More persecution re: Proposition 8 in California
Jose Nuñez was brutally attacked while waiting to distribute yard signs in favor of Proposition 8. Remember when “gay” used to mean “happy”?
Let’s uncover this stuff and expose it for the world to see.
Link to this page
Proud2b4family,
Are you serious? You started out with some fairly valid points but….so overwhelmingly religious that they didn’t need to mention it? You must be joking. That is the most pitiful statement i’ve seen in weeks. You are a sad and desperate human being.
proud2b4family,
Are you serious? “so overwhelmingly religious that they didnt have to mention god by name”???
Your are a sad and desperate human being. That is one of the most pitiful statements i’ve ever seen.
And you honestly believe the left wing has corrupted school systems? Man what is wrong with you?
For those who are so ignorantly convinced the the US was founded on christian principles, please review the following quotes from the author of the declaration, statue of religious freedom, and 3rd US president:
“I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.”
“In every country and every age, the priest had been hostile to Liberty. ”
“Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. ”
These are just a few.
TJ is often said to be christian because he used the word “god” in the declaration. If you are educated, you know that TJ was a diest, not a christian. His god was not a christian god.
This harsh reality is why history has been watered down for those of you too fearful to stare into the eyes of truth. You can find all of these quotes in the writtings of TJ, if you really want to be enlightened. If you wish to continue living in a suger-coated make believe world, so be it. But don’t distort the facts.
I challenge anyone to directly dispute these facts and TJ’s position on chrisitanity with something other than a TJ quote taken out of context.
Proud2b4family, walrus, and all other supporters of prop 8 and a connection between church and state,
The last entry was given by one of the most intelligent people i have ever met. Theres your proof. Counter that if you can even comprehend all of the fact that just obliterated what you thought to be true
@Friend of Eric Myers: Those that rewrite history are only doomed to repeat its pitfalls and folly. I actually have a 100+ year old copy of the Jefferson Bible. I will leave Jefferson, and his judgment to our maker. I pray you will someday find peace and understanding. The pure anger that eats at your inner recesses is obvious by your comment and thinking. May God bless you and I pray for you peace and some day maybe even understanding.
Chad Everson
@Eric Myers: Eric, your statements fall false and dead upon the ground that is so richly blessed with God’s blessings that even in such darkness and despair, life will break forth. I pray that someday you may find God’s peace and maybe even a hint of understanding. God Bless your struggle to attain what is given to us all, if we only believe and reach out our hand.
It should be very widely known that the public schools are and were created to do just that. They still run on an industrial time clock and beat down the student to quest to quench the thirst and need for knowledge. However, once we break this monopoly and enter the ever so coveted choice in parents to assure their children grow and prosper ever indulging in knowledge and questioning instead of being mandated to be forced the agenda of the day. Liberty will once again be attained and embraced. Until then, anyone entering this political arena will be engaged until the war is won, the good fight and the good race is won and we can lay down in victory and be with our savior, Jesus Christ.
Chad Everson
Chad,
You have absolutely no argument whatsoever. Please quote that jefferson bible of yours. I’m very curious to see what it has to say, if anything of value at all. All you said in both of your statements was religous and overly optimistic bull shit. The most angry people on the planet are the christians, many of which can be found on this very web site. I have no anger towards you or your companions, simply sorrow and dissappoinment. God never meant for any of us to be so blind, unquestioning, or dry of individuality whatsoever. But clearly you have gone against such will of his. If you would like to actually enter this debate with first off a topic, second maybe some backing to your opinion on the topic, then i would be delighted to converse with you. Until then i hope you fairland world makes you happy. Just keep it out of the law systems of one of the greatest countries to ever be.
On a side note, stop praying for me please. Several double blind studies (do you know what that is?) have been done on praying and its affects. Three patients all had cancer, one was being prayed for and knew about it, another being prayed for and not knowing about it, and the third not being prayed for at all. The one knowing of the prayers died quickest, the one being prayed for without knowledge of it died second, and the one not being prayed for at all actually beat the cancer. So if you pray for me you are actually statistically lowering my chances for survival. Please stop.
@”Friend of Eric Myers”:
First of all, I have to laugh that you tried to use the pseudonym “Friend of Eric Myers”. I did a little checking on the records kept by the Wordpress blogging software and found that, lo and behold, “Friend of Eric Myers” is actually “Eric Myers” himself! Same IP address, same username and email address, same personal web site listed. I remember that trick from my newbie days arguing with people on the Internet–trying to make a post sound like it’s coming from someone else just to add credibility to your arguments. Or did you invite a friend over to fill in the blanks?
Don’t sully the great name of Thomas Jefferson by attributing to him “values” which he most certainly did not share with you. I have reason to doubt whether Thomas Jefferson even said that first quote you gave. Certainly it could be found via Google, right? Well, Google only turned up nine (9) results matching the word-for-word text of that quote, all but two of them on anti-Christian, anti-religion web sites. Of the remaining two, one was a “centrist” (i.e. fence-sitter) blog and the other from…well, I can’t really figure out what that site’s point is. As Thomas Jefferson wrote in his August 18, 1785 letter to Peter Carr:
“He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good dispositions.”
I can even give the source of this quote, which is John Bartlett, Bartlett’s Familiar Quotations (Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1855, 1980), p.388.
Can you give the source for your first Thomas Jefferson quote?
The rest of them he did indeed say, but your understanding of them and what he actually meant are in completely different universes. You will see this both by studying the context of the emerging and ancient political systems he was fighting at home and abroad as well as the rest of his quotes.
We would not even be having this discussion…indeed Proposition 8 would have never been on the ballot in 2008…if those judges on the California Supreme Court had not misrepresented Thomas Jefferson’s true beliefs and had respected the will of the people on Proposition 22. It seems they only want to use his words when they can twist what he meant to suit their populist agenda.
For Thomas Jefferson, the judicial branch of the government was the greatest threat to liberty. He said (and not as an endorsement of the judiciary):
“The Constitution is a mere thing of wax in the hands of the judiciary, which they may twist and shape into any form they please.”
On September 28, 1820, Jefferson wrote to William Jarvis:
“You see…to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so…and their power [is] the more dangerous, as they are in office for life and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots.”
And, on June 12, 1823, in a letter to Justice William Johnson regarding the meaning to the Constitution, Thomas Jefferson wrote:
“On every question of construction [of the Constitution], carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”
So, Eric, school is now in session.
It’s time to un-indoctrinate and teach you more about what Thomas Jefferson really stood for. Your handpicked quotes are typical of the liberal, socialist, atheist school system you grew up in. Don’t bother looking for these quotes in any modern school’s materials and textbooks. They don’t exist there. Down the memory hole they went. These are primarily from texts and encyclopedias that had the fortune of being allowed into publication before the mid-1990s. At the risk of severe carpal tunnel syndrome, I will give you, as Paul Harvey used to say, “the rest of the story”. If you can handle the truth, read it at http://grizzlygroundswell.com/archives/5671.
Eric,
you still havnt produced any proof, any stats,….anything to back up your arguments.
