Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Perverted State Of America
Toogood Reports ^ | 11/25/03 | Allan C. Stover

Posted on 11/25/2003 11:55:26 AM PST by vladog

Think back: How long ago would you have scoffed at the idea of two men getting married? Or the Supreme Court endorsing sodomy? Or "domestic partners" enjoying the same rights and benefits as married couples? Or network television featuring shows with gays and lesbians? Or companies such as Avis announcing, "Domestic partners are automatically included as additional drivers. No extra fees charged. No questions asked." Or even that you would take the term "sexual rights" seriously?

It wasn't that long ago. The forces for perversion have subjected us to a propaganda campaign of such intensity that most Americans have surrendered to the perverting of America without a fight.

Radical "sexual rights" activists have learned how to manipulate American society for their own ends. They know Americans will accept even outrageous social changes if the changes are introduced gradually, and advocates conduct an effective "information and education" campaign.

You've probably read that the newly ordained homosexual Episcopal bishop is named simply Gene Robinson, or perhaps even V. Gene Robinson, one of those people who use an initial followed by a middle name. Few media sources mentioned that his first name is Vicky. That's right, Vicky, a name Baby Names website identifies as exclusively for females, sometimes short for Victoria. Why did they hide that fact? The media are rabidly pro-perversion and didn't want to feminize the homosexual bishop in any way. The same media now publish homosexual "unions" alongside wedding announcements.

Those who want to lull America into accepting every perversion as "normal" – and they include almost everyone in the entertainment industry, the media, and the judiciary – have other tricks they use. For one, they're brainwashing Americans into believing that those who don't approve of the practices are the abnormal ones. Thus the term "homophobe" and "biphobia" (Yes, there really is such a word being used nowadays) and the rules and laws against discrimination based on "sexual orientation."

Those rules and laws first applied to gays and lesbians. In a classic foot-in-the-door campaign, they are being extended to include transgenders, transsexuals, and bisexuals. Can anyone honestly say that those practices are normal? Yet they're dragging Americans toward acceptance of the perversions, and few of us are kicking and screaming on the way.

Well, you might ask, why should we care what they do in the privacy of their bedroom? This isn't about privacy. This is about Americans being forced to endorse (or pretend to endorse) every sexual perversion possible. This is about schools bringing in gays, lesbians, transsexuals, transgenders, and bisexuals to lecture children on "alternative lifestyles." This is about laws being passed to force employers to employ men who dress like women. A convoluted California bill noted, "Gender is defined as the employee's actual sex or the employer's perception of the employee's identity, appearance or behavior, even if these characteristics differ from those traditionally associated with the employee's sex at birth." This is about the greatest reordering of society in history, and few people of prominence are asking whether it's the right path to follow. Once America goes down that path, that part of society's destiny is locked in forever. We can't turn back.

The Internet has spawned hundreds of websites for these practices. In a classic example of activist doublethink, a website for bisexuals says we citizens become "biphobic" by "Automatically assuming romantic couplings of two women are lesbian, or two men are gay, or a man and a woman are heterosexual, " "Assuming that everyone you meet is either heterosexual or homosexual," "Looking at a bisexual person and automatically thinking of their sexuality rather than seeing them as a whole, complete person," and "Believing bisexual men spread AIDS/HIV and other STDs to heterosexuals." Am I missing something here?

A friend who works for a university told me that a male employee took a leave of absence to change his sex. When he/she returned, complete with panty hose and makeup, the issue of bathroom usage came up. The men didn't want him/her in their bathroom, and he/she didn't want to use it either. The women didn't want someone they had known as a man to use their bathroom. In a typical case of official wimping out, the university built him/her an exclusive bathroom.

In 1998, President Bill Clinton issued an Executive Order prohibiting discrimination in federal employment based on "sexual orientation." He's the same president who Colin Powell noted in his biography seemed more interested in forcing gays on the military than in supporting our troops in Somalia. Is America's "first black president" also America's first gay president?

Fast forward to 2003. Fox News quoted President Bush on the eve of Marriage Protection Week: "'Marriage is a union between a man and a woman." He also noted, "Research has shown that, on average, children raised in households headed by married parents fare better than children who grow up in other family structures."

By contrast, the next day, Terry McAuliffe, Chairman of the Democrat National Committee, announced, "On behalf of the DNC, I would like to recognize Saturday, October 11, 2003 as the 16th Annual National Coming Out Day. Coming out as a gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender (GLBT) American is a tremendous act of courage."

