay marriage is exceptable, you could guess that about 99% of them will say yes so they will not be called a hateful bigot.

 

 

Heck' You should go join the Jerry Sandusky defense team and help out with his PR campiagn. IMO people like you are part of the problems that we face in society today. Someday you will grow up and act like a man and hold people to a standard of good morals and not with some twisted utopian view.

 

Equating gays with child molesters. You really are a rare brand of asshole.

[Pumpkin Eater]

It's religious more than cultural.

 

No. Many denominations of the Christian religion accept openly gay members. A few churches have openly gay pastors. Many Christians, myself included, feel that

 

"Just because someone is a homosexual does not mean that we cannot love him (or her) or pray for him (her). Homosexuality is a sin, and like any other sin it needs to be dealt with in the only way possible. It needs to be laid at the cross and repented of.

 

Christians should pray for the salvation of the homosexual the same way they would any other person in sin. They should treat homosexuals with the same dignity as they would anyone else because, like it or not, they are made in the image of God. However, this does not mean that Christians should approve of their sin. Not at all. Christians should not compromise their witness for a politically correct opinion that is shaped by guilt and fear.

 

In fact, the following verses should be kept in mind when dealing with homosexuals.

 

"Conduct yourselves with wisdom toward outsiders, making the most of the opportunity. 6 Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned, as it were, with salt, so that you may know how you should respond to each person," (Col. 4:5-6).

"But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith," (1 Tim. 1:5).

 

You do not win people to the Lord by condemning them and calling them names. This is why God says to speak with wisdom, grace, and love. Let the love of Christ flow through you so that the homosexuals can see true love and turn to Christ instead of away from Him."

(http://carm.org/christianity-and-homosexuality)

 

Clearly, it is not the Christian way to hate others. I doubt many northern Christians hate gay people. It's mostly a cultural thing among less educated populations.

[heckofajobbrownie]

No. Many denominations of the Christian religion accept openly gay members. A few churches have openly gay pastors. Many Christians, myself included, feel that

 

(http://carm.org/christianity-and-homosexuality)

 

Clearly, it is not the Christian way to hate others. I doubt many northern Christians hate gay people. It's mostly a cultural thing among less educated populations.

 

I'm not saying all Christians are against gays. Obviously they're not. (There are also lots of gay Christians.) The point is that many black churches, which are predominantly Baptist, do often preach against homosexuality, and say it's immoral.

 

It's just a fact that acceptance of homosexuality isn't very high among black voters, especially when they're black and count themselves as religious. It's not all that different from white people who count themselves as religious, which is why I said it makes more sense to say that the opposition to homosexuality in the black community is more religious than cultural.

[Westside Steve]

I'm not saying all Christians are against gays. Obviously they're not. (There are also lots of gay Christians.) The point is that many black churches, which are predominantly Baptist, do often preach against homosexuality, and say it's immoral.

 

It's just a fact that acceptance of homosexuality isn't very high among black voters, especially when they're black and count themselves as religious. It's not all that different from white people who count themselves as religious, which is why I said it makes more sense to say that the opposition to homosexuality in the black community is more religious than cultural.

 

They're also nearly all Democrats.

Just saying....

WSS

[heckofajobbrownie]

They're also nearly all Democrats.

Just saying....

WSS

 

Yup, they are.

 

And it is also cultural. Like I have to tell you guys what the "DL" is.

[Mr. T]

Equating gays with child molesters. You really are a rare brand of asshole.

 

While pro-homosexual activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. Although almost all child molesters are male and less than 3% of men are homosexual, about a third of all child sex abuse cases involve men molesting boys. Tony Perkins, Family Research Council4

 

Source

 

So it is safe to say that only 2/3 of gays will not molest children

[sadbrownsfan]

While pro-homosexual activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. Although almost all child molesters are male and less than 3% of men are homosexual, about a third of all child sex abuse cases involve men molesting boys. — Tony Perkins, Family Research Council4

 

Source

 

So it is safe to say that only 2/3 of gays will not molest children

 

"It doesn’t matter how often the lie is repeated; it still remains false. Dr. Michael R. Stevenson conducted an exhaustive review of the literature in 2000, and concluded that “a gay man is no more likely than a straight man to perpetrate sexual activity with children,” and “cases of perpetration of sexual behavior with a pre-pubescent child by an adult lesbian are virtually nonexistent”.39 The research is so strong that the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatrists40 and the American Psychological Association41 are on record saying that there is no relationship between homosexuality and child sexual abuse."

 

Source: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,002.htm

 

Did you read the article?

[MLD Woody]

I guess I used to harsh of language in my last post so Mr T deleted it

 

I'll try again

 

 

So it is safe to say that only 2/3 of gays will not molest children?

 

If I may, my good sir, I do believe you do not understand how statistics work. That is quite alright though, I will help you through this minor inconvenience if you so choose.

