Tndeer Logo

Page all of 10 12345>Last »
Topic Options
#3207811 - 03/29/13 02:40 PM Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage
Vermin93
12 Point


Registered: 12/11/10
Posts: 5978
Loc: Dallas, TX & Signal Mtn, TN

Offline
The liberal social and economic agenda is rolling and winning like Alabama football, and it totally sucks...

Rush Limbaugh concedes conservatives 'lost' marriage debate
_________________________
"Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance." Barack Obama in Cairo, Egypt, June 4, 2009


Top
#3208576 - 03/30/13 02:42 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Vermin93]
W C
10 Point


Registered: 02/02/02
Posts: 2559
Loc: Alabama

Offline
Society as a whole has almost hit rock bottom. Right now it's raining outside and I have to wonder if it isn't God's tears for He must surely be terribly saddened by the utterly disgusting manner in which a LOT of mortals are carrying out their lives.
_________________________
Obama gets to have it both ways. He claims black from his father and American from his mother. Claiming to be a white Kenyan wouldn't get him very far though would it?

Top
#3208767 - 03/30/13 06:45 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: W C]
Rebel
TnDeer Old Timer
12 Point


Registered: 03/16/99
Posts: 5369
Loc: East Tennessee USA

content Online
We will all pay for the deterioration of morality in the USSA.
_________________________
Good night Chesty, wherever you are!

Tolerance is a virtue of those who believe in nothing.

Deo Vindice

Top
#3211219 - 04/02/13 09:47 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Rebel]
Greg .
aPoStROpHe PolIcE
16 Point


Registered: 08/24/04
Posts: 11122
Loc: NC Piedmonts

Offline
Perhaps the best thing that we can do -- and the worst thing for them -- is to give the lIbTARds everything they want.

How much will we suffer for it? I don't know. But I do believe that THEY will surely suffer more.
_________________________
Abandon all rational and unbiased thought. Just blame Boooosh.
lIbeRaLs LIE ... lazy lIbeRaLs repeat LIES.
Ø : http://obamaclock.org/

Top
#3211238 - 04/02/13 10:08 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Greg .]
Still-n-Quiet
10 Point


Registered: 07/18/06
Posts: 4868
Loc: San Antonio, TX

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Greg .
Perhaps the best thing that we can do -- and the worst thing for them -- is to give the lIbTARds everything they want.

How much will we suffer for it? I don't know. But I do believe that THEY will surely suffer more.


I know what you are saying is that if they get everything they are asking for, when we hit rock bottom (where ever that is), then they will finally see the errors of their ways.

The problem is two fold:

1) They never learn. Each new progressive leader thinks the previous tries failed because
a) They weren't the leader
b) Enough money/big government wasn't thrown at the situation.

2) Hitting rock bottom will most likely lead to a dictatorship of some kind. We cannot afford this! All liberties will have been permanently lost at this point.


Edited by Still-n-Quiet (04/02/13 10:08 AM)
_________________________
Mike

Searching for the elusive "Moderate" liberal and "Moderate" Muslim. Maybe they are hiding together...

Μολων λαβε

Top
#3214913 - 04/06/13 08:01 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Still-n-Quiet]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on how you personally look at it), Rush is right when it comes to the influence of the Fundamentalist/Evangelical arguments on this issue and any other of national interest. "Bible thumping" alone will never win another national election or debate on issues of national interest (although they still have considerable sway on issues at the state level in some states). As the populace swings more and more to towards secularism or more liberal forms of Christianity, "because the Bible says so" is a political argument that has lost the power to persuade the national majority (although again, it can still sway regional state majorities).

Although it has always been said that America is a "center-right" country, I don't think that is still true on both fiscal and social issues. The popularity of Ron Paul's Libertarian message among the youngest generations definitely indicates a continued interest in fiscal conservatism, but a swing in social beliefs to a "live and let live" viewpoint that is considered "socially liberal" by Conservatives (although it is not truly socially liberal; i.e. it does not promote the Progressive Nanny State of true Social Liberalism).

Unless the religiously-based Social Conservatives can find some way to stomach the constitutionally-based Social "liberalism" of the Libertarian-minded (a growing percentage of the populace), and join forces on just the Fiscal Conservatism issue, the Right will never win another national election.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3214975 - 04/06/13 09:49 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
I disagree with the view point that Conservative = Christian Fundamentalist.

The left has done an incredible job tying any Conservative candidate, ideology, or movement with the most extreme Christian Fundamentalists. They then go on to panic the masses with bogus claims that the "Christians/Conservatives want to outlaw ...Gays, pagans, atheists, rock and roll, beer, pre-marital sex, any sex other than the missionary position while reading a bible, bikinis, slow dancing...."
This simply isn't true, but is an effective means of divide and conquer.


With the MSM leading the low information voter by the nose, any "conservative" has a very difficult road ahead of them.

Libertarians have the same problem. Liberals should LOVE libertarianism, but since they are typically ignorant, and get what little information they DO consume from the MSM and leftist/socialist propaganda outlets, they think Libertarians want to disband the government, replace the dollar with bartering seashells, and legalize all drugs for anyone out of diapers.

IF America is ever going to get good leaders who truly care about the health and well being of our nation, the MSM propaganda strangle hold on "information" has be broken.

I still believe most Americans would side with good vs. evil/stupid/greedy IF they were given quality information.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3214983 - 04/06/13 10:02 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
AndyW
10 Point


Registered: 10/21/10
Posts: 4437
Loc: Allardt, TN

content Online
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1

With the MSM leading the low information voter by the nose, any "conservative" has a very difficult road ahead of them.


This is critical. As long as the Chris Matthews and Hollywood swine of the world have the ability to coronate or vilify candidates anyone on the right is fighting an intense uphill battle. Ask Herman Cain.
_________________________
This fall, FIRE THEM ALL. Re-elect NO ONE!!!!!

Top
#3215198 - 04/06/13 04:39 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
I disagree with the view point that Conservative = Christian Fundamentalist.


I never said nor implied that. My point is that using "because the Bible says so" as a political argument has lost its power on national issues. On regional state issues, it still has power, but not on national issues, as the U.S population is rapidly secularizing or choosing more liberal religious views.

Rush's point was the Right lost the argument on gay marriage because they used "Bible thumping" as their primary argument against it. I agree. For those who do not want to see gay marriage become The Law, they will need a better argument that plays to the secular or libertarian-minded.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3215204 - 04/06/13 04:45 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: AndyW]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: AndyW
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1

With the MSM leading the low information voter by the nose, any "conservative" has a very difficult road ahead of them.


This is critical. As long as the Chris Matthews and Hollywood swine of the world have the ability to coronate or vilify candidates anyone on the right is fighting an intense uphill battle. Ask Herman Cain.


I completely agree with both comments. With the vast majority of the Mass Media willfully and actively campaigning for one political party, and making absolutely no attempt to hide their vilification of the other party no matter the topic or issue, we are currently at one of the most dangerous times in American history.

The first step for any budding tyranny is to control the Press; i.e. control the message. The saddest part about our current growing tyranny is they didn't even have to lift a finger to gain control of the Press. The Press gladly handed over their objectivity and gleefully swore allegiance to the Far Left's cause. If history is any judge of the future, very, very bad things are to follow...

_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3215341 - 04/06/13 07:45 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
I think the "right" didn't have much fight in them.

Here is an argument that would change some minds.

"Who in their right mind would INVITE the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT into their personal life and bedroom? The argument for spousal rights is bogus. A $25 power of attorney and a will would handle 99% of the issues being discussed. MUCH cheaper than getting married.

So what IS The REAL issue? Normalizing deviant behavior under the smoke screen of "gay rights".
SO once homosexuality is "normal" and protected by law, what is next? Pedophilia? Bestiality? They will be the next "discriminated" class and demand their so called RIGHTS. What will happen to laws designed to protect children from sexual predators? Will they be declared discriminatory and unenforceable if a homosexual act is involved?

NOWHERE in the Constitution is the issue of MARRIAGE addressed. That means it is up to the STATES, CITIES, and CITIZENS to decide what is law. NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. So the entire idea that this is a national issue needing the involvement of the FEDERAL government is dead from the get go. The issue should be null and void on a federal level before it ever gets started.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3215632 - 04/07/13 08:45 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
I think the "right" didn't have much fight in them.

Here is an argument that would change some minds.

"Who in their right mind would INVITE the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT into their personal life and bedroom? The argument for spousal rights is bogus. A $25 power of attorney and a will would handle 99% of the issues being discussed. MUCH cheaper than getting married.

...NOWHERE in the Constitution is the issue of MARRIAGE addressed. That means it is up to the STATES, CITIES, and CITIZENS to decide what is law. NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. So the entire idea that this is a national issue needing the involvement of the FEDERAL government is dead from the get go. The issue should be null and void on a federal level before it ever gets started.


In my opinion, getting the government--all government from national to local--out of the marriage business is the right argument. Marriage is a social contract between two people. The idea of needing a government issued "license" to be married is ludicrous. A contract between those two people can easily be developed that would handle all necessary legal ramifications on issues of inheritance or divorce. Having the government involved at all is a mistake.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3215678 - 04/07/13 10:27 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Bambi Buster
14 Point


Registered: 01/29/04
Posts: 8735
Loc: Middle Tennessee

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
I think the "right" didn't have much fight in them.

Here is an argument that would change some minds.

"Who in their right mind would INVITE the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT into their personal life and bedroom? The argument for spousal rights is bogus. A $25 power of attorney and a will would handle 99% of the issues being discussed. MUCH cheaper than getting married.

...NOWHERE in the Constitution is the issue of MARRIAGE addressed. That means it is up to the STATES, CITIES, and CITIZENS to decide what is law. NOT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. So the entire idea that this is a national issue needing the involvement of the FEDERAL government is dead from the get go. The issue should be null and void on a federal level before it ever gets started.