Tobacco and Alcohol. If, in the 18th century, a scientist or doctor were asked if tobacco and alcohol had adverse negative side affects, how would they respond? Depends…the scientifically correct response may have been “There is no evidence that it does…yet no one has really researched it so we don’t know.” or “as far as we know, no…they do not.”
An endorsement? no. But if a rich wine drinking, cigar smoking doctor was asked by a patient or friend, I doubt he would be giving a negative endorsement.
Lack of evidence does not prove anything.
I used the tobacco alcohol example for two reasons. First, science doesn’t know everything. Even what it knows changes on a constant basis.
Second, the mormons, as a code of healthy living, taught and practiced their Word of Wisdom. No coffee or tea? no tobacco or alcohol? They were ridiculed for their “code”. In years to follow science reinforced their perspective. Science AND religion won. This in spite of the tobacco companies eventually failed attempts at hiding such evidence.
Perhaps i was lazy and included everyone in on the world being flat. At one time scientist and preist alike believed it to be. Science found otherwise and the religious were more than reluctant to concede the point.
I DO know that the Bible doesn’t preclude that the world was flat. I also know that the Bible doesn’t preclude that the earth was the center of the universe. The great thinkers of the day did…they rationalized that it must be so based upon their limited obervation skills.
153Friend of Eric Myers
on 14 Nov 2008 at 9:42 pm
Site your source please
148Eric Myers
on 14 Nov 2008 at 4:39 pm
“Our country basis revolves around the fact that we were one of the first country’s in the world to have a government by and for the people INSTEAD of guided by a faith or religion. ”
The idea behind the seperation of Church and State was to exclude any one religion to gain mass control and punish those not of their religion (as the Mother countries had).
Thomas Jefferson:
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between church and State.”
This seperation of Church and State does not seperate immoral behavior from the justice of law. Harmful acts are not to be tolerated, to self or society. Homosexuality was argued to not be harmful and yet scientific data shows the contrary. Or show me otherwise…I am still waiting for those stats. What good has come from legalizing homosexual activity? Those that want to, can. At what cost? Am I anti gay for bringing up the AIDS epidemic that swept through the Gay populations? Its a fact. Am i hateful for bringing to our attention that homo and bisexual men and women donated blood and had relations with heteros knowing that they were inffected with AIDS or an STD? How does this not fit into the catagory of one who seeks to harm themselves and others?
If its all about love who ever you want, it don’t hurt anybody, then i have some questions that need answering….cause it certainly HAS hurt quite a few million.
I’m not saying that all homosexuals are selfish and malicious, but a gay male in his 20’s has a 50%+ chance of contracting AIDS becuase a tremendous majority care more about their pleasure level than safety to self and others. The homosexual population have not conducted themselves responsibly.
I am for ANY rights that are lacking….Civil unions, as has been qouted, provide all rights and priveleges of marriage…if they are not, then one has to take it up with those who are violating the law.
For a population who thinks so short sightedly, as to risk deadly diseases for a moment of gratification, to suddenly want to change the workings of a social institution is dangerous to the extreme. Findings pro-gay are limited and not fully devoloped especially in light of so many studies that state the contrary.
151Eric Myers
on 14 Nov 2008 at 8:54 pm
Proud2b4family,
“Are you serious? You started out with some fairly valid points but….so overwhelmingly religious that they didn’t need to mention it? You must be joking. That is the most pitiful statement i’ve seen in weeks. You are a sad and desperate human being.”
you say that but ignore the evidence given in the link provided.
“78StopDiscriminating
on 04 Nov 2008 at 10:30 pm You believe some people choose- tell me why?”
I cannot presume to actually tell you why anybody would choose to do anything…to try would open me up to sure reproof, despite my accuracy. A conviction of belief will drive persons to extraordinary endurances of persecution.
(Eric, this can be considered a response to your pyschology reference)
How did they come to the conclusion that they were gay? What chemical factors contributed to the decision? A baby’s brain takes in stimulus of every kind…to understand the world it applys labels, makes connections, matches, pieces together..color, smells, sounds, sensations, emotions, behaviors….a SYMPHONY of information composed to understand self and the world around it. Why do any of us operate the way we do? Holy complicated! We’re talking lifetimes of research before we have a CLEAR understanding of any of this. As it is, Pychology is relatively new and in flux as to prevailing theories….and they are only theories.
The only common consensus between researchers is that homosexuality is influenced by both nature and nuture. Environmentally and biologically. To what degree and how is not clearly understood.
111StopDiscriminating
on 06 Nov 2008 at 10:39 pm
“I think if a descision hurts someone else than it is bad and when it is made rashly than it is bad. There are multiple criterias for it. I think that everything one does is a choice- one can choose to act on something and that is a choice but I don’t think they are wrong to be born a certain way. ”
“THey can have a healthy male father figure they just might have two moms. The kids I know have teachers and family friends who were their father figures and do fine actually. We should get fathers to not disown
their children and focus on that first in other cases because its very damaging. ”
I will not deny that there are motherless and fatherless who turn out great. It is undeniable that a teacher, extended family member, mentor, or otherwise will help a child lacking a parent. Those persons affect kids with both parents, as well. Despite the our marvelouse capacity to cope, it is still better that a father and a mother raise a child. Subjecting a child to the need of coping is less than right.
You’re right…we must do something about all the poor father figures out there…the abuse and neglect is shamful and destructive! We MUST do something.
We live in a world where the individual is free to make whatever choice one fancys. The individual is more important than another…if this makes me happy, than i should be able to do it…having an affair is nearly an expected occurance. There is no Love…but for love of self gratification.
Decisions to cheat, to violate trust between ones spouse definately hurts everyone emotionally involved…wives and children…the men who cheat might say “I was born this way” ,”i have a penis and like to use it”, “I couldn’t help myself”…such excuses do not make his actions right.
Yet, if he had love…really felt it…really knew what it was and what it was for…then his family would have a chance.
The highest degree of love is charity.
And charity suffereth long, and is kind, and envieth not, and is not puffed up, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil, and rejoiceth not in iniquity but rejoiceth in the truth, beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
If you truely loved someone, you would suffer with them and by their hand…you would be kind…you would not be envious or jealous but would be grateful for any ounce of their happiness…you would not pretend…you would not seek your own gratification/pleasure/happiness at the expense of anothers, would not be self serving…is not easily challenge, will be unwavering…does nothing of malicious or evil intent…supports and celebrates doing what is right…will bear any burden…is trusting and trustworthy…has faith in the other’s potential and in their own…is unconditional.
to be cont….
“To me ,love is having someone who will always be there and who thinks you are amazing and beautiful in every way even though they have seen how awful you can be. I have a more detailed personal definition but that may just apply to me and I have a slightly different definition that isn’t about romantic love but about being really close to a friend or someone.”
I love your definition…i love it i love it! To think of all those who i’ve met…and with whom ive had the chance to get to know and accept and love…it brings joyful tears to my eyes….its when we know each others worst side that we can truely accept and love someone… truely a keen observation! I do appreciate it!
I wanted to include that before i made my early exit
walrus,
i didnt ignore the evidence. i looked at it. You fools actually call that link evidence? It was sponsored by this site which is clearly biased and brought up no support for its argument. Its just another one of your religious followers arguing the same sad points as you. Do we need to define evidence now? lol jesus.