 

I will bow to my sensei.

[sadbrownsfan]

This part made me laugh after reading: http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/Articles/000,002.htm

 

"A Firmly Established Tactic

Yet anti-gay activists insist on spreading this misinformation. Dr. Timothy Dailey (Ph.D., religion) of the Family Research Council quoted Dr. Freund’s statement of “199 offenders against female children and 96 offenders against male children. This would indicate a proportional prevalence of 32 percent of homosexual offenders against children.”35 But he ignored Dr. Freund’s clarification in the very same report that:

 

Androphiles [homosexuals in adult orientation] actually responded significantly less to the male children.36

 

This echoes what Dr. Groth reported in 1982:

 

The research to date all points to there being no significant relationship between a homosexual lifestyle and child molestation. There appears to be practically no reportage of sexual molestation of girls by lesbian adults, and the adult male who sexually molests young boys is not likely to be a homosexual.37

 

Of course, you don’t see what the research really says in Dr. Dailey’s article. Instead, you’ll find massive misrepresentations of the research — including that of Dr. Groth, who denounced Dr. Dailey’s misuse of his work:

 

Since your report, in my view, misrepresents the facts of what we know about this matter from scientific investigation, and does not indicate that my studies on this topic reach conclusions diametrically opposed to yours, I would appreciate your removing any reference to my work in your paper lest it appear to the reader that my research supports your views.38"

[heckofajobbrownie]

I believe the kids call this getting "pwned."

[Mr. T]

I believe the kids call this getting "pwned."

 

[heckofajobbrownie]

You really should know better than to cite world-renown gay-hater Tony Perkins for your information on homosexuality.

 

Also, you equated Sandusky, a married, heterosexual pedophile, with gays. Also probably not the best example to use when trying to make the claim that gays are like pedophiles.

 

You're just a lunatic, T. You really are. Your views are way, way out of the mainstream, and always, always as paranoid as they are misinformed. You couldn't tell a piece of data or news from a piece of shit.

[Mr. T]

You didn't see Sandusky chasing little girls did you?

 

Who wants to be a follower of your mainstream crowd? Your kind have a twisted view on social life.

[Mr. T]

We can always turn this around and ask how many pro gay marriage people hate religion and would support laws that would censor preachers on what they say from the pulpit.

 

How does that stand up against the Bill of Right? Or would you suspend them as well.

[heckofajobbrownie]

In your mind, thinking our gay and lesbian friends and family members, neighbors, what have you, are like pedophiles is normal, whereas my view that they're people just like anyone else, entitled to the same rights and privileges as every other American, is "twisted."

 

I'm happy not to be in your untwisted world. Your views are dinosaurs, not to mention immoral, factually incorrect, and pathetic.

[heckofajobbrownie]

We can always turn this around and ask how many pro gay marriage people hate religion and would support laws that would censor preachers on what they say from the pulpit.

 

How does that stand up against the Bill of Right? Or would you suspend them as well.

 

I don't know anyone who would support laws that deny people the ability to speak freely, whether they be religious or not. You speak nonsense. Sometimes it's religious nonsense. Do you see anyone trying to ban what you say?

 

No. And not only because it's unconstitutional, and we believe in the constitution. Also because the easiest way to beat people like you and Cal and Diehard is to let you all speak as loudly as possible, so people can see and hear and read for themselves the angry, noxious, backward vision for America you have.

 

It's why I'm always begging Cal to take all of these things he's saying and to make them as public as possible. And I beg you to do the same.

[sadbrownsfan]

We can always turn this around and ask how many pro gay marriage people hate religion and would support laws that would censor preachers on what they say from the pulpit.

 

How does that stand up against the Bill of Right? Or would you suspend them as well.

 

I would guess its a lot less than you would imagine, unless you are talking about the preachers like the westboro baptist church.

 

Though I did a quick google search and found this report http://www.christianpost.com/news/more-young-people-believe-gay-marriage-compatible-with-religion-54813/

[Mr. T]

Westboro baptist church? Those guys are a bunch of idiots and don't deserve any attention for what they do.

 

But why is it that a few posters are so intrigued to promote gay rights? Is this some kind of a weird fetish they have? You would think that they believed we rounded up all the gay's and placed them in concentration camps and they are here to set them free or something.

[heckofajobbrownie]

Maybe because they're perhaps the last remaining group of Americans who are legally discriminated against because of who they are, and because of people like you.

[Mr. T]

Maybe because they're perhaps the last remaining group of Americans who are legally discriminated against because of who they are, and because of people like you.

 

I do not believe that to be the case. This subject matter equals the war on poverty. You libs always need some cause to trumpet out in front of the american people and have been doing crap like this since Lyndon B. Johnson and his Great Society program that has continued to fail or fall short of your expectations.