In my opinion, getting the government--all government from national to local--out of the marriage business is the right argument. Marriage is a social contract between two people. The idea of needing a government issued "license" to be married is ludicrous. A contract between those two people can easily be developed that would handle all necessary legal ramifications on issues of inheritance or divorce. Having the government involved at all is a mistake.


I tend to agree with the overall thrust of your argument, but it's seldom that simple. I'd also be interested in hearing on what basis you make the contention I've highlighted in red above; not that I disagree with it.
_________________________
"The American military is like a finely crafted sword. To be effective, it must be wielded by a discerning, skilled and merciless hand."

Top
#3215711 - 04/07/13 11:22 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Bambi Buster]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Bambi Buster
 Originally Posted By: BSK
In my opinion, getting the government--all government from national to local--out of the marriage business is the right argument. Marriage is a social contract between two people. The idea of needing a government issued "license" to be married is ludicrous. A contract between those two people can easily be developed that would handle all necessary legal ramifications on issues of inheritance or divorce. Having the government involved at all is a mistake.


I tend to agree with the overall thrust of your argument, but it's seldom that simple. I'd also be interested in hearing on what basis you make the contention I've highlighted in red above; not that I disagree with it.


Marriage is a social contract developed uniquely in each culture. Although there are a few examples of polygomist marriages in Western Culture, MOST societies in Western Culture haved based marriage on a paired bond. Not all, but the vast majority. This appears to be a common theme in Western Culture, probably based on the Judeo-Christian origin of Western Culture.

Although I'm not discounting what other cultures have found workable.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3216922 - 04/08/13 05:55 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
dr
10 Point


Registered: 02/24/03
Posts: 4340
Loc: USA

Offline
If same sex marriage is made legal, I expect some of these couples will demand that Christian ministers marry them. I believe their objective is to destroy churches with lawsuits, if ministers refuse.
_________________________
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the government take care of him --- better take a closer look at the American Indian." Henry Ford

Top
#3217216 - 04/08/13 11:03 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
AT Hiker
6 Point


Registered: 07/03/11
Posts: 931
Loc: Clarksville, Tennessee

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: Bambi Buster
 Originally Posted By: BSK
In my opinion, getting the government--all government from national to local--out of the marriage business is the right argument. Marriage is a social contract between two people. The idea of needing a government issued "license" to be married is ludicrous. A contract between those two people can easily be developed that would handle all necessary legal ramifications on issues of inheritance or divorce. Having the government involved at all is a mistake.


I tend to agree with the overall thrust of your argument, but it's seldom that simple. I'd also be interested in hearing on what basis you make the contention I've highlighted in red above; not that I disagree with it.


Marriage is a social contract developed uniquely in each culture. Although there are a few examples of polygomist marriages in Western Culture, MOST societies in Western Culture haved based marriage on a paired bond. Not all, but the vast majority. This appears to be a common theme in Western Culture, probably based on the Judeo-Christian origin of Western Culture.

Although I'm not discounting what other cultures have found workable.


Arguably so, but the question becomes this..."how does marriage positively affect our society?" Homosexual marriage has no positive effect for the government, one could also argue straight marriage is becoming less effective as well.

This, IMO, leads us back to your original stance...marriage should be left up to the states. However, the Feds have made their stance on it for over 1,100 different benefits. This makes "our" stance difficult, but if we would stop worrying about what makes people feel good or what is right for the "times" then we the people could decide what is best for our country. What is best? Simple...keep it a constitutional republic, so we can continue to be the strongest and most influential society to ever exist. Stray away from it (like we are doing now) and we will be in the history books as the "strongest and most influential society to ever exist".
_________________________

In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks.
-John Muir




Top
#3217381 - 04/09/13 08:24 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: AT Hiker]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: AT Hiker
 Originally Posted By: BSK
Marriage is a social contract developed uniquely in each culture. Although there are a few examples of polygomist marriages in Western Culture, MOST societies in Western Culture haved based marriage on a paired bond. Not all, but the vast majority. This appears to be a common theme in Western Culture, probably based on the Judeo-Christian origin of Western Culture.

Although I'm not discounting what other cultures have found workable.


Arguably so, but the question becomes this..."how does marriage positively affect our society?"


That is a very important question, yet one that is very difficult to define and assess beyond child-rearing, which is an obvious benefit and one critical to any society. But it really is amazing to see the variety of ways that different societies have defined "marriage," or the societally excepted bond between people, for that purpose.


 Quote:
This, IMO, leads us back to your original stance...marriage should be left up to the states.


I agree that IF the government is going to be involved in the marriage process (and I disagree that it should be at all), I would prefer it to be a State issue rather than a Federal issue. However, making it a State issue raises the problem of marriages recognized in one state may not in other states. Drivers' licenses are issued by individual states but are recognized by all states. What happens when marriage licenses are recognized by one state but not by others? What happens when a married couple crosses a state line into a state that does not recognize their marriage license?
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3217597 - 04/09/13 11:55 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
It does not matter if the Govt. is involved in Marriage or not. It's the "normality" that seek to destroy.

The govt. is not involved in Boys Scouts of America yet the Homo-mafia has them marked to desecration just like marriage.

That said, there should be no tax deductions or govt. rewards for marriage. Do away with anything that implies a govt. approval of lifestyle or religious belief.

Then see what the reasoning for the gay lobby is.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3217611 - 04/09/13 12:18 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
Hangnail
12 Point


Registered: 11/30/00
Posts: 7365
Loc: Murfreesboro, TN

content Online
I have no problem with two people being LEGALLY a couple. My issue is naming them married. Married has referred to a man and a woman for centuries. Gay couples will never be married in my eyes. I'm tired of the redefining of the English language. Call it anything they want, except marriage.
Top
#3217698 - 04/09/13 02:20 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Hangnail]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Hangnail
I have no problem with two people being LEGALLY a couple. My issue is naming them married. Married has referred to a man and a woman for centuries. Gay couples will never be married in my eyes. I'm tired of the redefining of the English language. Call it anything they want, except marriage.


I tend to agree with your sentiments Hangnail. I have no problem with providing equal rights but calling those legal bonds something other than "marriage." The one big problem with that is we've already tried "separate but equal" before, and it legally doesn't hold water. By definition, the "separate" makes it unequal.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3217733 - 04/09/13 03:02 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Quote:
By definition, the "separate" makes it unequal.


Totally agree, but there is 40+ years of precedent in that exact thing. Including exclusive days, months etc for homosexuals.

While you can be fired for expressing your opinion on someone's sexual preference, they have reserved an entire WEEK where they can proclaim their "Pride" in that which is none of our business.

Not to mention the enhanced sentencing for any crimes against these groups who want separation from society in their own protections while protesting separation by anyone or thing they, themselves are not included.

Nearly EVERY minority wants separate but equal, they just don't want Whites, Christians or conservatives to have it.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3217772 - 04/09/13 03:56 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
AT Hiker
6 Point


Registered: 07/03/11
Posts: 931
Loc: Clarksville, Tennessee

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK


I agree that IF the government is going to be involved in the marriage process (and I disagree that it should be at all), I would prefer it to be a State issue rather than a Federal issue. However, making it a State issue raises the problem of marriages recognized in one state may not in other states. Drivers' licenses are issued by individual states but are recognized by all states. What happens when marriage licenses are recognized by one state but not by others? What happens when a married couple crosses a state line into a state that does not recognize their marriage license?


IDK the answer, but it should only be relevant to government employees and government benefits. Which I dont think gay marriages should receive. Only because, what if I was single and decided to never marry. I just wanted to party for ever, but I was self employed. My best friend, who thinks the way I do, works for the feds. We marry, so I can have health care, etc. This already happens, imagine if gay marriage and other non-tradtional marriages were approved.

Like Crappie said, take the benefits out of the equation and they will likely die down.

Im just glad I do not have to decide on this decision.
_________________________

In every walk with nature one receives far more than he seeks.
-John Muir




Top
#3218268 - 04/10/13 07:34 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: AT Hiker]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: AT Hiker
Like Crappie said, take the benefits out of the equation and they will likely die down.


I'm sure there are some that want to scam/abuse the system. But to a person, the gay people I've talked to about this issue don't want "protected status" or anything special. They just want equal treatment under the law--to be seen and treated as equals.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3218287 - 04/10/13 08:09 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: AT Hiker
Like Crappie said, take the benefits out of the equation and they will likely die down.


I'm sure there are some that want to scam/abuse the system. But to a person, the gay people I've talked to about this issue don't want "protected status" or anything special. They just want equal treatment under the law--to be seen and treated as equals.


And there is the lie. Nobody is required to see and treat me as "equal" anything simply because I am married.

My neighbor doesn't have to like me or be nice to me because I am married. My neighbor can call me names and "hate" me so long as he doesn't assault me, married or not. I can legally be mocked, ridiculed, harassed due to my "old white guy" status with NO special protection or hate crimes associated with that behavior.

Now the Gay lobby is pushing for "gay infertility insurance coverage" So even though "married gays" are biologically incapable of having children BY THEIR OWN BEHAVIORAL CHOICE they want special insurance coverage due to their "infertility".

The whole "gay marriage" issue boils down to 2 things.
1. Money and forcing other people subsidize their lifestyle via insurance and other "marriage benefits"

2. Normalizing deviant sexual behavior and granting protected status to that behavior. Be it "legal gay marriage", forcing private organizations to allow gays to work closely with young boys (Boy Scouts), or "hate crimes" for expressing your opinion regarding gays and their behavior.

Example. If you put on nothing but as*less leather chaps then walk down town in front of a kindergarden, you would (rightly) get arrested for indecent exposure at the minimum and wind up on the sexual offender registry. But thrown in a rainbow scarf, and now it is ILLEGAL and a potential hate crime to tell the clown to put on a dang pair of pants and cover their arse.