Walrus,
Where to begin where to begin….
First off, you are NEVER going to stop homosexual activity haha so dont even try. They simply like their same gender and they arent going to magically become straight one day. This argument is about their right to be married, not them actually being gay. As for the AIDS epidemic….you have no proof to say that homosexuals started it and straight people can spread it just as easily as homosexuals so….whats your point? Or do you even have one. I dont need stats unless you actually bring up an argument haha
And homosexuality is an immorall behavior now? Really? Please tell me you arent honestly making such a close minded and corrupt statement.
So your argument about church and state was just shot down….next?
Walrus,
You mention that i havnt brought up any evidence and yet neither have you. You simply brought up a circumstance (regarding tobacco and alcohol) and played it out how YOU thought it would go. Thats nothing close to evidence.
I never said the bible said these things i merely said it was the religious crowd that supported the arguments. NOT the great thinkers of the day. Get your facts straight on that one. Preists and other religious leaders were shown plenty of evidence saying that the earth wasnt the center of the universe and such and yet they fought it for decades if not centuries.
I thought of a good quote the other day…”Religion is simply your answer when you dont have a real one” meaning that if you cant explain something with logic or science…clearly its an act of god. Back in the days of native americans everything was god sent. The rain, eclipses, the crops, the sun, etc. As time has gone on we have slowly discovered scientific explanations for each and every one of these things and more. Its only a matter of time before science disproves nealy all religious theorys and lack of answers.
As for my friend citing his sources, he did. Those are direct quotes from out third president. Read his entry more closely before you go telling him to do things he has already done. If you want to see those quotes then go find a book on jefferson or look up famous quotes on the internet. You’ll find them easily.
Proud2b4family,
Wow, are you really that stupid? My friend used the same computer and didnt bother to change the information (excluding the name) at all??? BLASHPHEMY!!! HOW could one commit such a crime lol god youre fucking retarded. He saw the debate i was having with you and decided to put in his own opinion. His name is cort abney. He is a genius and has more knowlegde and wisdom than your pewny little conservitive mind could ever hope to have. Dont insult me by spending so much time looking up minor details only to be shot down, please.
As for all your other quotes and “proof” if they are not to be found in the history books then where are they to be found? Not that history books are the only source of evidence because i agree with you some of it can be quite off. But im fairly certain you pulled those quotes out of your ass or altered them entirely. If you honestly thing Jefferson didnt agree with the constitution or that he was a supporter of religion then you know absolutely nothing about him. Read a book my friend, itll do you good.
Proud2b4family,
A few things i left out by the way. SCHOOL SYSTEMS ARENT LIBERAL OR ATHIESTIC. Neither is the mediea. You are one of the most well spoken idiots i have ever met. And because you are well spoken, you think that makes your arguments valid. I smile upon your false beliefs
even my teachers laugh at you. You’ve become quite the entertainment for my entire school along with everyone in my life. Honestly how old are you? And you’re wasting your time checking my email adress entrys and such? Please get a life or at least spend such valuable time coming up with REAL arguments if you can (finding support for conservative and religious thoughts is amazingly difficult in a mature debate).
@Eric Myers: Eric, here is a tip from an old Teddy Bear, when you have found yourself beaten, out classed and out maneuvered, admit it and move on! I love that you are putting profit in my pocket with all our hits, and I hope you keep coming back, if nothing else, then just to humor me, but you are digging a deeper and deeper hole revealing the silly socialist squirrel inside you to the whole world.
Now this is humorous to us, and honestly, we love the profit and laughter, but if you are going to fight with the big boys, you really should be wearing some big boy pants and be able to stand up and defend your assertions, not with feelings but with wisdom and understanding.
Good Luck to you, and let us know how that socialism works out for you!
~Teddy Bear
Oh Susan?
You are priceless my dear just priceless! I got a kick out of reading your comments. What a lovely bigot you are!
Listen hun, parents don’t need to hover and sign loads of paperwork. They need to read the form and ask hmmm… do I want my child to go to see his/her teacher marry (non-existent god forbid) another woman? If not opt them out it’s not hard. What kind of lazy parent wouldn’t do that? Gay marriage is not a choice you idiot! A lot of gay people wish they were straight but they just don’t feel that way and they can’t. Then they have to deal with stupid people like you who make it difficult for them. Ever heard of Harvey Mills? Damn bigots. Also, if you don’t sound at all like you think gay people are, well, people. Do you know any? Most of them are lovely people who want rights just like you and me.
A GOOD POINT TO BRING UP:
The bible is against gay marriage. So what? I’m an atheist but I still have valid opinions about this. Ok so the bible ALSO says that girls who aren’t virgins should be stoned to death, and that if your hand causes you to commit sin you should cut it off. You don’t see those getting bills so we can all cut off our hands and stone the non-virgins. You gotta understand that some things in the bible are absurd and not to be taken seriously. Also, it doesn’t matter if God agrees or not if you don’t even believe in God in the first place.
@Alice: Atheist, I guess I have to admire your commitment to being stubborn or nonobservant of the life that surrounds you. Stoning? I seem to remember that being in the Koran. Would love to find that passage in the Bible, I missed that one. The passage of cutting off your hand if it makes you sin is not literal, I think it points to the fact something so radical as cutting off you own hand to avoid sin is something we should think about. We often blame our own actions and thoughts upon others, a hand, a tv show, a birth defect.
If homosexuality is something people are born with and the new use of DNA should those with this “defect” be aborted? I would not want that. Therefore the argument that it is a from birth defect is probably not a strong argument. Environmental is even a worse one. Although, one of a sinful nature or decision is almost a plausable argument. I am a regretful sinner, and who am I to judge upon the difference of my sins and my friend who is homosexual?
I feel it is a choice. Not a birth defect or natural third sex. I feel it is also a sin, and who am I to judge if it is a worse sin then any of my own sins? Therefore, for those who choose to sin in homosexual acts, should not be any more scorned then any of my own personal sins. We are all children of God and we will have to deal with God as Job did, simply with prayer and exhaltation, prostrated before our almighty as sinners that because of Christ’s Grace we have an opportunity to be judged and loved by our creator.
Let’s leave the judgement of our neighbor to our Creator. If you like you may judge but wisdom warns against it. For myself, I have other sins to account for. I will go before my creator for those as I am sure we all will.
Homosexuals, theives, blasphemer’s, adulterer’s, and an ever growing list of us sinners will all go one by one into the presence of God. Who can say how each of us will fair? The Bible gives us a compass to live a joyous life. We attempt one and all to stay away from the pitfalls of despair and evil that robs us of the joy of a full life. Use it if you will, deny it if you must. As for me and my household, we will serve the Lord best we can. In doing so, therefore, we lift up and serve our neighbor and uphold our founding documents, both religious and political.
Marriage, between a man and woman are present in both our religious and political founding documents. When this issue enters the political arena, it is fair game to fight for what you and I hold as true and just.
For me, it is between a man and woman and the judicial has overstepped it’s vocation as upholding our founding documents. Therefore, it is fair game for you, Susan and myself to defend what we hold as true and just.
When you throw about the term bigot, be careful, ever hear the tale of the splinter your neighbors eye and yet oblivious to the log in your own?