 

This gay baiting agenda of yours is like any other liberal agenda.

All of you liberals will insight polls and propaganda speech in an attempt to sway opinion.

Heaven forbid that anyone would have a different opinion than Hecks on this subject.

[heckofajobbrownie]

In this case, T, I'm thoroughly unconcerned with your gibberish because I'm 100% certain that your opinion about homosexuals dies a little more every day, and people who share my opinion grows. And the polls, if you or Cal could ever understand them, what they are, and how they work - and clearly you won't - back me up on this.

 

You will lose on this issue. Soon. And in the not-too-distant future others will look back on people who thought like you and think you backward and quaint, if they don't already.

[Mr. T]

And in the not-too-distant future others will look back on people who thought like you and think you backward and quaint, if they don't already.

 

 

I see you are still doing your best spinning this while forming the opinions of everyone. If that is the case then we are in deep trouble because the so called people that you are assuming to believe like you do are very shallow thinkers.

 

But if you read my post from this morning you would have to agree that most of the people who you are speaking of are in the between the ages of 19 and 29. And like I stated in that same post the majority of these young adults/kids have been raised in a single parent home and in some cases have not had the luxery of having a structered family because their parents were having to work multiple jobs to be able to keep up with the rate of inflation. Hence forth many of these kids/young adults have been in the states care since pre school or earlier. And most of us realize that is where they have been endoctrinated into political correctness.

 

Damn Lenin would be proud of your party!

[heckofajobbrownie]

Yes, people who grow up in single parent households and go to school are wards of the state and have been indoctrinated by the state to believe being gay is okay, when it's not.

 

You're not completely batshit crazy at all.

[Mr. T]

Yes, people who grow up in single parent households and go to school are wards of the state and have been indoctrinated by the state to believe being gay is okay, when it's not.

 

You're not completely batshit crazy at all.

 

 

Another twisted statement from another useful idiot?

If you want to quote someone be sure that you do not misinterpret what they said. But I can see clearly that is your only defense.

[heckofajobbrownie]

That's exactly what you said. I summarized your post accurately.

 

Also, T, indoctrinated is spelled with an "I", not an "E"...

[Mr. T]

You are so full of it today, so you have retreated back to your spelling nazi criticisms since you cannot succombe to the understanding of what I stated.

 

As the youngins would say you are just a tool.

[heckofajobbrownie]

T, you're not that hard to understand. Really. It's understanding exactly what you say that makes you so comical.

 

And "succombe" is, oh, well. Never mind. We all make spelling mistakes sometimes.

[Mr. T]

I take it that you're only defense is to having a spelling bee, instead of excepting the truth. It is late and I have worked all day and into the nighyt so if you cannot read the text who gives a crap? you’d think I blasphemed a major religion or something.

 

Getting back to the topic I picked this one out just for you Heck.

 

 

 

10 Reasons Why Homosexual “Marriage” is Harmful and Must be Opposed

 

1. It Is Not Marriage

 

Calling something marriage does not make it marriage. Marriage has always been a covenant between a man and a woman which is by its nature ordered toward the procreation and education of children and the unity and wellbeing of the spouses.

 

The promoters of same-sex “marriage” propose something entirely different. They propose the union between two men or two women. This denies the self-evident biological, physiological, and psychological differences between men and women which find their complementarity in marriage. It also denies the specific primary purpose of marriage: the perpetuation of the human race and the raising of children.

 

Two entirely different things cannot be considered the same thing.

 

2. It Violates Natural Law

 

Marriage is not just any relationship between human beings. It is a relationship rooted in human nature and thus governed by natural law.

 

Natural law’s most elementary precept is that “good is to be done and pursued, and evil is to be avoided.” By his natural reason, man can perceive what is morally good or bad for him. Thus, he can know the end or purpose of each of his acts and how it is morally wrong to transform the means that help him accomplish an act into the act’s purpose.

 

Any situation which institutionalizes the circumvention of the purpose of the sexual act violates natural law and the objective norm of morality.

 

Being rooted in human nature, natural law is universal and immutable. It applies to the entire human race, equally. It commands and forbids consistently, everywhere and always. Saint Paul taught in the Epistle to the Romans that the natural law is inscribed on the heart of every man. (Rom. 2:14-15)

 

3. It Always Denies a Child Either a Father or a Mother

 

It is in the child’s best interests that he be raised under the influence of his natural father and mother. This rule is confirmed by the evident difficulties faced by the many children who are orphans or are raised by a single parent, a relative, or a foster parent.

 

The unfortunate situation of these children will be the norm for all children of a same-sex “marriage.” A child of a same-sex “marriage” will always be deprived of either his natural mother or father. He will necessarily be raised by one party who has no blood relationship with him. He will always be deprived of either a mother or a father role model.

 

Same-sex “marriage” ignores a child’s best interests.

