Skip to comments.Why conservatives are abandoning the 'gay' issue
Posted on 08/17/2010 1:50:23 PM PDT by Maelstorm
"Do you not know that your body is the temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you, whom you have from God, and you are not your own?" 1 Corinthians 6:19 NKJV
Sex is sacred.
For millennia, this biblical principle was the bedrock moral value of the Western World.
The mysterious portal through which human beings enter this world, sex was to be reserved exclusively for a man and a woman joined permanently by marriage vows, and all other forms and circumstances of sexual expression were forbidden locked away, as it were, in a sort of Pandoras Box, heavily guarded by the sentinels of Judeo-Christian Civilization. Confining sex to marriage was universally seen as essential to strong marital unions and secure families, and thus to the very fabric of civilization itself.
However, this strict but divinely inspired and life-protecting moral code after enabling century after century of dazzling societal evolution in the Western world has unraveled in our own lifetimes.
The change first emerged into stark public view during the 1960s under the banner of "sexual liberation" and "gay liberation." While the public was distracted by colorful spectacles of youthful rebellion, psychedelic drug use and the rock "invasion," just below the surface a full-bore assault on Western institutions and values particularly traditional sexual morality was taking place.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Liberals don’t believe anything is wrong. A society with that attitude will not survive.
If you believe the Bible is the word of God then you cannot be a gay rights supporter. The problem here is that many mainstream churche$$$$ not only condone same sex marriage but also allow their clergy to be gay.
This conservative is ‘picking his battles’ and sees far more destructive things going on at the hands of Obama and the Democrat majorities in the House and Senate.
Homosexuality is way down on the list of things I’m concerned about at this point. People are going to be attracted to whomever they’re attracted to. Not much you can do to stop that.
I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, but I’m devoting most of my energy towards driving the leftists and radicals out of the government, repealing Obamacare, stopping Cap & Trade and preserving what’s left of the country I grew up in.
You can only fight so many things at any one time...
The question is how much the government should be used to enforce moral codes.
Way too many conservatives started excusing people who had sex outside of marriage, which is just as much a sin as homosexual sex. Once you start excusing any sin, all sin is not far behind.
But that’s because too many conservatives found divorce or sexual dalliances to be convenient or desirable, and didn’t want their own actions to be considered immoral.
Who do you think it was that calibrated Obama's moral compass?Don't get caught in the trap of confusing Liberty with the fatal liberalism that substitutes the Truth with Lies - as so many have, even here on FR.Read Romans 1:25+ and pay attention to the order of precedence. What prompted the Roman's historical observation there?
Not high on your list - when Proliferation of sexual perversion was a precursor to the rise of National Socialism in Nazi Germany?
Why not? The more attention you give them, the more they want.
Pleased to meet you, you just found one. I cannot imagine caring less who my neighbor sleeps with so long as he or she obeys the law. I don't have a position I care much about on the subject of gay marriage but feel that serial divorcers probably do as much damage to the institution of marriage as gay marriage would. I also would never condone any forcible acceptance of lifestyles beyond the obvious admonishment that only those without sin should be first in line at the stone pile.
Socialist are a far bigger threat to our way of life than are Log Cabin Republicans, IMHO.
The thing is, you need a strong power base to accomplish your current goals. The power base in the American family - which will disappear with gay marriage.
Preserving traditional families first is your only chance to succeed.
If were truly set in your own mind and spirit on picking your battles in a way that excludes this issue you would not have even bothered reading this thread. The headline alone would have indicated it’s not something meaningful to you.
The fact that still are interested in this particular battle is indicated by your response. And that you responded rather than read and not respond means you have more than a residue of curiosity about the issue. The fact that you posted to warn off others must be read as really a note to yourself.
You yourself are not fortified in your opinion.
I’m just letting you see what you yourself are thinking. Thank me later.
You mean the progressive RINO crowd that pretended to be "fiscally" conservative, and obviously wasn't?The perverted jack wagons who helped systemically corrupt this nation's moral character - and imploded our financial infrastructure in the process......those Log Cabin RINOs?
Your expressed attitude is a libertarian smokescreen for those who are apathetic about homo-fascism, at best, or wholly endorse it, at worse. Press such people for the crux of the issue, and they will invariably come forward with some nonsense such that they believe in "civil unions" that give the same benefits as marriage, essentially "marriage" by another name.