He's not the only Democrat politician to pursue the perverted vote. Howard Dean calls himself a "metrosexual," another word I can't find in my dictionary. One on-line definition states that a metrosexual is a straight, urban male who is eager to embrace his feminine side. Great, now we're considering fruity guys for president.

Gay marriages will soon become legal in America, as they now are in Canada and the Netherlands. Is this the end of it all, the final victory for the sexual activists?

Rest assured it isn't. The practitioners of polygamy, polyandry, pedophilia, sadomasochism, incest, necrophilia, and bestiality, among others, will continue to fight for their "sexual rights." America is a long way from the bottom of its moral pit.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: activistcourt; activistjudges; afetishisntgenetic; ageofconsentlaws; bisexuals; culturewar; denialaintariver; gay; homosexual; homosexualagenda; homosexualbishop; homosexuals; lesbian; lgbt; marriagelaws; notaboutprivacy; notconsentingadults; permissivesociety; prisoners; promiscuity; prostitutionlaws; samesexdisorder; samesexmarriage; sex; sexlaws; sexualizingchildren; sodomites; sodomylaws; transexuals; transgendered; transvestites
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

1 posted on 11/25/2003 11:55:29 AM PST by vladog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: vladog
As with abortion, the slippery slope into perversion is being pursued through the courts. This is the #1 reason to re-elect Pres. Bush next year, and to send a large number of newly elected Republican Senators to Washington -- to remake the judiciary.
2 posted on 11/25/2003 11:57:45 AM PST by My2Cents ("Well....there you go again...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladog
read later
3 posted on 11/25/2003 12:04:07 PM PST by LiteKeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladog
Or the Supreme Court endorsing sodomy?

That didn't happen. Credibilty went out the window early.

4 posted on 11/25/2003 12:07:46 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladog
bump
5 posted on 11/25/2003 12:08:40 PM PST by Centurion2000 (Resolve to perform what you ought, perform without fail what you resolve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
The Supreme Court certainly didn't hold up privacy rights when they made their decision. Drugs laws and prostitution laws still hold.

Consenting adults are not permitted to pay for sexual services yet as we are learning with the norming of "age of consent" for homosexuals and heterosexual, we aren't even talking about consenting "adults" (minors aged 16 and 17 are legally consenting to have same sex relations with persons over 18, even younger minors in states that have "Romeo & Juliet" or "Romeo & Romeo" exceptions to statutory rape laws).

6 posted on 11/25/2003 12:26:44 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: My2Cents
A very good idea that won't ever happen.
7 posted on 11/25/2003 12:29:11 PM PST by Old Sarge (Whimper, Cry, Sniff... No steak tonight...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: weegee
They didn't endorse sodomy.
8 posted on 11/25/2003 12:30:40 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vladog; scripter
Bump & Ping
9 posted on 11/25/2003 12:39:06 PM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - Become a Monthly Donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
They said that their decision didn't legitimize any other acts between consenting adults in private (including other sex acts). The only "private" act endorsed by the activist judges WAS sodomy.
10 posted on 11/25/2003 12:43:33 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: vladog
Boy,when put on paper like that to see and think deeper about it...it makes you really disgusted...I hope.

I sure hope we have enough sense to get our Judiciary in that we need to uphold some sanity in this wacked out version we call society.Otherwise the future looks bleak from a morality standpoint for my children and thiers as well.I wonder what my Grandma and Grandpa would be thinking now if they were alive?

11 posted on 11/25/2003 12:44:51 PM PST by oust the louse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children

Ah yes, life is so much better under the Anarchists' model. No gods no masters, eh?

12 posted on 11/25/2003 12:45:09 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: weegee
No one endorsed any activity. And you know it.
13 posted on 11/25/2003 12:48:09 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: vladog
A friend who works for a university told me that a male employee took a leave of absence to change his sex. When he/she returned, complete with panty hose and makeup, the issue of bathroom usage came up. The men didn't want him/her in their bathroom, and he/she didn't want to use it either. The women didn't want someone they had known as a man to use their bathroom. In a typical case of official wimping out, the university built him/her an exclusive bathroom.

That's not all. Transvestites are lumped together with transexuals as members of transgender identity (crisis, the forgotten word).

If that man never had the sex change but simply wore women's clothes he would still be able to argue for use of the bathroom that meets the sexual identity of his chosen fetish. We are born naked, there is no genetic component to wearing clothes of the opposite sex. It is fashion and nothing else.