A vibrant discussion is fun and appretiated here in the Grizzly Groundswell. I thank everyone that takes their time to defend their stance. However, just know this free market is not without it’s perils. If you are not willing to stand behind your work, then you better not put it on this site. The patriots that have graced this site are ferocious in defending their stance and ideals.
I just don’t want your feeling hurt.
~Teddy Bear
First off, EricMeyers, as much as I agree with you on viewpoints- they won’t take you seriously if you keep insulting them- as tempting as it may be it shows immaturity and don’t say retarded- its offensive.
People tend to marry for love and so my definition of love I personally think is a valid reason for someone to marry at least for the love part- glad you seem to agree.
I would watch who you call ignorant-Chad T as some of your supporters are saying that homosexuality is a sin since the bible says it is and those of us who don’t believe in the bible or God should follow that. That’s pretty close minded and ignorant. I am not Christian- anything at all that from the Bible as a reason - is not valid with me- so you are more than welcome to be Christian and believe that but use points that are based in the world all of us accept and believe if you want to debate because you go nowhere using religion.
. Stoning? I seem to remember that being in the Koran.
Have you heard of ‘Leviticus, I think its spelled like that. In those laws it states that
Don’t let cattle graze with other kinds of Cattle (Leviticus 19:19)
Don’t have a variety of crops on the same field. (Leviticus 19:19)
Don’t wear clothes made of more than one fabric (Leviticus 19:19)
Don’t cut your hair nor shave. (Leviticus 19:27)
Have you read them?/ Some of those things are really really ridiculous.
Are you going to burn someone who wears clothes of more than one fabric.
Also,btw, stoning is definitelly in the Bible. Look at the Old testament. The Old Testament is a part of the Qur’an,Bible and Torah.
But I don’t think that homosexuality is a sin at all- I’m not Christian either- so are you going to tell me that since I don’t believe in your religion I still have to follow your laws and rules? Is that right.
I feel it is a choice.
Why would someone choose? I know personally a lot of people and I know they didn’t choose it. Did you choose your sexual orientation? Do you wake up in the morning and choose to be straight?
Is it in how you brush your teeth or what you wear? Seriously, how do you choose to be straight or gay or Bi?
I feel it is also a sin, and who am I to judge if it is a worse sin then any of my own sins?
So don’t judge then- you judge by saying they are wrong- its not a sin. Being attracted to someone else is not a sin- being attracted to the same sex is not a sin- you cannot help it.
When we clairfy why hitting is wrong or stealing is wrong to a little kid- we sometimes have to break it down all the way. IF you hit someone you might hurt someone- and hurting people is not right. Stealing is taking something that belongs to you and if you think its ok then will you feel the same if someone stole from you and justified it. Can you break down being gay like that and explain to me why its wrong? without using the bible.
Therefore, for those who choose to sin in homosexual acts, should not be any more scorned then any of my own personal sins.
I don’t think its a sin- I don’t think love is a sin at all. How does homosexuality hurt someone? I mean details and specifics. I want you to explainto me how it physically, emotionally or mentally hurts someone say a child?
Children get raped or molested all the time and they sometime never recover from that- why aren’t we focused on that as an evil and focusing on helping those children? HOw can homosexuality be so evil that it bypasses that?
Seriously- if you use religion actually I’m just not going to respond and I have every right not to because to me - it doesn’t mean anything. Facts, morals, values, something I can relate to does.
Thieves take what does not belong to them and those people may be hurt by what was taken. Actually today a friend of mine, her house was robbed and I know she is pretty much in shock right now- I’m sure she feels those people are way more evil and say some lesbian couple she sees happy and in love. Blasephemy isn’t a crime so much for me cause I’m not religions. Adultery seriously hurts people- people are left damaged and betrayed- that doesn’t mean those people are evil but they did make some bad choices and they do hurt people sometimes families and children.
Marriage, between a man and woman are present in both our religious and political founding documents.
But if we aren’t religious why should religion matter to us?
Where in the political founding document does it say that marriage is between a man and a woman?
I’m curious- what is the purpose of marriage? Why does it exist?
When this issue enters the political arena, it is fair game to fight for what you and I hold as true and just.
I believe in tolerance and that in having our rights we have no right to take away rights of someone else. Marriage is a right as long as the person is of legal standing and an adult and want to be married.
I have a question- what about tranvestites? Who do they marry? girl or guy? And since they are half of both what do they do?
j
As an old teacher of mine put it best I think” Your right to swing your arm is limitless until you hit my nose. You can swing your arm as much as you want but your right stops at my nose. You can have a right to your beliefs until you tell me mine are wrong and that I don’t get my rights because of it.” The minute you take away rights- you forfeit the right to protection of having your own beliefs.
“and yes, we are intolerant of intolerance.”
166Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 6:59 pm
“It was sponsored by this site which is clearly biased and brought up no support for its argument. ”
Eric
Below are the references that the article listed as its support. I do not discount bias for bias is what drives every opinion out there…including yours. Never-the-less, this article cites its sources. Notice that one could look up the exact book, exact page or chapter, and find the information qouted. That’s what i call citing your source. If the article only said, “and a doctor reported that..” without citing the study or from wence it was taken, one cannot really trust the qoutation.
168Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 7:14 pm
“As for my friend citing his sources, he did. Those are direct quotes from out third president. Read his entry more closely before you go telling him to do things he has already done.”
169Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 7:24 pm
“As for all your other quotes and “proof” if they are not to be found in the history books then where are they to be found? Not that history books are the only source of evidence because i agree with you some of it can be quite off. But im fairly certain you pulled those quotes out of your ass or altered them entirely.”
Eric, notice that I or anybody else suggested that you pulled, your friend pulled, those TJ qoutes out of you arse…we asked that a source be provided. If you cannot, than you allow your qoutes to be subjected to the same scrutiny that you have passed on us. If you insist on defining the rules…then play by them.
1. Karlen A. SEXUALITY And HOMOSEXUALITY. NY Norton, 1971.
2. Pines B. BACK TO BASICS. NY Morrow, 1982, p. 211.
3. Weinberg G. SOCIETY AND THE HEALTHY HOMOSEXUAL. NY St. Martin’s, 1972, preface.
4. Amici curiae brief, in Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986.
5. Corey L. & Holmes, K.K. Sexual transmission of Hepatitis A in homosexual men. “New England Journal of Medicine,” 1980302435- 38.
6. Cameron P et al Sexual orientation and sexually transmitted disease. “Nebraska Medical Journal,” 198570292-99; Effect of homosexuality upon public health and social order “Psychological Reports,” 1989, 64, 1167-79.
7. Manligit, G.W. et al Chronic immune stimulation by sperm alloan- tigens. “Journal of the American Medical Association,” 1984251 237-38.
8. Cecil Adams, “The Straight Dope,” THE READER (Chicago, 3/28/86) [Adams writes authoritatively on counter-culture material, his column is carried in many alternative newspapers across the U.S. and Canada].
