Blogger smeared by homosexual apologists

Matt Margolis ^ | 12/1/2004 | agitate

[Agitate]

ping?

[Mikey_1962]

I am from a mixed marriage too:

North Ireland and The Republic of Ireland.

[EdReform]

Ping

[Da Bilge Troll]

Black people do not have to "come out of the closet" for people to know that they are black. Gay marriage is not a civil-rights issue the way race is for that reason.

[Jibaholic]

My concern with gay marriage is the welfare of the children. Standard liberal thinking is that as long as children have two people that love them then it doesn't matter who raises the children. This is similar to the reasoning that was used with divorce and now we know that children raised by single mothers and stepparents (on average, there are exceptions) do not fare as well as children raised by their biological parents.

Now we're fighting the whole debate over again, and once again children will be the real losers.

[Noachian]

The right to adopt.

This is the part that gets to me.

If a guy whats to screw up his life, OK, but why bring kids into his weird life?

These children have no say in what family they're brought into, and unlike the homosexuals who adopt them, the children are "not consenting adults".

In effect, children adopted by homosexuals are little more than "pets" that only serve the pleasure of the homosexual parents. When these homosexual "parents" divorce, as they generally do, who takes care of the children while the now divorced "parents" are scouting out new partners?

[MadAnthony1776]

Another attempt by a small minority to dictate what the majority must do. I don't approve of homosexuality and the Bible also condemns it. So for someone to try and ram sin down my throat and tell me I have to enjoy it is wrong. I won't tolerate it. It's sin and it just burns me what they try to do. To compare it to mixed marriages is a real stretch and is a real injustice.

[atomicpossum]

The racial issue is a sham, simply because a male is a male and a female is a female. The gay marriage proponents want to change the traditional definition of marriage by making it sex neutral. Racial differences are cosmetic-- differences between the sexes are structural and sociologically fundamental.

The single truth in this debate that no one seems to point out is that marriage, as a social contract, is not between two people, it is between two people and everybody else. All the rights the individual above claims are rights not between the two married individuals, but rights of recogition required by the rest of society. This is why the 'private behavior' argument does not work-- this is demanding the recognition and accomodation, and therefore complicity, of everyone else. Any legislation or judicial edict instituting gay marriage is not to change the behavior of the couple in question, it is to change the behavior of everyone else in society.

[Agitate]

My concern with gay marriage is the welfare of the children. Standard liberal thinking is that as long as children have two people that love them then it doesn't matter who raises the children. This is similar to the reasoning that was used with divorce and now we know that children raised by single mothers and stepparents (on average, there are exceptions) do not fare as well as children raised by their biological parents.

Now we're fighting the whole debate over again, and once again children will be the real losers.

That's a concern of mine also, which is why I have a problem with civil unions. They shouldn't be able to adopt children. It's not just bad for the kids they adopt but also think of the mess when a child's two daddies want to come to school functions, etc. Your child will be exposed to it whether you want it or not, which is what they are working on anyway.

---

WAKE UP AMERICA	"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." -Omar Ahmad, Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, aka CAIR President and CEO of Silicon Expert Technologies A Palestinian who grew up in a refugee camp in Jordan.
ANTI-Cair -- Little Green Footballs -- JIHAD Watch -- DHIMMI Watch -- internet haganáh -- FaithFreedom -- Answering Islam -- Daniel Pipes -- Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) -- MEMRI TV-Videos

[Agitate]

The racial issue is a sham, simply because a male is a male and a female is a female. The gay marriage proponents want to change the traditional definition of marriage by making it sex neutral. Racial differences are cosmetic-- differences between the sexes are structural and sociologically fundamental.

The single truth in this debate that no one seems to point out is that marriage, as a social contract, is not between two people, it is between two people and everybody else. All the rights the individual above claims are rights not between the two married individuals, but rights of recogition required by the rest of society. This is why the 'private behavior' argument does not work-- this is demanding the recognition and accomodation, and therefore complicity, of everyone else. Any legislation or judicial edict instituting gay marriage is not to change the behavior of the couple in question, it is to change the behavior of everyone else in society.