You can fight many things at once, if with nothing other than your verbal protest. We must name the sin, even from the heart of the beast. But libertarians/CINO's (conservatives in name only) won't do even this, which belies their true leanings. Your refusal to fight even one facet of radical leftism invalidates your other conservative efforts to some degree.
So do you support Prop 8 or do you support the arbitrary ruling of a judge disregarding the will of the people? You don’t support hate crimes legislation? You don’t believe military personnel should be punished and schools forced to teach homosexual activist positions? This isn’t about serial divorcees but on a side note homosexuals where they are allowed marriage have a far greater rate of divorce. It isn’t even about whether you believe gays should be allowed to be “married” they can do that without legal standing already. It is about forcing through Judicial fiat and misleading activist rhetoric communities to license a thing called homosexual “marriage” which runs counter to reason.
The same methods that are use to produce socialism are used to norm homosexuality. The lies, the pseudoscience, the inaccurate picture of human sexuality. I assure you that once one believes that homosexuality is normal and acceptable they will believe and accept almost anything.
Also socialism is fed by false problems, suddenly we need to create complex programs to “protect” homosexuals and “questioning” youth. Suddenly we have to make special arrangements to appease every demand of the Homosexual activist who has suffered not a tenth of the abuse that was heaped on Ethnic and racial groups.
Gay activism and the mindset of sexual political activism in general has led to much of the mess we see our selves in.
It would do you well to spend some time researching the issue instead of parroting cowardly liberal viewpoints.
I haven't read the thread. I read the article. I expected to be attacked by nitwits like you who presume to know everything about me and what my thoughts are, based upon a stated personal opinion. And, for your information, my opinion is just as valid as anyone else's.
"The headline alone would have indicated its not something meaningful to you."
The headline, alone, is exactly why I expressed my opinion. Because Beck, Limbaugh and others don't turn red in the face and jump up and down over gay marriage means they've abandoned conservative and Christian principles and are on their way to Hell? I don't know what their reasons are for not being in full-attack mode over this, and I don't care. I expressed my opinion, and you can talk all day about what I'm thinking and what my comment means. You know what? You haven't the faintest idea, because you ain't in my head. You just like to hear yourself talk.
"The fact that still are interested in this particular battle is indicated by your response. And that you responded rather than read and not respond means you have more than a residue of curiosity about the issue."
Oh -- that makes a lot of sense. I'm curious about how up can look like down when I bend my head and look to the sky and consider that gravity is holding my feet to the ground. I'm interested in a lot of things, and I read to learn. It doesn't mean that I believe or agree with everything I read.
"The fact that you posted to warn off others must be read as really a note to yourself."
Boy, you're just filled with "facts", aren't you? I posted to express my opinion, and don't particularly care if you or anybody else agrees with it. Warn others off? Get a grip.
"You yourself are not fortified in your opinion."
Another impressive, yet empty, profundity. Just exactly what the hell is that supposed to mean? (He asked, rhetorically, because he has no intention of wasting time poring over any additional twaddle you want to throw out on the subject.)
"Im just letting you see what you yourself are thinking."
Wanna buy a few commas? You really should use one on occasion. In the meantime, I'm happy to finally know what I'm thinking. My initial thought was to say "Gee, thanks". But you told me not to...
"Thank me later."
Don't hold your breath.
To anyone else reading this: I expected to be attacked for having the temerity to express an opinion that's contrary to all of you who think you know God better than I do, and I made a promise to myself that I wouldn't waste my energy reading and debating the 'true meaning' of what I've written. This one got to me, though and I've broken that promise. But this is the only response that I'll be tendering.
I shall neither read nor write another word in this thread. So enjoy yourselves and hack away. Waste your own time and impress those who read to the end that you "really told that guy off"! You know that old expression -- "Never argue with a pig; it just frustrates you and annoys the pig."?? Bingo.
I am, indeed, "fortified" in my opinion, and am not about to be swayed by self-righteous idiots who purport to know my thoughts better than I do. You don't agree with me? Fine. We don't agree.
Heh. “Penetrated.” Heh heh.