Expand that to the Boy Scouts... Gays forcing their way into positions of trust with young boys. Legalizing, normalizing, and protecting the "gay" status then puts the burden of overwhelming legal proof on the potential victims of pedophilia, where an accusation of would be grounds for arresting the VICTIM if they didn't have overwhelming evidence of child molestation BEFORE levying charges.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3218316 - 04/10/13 08:36 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: AT Hiker
Like Crappie said, take the benefits out of the equation and they will likely die down.


I'm sure there are some that want to scam/abuse the system. But to a person, the gay people I've talked to about this issue don't want "protected status" or anything special. They just want equal treatment under the law--to be seen and treated as equals.


I suspect that those that truly only want to be seen and treated as equals don't define themselves by their sexual choices. They keep their personal lives personal and just navigate the same life obstacles as the rest of us. Equality would be heterosexuals declaring themselves victims, adopting awareness months, annoying speech patterns/habits and suing anyone who dares offend them....

or.

Equality could be homosexuals stopping the aggressive attacks on anyone that does not celebrate their personal choices and just live their lives like everyone else.

No one really cares about their sexuality. No one cares what they do at home or who they do it with. What people care about is the persistent re-definition and attack of anything that is not gay friendly. Thousands of years of tradition have been invested in the institution of Christian or Western style of marriage. It is "Our" lifestyle. We are offended by their attempt to destroy that tradition.

In the name of equality and acceptance, you'd think they'd care more about the murder of gays by the Muslim population than the simple non-inclusion of gays by the Christian or Western traditional marriage. There is no campaign against Muslims who are taught to hate gays. Christians or non-believers of our culture typically may not like their lifestyle choices, but they accept them as individuals and fellow Americans.

The truth is, it's not about equality. It's about attacking and aggression towards a faith and lifestyle they do not like. It's intolerance of the tolerant.

The proof is in the absence of equality in their campaign for equality. The proof is in their own bigotry.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218319 - 04/10/13 08:44 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
This is kind of a silly conversation. Do you really think there are not incidences where a heterosexual couple gets married so that one of the spouses can get the benefits of the other? As for the federal govenment getting involed, they need to because of federal income taxes, social security benifits, and medicare benifits, not to mention if it goes to the state level then all marriages, not just same sex marriages, will be determined at the state level and just because you are married in TN does not mean you are married in KY. You can't say that some marriages are dealt with at the state level and some at the federal level. As for it being deviant sexual behavior, what makes it so? This has been going on since the dawn of man. Animals have been known to exibit homosexual behavior. Why would God be ashamed of something he created? Why is there an assumption that all gay men want to rape little boys? Should we worry that all heterosexual men want to rape little girls and therfore not allow them to work closely with little girls. Should they not be allowed to work with the girl scouts? For every incidence where you have a gay man taking advantage of an underaged boy, there are probably a minimum of 10 incidences of heterosexual man taking advantage of a underaged girls. Is raping a minor ok as long as it is a heterosexual rape? Isn't this kind of like the gun control arguement? Should the actions of a few affect the rights of everyone else?

My confusion on all of this is, why do you care? How is allowing 2 people of the same sex to get married going to hurt you?

Top
#3218321 - 04/10/13 08:45 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Men who molest little boys are not gay?
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218322 - 04/10/13 08:49 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
This is kind of a silly conversation. Do you really think there are not incidences where a heterosexual couple gets married so that one of the spouses can get the benefits of the other? As for the federal govenment getting involed, they need to because of federal income taxes, social security benifits, and medicare benifits, not to mention if it goes to the state level then all marriages, not just same sex marriages, will be determined at the state level and just because you are married in TN does not mean you are married in KY. You can't say that some marriages are dealt with at the state level and some at the federal level. As for it being deviant sexual behavior, what makes it so? This has been going on since the dawn of man. Animals have been known to exibit homosexual behavior. Why would God be ashamed of something he created? Why is there an assumption that all gay men want to rape little boys? Should we worry that all heterosexual men want to rape little girls and therfore not allow them to work closely with little girls. Should they not be allowed to work with the girl scouts? For every incidence where you have a gay man taking advantage of an underaged boy, there are probably a minimum of 10 incidences of heterosexual man taking advantage of a underaged girls. Is raping a minor ok as long as it is a heterosexual rape? Isn't this kind of like the gun control arguement? Should the actions of a few affect the rights of everyone else?

My confusion on all of this is, why do you care? How is allowing 2 people of the same sex to get married going to hurt you?


To answer this specific question...b/c He deems it an abomination in His eyes. Nuff said.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218324 - 04/10/13 08:51 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
How is allowing 2 people of the same sex to get married going to hurt you?


The problem with this country is people have let things that "Don't affect you" go on for too long.

Marriage is the cornerstone of the family unit in our culture. Homosexuals getting married does not re-define marriage, it undefines it.
Marriage is more than a tax shelter. It's the foundation of a society. If you cannot have a clear definition of that, then your society has a foundation of chaos.

 Quote:
they need to because of federal income taxes, social security benifits, and medicare benifits


No, Those can all be addressed with civil unions of any other type of legal contract and the federal govt. has no business creating tax codes that are favorable to married people exclusively in the first place. That is punitive to single people as well as homosexuals. Get the govt out of marriage!
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218328 - 04/10/13 08:55 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
Why would God be ashamed of something he created?


He didn't create homosexuals. He created the people. They made the choice to act on temptation. People chose to act opposite of the will of God every day. In his eyes one sin is no worse or better than the others.

People steal, lie, curse and kill. God didn't make them do it.

Take some responsibility for your actions and stop blaming god for poor choices.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218336 - 04/10/13 09:01 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
Marriage is a civil union. If the govt gets out of marriage, then what happens to things like social security benefits and va benifits where the spouse recieves the other spouses benifits after they die. Its not as simple as simply getting the govt out of the marriage business. You can also get divorced in a different state than you got married in. What do you do when it crosses state lines? Thats makes it federal.
Top
#3218344 - 04/10/13 09:06 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Marriage existed thousands of years before govt decided to dip it's tyrannical hands into it and turned it into something state provided.

How did they ever survive, raise up children and keep it pure without the blessing of a bureaucrat?

We neither need or desire the blessings of a politician to get married or dissolve one. It's not Geography, it's self governance and liberty.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218353 - 04/10/13 09:15 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
Why would God be ashamed of something he created?


He didn't create homosexuals. He created the people. They made the choice to act on temptation. People chose to act opposite of the will of God every day. In his eyes one sin is no worse or better than the others.

People steal, lie, curse and kill. God didn't make them do it.

Take some responsibility for your actions and stop blaming god for poor choices.


You make the assumption that its a choice because you are not gay. If God did not give a man or a woman the desire to be with someone of the opposite sex, then its not the same as a simple temptation.

Top
#3218356 - 04/10/13 09:17 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
Marriage existed thousands of years before govt decided to dip it's tyrannical hands into it and turned it into something state provided.

How did they ever survive, raise up children and keep it pure without the blessing of a bureaucrat?

We neither need or desire the blessings of a politician to get married or dissolve one. It's not Geography, it's self governance and liberty.





Like I mentioned before, what about social security and va benifits. Widows and widoers need those benifits to survive.

Top
#3218359 - 04/10/13 09:19 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
Why would God be ashamed of something he created?


He didn't create homosexuals. He created the people. They made the choice to act on temptation. People chose to act opposite of the will of God every day. In his eyes one sin is no worse or better than the others.

People steal, lie, curse and kill. God didn't make them do it.

Take some responsibility for your actions and stop blaming god for poor choices.


You make the assumption that its a choice because you are not gay. If God did not give a man or a woman the desire to be with someone of the opposite sex, then its not the same as a simple temptation.


Of course it's a choice. I'm attracted to my neighbor's 4X4 truck. Does that mean I can just take it and say that God made me that way? Some people are attracted to other people's wives. Some are attracted to underage children, some are attracted to the same sex. Yes, there IS a choice involved.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218363 - 04/10/13 09:22 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
Marriage existed thousands of years before govt decided to dip it's tyrannical hands into it and turned it into something state provided.

How did they ever survive, raise up children and keep it pure without the blessing of a bureaucrat?

We neither need or desire the blessings of a politician to get married or dissolve one. It's not Geography, it's self governance and liberty.





Like I mentioned before, what about social security and va benifits. Widows and widoers need those benifits to survive.


That can be solved with a power of attorney. Much easier to change the laws regarding benefits than change the definition of marriage. Single people who lived together but not married don't receive these benefits either. is that intolerance?

Claiming that we need govt because they have complicated the system so much that only they can sort it out is the very definition of circular logic.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218375 - 04/10/13 09:29 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
Why would God be ashamed of something he created?


He didn't create homosexuals. He created the people. They made the choice to act on temptation. People chose to act opposite of the will of God every day. In his eyes one sin is no worse or better than the others.

People steal, lie, curse and kill. God didn't make them do it.

Take some responsibility for your actions and stop blaming god for poor choices.


You make the assumption that its a choice because you are not gay. If God did not give a man or a woman the desire to be with someone of the opposite sex, then its not the same as a simple temptation.


Best I can tell, God gave men and women a free will, either to do what is right, wrong...or whatever. It's on your head if you live out of the will of God.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218390 - 04/10/13 09:44 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
When you see a beautiful woman walking down the street, you are filled with desire, even if you are married to a beautiful woman. This is natural. Its not a choice. Its instinct. Its animal nature. The animal in you makes you want to breed with that person. If you were dogs, you would take them right then and there. Every heterosexual male on this planet knows that feeling. If you don't have that then you were born that way. You don't lose it or make it go away. Its instinct. If you were born without that instinct then God made you that way. It was not a choice. As far as God being against it because thats what the bible says, the bible was interpreted by people like you who don't understand and don't want to understand so it was only natural for them to say that God is against homosexuality. The people here who are against it would be that way regardless of what the bible says. Thats why you are so passionate about it. You are simply using the bible as a justification of your feelings.
Top
#3218401 - 04/10/13 09:52 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
Just curious Jim, but why do you keep referencing God, when you don't believe what He says? You only piece together bits and pieces from your mind as to what you think God has done, or how He thinks, when it's written plain in His Book. The animal desire you speak of is sin, plain and simple. Not saying I'm w/o sin by any stretch of the imagination, but it's still sin according to God, says so right in the Book.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218408 - 04/10/13 09:59 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
"People like me?"