Extending the argument, he could still argue for use of the women's facilities if all he wore were panties and a bra or pantyhose under his street clothes. He might not even need to wear such clothes if his mental "identity" was that of a female.

14 posted on 11/25/2003 12:49:58 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Ah yes, life is so much better under the Anarchists' model. No gods no masters, eh?

Off topic attack on anyone who disagrees with you is a sure sign of an arrested development.

I guess you want a flame war. Grow up son.

15 posted on 11/25/2003 12:51:05 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Off topic to discuss your tagline? Just points to a side of your argument.

If the framework of civilization (government) is not fit to enforce (moral) law, then no one is. Unfortunately for you, that is not true of the history of this country (even the founding fathers).

16 posted on 11/25/2003 1:02:07 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Ah yes, life is so much better under the Anarchists' model. No gods no masters, eh?

Government may be your god and your master...but not mine. Someone else has that job.
17 posted on 11/25/2003 1:02:38 PM PST by microgood (They will all die......most of them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: microgood
Anarchists don't believe in God or god. No gods no masters.

Government would be a "master" in their worldview.

18 posted on 11/25/2003 1:06:29 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: weegee
Off topic. A personal attack by a twit who can't make a valid point. Grow up son.
19 posted on 11/25/2003 1:08:54 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: vladog
Read later.
20 posted on 11/25/2003 1:12:58 PM PST by EagleMamaMT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Calling me a twit and "son" are personal insults. I kept to the discussion at hand. This is a warning.

Meanwhile, would you care to address the rest of the editorial that you dismissed at the second sentence? You sure did your job of derailing this thread by posting so many times while actually avoiding any discussion of the lead article.

21 posted on 11/25/2003 1:21:18 PM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vladog
bump
22 posted on 11/25/2003 1:59:08 PM PST by WhatNot ( B.I.B.L.E, Basic, Instructions, Before, Leaving, Earth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
The Importance of Morality and Religion in Government

Conservativism and Morality (Cathryn Crawford)

23 posted on 11/25/2003 2:19:09 PM PST by EdReform (Support Free Republic - Become a Monthly Donor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: vladog; EdReform; *Homosexual Agenda; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; ...
Bump and ping. I thought the article was well written. Thanks for posting it.

Homosexual Agenda: Categorical Index of Links (Version 1.1), (Version 1.0)
Homosexual Agenda Index (bump list)
Homosexual Agenda Keyword Search
All FreeRepublic Bump Lists

Would you like to be part of the solution? To stay informed of the issues? A simple freepmail is all it takes to join the homosexual agenda ping list, and you can cancel at anytime.

24 posted on 11/25/2003 3:27:44 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: vladog
You've probably read that the newly ordained homosexual Episcopal bishop is named simply Gene Robinson, or perhaps even V. Gene Robinson, one of those people who use an initial followed by a middle name. Few media sources mentioned that his first name is Vicky. That's right, Vicky, a name Baby Names website identifies as exclusively for females, sometimes short for Victoria. Why did they hide that fact? The media are rabidly pro-perversion and didn't want to feminize the homosexual bishop in any way.

That little known fact is something I don't remember reading before.

25 posted on 11/25/2003 3:41:42 PM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ahadams2
Tangential relevance ping. (First day in almost two weeks I've had the "leisure" to scroll past the first page of postings...)
26 posted on 11/25/2003 5:36:48 PM PST by Eala (Traditional Anglican resource page: ---> http://eala.freeservers.com/anglican <----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Okay, they didn't endorse it. They gave it special protection under the law. The act(s) of sodomy which for many long years was illegal in the US, now is a legally protected act. As decided by five buffoons, for the rest of us.
27 posted on 11/25/2003 5:48:34 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: scripter
I've read it several times on articles here (that his first name is Vicky). I'll try to dredge my memory. But I've read several references in that regard.

Memory kicks in! In the Federalist (www.federalist.com) - they send out an e-newsletter a couple times a week. Very good reading.
28 posted on 11/25/2003 5:52:22 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: viaveritasvita
Testing new software. Sending this post to myself to see if it shows up in my comments (according to my reading of JohnRob's thread about FR changes, it won't show).

<><
29 posted on 11/25/2003 5:56:00 PM PST by viaveritasvita ("When Love takes you in, everything changes.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladog
Sorry-to-clog-up-vladog's-mycomments-section-but-read-later bump.