Okay, now that I've got that out of my system,
I found this to be somewhat convicting. I'd started drifting toward a libertarian view on this, thinking, “I can't force my religion on them, or they can force theirs on me.” And it does appear that that is exactly what they are trying to do; in actuality, they are trying to violate my right to disagree with them—the author makes a beautiful Orwellian metaphor, calling this “thoughtcrime.”
He's right. It's oil and water. The two freedoms (to same sex marriage or religion) are mutually exclusive. May God deliver us.
I am not you.
“Liberals dont believe anything is wrong”
Unfortunately, extreme libertarians don’t necessarily either. They go with “as long as it is between two consenting adults.” That is why I call hardcore libertarians “libertines”
Remember: Politics-not science-decided that homosexuals are ‘normal’
Unless you'd like to argue the opposite.
First, you would be well advised not to insinuate a connection between me and cowardice.
Second, get someone to read to you my earlier response slowly, explaining the big words, wherein I stated I had no strong feelings about gay marriage, a position I am entitled to.
If you need to create a strawman to argue with be sure to leave me uninvolved.
“preserving what’s left of the country I grew up in.”
In large part because of the success of the sodomite agenda the same country I grew up in too is nearly unrecognizable. Its as deadly to the moral and social health of a nation,if not more so than big government.
Desensitized much?Was this instinctive defect rendered at birth or as a result of politically correct association and indoctrination?Do you similarly lack the instinctive revulsion which protects normal humans from eating rotten food because it tastes and smells bad?
LOL. Or what?
Perhaps there is something about homosexuality that resonates so strongly with you that you feel compelled to publicly shout the loudest in condemning it. Not that that makes you a bad person...
The natural revulsion I feel is for those tiny little nazis who see themselves as somhow chosen to regulate life for others. They are very brave behind the keyboard, when their mommy let's them use it.
Gee, homosexuality has only been taboo in every long lasting social culture in history, maybe that “resonates” for some strange reason?
The behavior is immoral. Like murder, kidnapping, rape. And yes there have been times and places where each one of those vices were legally practiced by free people. Ever hear of that word, “vice”, kinda rare in your neck of the woods I’d think — a helpful concept though — it means something that’s bad to do and yet can become a habit for some.
The ancient wisdom of making homosexuality taboo has many solid reasons. To be honest you’ve probably read or heard many or most of them,. But, grasshopper, the power of the dark side is very strong. It’s easy to find some perfectly “logical” reason why all of human history and moral code development is wrong and your chosen vice is just the thing for you.
Legalizing homosexuality is incredibly destructive to a society. It is suicide.
“There are many other examples, even among top conservatives. It seems most, if not all, are falling away from this jugular issue for the same reason: They’re afraid”
Give me a break. This makes no sense at all. Ann Coulter is afraid of homosexuals? Why the heck is she voluntarily going to speak at their conference? No one would have persecuted her if she had been conveniently busy with something else that evening. Fear doesn’t guide Ann’s speaking or writing. No, this is something else, entirely.
I’m not talking about Ann being afraid but I do believe Rush, Beck, and many others are or more so they don’t want to deal with it. I think what I find the most offensive is that so many conservative voices use the word “homophobia” alongside racism and omit anti-antisemitism. Also these conservative voices totally ignore stories on campus intimidation and blacklisting of individuals who will not tow the Homosexual line. CNN, ABC, CBS, and MSNBC run stories like Mathew Sheppard but when it comes to the antithesis cases the conservative media is silent. It is as if there is an unspoken rule that you can’t report on homosexuals unless it is positive or something detached like George Michael getting busted again for picking up dates in public restrooms.
I disagree. The battle is one and the same and it doesn’t mean that you have to devote all your energy to it. As for people being attracted to whomever they are well that isn’t the point. The point is dealing with the issue in a way that does not encourage homosexuality or sexual liberalism. People are attracted to many things, rubber coats, shoes, animals, etc. Homosexuality is the one place where what is just propaganda, pseudo science, and lies can be used to get people fired for not agreeing, get students kicked out of graduate programs for disagreeing. Doesn’t that bother you? I’m not asking for any conservative voice to go 24/7 anti-gay but at least show that you are brave enough to occasionally report the news that isn’t favorable to the hateful radicals. Occasionally have on the opposing view of scientists and professionals who do not agree.