Well, I'd say "People like you" don't understand the difference between attraction and action on that attraction.

Just because you are attracted to the beautiful woman does not mean you have the right to grab her and have your way with her behind the bushes.

Furthermore, it doesn't mean I have to accept your actions as "Normal".

To accept your view on nature and behavior, I'd have to accept the regression of our species back about 2 million years. That's the irony of "Progressive thought". We have what is called self-control, personal restraint and the ability to predict the consequences of our actions.

I've excused nothing as the will of God. I've not made any excuses for my view at all. It's man's burden to weight temptation and desire against law or culture.

Desire does not mean entitlement. Just because you like something does not mean it's yours and it does not mean the rest of us have to accept your lack of self control as normal.

_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218439 - 04/10/13 10:26 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
Are you saying that you only believe sex is for procreation and you would never have it unless you were trying to conceive a child? Anything else would be a sin? Just trying to get a perspective on your beliefs.
Top
#3218444 - 04/10/13 10:32 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
No. I never said that and I suspect that is just a detraction from the conversation.

Two consenting adults can do whatever they want in the bedroom. Why do you need the government's permission to do it? And why do you think I have to approve of it for it to be "Legit".

No one is suggesting a man can't have sex with another man. But I reject the idea that I have to accept it as normal or call it "Marriage".
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218449 - 04/10/13 10:33 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
Just curious Jim, but why do you keep referencing God, when you don't believe what He says? You only piece together bits and pieces from your mind as to what you think God has done, or how He thinks, when it's written plain in His Book. The animal desire you speak of is sin, plain and simple. Not saying I'm w/o sin by any stretch of the imagination, but it's still sin according to God, says so right in the Book.


How many versions of the Bible are there? How many times has it been translated? How many books have been left out? Which specific version should I read and believe? I believe that man has changed the Word to fit his own beliefs. I believe prejudice has played a role in the translation and interpretation. I believ there was prejudice during the day when it was written that affected what went into it. Paul, obviously had a prejudice against homosexuals.

Top
#3218455 - 04/10/13 10:36 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
No. I never said that and I suspect that is just a detraction from the conversation.

Two consenting adults can do whatever they want in the bedroom. Why do you need the government's permission to do it? And why do you think I have to approve of it for it to be "Legit".

No one is suggesting a man can't have sex with another man. But I reject the idea that I have to accept it as normal or call it "Marriage".



Actually, they are. How many times in this thread has it been referred to as deviant behavior? As for the government, it wasn't until the last 20 years that homosexual behavior in the bedroom was legal. It may still be illegal in some states.

Top
#3218458 - 04/10/13 10:39 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: MUP
Just curious Jim, but why do you keep referencing God, when you don't believe what He says? You only piece together bits and pieces from your mind as to what you think God has done, or how He thinks, when it's written plain in His Book. The animal desire you speak of is sin, plain and simple. Not saying I'm w/o sin by any stretch of the imagination, but it's still sin according to God, says so right in the Book.


How many versions of the Bible are there? How many times has it been translated? How many books have been left out? Which specific version should I read and believe? [u]I believe that man has changed the Word to fit his own beliefs.[/u] I believe prejudice has played a role in the translation and interpretation. I believ there was prejudice during the day when it was written that affected what went into it. Paul, obviously had a prejudice against homosexuals.


I believe the underlined is painfully obvious according to your posts Jim.

I've never EVER read any version that condoned homosexuality, or infidelity with another mans wife...maybe you're thinking of muslims...well, no, I can't say that...B/C I haven't ever read the koran....
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218469 - 04/10/13 10:46 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline

Notice how gays always try and use the "natural desire/sex act" then pulling in the "god made me this way" argument when discussing "gay marriage"???? .

Some people like to have sex with dead animals. IS that deviant? Is that normal? Should we make it illegal to "discriminate" against them since "god made them with those desires? " That argument doesn't wash.

If that is the case, then ANY sexual act should be legally protected including Rape, Incest, child molestation, and more since "god made them with those desires".

Why is it always about justifying the SEX when trying to get gays to discuss the government getting involved in changing what Marriage means?

Crappie is right. Just because someone has a "desire" and wishes to live a certain lifestyle, it DOES NOT mean that the rest of the world has to change their beliefs, morals, and laws to accommodate them.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3218470 - 04/10/13 10:47 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
preachermantom
12 Point


Registered: 12/05/02
Posts: 5128
Loc: waverly,tn,USA

Offline
It is pretty simple really. If you are not a Christian that you are free to believe how you want and choose sin as your life style. However, if you are a Christian then you are to obey the Bible. God's Word states marriage is between a man and women, also that Homosexuality is sin along with drunkenness, lying, ect. We do not have the option to pick and choose what parts of our lives God is to be in. It is all or nothing yes even politics and government. Your votes should reflect your beliefs as best they can as many times it is the lesser of two evils! Common sense tells you homosexuality is wrong but God confirms it. Here are some scriptures to back up what I say or what God says:


Genesis 2:24

24 Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.



Proverbs 18:22

He who finds a wife finds what is good and receives favor from the LORD



Matthew 19:4-6

"Haven't you read," he replied, "that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female,' and said, 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh' ? So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."



1 Corinthians 7:1-16

Now for the matters you wrote about: It is good for a man not to marry. But since there is so much immorality, each man should have his own wife, and each woman her own husband. The husband should fulfill his marital duty to his wife, and likewise the wife to her husband. The wife's body does not belong to her alone but also to her husband. In the same way, the husband's body does not belong to him alone but also to his wife. Do not deprive each other except by mutual consent and for a time, so that you may devote yourselves to prayer. Then come together again so that Satan will not tempt you because of your lack of self-control. I say this as a concession, not as a command. I wish that all men were as I am. But each man has his own gift from God; one has this gift, another has that. Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I am. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion. To the married I give this command (not I, but the Lord): A wife must not separate from her husband. But if she does, she must remain unmarried or else be reconciled to her husband. And a husband must not divorce his wife. To the rest I say this (I, not the Lord): If any brother has a wife who is not a believer and she is willing to live with him, he must not divorce her. And if a woman has a husband who is not a believer and he is willing to live with her, she must not divorce him. For the unbelieving husband has been sanctified through his wife, and the unbelieving wife has been sanctified through her believing husband. Otherwise your children would be unclean, but as it is, they are holy. But if the unbeliever leaves, let him do so. A believing man or woman is not bound in such circumstances; God has called us to live in peace. How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, whether you will save your wife?



Ephesians 5:22-23

Wives, submit to your husbands as to the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, of which he is the Savior.



Colossians 3:18-19

Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives and do not be harsh with them.



Hebrews 13:4-7

Marriage should be honored by all, and the marriage bed kept pure, for God will judge the adulterer and all the sexually immoral. Keep your lives free from the love of money and be content with what you have, because God has said, "Never will I leave you; never will I forsake you." So we say with confidence, "The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?" Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you. Consider the outcome of their way of life and imitate their faith.



Mark 10:6-9

"But at the beginning of creation God 'made them male and female.' 'For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.' So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate."





1 Corinthians 6:8-10

8 No, you yourselves do wrong and cheat, and you do these things to your brethren! 9 Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, 10 nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God.



Romans 1:26-28

26 For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. 27 Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due.

28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting;



1 Timothy 1:8-10

8 But we know that the law is good if one uses it lawfully, 9 knowing this: that the law is not made for a righteous person, but for the lawless and insubordinate, for the ungodly and for sinners, for the unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, 10 for fornicators, for sodomites, for kidnappers, for liars, for perjurers, and if there is any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine,



Jude 1:7

7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.



Remember this is God's Word not mine. We are not above God. Man's opinion does not matter when it conflicts with God's Word. Our feelings do not matter when it comes to God's Word. Our love does does not matter when it contradicts God's Word. His Word is the final authority, case closed. If you are a Christian and you disagree with God then you had better check to see if you are really a Christian because God is God and what He says goes. There is no other option.

Now if one don't believe the Bible, there is not much you can do with them but pray God will open their eyes to the truth!

PMT


Edited by preachermantom (04/10/13 10:48 AM)
_________________________
"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one may come to the Father except through Me."

Jesus Christ

http://walkthewalkwithjesus.blogspot.com

Top
#3218471 - 04/10/13 10:50 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: preachermantom]
preachermantom
12 Point


Registered: 12/05/02
Posts: 5128
Loc: waverly,tn,USA

Offline
The problem is man is doing what he thinks is right instead of what God tells us IS RIGHT!
_________________________
"I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life, no one may come to the Father except through Me."

Jesus Christ

http://walkthewalkwithjesus.blogspot.com

Top
#3218483 - 04/10/13 11:07 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Quote:


As for the government, it wasn't until the last 20 years that homosexual behavior in the bedroom was legal. It may still be illegal in some states.


Laws, especially laws within specific states, reflect the will of the people and common culture of that time. That is how it was intended to work. The fact that you stated "up until 20 years ago" is proof that changing cultures result in changing laws.

The debate is whether these changes are good for society or not. That is the essence of this thread.

If desire or want equals a right, then we are on a very bad path here.
The homosexual point of view is that not that they have a right to behave as they choose. Their claim is that we don't have a right to not approve.

The suicide rate of homosexuals is 10X that of heterosexuals. Their rate of medicated depression is similar. Many of them have deep seeded personality disorders, unresolved childhood trauma or neglect. It's my believe that a vast majority of homosexuals are acting out symptoms of self-destraction and not actual attraction or lifestyle. (not all, but many).

Being politically correct, denying them access to treatment and just labeling their self-destruction as "normal" or "enlightened" is not helping them. It's celebrating their living heII.