<><
30 posted on 11/25/2003 5:57:46 PM PST by viaveritasvita ("When Love takes you in, everything changes.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Do you have an argument? Or do you just like to pitch pious sounding crap in support of the gay agenda because it's easier than thinking?

Grow up, boy.

31 posted on 11/25/2003 6:05:22 PM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vladog
The perversion so rampant in America stemms from our Failure of Our Church Leaders to stand up for Jehovah Gira. For fear of offending "Fat Cats" in the Brotherhood they leave the vast majority of this Country totally un-churched. Where are the Billy Grahams, Falwells and the Robertsons? Even James Robison has gone soft; he used to be a firebrand and totally fearless for Jesus Christ now he promotes vitamin supplements and a watered down Gospel like all the others who remain silent. These are the very ones we need to forcefully attack the liberals and Preach A Lot Of Jesus to our leaders but they remain strangely silent. We are forced to fight a rear guard action to demand a change that should be coming from on High!
32 posted on 11/25/2003 7:33:35 PM PST by winker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vladog
OK, I didn't post a comment when I posted the article. Here is the way I feel about. Any sort of homosexual act is wrong and no law or rule from any court can make it right.

Now before someone thinks I'm a frothing at the mouth religious type, I'm not even a Christian or a member of any organized religion. I just know that the perversion that they call homosexual love is wrong and so do the people who are in these relationships, no matter how much they lie about it.
33 posted on 11/25/2003 8:36:15 PM PST by vladog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: weegee
This is a warning.

LOL,,you are demented.

34 posted on 11/25/2003 8:58:40 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
I made a point which none of you taliban homophobes can deny. But some twits like you and the other flame war attemptee forgot it in your obsessive delusions.

I said the court never endorsed sodomy.

I don't support the gay agenda, homosexuality is wrong. And so are you and the taliban youth. Grow up boy.

35 posted on 11/25/2003 10:24:04 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Okay, they didn't endorse it.

Bingo!!! Go to the head of the class! Of course it's not much of a class, but still, YOU got it!

BTW, they didn't give it special protection, they said it was none of your business or the governments either, and in one of the very few cases,,they were correct.

Mind your own business and you will be fine. If someone violates your rights, you have a bitch, until then you are just another busybody hiding behind a government gun.

36 posted on 11/25/2003 10:28:39 PM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Sorry, they DID give it special protection. Sodomy - particularly same sex sodomy - has been illegal practically since time immemorial, and most if not all states had laws against it with rather strong penalties. This kept sodomy in the closet, where it belongs. No one minded, no one thought such laws unconstitutional. But now, because 1-2% of the population (roughly, could be as high as 2.4) want their sexual proclivities to be normalized - nay, glorified - and a larger percent of the sheeple - I mean the people who follow the liberal/leftist secular humanist/marxist style revisionist moral relativist one worlder philosophy - have now decided that sodomy is a guaranteed right under the Constitution. Funny how the actual guys who wrote the document thought it wasn't a protected act.

But now we know better, with a few generations of enlightenment from the ACLU and others of their ilk.
37 posted on 11/25/2003 10:47:46 PM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
Sorry, but no new right was created and no "special" protection granted.

And to cite the length of time a bad law has been on the books as justification for it, is poor thinking taken to an artform. Many bad laws can be cited that meet your criteria.

I mean the people who follow the liberal/leftist secular humanist/marxist style revisionist moral relativist one worlder philosophy

Leave anyone out? LOL. Would all the people who disagree with you fall into that rather broad catagory?

I repeat, your rights are not being violated and therefore it is none of your business.

38 posted on 11/26/2003 6:35:52 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; little jeremiah
I repeat, your rights are not being violated and therefore it is none of your business.

So lets say that little jeremiah decides to murder Protagoras. Since MY rights aren't being violated then I have nothing to say about it. The act is totally legal moral ethical etc because it doesn't violate my rights.

Or you could look at the complete picture. Now Protagoras' family is bereft and looking for revenge and this will cause ripples of effects throughout society as the fued expands. So the murder of Protagoras does affect my rights.

In the same way homosexual behavior affects all of society by increasing health care costs, increasing the presence of disease, increasing child molestations, damaging the family relationship etc. It affects my rights by destroying my country just as much as the murder of Protagoras would. In fact homosexual behavior damages my rights far more that the murder of P would.

39 posted on 11/26/2003 7:26:39 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: John O
So lets say that little jeremiah decides to murder Protagoras. Since MY rights aren't being violated then I have nothing to say about it.