Instead we get countless responses like this which tells me that maybe you really want homosexuality to be normed and you really want the view of homosexual radicals to be pushed down everyone’s throat or else. Are you going to be silent when soldiers get reprimanded and kicked out the military for not wanting to submit to the gay activist propaganda? I’m sure you will be silent as will Rush, as will the mainstream media. You’ll leave it up to worldnetdaily and cnsnews not wanting to give it more credibility. Right now much of the conservative media is ignoring what is happening on campuses with students being kicked out of programs for simply not being willing to tow the pro-gay line.
According to my opinion, and the opinions of many defectors of my caliber, only about 15% of time, money, and manpower is spent on espionage as such. The other 85% is a slow process which we call either ideological subversion, active measures, or psychological warfare. What it basically means is: to change the perception of reality of every American that despite of the abundance of information no one is able to come to sensible conclusions in the interest of defending themselves, their families, their community, and their country.
It's a great brainwashing process which goes very slow and is divided into four basic stages.
The first stage being "demoralization"....---KGB Defector Yuri Bezmenov, circa 1984
you sound like an expert on idiots. You no doubt developed your expertise at family reunions.
Sounds like leftist speak to me... There are centuries of historical precedence regarding what works and what society values (laws) versus this novel homosexual experiment imposed by the elitists on the yellow brick road...
Go right ahead and celebrate society being forced to value and give privilege to two men exploring each others colons in a 'committed' & 'loving' relationship premised upon a sexual disorder.
I will continue with my "bad thinking" while you choose irrelevance --thank you very much
I am with you as are a super majority of Americans outside of the media, Washington DC, Hollywood, and areas of Urban blight.
Note: My referenced response was not specific to any posting here -it was meant in general to ALL supposed conservatives that are ‘afraid’ to oppose the homosexual agenda...
Truth eventually always wins..
I think it will. This is an issue I wish I didn’t have to worry about and I understand how others don’t like having to deal with it either but that is what the left counts on that is how they have succeeded in pushing their agenda of sexual liberalism so far against the grain. They know if they can get us to shut up or be shamed into silence they win. They don’t want a debate because it hurts them every time.
Seek professional help, child. Your fascination with homosexuality is an issue you can be helped to come to terms with. It’s okay if you like gladiator movies and show tunes.
"The result? The result you can see...."
--KGB Defector Yuri Bezmenov
Nice personal attack -Saul Alinsky would be proud & the homosexual agenda perverts would cheer (you know, that enemy of my enemy thing)...
You apparently have no valid argument that supports your position which is?
You have accurately diagnosed the problem. This is why we are swimming upstream when even churches are telling gullible parishoners that homosexuality is a good thing, we're expecting political solutions from a spiritual problem.
First, clean up the churches.
These are the "churches" that are the most likely to promote homosexuality and virtuous. This is the list of the National Council of Churches which is an extremely liberal group.
African Methodist Episcopal Church
The African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church
Alliance of Baptists
American Baptist Churches in the USA
Diocese of the Armenian Church of America
Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
Christian Methodist Episcopal Church
Church of the Brethren
The Coptic Orthodox Church in North America
The Episcopal Church
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
Friends United Meeting
Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America
Hungarian Reformed Church in America
International Council of Community Churches
Korean Presbyterian Church in America
Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
Mar Thoma Church
Moravian Church in America Northern Province and Southern Province
National Baptist Convention of America
National Baptist Convention, U.S.A., Inc.
National Missionary Baptist Convention of America
Orthodox Church in America
Patriarchal Parishes of the Russian Orthodox Church in the USA
Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends
Polish National Catholic Church of America
Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.)
Progressive National Baptist Convention, Inc.
Reformed Church in America
Serbian Orthodox Church in the U.S.A. and Canada
The Swedenborgian Church
Syrian Orthodox Church of Antioch
Ukrainian Orthodox Church of America
United Church of Christ
The United Methodist Church
My position is that the free, lawful choice of adults is none of my business. If that’s hard for you to grasp, there’s not much more to discuss. Lawful freedom is for everyone, not just the folks who please you.
Nice platitudes -meaningless BUT they sound nice -just like social justice sounds nice, economic justice too -whoopee!
The rubber hits the road though when you must define such things like "change you can believe in" or "lawful freedom" or even "lawful choice"... DEVOID of legitimate authority law is meaningless...