Ironically, it's the Homosexuals themselves who have limited their access to help by demonizing and being offended by the suggestion that they need it in the first place.

"Up until about 20 years ago" it wasn't illegal to even suggest it.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57523211/california-bans-gay-cure-therapy/
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218492 - 04/10/13 11:14 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: preachermantom]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
The majority of passages that you mention don't actually say anything against homosexuallity.

Secondly, I am not gay. I just happen to believe that everyone should be aloud to be who they are and no one is better than anyone else regardless of race, religion, or sexual oreintation. The reason I feel that way is because of my christian upbringing. I went to catholic school. Maybe thats my problem. They didn't teach enough hate. They just taught us about what a great guy Jesus was and how he was accepting of everyone. Heck, I never heard anyone use the "N" word until I was in fifth grade. The simple fact is that animal behavior/instinct/God given desire is the basis of sexual relationships and marriage. If we did not have it, we would die out as a species.

Top
#3218494 - 04/10/13 11:16 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
Again, if we were all homo, we would die out as a species...it's not natural.

Jesus was no doubt accepting to all, but when one came to Him, He had requirements...that sin was to be abandoned and to live a Godly life, that is, according to his commandments and Word.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218499 - 04/10/13 11:19 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Quote:
The simple fact is that animal behavior/instinct/God given desire is the basis of sexual relationships and marriage. If we did not have it, we would die out as a species


Plugging an extension cord back into itself is not going to turn the lights on either? \:D

I'm not anti-gay. I dont' care what they do. I just reject that suggestion that I have to condone or, in some cases, celebrate what I view as deviant behavior.
I don't believe their behavior should be illegal nor do I believe that my rejection of it should be either.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218504 - 04/10/13 11:22 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
The majority of passages that you mention don't actually say anything against homosexuallity.



No, some deal with infidelity, and that marriage is between a man and a woman, the topics that have been raised by your comments. ;\)
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218514 - 04/10/13 11:28 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
[quote=Crappie Luck]
 Quote:


The suicide rate of homosexuals is 10X that of heterosexuals. Their rate of medicated depression is similar. Many of them have deep seeded personality disorders, unresolved childhood trauma or neglect. It's my believe that a vast majority of homosexuals are acting out symptoms of self-destraction and not actual attraction or lifestyle. (not all, but many).

Being politically correct, denying them access to treatment and just labeling their self-destruction as "normal" or "enlightened" is not helping them. It's celebrating their living heII.

Ironically, it's the Homosexuals themselves who have limited their access to help by demonizing and being offended by the suggestion that they need it in the first place.


Your very statement says they need help like there is something wrong with them. That its a result of a mental disorder or some childhood trauma. You don't think that your opinion could have something to do with why they have such a high suicide rate do you? In addition to your reasoning for them being gay, their behavior is called deviant, unnatural, and an abomination in Gods eyes. I don't know, between your opinion and every elses, I would want to kill myself too if I were gay.

What kind of help are you suggesting they get? Do you really think you can pray the gay away?

Top
#3218518 - 04/10/13 11:40 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Quote:


1) Your very statement says they need help like there is something wrong with them. That its a result of a mental disorder or some childhood trauma.


Of course I am. After all this back and forth you just realized that?

 Quote:

2) You don't think that your opinion could have something to do with why they have such a high suicide rate do you?


Again, back to personal responsibility. so it's MY fault that a man servicing another man in a filthy bath house in a city park suffers from low self esteem?

NO WAY, will we even consider that the same personal daemons that drove him to kneel in a pool of urine to please a stranger could also have been a force that ultimately drives him to take his own life.

He has the confidence to walk down a public street wearing nothing but black chaps and lipstick but he's so traumatized by my opinion of disapproval that he ends his entire life.

You're suggestion is ludicrous on it's face.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218523 - 04/10/13 11:45 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
[quote=JimFromTN][quote=Crappie Luck]
 Quote:




What kind of help are you suggesting they get? Do you really think you can pray the gay away?


I'm suggesting that it's possible the lack of accepted communication makes it impossible for him to receive treatment for any mental imbalances he may have.

I'm not suggesting prayer specifically, but If prayer helps, why do you disregard it immediately?

is it possible your own prejudice clouds your willingness to accept that he might benefit from a belief in God?
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218533 - 04/10/13 11:57 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
I have known quite a few gay people in my day and none of them have walked down the street in nothing but a pair of black chaps or lipstick for that matter. Never known them to kneel in urine either. As far as one night stands, I have known far more heterosexuals to do that then homosexuals. None of their behavior is any different than that of a heterosexual. Its just the partner that they chose that is different

Your assumptions about gay people are way off which is not surprising at all. Your assumptions end up in the form of bigotry which is cruelty and you don't feel you should be held responsible for that cruelty.


Edited by JimFromTN (04/10/13 11:58 AM)

Top
#3218541 - 04/10/13 12:02 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
JimFromTN
8 Point


Registered: 07/14/08
Posts: 1453
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
I'm not anti-gay. I dont' care what they do.


Your very assumptions make you anti-gay. Your assumptions are the basis of bigotry and prejudice.


Edited by JimFromTN (04/10/13 12:04 PM)

Top
#3218548 - 04/10/13 12:13 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Call it what you want if that makes you feel better. But it was not the bigoted heterosexuals who organized and participated in the gay parades that labeled them as such. It was not a deep rooted love of a women that drove George Michael to the restroom. It was not me and my prejudice that allowed AIDS to spread so rapidly though the gay community. It was promiscuity and living up to the low expectations of us bigots.

You've proved my point about the censorship that leaves so much unspoken. Fear of the truth and denial of what is real is what got us to this point.

Celebrate the worst in society. Label those who reject it as "Bigots" but the hard truth that lives just out of your grasp is that all that ails the Homosexual community is self-inflicted and grows stronger in the fear of speaking the truth.

There will be no equality until the gay community stops pointing at the splinters in our eyes and address the issue of the plank in theirs. (a little scripture just to twist the knife a little) ;\)

_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218549 - 04/10/13 12:14 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
I'm not anti-gay. I dont' care what they do.


Your very assumptions make you anti-gay. Your assumptions are the basis of bigotry and prejudice.


By the same token, I could very easily conclude that you are anti-christian Jim. Not saying that you are, but by dismissing certain guidelines from the Bible, the basis of christian living, one could very easily see it that way, or at least waging a campaign against it.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3218584 - 04/10/13 12:51 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
preds1
12 Point


Registered: 10/16/09
Posts: 6464
Loc: Sumner County

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck


I'm not anti-gay. I dont' care what they do. I just reject that suggestion that I have to condone or, in some cases, celebrate what I view as deviant behavior.
I don't believe their behavior should be illegal nor do I believe that my rejection of it should be either.



The State of Washington is suing a small flower shop after the owner declined to provide flowers for a homosexual wedding – based on her religious beliefs.


Barronelle Stutzman, the owner of Arlene’s Flowers in Richland, Wash., is facing thousands of dollars in fines and penalties for allegedly violating the state’s Consumer Protection Act.

“If a business provides a product or service to opposite-sex couples for their weddings, then it must provide same-sex couples the same product or service,” Attorney General Bob Ferguson said in a statement.

On March 1, a longtime customer asked Stutzman to provide flowers for his upcoming same-sex wedding. According to court documents, she told him that she would not be able to do so “because of her relationship with Jesus Christ.”

The Attorney General’s office sent a letter to the florist on March 28 giving her a chance to reconsider her position and sign an agreement indicating her intention to comply with the law. But Stutzman refused.

“Under the Consumer Protection Act, it is unlawful to discriminate against customers on the basis of sexual orientation,” the attorney general said.

In their letter to Stutzman, they told her the only way to avoid a lawsuit was to agree to provide services for homosexual weddings.


“This means that as a seller of goods or services, you will not refuse to sell floral arrangements for same-sex weddings if you sell floral arrangements for opposite-sex weddings,” the attorney general’s office wrote.

Attorney JD Bristol called the notion that his client was guilty of discrimination “nonsense.”

“Arlene’s Flowers has catered to all patrons, including homosexuals, for many years,” Bristol wrote in his reply to the Attorney General. “Arlene’s Flowers has had openly gay employees.”

He told The Seattle Times that he believes the state is trying to make an example of the flower shop.

“This is about gay marriage, it’s not about a person being gay,” he told the newspaper. “She has a conscientious objection to homosexual marriage, not homosexuality. It violates her conscience.”

Bristol said he believes this is a freedom of religion issue.

“What the government is saying here is that you don’t have the right to free religious exercise,” he told the newspaper.

Religious liberty groups in Washington and across the country are voicing their support for the flower shop.

“You may not be a florist, and you may have made a different decision, but liberty is at stake for all of us,” said Joseph Backholm, executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington. “Draw your line in the sand right here.”

Backholm sent an email blast urging supporters to stand with Arlene’s Flowers.

“Don’t ignore the bully just because he hasn’t punched you in the mouth yet,” he said. “A small business owner is looking at years of litigation and huge legal expenses because she won’t bow to the political elites.”

Peter Sprigg, with the Family Research Council, told Fox News they are seeing more and more of these types of cases.

“People need to be aware this is the underlying motive for the push for same sex marriage,” he said. “It’s not just about legal rights and benefits. It’s about forcing everyone in society to recognize their relationships as being one hundred percent equal to opposite sex marriages.”

He called the lawsuit a dangerous step towards encroaching on religious liberty.

“It also reflects a narrow view of religious liberty where people may have freedom to exercise religious liberty in their church but they don’t have that right when they go outside those four walls,” he said.

The Attorney General is seeking a permanent injunction forcing the flower shop to comply with the law – as well as $2,000 in fines for every violation.

Top
#3218622 - 04/10/13 01:30 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: preds1]
Pic IN the Casa
TurdFarmer2.0
14 Point


Registered: 03/18/11
Posts: 9709
Loc: TN

Offline
Man do we need a social enema.
_________________________
Tolerance now means OBEY!!!!


Top
#3218630 - 04/10/13 01:41 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Pic IN the Casa]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Not yet. But maybe it's time to consider scrub brushing gloves for gerbils
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218639 - 04/10/13 02:01 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
I completely agree with some of your points Crappie Luck. Although I consider myself somewhat "gay friendly," in that I really don't care, and I'm not interested in knowing who someone finds sexually attractive, I too find the in-your-face "We're queer and we're here, so get over it" attitude of militant gays offensive and irritating. In addition, I too believe they are pushing their sexual orietation towards a "protected status" to gain advantage over others.

But that group's "Rights" (read: special status) is of no interest to me. I'm more concerned with the Rights of those gay people I know, which dress just like the rest of us, work at the same jobs as the rest of us, and go about their daily lives just like the rest of us. The only major differences is who they partner with--someone of the same sex. I know quite a few gay people who fit this bill (and I also know a few of the flamboyant, militant types of gay people, who tend to truly get on my nerves, just as Ultra Left Wing Socialists and Communists do). As a heterosexual, I have the right to be legally married, and accrue all of the legal and societal rights of that legal status. I would like gay people to have the same right.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3218654 - 04/10/13 02:18 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
Contrary to what my arguments on here seem to imply, I'm not "anti-gay". I took a hard line on the topic so I would not be mistaken as "sitting on the fence".

I also don't care what people do. But I differ from you in that I feel gay marriage effects me and the institution of marriage in a negative way. I agree there should be no legal punishment for being gay, financially, Tax or otherwise.

My argument that those rewards should be removed from the current system entirely, not expanded to included homosexuals.

As for the issue of rights, Homosexuals should enjoy that same rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the rest of us. If they are not specifically listed, they are not rights at all, they are privileges granted by a benevolent Government.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3218957 - 04/10/13 09:06 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
My feeling mirror Crappie Lucks though he is much more eloquent at stating it.

Anybody else notice the 10000lb gorilla in the room?

ANOTHER long string of bad government policy ? One that opens the door for abuse and degrading society?

Sadly it seems that Americans will endure endless numbers of policy outrages as long as they feel like everybody else is getting equally screwed.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3219074 - 04/11/13 04:57 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: JimFromTN]
BMan
16 Point


Registered: 02/06/06
Posts: 10599
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: JimFromTN
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
No. I never said that and I suspect that is just a detraction from the conversation.

Two consenting adults can do whatever they want in the bedroom. Why do you need the government's permission to do it? And why do you think I have to approve of it for it to be "Legit".

No one is suggesting a man can't have sex with another man. But I reject the idea that I have to accept it as normal or call it "Marriage".



Actually, they are. How many times in this thread has it been referred to as deviant behavior? As for the government, it wasn't until the last 20 years that homosexual behavior in the bedroom was legal. It may still be illegal in some states.

It IS deviant behavior. You cannot argue that fact.
_________________________
Rules are for people who lose fights.

Top
#3219151 - 04/11/13 07:52 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
I also don't care what people do. But I differ from you in that I feel gay marriage effects me and the institution of marriage in a negative way.


I've never understood this argument. How does allowing gay people to marry effect you and your marriage, or the the "institution" of marriage? (and what is the "institution" of marriage?)


 Quote:
I agree there should be no legal punishment for being gay, financially, Tax or otherwise.

My argument that those rewards should be removed from the current system entirely, not expanded to included homosexuals.


That is an interesting concept I tend to agree with, but removing all benefits of marriage would be exceedingly difficult. On any paperwork completeled for any purpose, once you write "spouse" in the section indicating your relationship to another person, everything changes. Finding and eliminating all of those benefits would be very difficult.


 Quote:
As for the issue of rights, Homosexuals should enjoy that same rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the rest of us. If they are not specifically listed, they are not rights at all, they are privileges granted by a benevolent Government.


I agree, but the right to not be descriminated against is something I believe in. I also believe this right is an intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3219163 - 04/11/13 08:09 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BMan]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BMan
It IS deviant behavior. You cannot argue that fact.


I can. Deviant behavior is a violation of social norms. If you do not consider homosexuality as violating societal norms, then it is not deviant behavior. Considering the vast majority of people who are gay are born that way, then being attracted to people of the same sex is part of nature's system. Definitely a small part of the natural system, but a 2-4% of the human population, still a norm when you consider the world's population.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3219167 - 04/11/13 08:11 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
ANOTHER long string of bad government policy ? One that opens the door for abuse and degrading society?


Without question, every time the government attempts to "regulate" or control anything, they screw it up. Every "good" policy ends up creating a dozen bad, unintended policies. That's just a fact of governance experienced by all societies that have governments.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3219181 - 04/11/13 08:26 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
I also don't care what people do. But I differ from you in that I feel gay marriage effects me and the institution of marriage in a negative way.


I've never understood this argument. How does allowing gay people to marry effect you and your marriage, or the the "institution" of marriage? (and what is the "institution" of marriage?)

'
Marriage as an institution is terms of on what the foundation of our culture is built and to what norms we as a society follow.

The decay of this fabric is visible all around us. Marriage as a root of our culture and a pillar of our society has already rotted at the base and is barely standing. Divorce, Hollywood influence, the increase in single parents, the hook-up culture and a self-serving society of narcissists who marry for convenience and divorce for the same reason is already eating at the stability of our nation. The generations we're raising up now are the dumbest and most confident in nothing generation yet.

Without a root culture of a solid family unit, we as a society are MUCH more willing to forgo the traditions and struggles of the past and embrace "new" ideas of promised utopia. The result is a loss of liberty, an increase in poverty, illiteracy and violence.

I'm not suggesting that gay marriage creates a society of violent pan handlers who can't read their own "Will work for food" signs. But I AM suggesting that it is just another brick removed from our footing as a culture.

Some may welcome the changing landscape of American values and tradition. I, for one, do not and I've yet to see evidence that it's beneficial.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3219194 - 04/11/13 08:44 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
[quote=Crappie Luck]
 Quote:
As for the issue of rights, Homosexuals should enjoy that same rights guaranteed in the Constitution as the rest of us. If they are not specifically listed, they are not rights at all, they are privileges granted by a benevolent Government.


I agree, but the right to not be descriminated against is something I believe in. I also believe this right is an intent of the Constitution and Bill of Rights.


I guess I just don't see the lack of gay marriage as discrimination. It's just not an option. All roads in life lead you to a menu of choices. Marriage is just not on the gay menu.

What benefits do unmarried couples enjoy that gays do not? People live together, have children and live happily their entire lives. Are they discriminated against when one dies and the other doesn't collect? What about single people? They don't enjoy the tax breaks either. Is that discrimination? No less than that which the homosexuals claim it is.

Different choices in life lead you to different options. The presence or absences of other people's choices does not automatically signal oppression or unconstitutional denial of rights.
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3219218 - 04/11/13 09:31 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
So just to be clear.....
What EXACTLY are the "rights" enjoyed by Married people that are not afforded to gays and single couples?

Please give specifics. Thanks!
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3219226 - 04/11/13 09:43 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
ANOTHER long string of bad government policy ? One that opens the door for abuse and degrading society?


Without question, every time the government attempts to "regulate" or control anything, they screw it up. Every "good" policy ends up creating a dozen bad, unintended policies. That's just a fact of governance experienced by all societies that have governments.


And THAT is why I am a conservative.
There are ALWAYS consequences to a law/policy. Some intended, some unintended. It is a FACT that we loose a little bit of our liberty and self governance with EVERY law that is passed.
(Which is why conservatives believe in LESS government involvement in our lives)
Once a law is passed and the consequences start rolling in, the status quo is to pass MORE laws to try and correct the symptoms of bad policy. You almost NEVER hear about repealing a bad policy and shrinking government meddling.

We have been conditioned to believe that the answer to bad policy is more policy, NOT the obvious common sense choice of ELIMINATING THE BAD POLICY!!

The gay community is in for a rude awakening down the road when the government they thought they had on a leash turns around and bites them. One obvious hammer that WILL fall on them is Obommacare. They will be labeled a "high risk" category and have super high premiums. Special taxes and fines will likely be implemented by some bureaucrat to help pay for the increased risk. This is one obvious reason why I think they are crazy/stupid for INVITING the government into the private personal lives.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3219229 - 04/11/13 09:45 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
Excellent observation fishboy! That is, unless we end up paying for their "high risk" behavior thru more govt taxes and such.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3219296 - 04/11/13 11:02 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
Excellent observation fishboy! That is, unless we end up paying for their "high risk" behavior thru more govt taxes and such.


Why do you think they are screaming for "spousal rights" now?
#1. is to get insurance coverage through their partners work policy. Thereby shoving some/most of the cost of their high premiums off on the employer.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3220173 - 04/12/13 08:32 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: Crappie Luck]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: Crappie Luck
 Originally Posted By: BSK
I've never understood this argument. How does allowing gay people to marry effect you and your marriage, or the the "institution" of marriage? (and what is the "institution" of marriage?)

'
Marriage as an institution is terms of on what the foundation of our culture is built and to what norms we as a society follow.

The decay of this fabric is visible all around us. Marriage as a root of our culture and a pillar of our society has already rotted at the base and is barely standing. Divorce, Hollywood influence, the increase in single parents, the hook-up culture and a self-serving society of narcissists who marry for convenience and divorce for the same reason is already eating at the stability of our nation. The generations we're raising up now are the dumbest and most confident in nothing generation yet.

Without a root culture of a solid family unit, we as a society are MUCH more willing to forgo the traditions and struggles of the past and embrace "new" ideas of promised utopia. The result is a loss of liberty, an increase in poverty, illiteracy and violence.

I'm not suggesting that gay marriage creates a society of violent pan handlers who can't read their own "Will work for food" signs. But I AM suggesting that it is just another brick removed from our footing as a culture.

Some may welcome the changing landscape of American values and tradition. I, for one, do not and I've yet to see evidence that it's beneficial.