 

4. It Validates and Promotes the Homosexual Lifestyle

 

In the name of the “family,” same-sex “marriage” serves to validate not only such unions but the whole homosexual lifestyle in all its bisexual and transgender variants.

 

Civil laws are structuring principles of man's life in society. As such, they play a very important and sometimes decisive role in influencing patterns of thought and behavior. They externally shape the life of society, but also profoundly modify everyone’s perception and evaluation of forms of behavior.

 

Legal recognition of same-sex “marriage” would necessarily obscure certain basic moral values, devalue traditional marriage, and weaken public morality.

 

5. It Turns a Moral Wrong into a Civil Right

 

Homosexual activists argue that same-sex “marriage” is a civil rights issue similar to the struggle for racial equality in the 1960s.

 

This is false.

 

First of all, sexual behavior and race are essentially different realities. A man and a woman wanting to marry may be different in their characteristics: one may be black, the other white; one rich, the other poor; or one tall, the other short. None of these differences are insurmountable obstacles to marriage. The two individuals are still man and woman, and thus the requirements of nature are respected.

 

Same-sex “marriage” opposes nature. Two individuals of the same sex, regardless of their race, wealth, stature, erudition or fame, will never be able to marry because of an insurmountable biological impossibility.

 

Secondly, inherited and unchangeable racial traits cannot be compared with non-genetic and changeable behavior. There is simply no analogy between the interracial marriage of a man and a woman and the “marriage” between two individuals of the same sex.

 

6. It Does Not Create a Family but a Naturally Sterile Union

 

Traditional marriage is usually so fecund that those who would frustrate its end must do violence to nature to prevent the birth of children by using contraception. It naturally tends to create families.

 

On the contrary, same-sex “marriage” is intrinsically sterile. If the “spouses” want a child, they must circumvent nature by costly and artificial means or employ surrogates. The natural tendency of such a union is not to create families.

Therefore, we cannot call a same-sex union marriage and give it the benefits of true marriage.

 

7. It Defeats the State’s Purpose of Benefiting Marriage

 

One of the main reasons why the State bestows numerous benefits on marriage is that by its very nature and design, marriage provides the normal conditions for a stable, affectionate, and moral atmosphere that is beneficial to the upbringing of children—all fruit of the mutual affection of the parents. This aids in perpetuating the nation and strengthening society, an evident interest of the State.

 

Homosexual “marriage” does not provide such conditions. Its primary purpose, objectively speaking, is the personal gratification of two individuals whose union is sterile by nature. It is not entitled, therefore, to the protection the State extends to true marriage.

 

8. It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

 

By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes its official and active promoter. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.

 

In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new “morality,” businesses offering wedding services will be forced to provide them for same-sex unions, and rental property owners will have to agree to accept same-sex couples as tenants.

 

In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect Christians and all people of good will to betray their consciences by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and Christian morality.

 

9. It Is the Cutting Edge of the Sexual Revolution

 

In the 1960s, society was pressured to accept all kinds of immoral sexual relationships between men and women. Today we are seeing a new sexual revolution where society is being asked to accept sodomy and same-sex “marriage.”

 

If homosexual “marriage” is universally accepted as the present step in sexual “freedom,” what logical arguments can be used to stop the next steps of incest, pedophilia, bestiality, and other forms of unnatural behavior? Indeed, radical elements of certain “avant garde” subcultures are already advocating such aberrations.

 

The railroading of same-sex “marriage” on the American people makes increasingly clear what homosexual activist Paul Varnell wrote in the Chicago Free Press:

 

The gay movement, whether we acknowledge it or not, is not a civil rights movement, not even a sexual liberation movement, but a moral revolution aimed at changing people's view of homosexuality.

 

10. It Offends God

 

This is the most important reason. Whenever one violates the natural moral order established by God, one sins and offends God. Same-sex “marriage” does just this. Accordingly, anyone who professes to love God must be opposed to it.

 

Marriage is not the creature of any State. Rather, it was established by God in Paradise for our first parents, Adam and Eve. As we read in the Book of Genesis: “God created man in His image; in the Divine image he created him; male and female He created them. God blessed them, saying: ‘Be fertile and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it.’” (Gen. 1:28-29)

 

The same was taught by Our Savior Jesus Christ: “From the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. For this cause a man shall leave his father and mother; and shall cleave to his wife.” (Mark 10:6-7).

 

Genesis also teaches how God punished Sodom and Gomorrah for the sin of homosexuality: “The Lord rained down sulphurous fire upon Sodom and Gomorrah. He overthrew those cities and the whole Plain, together with the inhabitants of the cities and the produce of the soil.” (Gen. 19:24-25)

 

 

This is a source. Click here to view and give credit to these fine people. As I say this I suggest that if you want to contribute any information please reveal the source as to where it came from.