Excellent points! Thanks.

---

WAKE UP AMERICA	"Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faiths, but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." -Omar Ahmad, Co-founder of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, aka CAIR President and CEO of Silicon Expert Technologies A Palestinian who grew up in a refugee camp in Jordan.
ANTI-Cair -- Little Green Footballs -- JIHAD Watch -- DHIMMI Watch -- internet haganáh -- FaithFreedom -- Answering Islam -- Daniel Pipes -- Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) -- MEMRI TV-Videos

[EdReform]

My concern with gay marriage is the welfare of the children...

Agreed. Pro-homosexual activists in "professional" medical organizations such as the American Academy of Pediatrics (and both the American Psychiatric and American Psychological Associations) are working overtime to normalize "homosexual parenting."

See replies 283 and 284 in Scripter's Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Revision 1.1) thread.

[EdReform]

Ping

[Servant of the 9]

the minor physical characteristics which make us look different; melanin in the skin, bone structure, hair follicle shape, etc--are all physical, observable characteristics that are immutable. Conversely, there is no gay gene!

Does that mean racially mixed marriages are worse than Gay Marriages?

So9

[little jeremiah]

Homosexual Agenda Ping.

Interesting dicussion. Couple points: There really isn't a 50% failure rate for marriage. And by marriage, I mean of course one man and one woman. Secularists for some reason want to make everyone think that marriage is kaput, finished, on its way out. (Except for "gay" marriage. No rationality here.) The fact is, that of ALL marriages, the latest rates I've seen are the 50% end in divorce. BUT - the secret is, that out of those which end in divorce, a goodly share are - get this - RE-MARRIAGES. IOW, when someone divorces, and then remarries, and then divorces again, this is two divorces and two marriages. But for the same person. Additionally, it's also a fact that divorcees when remarrying divorce again at a higher rate.

So, the point is that out of people who marry for the first time, there is a higher success rate (meaning staying together) than 50%. I don't know exact figures; if anyone does, ping me.

It's also worth noting that every single one of the legal benefits or arrangements that homosexuals supposedly want "marriage" for, can be done without any "marriage". There are attorneys galore, paralegals, do it yourself legal forms and books. All can be done without faux same sex "marriage".

Let me and ItsOurTimeNow know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.

[little jeremiah]

Must be repeated, an EXCELLENT point brought up by our esteemed radioactive marsupial:

The single truth in this debate that no one seems to point out is that marriage, as a social contract, is not between two people, it is between two people and everybody else. All the rights the individual above claims are rights not between the two married individuals, but rights of recogition required by the rest of society. This is why the 'private behavior' argument does not work-- this is demanding the recognition and accomodation, and therefore complicity, of everyone else. Any legislation or judicial edict instituting gay marriage is not to change the behavior of the couple in question, it is to change the behavior of everyone else in society.

[EdReform]

BTTT!

[Agitate]

the minor physical characteristics which make us look different; melanin in the skin, bone structure, hair follicle shape, etc--are all physical, observable characteristics that are immutable. Conversely, there is no gay gene!

Does that mean racially mixed marriages are worse than Gay Marriages?
So9

Not at all, I'm trying to say that they are comparing unchangeable features we are born with to a chosen behavior. Saying banning mixed marriage is like banning gay marriage is not logical because being homosexual is not the same as being black, white, asian, or any combination thereof.

---

	ANTI-Cair -- Little Green Footballs -- JIHAD Watch -- DHIMMI Watch -- internet haganáh -- FaithFreedom -- Answering Islam -- Daniel Pipes -- Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) -- MEMRI TV-Videos
WAKE UP AMERICA

[JesseHousman]

I'm a German and married an Englishwoman.

My oldest daughter married a Filipino.

That is the most ignorant thing I have read this week on this site!

Homosexuals are deviant, perverts!

[Jibaholic]

The worst thing is that unless the country accellerates its rightward drift, it will take twenty or thirty years before a younger and less biased generation of scientists emerge.