Thanks for the excellent response CL.

I do agree that the rise in narcissism, self-absorbtion and selfishness are degrading our society. But I tend to see the divorce rate and decline of the "nuclear family" as symptoms of these problems rather than the cause of these problems. But I do agree that "Leftism" is the root of these societal personality issues.

I just don't think allowing gay couples the same right to marry as heterosexual couples automatically increases these societal problems. Nor do I believe what one couple does, or how they define their relationship legally or personally, has any influence on my marriage or how my wife and I define our relationship.

But to one of your points above, I absolutely agree that the traditional "nuclear family" produces the best chances at well-balanced children who become good members of society at adulthood. It doesn't by any means guaratee good members of society, nor do untraditional family units automatically produce poorly adjusted young adults, but the tradition family unit has the best chance of producing good citizens.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3220184 - 04/12/13 08:39 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
BirdDog123
4 Point


Registered: 08/17/12
Posts: 384
Loc: Tennesssee, US

Offline
Wow, very articulate and thoughtful debate guys! Good job on presenting clear, intelligent, points for each side.
Top
#3220186 - 04/12/13 08:40 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
It surely doesn't define my relationship between my wife and I either Bryan, but what I become concerned with is children, that, in an ever increasingly liberal, deviant culture, will tend to adopt this type behavior. And I don't want it to define my children's relationships either, but, as we all know, societal pressures can deter even the best upbringing, this from a christian aspect of course tho.
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3220196 - 04/12/13 08:46 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
Crappie Luck Moderator
Non-Typical


Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 61369
Loc: Smith Co.

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
Nor do I believe what one couple does, or how they define their relationship legally or personally, has any influence on my marriage or how my wife and I define our relationship.


Nor do I. It's how Society and we, as a culture define those relationships that matters. People are free to label themselves as they see fit. They can do that now. What concerns me is the undefinition of marriage as a legal and official institution.

We can chase these victimized, civil issues until marriage is Chicken + Waffle. Once the initial redefining is done, what follows is just a matter of degree. The mortal wound will have already been inflicted.

Thanks for the compliment. I've enjoyed the debate as well \:\)
_________________________
"To find out who your real rulers are, simply look to those whom you CANNOT criticize..."
--Voltaire

Top
#3220215 - 04/12/13 09:04 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
It surely doesn't define my relationship between my wife and I either Bryan, but what I become concerned with is children, that, in an ever increasingly liberal, deviant culture, will tend to adopt this type behavior. And I don't want it to define my children's relationships either, but, as we all know, societal pressures can deter even the best upbringing, this from a christian aspect of course tho.


Because I went back and editted/added to my previous post above, let me repost what i added above:

 Quote:
But to one of your points above, I absolutely agree that the traditional "nuclear family" produces the best chances at well-balanced children who become good members of society at adulthood. It doesn't by any means guaratee good members of society, nor do untraditional family units automatically produce poorly adjusted young adults, but the tradition family unit has the best chance of producing good citizens.


So to your point MUP, I do agree that the traditional family is best, but I'm very hesitant to disallow other options just because it MIGHT produce less adjusted children. I don't like the idea of limiting people's liberties simply because providing those liberties may produce a negative outcome for society. With Freedom and Liberty comes real risks...

I also want to clearly state that I respect those--who for religious or other reasons--see homosexuality as "deviant" behavior, and see legalization of gay marriage as government promotion and "normalization" of deviant behavior. I fully understand these beliefs. I disagree withthis viewpoint, but respect those who feel this way.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3220222 - 04/12/13 09:11 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
MUP
Non-Typical


Registered: 08/01/07
Posts: 45465
Loc: Just North of Chatt-town

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: MUP
It surely doesn't define my relationship between my wife and I either Bryan, but what I become concerned with is children, that, in an ever increasingly liberal, deviant culture, will tend to adopt this type behavior. And I don't want it to define my children's relationships either, but, as we all know, societal pressures can deter even the best upbringing, this from a christian aspect of course tho.


Because I went back and editted/added to my previous post above, let me repost what i added above:

 Quote:
But to one of your points above, I absolutely agree that the traditional "nuclear family" produces the best chances at well-balanced children who become good members of society at adulthood. It doesn't by any means guaratee good members of society, nor do untraditional family units automatically produce poorly adjusted young adults, but the tradition family unit has the best chance of producing good citizens.


So to your point MUP, I do agree that the traditional family is best, but I'm very hesitant to disallow other options just because it MIGHT produce less adjusted children. I don't like the idea of limiting people's liberties simply because providing those liberties may produce a negative outcome for society. With Freedom and Liberty comes real risks...

I also want to clearly state that I respect those--who for religious or other reasons--see homosexuality as "deviant" behavior, and see legalization of gay marriage as government promotion and "normalization" of deviant behavior. I fully understand these beliefs. I disagree withthis viewpoint, but respect those who feel this way.


Along with CL, I'm most upset about the way gays and lesbians "flaunt" their behavior, and thus "push" their agenda and "lifestyle" on the rest of society. I guess what I'm trying to say is, you don't see "straight days" or "days of silence" for straight folks. Anyone has the right to their own beliefs and to live their life accordingly imo, I just don't like someone telling me that I have to conforom to their way of thinking how life is, or that I must condone it or be labeled a hate-monger or closed-minded. Thanks for the very straight-forward debate guys. ;\)
_________________________
MUP

Amateurs: Built the Ark

Professionals: Built the Titanic

Top
#3220281 - 04/12/13 09:56 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
BSK brings up a good point.

We should be careful about "disallowing" things.....period.
And by Disallow I mean giving government the power and authority to interfere with our lives.

Where I disagree with the notion is when it is taken to the extreme of creating a legal basis, endorssement, or protection for some idea or policy via the government.

Experimenting with your own private individual personal life is your right. If you make a mistake in judgement, the damage is limited, primarily to you.

Forcing that experiment on others through government policy is what has led America down a path leading to the septic pond of humanity.

Look at all the "well meaning" government programs which are imploding. Welfare is causing poverty and fueling addiction, affirmative action is harming minorities, CRA and government backed loans caused the biggest wave of bankruptcy in the history of our country....

NONE of those MANDATED policies were PROHIBITED. Private citizens were free to experiment with giving loans to people with no jobs or credit on their own private dime. Charity is abundantly available through private organizations..... I can give my money to the lazy bum down the street so he doesn't have to go get a job, or to the druggie so he can get his next fix.

Notice how there isn't much PRIVATE support for those bad policies ???? But there is a lot of support for those "experiments" because they MIGHT turn out ok "in some cases" ??

IT is very easy (and dangerous) to endorse experimenting with society when it is someone else's money that pays for it, and someone else's life that is crushed, and someone elses pain that is felt when the experiment fails.

That is in part where liberals get their superior attitude and god complex. They can make decisions/endorsements which FORCE compliance yet only hurt "other people" if they are wrong.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3220429 - 04/12/13 01:07 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: MUP]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: MUP
Along with CL, I'm most upset about the way gays and lesbians "flaunt" their behavior, and thus "push" their agenda and "lifestyle" on the rest of society. I guess what I'm trying to say is, you don't see "straight days" or "days of silence" for straight folks. Anyone has the right to their own beliefs and to live their life accordingly imo, I just don't like someone telling me that I have to conforom to their way of thinking how life is, or that I must condone it or be labeled a hate-monger or closed-minded. Thanks for the very straight-forward debate guys. ;\)


I couldn't agree more MUP. And surprisingly, so do some of the gay people I know. They can understand other gay people not being ashamed of who they are, but can't imagine what there is about their own personal sexual orientation that needs to be "celebrated."

I'm a guy who likes women. So what? I'm not ashamed of that but I'm certainly not going to be marching in any "Guys Who Like Women Pride" parades. I'm of European heritage. I'm not ashamed of that but I also associate no specific "pride" towards that fact. My genetic background is what it is. I'm not looking for the next "Old WHite Guys Pride Day" celebration. Many gay people feel "Gay Pride" celebrations are harmful to their efforts towards being accepted as Human Beings as well as equal and productive members of society, rather than the societally destroying demons some see them as.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3220471 - 04/12/13 02:05 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: fishboy1]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: fishboy1
We should be careful about "disallowing" things.....period.
And by Disallow I mean giving government the power and authority to interfere with our lives.

Where I disagree with the notion is when it is taken to the extreme of creating a legal basis, endorssement, or protection for some idea or policy via the government.


I agree fishboy1. I want to see no "special" priviledges (beyond just equal treatment and rights) for any group. But we all know how every special interest group works...
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3220637 - 04/12/13 06:18 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4032
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK


So to your point MUP, I do agree that the traditional family is best, but I'm very hesitant to disallow other options just because it MIGHT produce less adjusted children. I don't like the idea of limiting people's liberties simply because providing those liberties may produce a negative outcome for society. With Freedom and Liberty comes real risks...

I also want to clearly state that I respect those--who for religious or other reasons--see homosexuality as "deviant" behavior, and see legalization of gay marriage as government promotion and "normalization" of deviant behavior. I fully understand these beliefs. I disagree withthis viewpoint, but respect those who feel this way.


I would ask who thinks they have a right to conduct social experiments with orphan children in the hopes a gay couple "may" raise them up properly? History has shown heterosexual couples raising poorly adjusted children is the exception. While I will wager that a gay couple raising well adjusted kids will likewise turn out to be the exception. How many gay parents will encourage their teenage kids to just try a homosexual relationship? How do you think a completely heterosexual teenager will feel after he mimics his "parent's" gay lifestyle for a time and finds out, oops, this ain't for me?

As far as deviant behavior the average homosexual generally has more sex partners than the most promiscuous of heterosexuals. The effects of the homosexual lifestyle are more damaging to ones lifespan than smoking. The rates of mental disorders and pedophilia among homosexuals dwarfs the rates of the rest of society. So if you're basing your beliefs on your monogamous, loving gay couples in your life they are the exceptions.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3221023 - 04/13/13 10:24 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: de novo]
BSK
Jerkasourous of the non-typical kind
Non-Typical


Registered: 03/11/99
Posts: 65637
Loc: Nashville, TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: de novo
History has shown heterosexual couples raising poorly adjusted children is the exception.