9. Dritz, S. & Braff. Sexually transmitted typhoid fever. “New England Journal of Medicine,” 19772961359-60.
10. Dritz, S. Medical aspects of homosexuality. “New England Journal of Medicine,” 1980302463-4.
11. CDC Hepatitis A among homosexual men –United States, Canada, and Australia. MMWR 199241155-64.
12. Christenson B. et al. An epidemic outbreak of hepatitis A among homosexual men in Stockholm, “American Journal of Epidemiology,” 1982115599-607.
13. Jay, K. & Young, A. THE GAY REPORT. NY Summit, 1979.
14. McKusick, L. et al AIDS and sexual behaviors reported by gay men in San Francisco, “American Journal of Public Health,” 1985 75493- 96.
15. USA Today 11/21/84.
16. Gebhard, P. & Johnson, A. THE KINSEY DATA. NY Saunders, 1979.
17. Bell, A. & Weinberg, M. HOMOSEXUALITIES. NY Simon & Schuster, 1978.
18. Jaffee, H. et al. National case-control study of Kaposi’s sarcoma. “Annals Of Internal Medicine,” 198399145-51.
19. Quinn, T. C. et al. The polymicrobial origin of intestinal infection in homosexual men. “New England Journal of Medicine,” 1983309576-82.
20. Biggar, R. J. Low T-lymphocyte ratios in homosexual men. “Journal Of The American Medical Association,” 19842511441-46; “Wall Street Journal,” 7/18/91, B1.
21. CDC HIV/AIDS SURVEILLANCE, February 1993.
22. Chu, S. et al. AIDS in bisexual men in the U.S. “American Journal Of Public Health,” 199282220-24.
23. Cameron, P., Playfair, W. & Wellum, S. The lifespan of homo- sexuals. Paper presented at Eastern Psychological Association Convention, April 17, 1993.
24. Dooley, W.W. et al. Nosocomial transmission of tuberculosis in a hospital unit for HIV-invected patients. “Journal of the American Medical Association,” 19922672632-35.
25. Schechter, M.T. et al. Changes in sexual behavior and fear of AIDS. “Lancet,” 198411293.
26. Elford, J. et al. Kaposi’s sarcoma and insertive rimming. “Lancet,” 1992339938.
27. Beral, V. et al. Risk of Kaposi’s sarcoma and sexual practices associated with faecal contact in homosexual or bisexual men with AIDS. “Lancet,” 1992339632-35.
28. Testimony before House Health & Environment Subcommittee, 2/24/92.
29. Ciesielski, C. et al. Transmission of human immunodeficiency virus in a dental practice. “Annals of Internal Medicine, 1992116 798-80; CDC Announcement Houston Post, 8/7/92.
30. Rubin, S. “Sex Education Teachers Who Sexually Abuse Students.” 24th International Congress on Psychology, Sydney, Australia, August 1988.
31. Cameron, P. & Cameron, K. Prevalence of homosexuality. “Psychology Reports,” 1993, in press; Melbye, M. & Biggar, R.J. Interactions between persons at risk for AIDS and the general population in Denmark. “American Journal of Epidemiology,” 1992135593-602.
32. Rodriguez-Pichardo, A. et al. Sexually transmitted diseases in homosexual males in Seville, Spain, “Geniourin Medicina,” 1990 66;423-427.
33. AIDS Prognosis, Washington Times, 2/13/93, C1.
“168Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 7:14 pm
You mention that i havnt brought up any evidence and yet neither have you. You simply brought up a circumstance (regarding tobacco and alcohol) and played it out how YOU thought it would go. Thats nothing close to evidence. ”
I appreciate the attempt at directing my “evidence” to a hearsay antecdote that i gave while making a completly different point. I will readily admit that my tobacco and alcohol example is not exactly a source of evidence. As per evidence i was referencing…try the the sources i just listed. Or perhaps any of the other facts, stats, that i both qouted and cited in the many other comments made by me in the last few weeks.
The crazy thing is that even if we were to admit that the sources stated were COMPLETELY biased, its strange that there is no counter biased evidence to refute it. Or is there? Let me know. You are so incredibly knowledgable on the subject that you must be able to provide a link, a book title a something from whence you’ve absorbed this information. So far you’ve only been insulting and evasive and i don’t appreciate it.
“168Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 7:14 pm
You mention that i havnt brought up any evidence and yet neither have you. You simply brought up a circumstance (regarding tobacco and alcohol) and played it out how YOU thought it would go. Thats nothing close to evidence. ”
I appreciate the attempt at directing my “evidence” to a hearsay antecdote that i gave while making a completly different point. (I say hearsay because i didn’t provide any statistics or cite any references) I will readily admit that my tobacco and alcohol example is not exactly a source of evidence for or against homosexuality. I suppose i didn’t make myself clear and for that i do sincerely apologize. My purpose was to provide a clear example of religion, or a religious group following a religious creed and having science back them up in the course of scientific advancement. Mormons were mocked for their adherance to these words of wisdom…and still are. Why were they mocked for not drinking and smoking and chewing? The prevailing thought of the day was that there was nothing wrong with using said substances…why? science, at that time, did not deem them harmful. I might add that there might have been at least one, of the many who mocked them, who said “You are so ignorant! Don’t you know that any doctor will say there is nothing wrong with it?” Might have been….strictly hearsay….but i make this point in opposition to your statement that (paraphrased) religion is for the ignorant. Todays medicine and the practicing LDS’s higher life span are evidence of my point.
As for evidence i was referencing that you provide a counter to…try the the sources i just listed. Or perhaps any of the other facts, stats, that i both qouted and cited in the many other comments posted by the Walrus in the last few weeks.
A side note: The crazy thing is that even with the admittance that the sources stated were COMPLETELY biased, its interesting that there is no counter evidence that has been submitted in this forum. Or is there? Let me know. Your self stated enlightenment on the subject would presume that you must be able to provide a link, a book title a something from whence you’ve absorbed this information. Insulting me and my opinions and the opinions of others is hardly an appropriate response in a mature dialoge. I don’t appreciate it. And although it might make you feel good to call others ignorant and stupid, your arguement is only weakened by such conduct. I’m not trying to tear you down…I’m trying to give you an idea as to how to be more pursuasive and how to present a stronger argument.
hmmm…that was interesting….i didn’t realize i posted my first draft. opps
Eric
Global warming? How does is that proven, and what does that have to do with religion? earth is the center of the universe, the earth is flat, evolution and creation (The evolution theory is still a theory last i checked and science has no idea how ‘life’ comes and goes just yet)
Earliest of thoughts, (earth is flat, earth is the center) was, again, thought up by the great minds of that day. The theologists and philosphers adapted this mode of thinking to explain the world around them…the arguements were quite indepth. Later…OTHER great minds figured out more then the previous…and so we progressed. To say that only religious folks believed these things is erroneous. The heirarchy of the churches in power opposed changes in thought as it conflicted with their current understanding and instruction. They based most of their support on science than they did on the holy writ before them. After they looked closely at their holy writ and realized that a the new discoveries really didn’t effect them, they eventually conceded.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality
Am i making homosexuality a moral issue? Is it ethical to expose self and others to viruses and diseases? Is it ethical/moral to pursue a lifestyle that has a high percentage of depression? One cannot snort cocaine, but one can induce the chemicals released during sex in any fashion they choose. What is ethical? What is morality? Why have either? Yes…i do think morality and ethics has a place in the argument. Allow a person to act according to their desires, but let us not endorse a lifestyle with marriage that is risky…biologically and pyschologically.
Despite ones desdain for religion, science, fact or fiction…one demonstrates ignorance when they ignore the good merits upon which they are based.
(so sorry if this repeats…im trying to post this without the references)
167Eric Myers
on 22 Nov 2008 at 7:06 pm
“As for the AIDS epidemic….you have no proof to say that homosexuals started it and straight people can spread it just as easily as homosexuals so….whats your point?”
Eric, what i said was:
“Am I anti gay for bringing up the AIDS epidemic that swept through the Gay populations? Its a fact. Am i hateful for bringing to our attention that homo and bisexual men and women donated blood and had relations with heteros knowing that they were inffected with AIDS or an STD? How does this not fit into the catagory of one who seeks to harm themselves and others?”
I did not say homosexuals ’started’ the AIDS epidemic…i did suggest that it swept throught the gay community and i did infer that there are self reports of homosexuals/lesbians that purposely donated blood and had sex with others, to spread the virus. The ’start’ of the epidemic has been traced down to an intermingling of chimpanzee or ape blood with human blood. Wheither transfered via open wounds of a hunting party or sexual relations, we will never know. We may never know if it came from apes at all (created in a lab?).
You don’t like self reports, as they are surely lying if they don’t testify according to your ….ideas. As for sweeping through the gay community…do you have any proof that it didn’t?
Here a group within the gay community publishes a manifesto that stires up the gay community
http://www.homohealth.org/taskforce/manifesto.htm
Here the L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center and their campaign for the gay community to own it and end it (AIDS) is covered
http://www.medialifemagazine.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=444&num=7806
And another that seems relatively fair
“In the First-World, AIDS was first diagnosed among American white homosexual men in the early 1980s, but retrospective studies have documented HIV and AIDS among Haitian immigrants to the U.S. and Americans associated with them in the late 1970s.(21) Similarly, body fluids obtained from a Norwegian family between 1971 to 1976 revealed a type of HIV-1 infection, acquired earlier than 1971, and this type of HIV is mainly restricted to West Africa.(20) HIV appears to have entered the U.S. around the late 1960s,(21) and was then primarily spread by homosexuals throughout the U.S. and Europe. In a survey on AIDS conducted in Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany (FDR), Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the U.K, in 1983, the most important contributors to the AIDS epidemic in Europe were male homosexuals (58% of all cases, and likely contracted from the U.S.A., Europe, and Haiti), followed by individuals from Central Africa (26%), and whites who had sex with natives from Central Africa (3%); drug abuse was not a risk factor.(22) ”
21 K. E. Robbins et al., J Virol 77, 6359 (Jun, 2003).
22 M. P. Glauser, P. Francioli, Eur J Clin Microbiol 3, 55 (Feb, 1984).
Walrus,
Are you actually claiming that homosexuals purposely donated blood to spread the virus???
Walrus,
On one thing i will admit you are correct. Proud2b4family got the best of me when he started insulting me and bringing up arguments that insulted people like me with no backing whatsoever. So i am truly sorry for tearing you down, that was not my intention. I suppose i just got a little carried away. You have to understand, i am extremely understanding of people having views different than mine. But when those people’s views start to cause death, poverty, and discrimination, i cannot simply stand by and watch as the masses base their actions on such falsehoods. And i will occasionally grow angry at the injust being caused.
Religion has been the cause of more death, violence, purgery, fraud, discrimination, mindless exectution, and torture than any other single factor in this planets history. And that did not stop in the days of the crusades. Many of those things are still happening today due to organized religion. Look i dont mind you having your beliefs, but please keep them out of the laws that affect millions of people every day. Keep them out of my church free sundays. Keep them out of the school systems. Worship your god and live happily but do not try to make others worship him or make it so that he is around every corner in our community. That is what this country is about, to be able to practive your beliefs (no matter what they may be) without being persecuted or looked down upon.
As for the statement you begin with global warming….
The major opposition to global warming’s existence and it being attributed to man was the conservitive crowd which as you know has a strong link to religion.
Evolution is just a theory…oh man. I dont know how many times ive had to educate people on this exact issue in the past few years. You do know that GRAVITY is just a theory right? And that there is less evidence for it than evolution? I think you are smart enough that that is all need be said.
As far as the great minds debate…simple miscommunication. I dont think of those who thought the earth was flat as great minds. Scientifically at least. Or not great/educated enough globally to be considered reputable on the topic. But the priests did not look to science or fact when they argued the earth being round. They simply were taught that it was flat and didnt second guess it. The basis of religion is to not question or educate yourself. So they blindly obeyed. Blind faith is the cause of so many wars…blind faith is what caused those men to fly their jets into the world trade centers on 9/11.
Can you see why i grow angry walrus? Its nothing against you personally. Its against organzied religion.
Teddy bear,
Walrus, Stopdiscriminating, and i are all having a mature conversation. Each of us has brought up valid points and defended them to the tooth. Admittedly now and then we have each grown angry, but even so we are actually debating. I hate to break it to you but laughter or not, you are not one of the big boys. Nor are you contributing anything to this debate with the exception of your insulting opinions. If you choose not to bring up a valid point at absolute LEAST then you will get no response from me and hopefully not from others.
Stopdiscriminating,
You’re right. I was in a poor mood that day and i lost my temper. If you look at my response to Walrus, you’ll see i apologized. And i apologize to you too, yelling and such only weakens one’s argument.
Walrus,
One last thing, i looked up some of your sources in referance to homosexuality being more comon in gay men. I do not deny that statement. But there are a few things i dont think you are picking up on. First, there are far less gay people than straight people, so its inevitable that there will be higher percentages of infected gays. Second, it is just as easy for a straight person to spread HIV than a gay person and straight people have just as much potential to be permiscuous if not more so….as far as homosexual activity being a threat to you im going to strongly disagree. HIV is a threat to you. But since gays neither started it nor contribute to it any more than straights than you cannot say they are immoral do to HIV, sorry.
Btw if its not too inconvinient could you respond to my responses in a single resoponse? Haha we have WAY too many conversations going on here.
I noticed- Eric thanks.
So are all the little kids in AFrica who have Aids immoral?
Is anyone going to respond to my latest post?
Dear Yes on 8 people,
I'm a fifteen year old girl who was raised in tolerance and
acceptance. All my life I've been taught to listen and to learn and
that some things aren't something people can control. Race, gender,
what family one is born to , and sexual orientation. You believe some
people choose- tell me why? Why someone chooses to go to school and
get spit on- told they are inferior-hated- discriminated against-
bullied- told they aren't good enough- thrown out of their religion or
community ?
Why would someone choose that? I am who I am and I've learned to live
with that and learned how to live with how others are. I won't condemn
someone for something they do anything about because that is wrong as
I was raised to believe.
Also- in the 60s there were laws preventing people of mixed races from
marrying- that was discrimination and something I'm ashamed to know my
country had a part in. HOw is this any different? Discrimination is
discrimination no matter who you are discriminating against- blacks,
whites, latinos, gays, lesbians, bisexuals, Christians,Jews, or
Muslims.
Its fine for you to have your own beliefs but don't take away others
rights for them. Also Prop 8 doesn't affect the schools because 1) in
all the years I've been a student I've never taken a class on marriage
and never heard of it being offered and 2) anything related to sex or
sexual orientation is under the command of parents- if they don't want
their children learning it they are allowed to pull their kids out of
the class. Please don't think you are helping the schools!
You want to protect kids? Like me? From what though- I have friends
and family members who are lesbian and bisexuals and gay and believe
me it wasn't an easy transition into finding themselves. They are all
good people- they believe in doing the right thing- sticking up to
ones morals and accepting responsibility. That's something I've
learned from them- especially about staying true to oneself - is that
what I need to be protected from?
God created marriage to be between man and woman?
1) It isn't relevant to humanity since humans are more than capable of
having kids without marriage and plenty do and whatever your personal
beliefs on that are you don't have the right to condemn them for it.
2) Some of us don't believe in your god and or don't believe in God.
I personally don't after being raised Jewish and Catholic - I've made
a conscious choice to be non religious and that one religion isn't
right for me. Marriage means something different to everyone- to me
it means to people who love each other being legally recognized. Love
is so hard to find and its one of those things you dream about and
think about as a teenager. Love isn't lust- its not peer pressure, its
something different. Why would you condemn someone for loving someone
when almost no one gets to decide who they love? I"m a fifteen year
old teenager and believe me - you can want to not feel something but
you still feel it- love doesn't follow any rules.
If marriage is sacred , do you mean a 55 hr marriage is sacred? Or
marriages where the wives are beaten half to death is sacred?
Marriages where little girls lose their innocence and hope forever
because their mother married someone who was a bad person because her
community says being an unmarried mother is wrong. I don't know what
you judge as sacred but to me- children terrified of everything
because they see their father beat their mother is not sacred- girls
who grow up beaten and scarred only able to expect the same cycle to
continue is certainly not sacred. Marriage is what it is- it should be
people who love each other not relying on gender because a straight
marriage is very capable of not being sacred.
Stop judging, stop hating, stop discriminating!
A proud member of GSA who believes in doing the right thing which is
why she is speaking up right now. I'm fifteen but my eyes are open
and I'm willing to accept people who are different than me- Are you?
Discrimination is wrong- no one has the right to take away rights from
someone else- regardless of what they believe! Everyone is entitled to
a voice but not when it silences others.
* I"m not sure if this covers a lot of what has been sad- I'm going to read over and mention anything else.
1. Homosexual marriage degrades a time-honored institution
Where are the facts for that?
Marriage is not solely religious it is also legal which is the right people want to have. Our country is secular so we aren't going to make laws solely based on your religious beliefs. You are welcome to have them but understand that for those of us who aren't religious, religious rules aren't something we follow.
The white supremacists are convinced that inter racial marriage is degrading sacred unions- should we listen to them and make it impossible for people of different races to marry?
WE aren't saying you can marry just that anyone lLesbian or gay should be allowed too
Homosexual marriage is an empty pretense that lacks the fundamental sexual complementariness of male and female.
Marriage doesn't need to have the people able to have children. People who are infertile marry or elderly people marry and they don't have children - should we declare their marriages invalid?
2. Homosexual marriage would radically redefine marriage to include virtually any sexual behavior.
Ha, um no. Marriage would still be get legally married- no it doesn't its two people who love each other wanting to be recognized legally and have the legal rights. Two people- not more.
There are plenty of lesbians or gays in committed relationships with one person who they love.
What if I thought straight marriage was bad? What if I said you couldn't marry because your straight? Would you accept that?
I mean lesbian relationships might be healthier because women tend to be able to talk about things and women are more sensitive and better generally at relationships. That doesn't mean other types of relationships are wrong- and that is a blanket statement and stereotype also what I just said. As what you are saying .
3. Homosexual marriage is NOT a civil rights issue
Defining marriage as the union of a man and a woman would not deny homosexuals the basic civil rights accorded other citizens
Telling homosexuals you can't marry the ones you are attracted to because you are of the same sex is like telling you you can't marry the person you love because they aren't.. this and this and this.
Also, what about tranvestites , who do they marry?
. Nowhere in the Bill of Rights or in any legislation proceeding from it are homosexuals excluded from the rights enjoyed by all citizens–including the right to marry.
Being gay is not a choice and someone also doesn't choose who they love- you are excluding gays and lesbians from marrying the people they love.
However, no citizen has the unrestricted right to marry whomever they want. A person cannot marry a child, a close blood relative, two or more spouses, or the husband or wife of another person.
Both parties being married have to be at least 18 and able to sign a marriage contract if they don't have permission of their parents to marry underage. A contract is between two people and someone who is already married is already bound to a different contract.
Such restrictions are based upon the accumulated wisdom not only of Western civilization but also of societies and cultures around the world for millennia.
Homosexuality doesn't hurt anyone- in fact it affects the two people being married. Unless you want to argue that straight marriage affects other people too.
4. Upholding traditional marriage is NOT "discrimination"
Years ago it was tradition that the women only be at home and not allowed to be educated. That isn't socially acceptable anymore for a reason. WE keep to traditions when they are relevant to today. Years ago they shipped slaves over here from AFrica- it was tradition but it was also grossly wrong. I don't think many want to bring back that tradition- it is not relevant to today because we know its wrong. WE keep tto traditions when they help us further society which discrimination does.
Actually its wrongful discrimination, discrimination in and of itself is not wrong. Look up discrimination because it definitely is what prop 8 does.
We aren't saying you can't marry someone who is straight- are you not allowed to marry someone of the oppisite sex? I was unaware that was the case because that should change. I"m sorry you feel that because someone marries someone of the same sex you can't marry- thats not the case but each to his own and if thats how you feel about it ok.
Discrimination occurs when someone is unjustly denied some benefit or opportunity.
Actually no, thats wrongful discrimination- look up discrimination. Post the definition on here.
But it must first be demonstrated that such persons deserve to be treated equally regarding the point in question.
Anyone who is gay lesbian or Bi are human and they don't choose their sexual orientation. Anyone who is a minority didn't choose their skin color in fact no one chooses skin color should we refuse them rights based on that?
How is it different from the inter racial marriage laws of the sixties?
Similarly, the accumulated wisdom of thousands of years of human history, as expressed in virtually all cultures, has defined marriage as between a man and a woman.
We want to redefine it because we are growing as a society and becoming more tolerant.
Homosexual activists conveniently avoid the question of whether homosexual relationships merit being granted equality with marriage.
Yes- I'll answer it they should if the want to marry in the same way a straight relationship ready to move to marriage should be.
Although not strictly comparable, radically altering the definition of marriage can also pose dangers to society in much the same way as permitting unqualified individuals to fly airplanes.
Care to expand? I'm quite curious.
5. Any comparison with interracial marriage is phony
It could just be me but I thought marriage was about love. Oops, guys we are wrong- marriage is about m an and a woman not love not at all. I better get busy going out on the street finding someone to marry me- I mean who cares if I actually love them or want to marry them- as long as its a guy right? I"m ok?
Well ignoring that I'm 15 and can't marry but I think you get my point.