Nice try at a childish play on words.

Consenting adults in this behavior violate no one's rights.

40 posted on 11/26/2003 7:34:54 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: John O
The rest of your post is equally incorrect. The statements represent your opinion, which I reject. And rights aren't based on opinions.
41 posted on 11/26/2003 7:36:50 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
Nice try at a childish play on words.

Did I insult you? why are you trying to insult me?

42 posted on 11/26/2003 9:21:47 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
And rights aren't based on opinions.

You're right. Rights are given to us by our Creator. And His opinion is that homosexual behavior is immoral.

There is no right to commit sodomy no matter how the sodomites try to force it.

43 posted on 11/26/2003 9:23:09 AM PST by John O (God Save America (Please))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: John O
The play on words thing was childish. I never referred to you, only your method.
44 posted on 11/26/2003 9:34:14 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; John O
There is no inherent right to practice sodomy, and throughout the history of Western Civilization, and indeed, other civilizations as well such as the Vedic civilization, as well as the moral absolutes inculcated by Judeo-Christian scriptures, sodomy has always been considered a crime against nature and society. Only in the last couple of generations - or even one generation - has it become venerated as an inalienable right. Sure, some societies have allowed it - the homoerotic Spartans, the SS elite under Nazism, the New Guinea aborigines who also eat their dead grandfathers, but these are not cultures upon whom our Constitution or laws are based.

By rejecting moral absolutes - which are fairly standard in every monotheistic tradition - we are bringing chaos and destruction upon ourselves. Those who like chaos and destruction - and the ensuing totalitarianism - applaud the legalization of sodomy.

Now being defended not only in the bedroom, but in the public bathrooms of universities, parks and beaches, as well as the public streets across our fair land.
45 posted on 11/26/2003 10:09:50 AM PST by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: John O
You're right.

I know.

Rights are given to us by our Creator. And His opinion is that homosexual behavior is immoral.

He also didn't tell you to get a gun and enforce his rules. He doesn't need the violent help of puny immoral people. He will handle sin himself, in this world or the next.

There is no right to commit sodomy no matter how the sodomites try to force it.

You are confusing interactions between humans and human relationships with God. In THIS world, unless someone is violating someone elses rights, other sinning human beings have no LEGITIMATE power to interfere. Unless you violate my rights, your sin is not to be addressed by me violently.

If you believe in a violent theocracy, (and I'm not implying that you do) all bets are off.

46 posted on 11/26/2003 10:10:27 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: little jeremiah
There is an inherent right to do whatever doesn't violate the rights of others. Any other activity is between God and sinners.

If you want to make the case for a theocracy in this country, have at it.

We can talk about other sin and whether it should be violently suppressed if you want.

47 posted on 11/26/2003 10:19:42 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras; little jeremiah; John O
I repeat, your rights are not being violated and therefore it is none of your business.

I disagree. As I see it, just because someones rights aren't violated doesn't mean it's nobody else's business.

First, from where do our rights come from? I believe our rights come from our Creator and as John O said: [Our Creators] opinion is that homosexual behavior is immoral.. Sure, homosexual activists try to twist what the Bible says but in doing so they twist Scripture just as the cults do.

Second, homosexual behavior results in severe health hazards that can affect all of us.

Third, homosexuals, being around 2% (including bisexuals) of the population, account for a third of child molestations. Now that's some of everybody's business. Sources: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Fourth, there is absolutely no evidence homosexuality is genetic. In fact the major factor in determining homosexuality is environment. The fact that thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle supports the environmental factor.

Fifth, homosexuals can change.

So why do we even tolerate homosexualty, let alone accept it? Homosexuals should be encouraged to leave the lifestyle, not continue the destructive lifestyle that it is. And those who truly care for homosexuals will do just that.

48 posted on 11/26/2003 10:23:18 AM PST by scripter (Thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Protagoras
In THIS world, unless someone is violating someone elses rights, other sinning human beings have no LEGITIMATE power to interfere. Unless you violate my rights, your sin is not to be addressed by me violently.

Then why weren't prostitution and at home drug cultivation/use legallized with the sodomy decision?

49 posted on 11/26/2003 10:23:45 AM PST by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: weegee
One problem at a time.
50 posted on 11/26/2003 10:28:30 AM PST by Protagoras (Putting government in charge of morality is like putting pedophiles in charge of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-91 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson