Posted on 10/08/2007 7:59:28 AM PDT by SmithL
I was expecting a typical BS homosexuals with “children” trying to look normal.
That's what they claim they want now. After normalizing this behavior they will proceed to opening other parts of the anatomy.
BTW where did you see the image?
the newspaper link does not have the ad.
BTW where did you see the image?
the newspaper link does not have the ad.
The article says they want to start 500000 conversations. It will be the same as other places, 500000 conversations about the fact homosexual behavior is abnormal and should not be endorsed.
When will they get it through their thick heads that homosexuality has absolutely nothing to do with hearts and minds? I wish someone had the temerity to put together a public service announcement detailing the risks and dangers associated with homosexuality and the other perversions that have now been included with the movement.
At the most basic level homosexuality is just functionally incorrect as is the idea of homosexual marriage. It is a confusion of otherwise normal drives for friendship and partnership with the fulfillment of a sexual fetish. I do not really care about that so much, people do things that are incorrect all the time. I draw the line when they are working to change laws to reflect their sexual peculiarities and force not just acceptance but push forth the false idea that same sex marriage is no different than normal marriage.
It is indeed different.
Everyone knows what it means to have a normal sexual relationship though it is popular now to pretend otherwise.
They ask “What is normal” and then because they refuse to answer the question assume others are as challenged as they.
They can pretend but an anus will never be a sex organ and long after many of these are wearing colostomy bags collecting sympathy cards and quilts it still will not be.
They use the hearts and minds crap to derail the brain in favor of a trip down a land of delusion. They should just have their partnerships quietly and leave the rest of the world alone and we most certainly would leave them alone provided they stop exposing themselves in public restrooms and having sex in public parks and such. We do not have to indulge them and their political ideas in order to be open minded with big hearts. I don’t see any need for changing things as they are and most certainly don’t want to do anything to make homosexuality and its ugly partners bisexuality and transexuality more visible in society.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
I don't believe gov't regulation of marriage itself has led us to this point. The lowering of social mores has created this mess. But gov't interference with everything else - such as education, adoption, health insurance - has added to it.
The main reason that changing the legal definition of marriage affects the rest of us is that it affects everything else: Our children are forced to learn about it in public school. Even if we don't send our kids to public school, we're forced to pay taxes for it. And then "same-sex couples" can adopt children - maybe even our own children if something happens to us. Insurance companies have to insure them as a married couple. Etc. Etc.
Because gov't is involved in everything, changing the legal definition of marriage affects everything.
And, although I may be flamed for saying it, the creeping incrementalism comes not only in the lowering of social mores, but in the use of sperm banks and surrogate mothers. I feel sympathy for any couple unable to bear children together. But, once it became acceptable for a married man and woman to go outside the marriage and essentially bring in a third party to have a child, and then put only their names on the birth certificate, the role of birth parent was reduced to lab rat. Marriage became nothing more than two people wanting to be together. And now here we are with two women or two men equating themselves with men and women who cannot bear children together, using the same technologies to have children, and putting their own names on the birth certificates.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Who are these “proponents” and why are they in the shadows?
Why doesn’t the Sacremento Bee say who the “proponents” are?
Follow the Money.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Very stuck on stupid, but I think its gonna change. I was actually talking to some people on the hill last weekend and for once they actually are coming up with a plan.
The ad is trying to appeal to the emotions of women. What woman wants to be humiliated while walking down the aisle? They portray a situaion where many women might say; “I don’t wish that upon anyone, even the poor little queers. Let’s let them get married so they are no longer humiliated.”
I would almost agree that civil unions would be the answer ... or having government get out of the marriage business entirely.
Except for one thing: forcing priests/ministers and organized religion to marry them is the next logical step on the campaign.
Why should there be civil unions? They’re just marriages without the name. Why should society in any way ratify same-sex pairings?
You’re exactly right.
It’s not about ‘marriage’ in the legal or religious sense. It’s about thought/mind control.
“to change the climate here,” said Geoff Kors, executive director of Equality California, which is coordinating the campaign.”
Guess they did not get the good word from ALGORE that climate change is bad.
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.