No- marriage to me is this"Binding two souls who only see each other - already bound by love." Its two people who love each other and want to be together.
People marry for different reason and you should respect that.
. Those who claim that some churches held interracial marriage to be morally wrong fail to point out that such "moral objection" to interracial marriage stemmed from cultural factors rather than historic and widely-accepted biblical teaching.
I'm not religious- why do I have to listen to your bible? I see nothing wrong with you choosing to follow it- most of my family is religious- I chose not to be. I just don't want to follow the rules of a religion I don't believe in it.
6. Homosexual marriage would subject children to unstable home environments
I have a good friend who has two moms- he is one of the most polite and good people I have ever known. Also thats not at all true- why do those people stop being good people who love their kids just because they are gay?
People are gay they live together now , does marriage change that?
Also marriage isn't about having a family nessecarily- its about two people who love each other wanting to be together.
Many homosexuals and their sex partners may sincerely believe they can be good parents. But children are not guinea pigs for grand social experiments in redefining marriage, and should not be placed in settings that are unsuitable for raising children.
Are marriages where the man beats the women sacred or suitable for raising children?
My cousin had a father and a mother- her father abandoned her practically and she lived with her mother and her step dad for years. It was really rough for her- she moved back with her dad for awhile but her dad is a druggie and because she never had anyone consistant in her life , she got into drugs, and a lot of really really bad things. It was really hard because I watched her be hurt really badly and her parents who were straight but not together were unable to do anything.
I have friends who stay at school doing school work and hanging out because they don't want to go home- at all. They don't like being there because their home life is really bad. These are friends whose parents were yes on 8 people- these friends are too.
Straight marriages are very very capable of being not sacred and unsuitable for raising children. In many homes, the father drinks or beats the wife or children. Plenty of girls have a father and a mother who are married but they lose their innocence young because they were raped. How is that suitable for children?
I'm sorry but I want children to grow up happy, innocent and capable of being a child and I don't care if they live with one mom, one dad, or two moms or two dads as long as t hey get a good home life like the deserve.
* Transient relationships: While a high percentage of married couples remain married for up to 20 years or longer, with many remaining wedded for life, the vast majority of homosexual relationships are short-lived and transitory.
I would like to see facts for this?
My sister and her bf have been together for like 3 years and my uncle and his bf have been together for over 7.
My friends moms have been together for over 18 years but my other friend whose parents are a man and woman were together for seven around. It devastated her when they divorced.
Sources!!!!!
* Serial promiscuity: Studies indicate that while three-quarters or more of married couples remain faithful to each other, homosexual couples typically engage in a shocking degree of promiscuity. The same Dutch study found that "committed" homosexual couples have an average of eight sexual partners (outside of the relationship) per year. Children should not be placed in unstable households with revolving bedroom doors.
Sources please. Children shouldn't be in households where the children are crying themselves to sleep each night because their parents verbally, physically or emotionally abuse them. Do you know how many homes have the children grow up screwed up because of neglect or their parents are just really awful?
Do you want statistics?
7. Homosexual activists have a political agenda: to radically redefine the institution of marriage
Homosexual activists admit that their goal is not simply to make the definition of marriage more "inclusive," but to remake it in their own hedonistic image. Paula Ettelbrick, former legal director of the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, states, "Being queer means pushing the parameters of sex, sexuality, and family, and … transforming the very fabric of society." Homosexual writer and activist Michelangelo Signorile rejects monogamy in favor of "a relationship in which the partners have sex on the outside often … and discuss their outside sex with each other, or share sex partners."
Well, thats not my point and thats not the point of the many people pushing for equal rights. Just as they don't speak for all of us- I assume Bush doesn't speak for all of you.
8. If victorious, the homosexual agenda will lead to the persecution of those who object on moral or religious grounds
How so? I don't think you can't have your beliefs just that you can't restrict me from having mine and you can't take rights away from the people I care about.
If homosexual marriage becomes the law of the land, then children in public schools will be taught that homosexuality is a normative lifestyle, and that gay households are just another "variant" style of family.
I don't know about you but I'm actually in highschool now and I have never ever taken a class on marriage nor is one offered. I go to public school and my other cousin teaches and she said that there is nothing about that that Prop 8 affects. Parents have final influence on what their kids learn- they teach sex ed but if parents don't want their kids in that they can pull them out.
If I ask my teachers if abortion or murder exists they would answer yes. If I asked does love and friendship exist they would agree. If I asked does straight and homosexual marriage exist they would also say yes. That is not teaching. Thats answering questions as they are supposed to be.
Th
At a scheduled meeting at the school, when Parker refused to back down from his request that the school honor the Massachusetts parental notification statute, he was arrested for "trespassing," handcuffed, and put in jail overnight. The next morning Parker was led handcuffed into court for his arraignment, and over the next several months endured two subsequent court appearances before the school district backed down and decided to drop all charges against him. In 2007, Parker's lawsuit against the Lexington school officials was dismissed by a federal judge who refused to uphold his civil rights and to enforce the Massachusetts parental notification statute. Parker's shocking story will become commonplace in a society that forces the acceptance of homosexual marriage as normative.
Thats wrong that they were put in jail for that though- they have the rights to t heir own views and what their cild learns.
Because you see the future? YOu know you can get a lot of money for that. Wait, can you tell me what scores I'll get on finals? Or how to study for them and be prepared?
Since you know for sure thats what will happen- obviously you can tell the future.
Hun, you can predict but you don't know what will happen and I fail to understand how you can assume that either.
10. Support for traditional marriage translates into ballot initiatives and laws around the country
Because of strong public support for traditional marriage, same-sex marriage advocates have attempted to circumvent public opinion by redefining marriage through the courts. Despite some victories, such as in Massachusetts and California where the courts have mandated same-sex marriage, there is a strong national movement to protect traditional marriage. A total of 45 states have instituted protections for traditional marriage either through state constitutional amendments or through laws:
We are working on increasing tolerance- its a battle though.
That doesn't mean you are right though. I mean sixty years ago my best friend wouldn't be allowed to go to the same school as me because she's half black- but today she is and she is one of the people closest to me. That doesn't mean its right.
* Despite the greater ability of same-sex partners to understand each others’ points of view, same-sex relationships tend to be short-lived. (Diggs, The Health Risks of Gay Sex, p. 9)
Because thats not at all unbiased- find someone who knows what they are talking about.
* Homosexual households are also more prone to domestic violence. For example: “The incidence of domestic violence among gay men is nearly double that in the heterosexual population,”
Tell that to the girls at my school victims of rape- the girl who can't hear a bag pop without being terrified because she's been shot at. I think they would disagree.
Thats also not true btw at all .
according to D. Island and P. Letellier in Men Who Beat the Men Who Love Them (New York: Haworth Press, 1991). A study in the Journal of Social Service Research reported that “slightly more than half of the [lesbians surveyed] reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner.” (G. Lie and S. Gentlewarrior, “Intimate Violence in Lesbian Relationships: Discussion of Survey Findings and Practice Implications,” No. 15, 1991.)
*
LeHomosexuality is a learned behavior like an addiction
Sexual orientation is not a choice- there is no one way to act to be homosexual. There is no one way to act either way.