I do not grasp the ethereal and vague wisps you suggest graspable...
We specifically talk about homosexual sex here and this sex being a premise for marriage. I talk specifics you talk vague -can you feel this distinction -grasp it?
Homosexual sex may be legal -so what? Legality does not imply it a legitimate premise for a supposed societal value of homosexual marriage no more than the legality of group sex or swinging are legitimate premise for a supposed societal value of group or swinging marriages...
If homosexual couplings were of high value to society -were worthy of recognition and privilege THEN where have these great couplings been hiding?
Why do we not see these highly cherished and much sought after loving committed homosexual couplings until now? Why does society reject that which is so good? Why must this good thing be IMPOSED upon society much like the good of health care reform or any number of other leftist "goods" that society is FORCED to buy.
Legal? Sounds nice... Based upon what authority? --Ah... there's the rub...
We had a revolution against not only a country but the laws as well. The revolution was illegal under the law of man and it was only legitimate under the law and greater authority of God.
The same premise that authored legitimate revolution as well deemed legitimate the authority to establish a government upon and concurrently establish the supreme law of the land under. A nation under God -a government under God -laws under God... Do you see a theme?
Mix that into your platitudes and see what is what. Contrast your concept of legal with the one I suggest and ask yourself which one would have, for instance, been a barrier to the many 'lawful' atrocities committed by Communists, Socialists, and Nazis?
Learn to understand these specific facts.
The free, legal actions of other adults are not yours to control.
You are free to comment on them; you are not free to control them.
They do not have to have value or legitimacy in your eyes; no one needs to meet your expectations or your approval.
The truth is that the world doesn't give a rats a$$ what you think or say.
Least of all me.
Specific enough for you?
NO. You stated nothing specific to the issue of homosexual marriage. I see many words that at best imply your support of the legal freedom of two adults to engage in homosexual sex... I do not dispute this legal factoid that at best in this discussion is a red herring...
Setting aside the red herring, as well setting aside my obvious opposition to the claim that homosexual sex is beneficial and your at best acquiescence or at worst support --We discuss here "homosexual marriage" specifically -at least I do.
As such, THE REAL QUESTION IS: Why should I, or for that matter society, grant value, privilege, benefit, and subsidy to homosexual sex premised couplings?
I oppose the homosexual agenda and this absurd experiment being imposed upon society. Cloaking the absurd in the supposed cherished 'freedom of orifice diversity' which is all about disordered sex does nothing to legitize the illegitimate -that which society places no value in...
"Orifice diversity" is about as sound and legitimate premise for imposing value upon something that society regards as bankrupt...
We see in this case the government used as a tool by the morally devoid leftist elites to impose their values upon society... We see this and we as well see their useful idiots rallying to support them.
One question to ask is -are you one of the useful idiots?
I know I am not...
It's been my experience in over 60 years of life that the folks most interested in controlling the lives and choices of others are those least able to control themselves.
I think you are rapidly revealing yourself as a useless idiot. Is this finally specific enough for you or did the head injury take all your ability to reason?
It would appear you do not care about the issue, you have no opinion on the issue and you state this non position repeatedly...
It would probably take far less effort on your part to take no position and show no care by simply not posting on this subject.
Generally speaking, these homosexual agenda topics posted on FR are posted for the purpose of information and update premised upon furthering discussion and debate regarding how best to oppose the homosexual agenda.
If you simply wish to attempt to ridicule those who oppose the homosexual agenda then it is YOU who have a problem...
Take a hike wimp...
You can have the last word on this topic. Little tiny brainless children enjoy that.
You can only fight so many things at any one time..."
Roger that. Keep your eye on the big prize. All the the other stuff will take care of itself.
You can have the last word on this topic. Little tiny brainless children enjoy that.
Thank you so much for your continued persistent irrelevance...
I will continue as I see fit on this subject you have no opinion on...
conservatives are NOT abandoning the issue.
it is Republicans with too many homosexual staffers controlling them. Congress critters are those with too many DC poofy staffers who direct the message.
It is like expecting shep smith to report a postive pro-marriage amendment story.
As for commentators, it is clear they are in NYC news areas where the behind the sceense types; studio employees, reporters etc. are just more of the same.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.