Actually, psychological studies show poorly adjusted children being raised by heterosexual parents is a rapidly growing problem.


 Quote:
I would ask who thinks they have a right to conduct social experiments with orphan children in the hopes a gay couple "may" raise them up properly?


I find the idea of people thinking they can allow or disallow other people's opportunity to be parents truly disgusting, and honestly quite frightening. Who thinks they have the "right" to decide this? That smacks of some of the horrific experiments the Nazis were involved in.


 Quote:
As far as deviant behavior the average homosexual generally has more sex partners than the most promiscuous of heterosexuals. The effects of the homosexual lifestyle are more damaging to ones lifespan than smoking. The rates of mental disorders and pedophilia among homosexuals dwarfs the rates of the rest of society.


The above is so outrageously false, it doesn't deserve comment.
_________________________
"Know where you stand, and stand there" --Jesuit Father Daniel Berrigan

"There is no reasoning someone out of a position he has not reasoned himself into." --Clive James

Top
#3221043 - 04/13/13 11:18 AM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
fishboy1
16 Point


Registered: 01/13/03
Posts: 10547
Loc: Warren Co

Offline
So, by your thinking..... having children is a "right".

What about adoption?

Who is qualified?
Married Hetero couple?
Single white guy?
Gay couple?
Crack Ho?
Pedophile?
Pimp?
Drug Cartel Lt. ?
Muslim sex trader?

Here is where the argument that "having" meaning in this case, to possess, is a RIGHT. Those who "have" the children have the "RIGHT" to determine who is qualified to take ownership of them. AND SOMEBODY RESPONSIBLE AND SENSIBLE SHOULD be evaluating who is qualified based on the best interests of the child. NOT based on some perceived social wrong or invented "right".

Natural parenting rights, through reproduction is another matter. The government should NOT be involved at all. YES there are sorry people out there who should not be allowed to have head lice let alone children. That is a hard cost of freedom. You cant save everyone.

BUT
By putting government in charge and creating "rights", you REMOVE the common sense and flexibility of freedom and more importantly social morals and social pressure.

Ex. Private adoption agency decides to experiment and allow a gay couple to adopt a child. They monitor and discover that the gay couple are poor parents for whatever reason and remove the child in the trial period. They can then evaluate and decide if it is in the interest of children to discontinue that practice. Couple can re-apply but agency has the flexibility to deny the request.

ENTER GOVERNMENT... Adoption agencies are FORCED to adopt out children to a certain quota of gay couples that apply. It is discovered that a % of them are poor parents for whatever reason. When/if the agency removes the child, then the "parents rights" have been violated.

Discrimination would be the cry and lawsuits filed. The issue would become "gay rights" "parent rights", NOT the best interest of the child. Government would FORCE the return of the child based on some INVENTED right of gays to marry and "have" children. The child is imprisoned in a dysfunctional family until they turn 18 or run away. More likely they will become poorly adjusted and have emotional problems well into adulthood.
All in the interest of a social experiment and a misguided view of "fairness".

Social pressure would also be illegal. The gay couples family members, friends, neighbors, and the child's teachers, would be violating "gay parent rights" if they put pressure on them to be better parents, behave differently, raise the child differently, give the child up, or report them to the authorities for abuse/neglect. Hate crimes or hate speech could provide a protective defense for anyone criticizing poor parenting.

Here again, having government "fix" something creates a whole boat load of additional problems.
_________________________
If you can't trust people with freedom, how can you trust them with power ?




Top
#3221113 - 04/13/13 03:10 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: BSK]
de novo
10 Point


Registered: 07/21/08
Posts: 4032
Loc: Middle TN

Offline
 Originally Posted By: BSK
 Originally Posted By: de novo
History has shown heterosexual couples raising poorly adjusted children is the exception.


Actually, psychological studies show poorly adjusted children being raised by heterosexual parents is a rapidly growing problem.


Please share these studies with us. And to be relevant they should compare straight and gay couples.



 Originally Posted By: BSK
I find the idea of people thinking they can allow or disallow other people's opportunity to be parents truly disgusting, and honestly quite frightening. Who thinks they have the "right" to decide this? That smacks of some of the horrific experiments the Nazis were involved in.


I'm speaking of adoption not those who can biologically have children. Is it disgusting to prevent adoption by pedophiles? Where do you draw the line? Can a special needs adult that can't take care of themselves be given a child?


 Originally Posted By: de novo
As far as deviant behavior the average homosexual generally has more sex partners than the most promiscuous of heterosexuals. The effects of the homosexual lifestyle are more damaging to ones lifespan than smoking. The rates of mental disorders and pedophilia among homosexuals dwarfs the rates of the rest of society.



 Originally Posted By: BSK
The above is so outrageously false, it doesn't deserve comment.


This one article discounts everything you have posted on the entire thread. http://www.wnd.com/2002/04/13722/

I don't have a habit of making outrageously false statements.
In the article below, the author doesn't dispute the rate of mental disorders in the LGBT community but attributes it to the attitude of the rest of society.

In this article the author reviews research evidence on the prevalence of mental disorders in lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (LGBs) and shows, using meta-analyses, that LGBs have a higher prevalence of mental disorders than heterosexuals.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc2072932/

Gay men's lif spans 20 years shorter than heterosexual

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2005/jun/05060606

http://theroadtoemmaus.org/RdLb/22SxSo/PnSx/HSx/hosx_lifspn.htm

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&sclient=psy...iw=1366&bih=673

The illusion that the homosexual lifestyle is a normal way of living has been successfully propagated by promoting a "victim" image for homosexual persons, and by the pseudo-science alleging a ‘gay" gene.

Of the reports alleging, or promising soon down the road, a "gay" gene, not a single one has survived scientific peer review. There is no "gay" gene.

On the other hand, the evidence does show that homosexual persons are indeed victims -- but overwhelmingly of their own behavior, not that of others.

Typical homosexual behavior includes regular contact with fecal matter from oneself and from sexual partners, tragically reversing several centuries of learning about cleanliness, and thus several centuries of growing lifespan. Homosexual behavior makes no more sense than playing in the toilet.

All available evidence indicates that the lifespan of practicing homosexual persons is drastically shortened by their behavior. No reliable study indicates otherwise. The lifespan topic is taboo among homosexual advocates because the evidence is so damaging to their case.

The following information has been adapted from website: http://web.archive.org/web/20010124040800/www.cprmd.org/Myth_Fact_004.htm References are cited in chronological order. This information represents a fair summary of the available evidence concerning homosexual lifespan. It indicates that on average, even apart from AIDS, homosexual persons will probably not live past their 40’s, an appalling loss of about 30 years, or nearly 40% of normal American lifespan.
_________________________
“Reality is what continues to exist whether you believe in it or not.” 

“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.”

Top
#3221153 - 04/13/13 04:40 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: de novo]
Pic IN the Casa
TurdFarmer2.0
14 Point


Registered: 03/18/11
Posts: 9709
Loc: TN

Offline
^^^^^^ Yep.
_________________________
Tolerance now means OBEY!!!!


Top
#3221156 - 04/13/13 04:50 PM Re: Rush Limbaugh concedes defeat on gay marriage [Re: de novo]
citico_tim
10 Point


Registered: 10/02/02
Posts: 4563
Loc: Knoxville, TN, USA

Offline
I am just now joining this conversation. This point may have been made already, but I am libertarian enough to say I really don't care what people do, to a point. I will say it will never happen in a church I belong to. But I do think that gays should try to get their benefits the old fashioned way by going through Congress, instead of the courts. Abortion was a "right" established by the courts and not by the people, and look where we are on it 40 years later. The same thing is going to happen if gay benefits associated with marriage are ordered by court decree.

I don't take comfort in saying this, but I do think homosexuality may have a genetic link. Why it would be adaptive, I haven't a clue. But I just don't see every aspect of it as completely a lifestyle choice. If so, it is only a matter of time before it can be identified prenatally. That is when we will see the perfect liberal storm. Parents will then have a "choice". The progressives will lose it when parents start aborting potentially gay children.

For the record, I am strongly opposed to abortion, but not necessarily opposed to a legal arrangement between any adults. I'm just not going to go Orwellian and call it marriage, because it isn't. Marriage is a religious and biological relationship between a man and a woman. Always has been, always will be. If gays, or any group, wants government acknowledgement, do it the right way and don't bypass we, the people. They will be better off in the long run.
_________________________
"If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so."

-Thomas Jefferson

Top
Page all of 10 12345>Last »


Moderator:  Crappie Luck, Tennessee Todd, RUGER, Unicam, stretch, Cuttin Caller, Bobby G, Kimber45 
Hop to:
Top Posters
4105862
RUGER
87575
Deer Assassin
65637
BSK
61369
Crappie Luck
51376
spitndrum
Newest Members
buckslayer85, crose84, Fisher 1959, AKeys, GUIDO
13383 Registered Users
Who's Online
106 registered (sll, medic, killerford, Rockhound, benellivol, tyson007, 11 invisible) and 165 anonymous users online.
Forum Stats
13383 Members
42 Forums
95727 Topics
1120680 Posts

Max Online: 788 @ 11/11/13 08:06 PM
Moon Phase
CURRENT MOON
October
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31
Forum Donations
The TnDeer.Com Deer Talk Forum is for Tennessee Deer Hunters by Tennessee Deer Hunters. If you enjoy using our Talk Forum and would like to contribute to help in it's up-keep. Just submit your contribution by clicking on the DONATE button below and paying with PayPal or a major credit card. Any amount is much appreciated. Thanks for your support!

TN Burn Safe

Generated in 0.057 seconds in which 0.004 seconds were spent on a total of 14 queries. Zlib compression enabled.