Homosexuality and Marriage Issues
82916 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 8/22/13 , edited 8/22/13
I started this thread because the discussion was getting away from the main theme of another thread called “Why Are Homophobes Obsessed with Gay Men But Ignore Lesbians?”

Heterosexual relationships are more consequential than Homosexual relationships and heterosexual relationships without children; marriage is important to government because only a man and woman can produce children - 0% of homosexual relationships are capable of producing children. The ideal situation for children is to have both a mother and a father, which is well born out by every statistic.

The charge of discrimination in marriage is simply not true - any homosexual can marry ...any woman he wants – or not if he chooses; any heterosexual cannot marry any woman he wants. Marriage can only happen between a single man and single woman. Both homosexuals and heterosexuals both have the same rights, no one is being denied. Homosexuals should be allowed to have a private ceremony if they wish to and call their relationship whatever they want; the government should not prohibit their ceremony, but neither should government endorse it. The traditional definition of marriage should be preserved. The traditional definition of marriage does not loose its meaning because some fail to live up to it; Hollywood certainly does not count and an example worth emulating (in most cases).

Any comparison to the discrimination faced by black Americons is both ludicrous and insulting. They have suffered tremendously in our history, homosexual Americans as a group are more prosperous the heterosexuals – no children being a major factor. There is no substantive difference between men of any race – there is a profound difference between men and women. Marriage unites these two opposites in a way that is not possible with same sex couples – meaning they are less consequential to society.

Discrimination is legally permitted in some cases: a Korean restaurant is allowed to hire Korean servers, a pastor does not have to hire a homosexual assistant. Discrimination is important in everyday life as well – I discriminate against warm drinks on a hot day for example. Obviously discrimination is not always wrong. Hate is a term thrown around in an attempt to demonize and silence the opposition – liberals and homosexual activists are most often guilty of this. Matthew Shepherd was assaulted on motives of drugs and robbery (not anti-gay hate) – his “gay panic” defense” was a last ditch effort to save himself.

The Catholic church can no longer give needy children homes in Illinois because the side of "love and tolerance" could not accept a group who only placed children with heterosexual couples. To force them to choose between their faith and adoption ministry is wrong and a violation of their religious freedom. The government discriminated wrongly against them and forced them to close; I think it was more than the cutoff in funding as they would have been dictating what Catholics could believe. Accusations of “shifting the blame” make no sense. No one said homosexuals should not be able to adopt; however between a homosexual couple and a heterosexual couple, the better place for the child is with the heterosexual couple. The intolerant ones here are not the Catholics. The church accepts people, not what it regards as sinful behavior.

Catholic churches did handle things poorly concerning abused children – but what has happened to children in public schools has been far worse. The coverage and emphasis is simply a matter of media bias. Pedophiles prey on children wherever they can and all organizations should do better at protecting them.

A Christian florist was sued because she did not want to arrange flowers for a homosexual wedding as it would violate her religious faith - they should leave her alone and find someone else instead of imposing their beliefs on her; she SHOULD be allowed to discriminate and they should be allowed to do business elsewhere . A woman was sued because she would not allow a lesbian couple to stay in her home (a 3 or 4 room hostel); its her home she should be allowed to be discriminating on who she chooses to allow in her home/hostel.

A lot of people in favor of homosexual marriage have brought up the Bible so I want to briefly address it. When Jesus was asked about divorce he pointed to the beginning stating that God made male and female and that the two would become “one flesh” and that man should not separate what God has joined. That was God’s design but people have always tried to do their own thing. God allowed divorce because people were so hard hearted. So any sex other than between a married man and women is regarded as sinful. If you are not a Christian, the above probably will not mean anything to you.

Tradition should neither be kept or discarded simply because it is tradition – it should be evaluated based on its own merits; but neither should “modern” or “new” be a reason to dispense with tradition. The “flat earth” accusation is baseless demagoguery – no one in the western world has EVER believed the earth was flat – that was just a slur invented by a guy who didn’t like the church.

I had stated that homosexual marriage would cause fewer heterosexuals to marry (at least directly) and that appears to be incorrect so I retract it. The words “Speculative nonsense” ‘Irrational” and “fear-mongering” are inaccurate and do not apply.

I am happy to have the log cabin Republicans in my party and and glad we can fight for the conservative cause we share.

[Someone else had brought Thomas Jefferson up] Jefferson opposed the efforts in his state to have an official state supported church in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom (I agree with his sentiments) – he was not opposed to all clergy; today there is a move to change the definition of marriage and have the state endorse homosexual unions – this I strongly oppose. Sadly the issue lost in my state. If it does, become the law of the land, it will result in a loss of religious freedom for all those who do not conform – even if they stay within the four walls of the Church. True, marriage is not defined in the constitution – Because it is a STATE issue.

NOTE: Many of my points I gleaned from discussions on the Michael Medved radio show; Michael is a conservative Jewish talk show host who prides himself on favoring disagreeing callers; he usually interviews people on the opposite side of issues he cares about (in a civil manner) and has good relationships with influential people on the political left - including individuals in favor of homosexual marriage. I wish I possessed 1/5 of his encyclopedic brain - few know and understand statistics like him. He favors homosexual adoption but not the redefinition of marriage.

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4426843/k.9AFE/Heterosexual_and_Homosexual_Marriages.htm

http://www.brightlightsearch.blogspot.com/2013/06/preserving-traditional-marriage-is.html

http://www.michaelmedved.com/column/unique-power-in-traditional-marriage/


Posted 8/22/13
MArriage is such a load of bullshit, no one should be doing it.
82916 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M / WA
Offline
Posted 8/22/13
I realized this was a duplicate thread so I moved my comments to the correct thread and asked the moderator to delete it.
One Punch Mod
85833 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Boston-ish
Offline
Posted 8/22/13
Closed at request of OP as duplicate.
You must be logged in to post.