Posted on 04/30/2013 12:24:02 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Amen Brother , you got that right.
......”and the solid family units which exist to protect it.”.....
Where are they? The family unit today is all but fractured for the most part. Devoted families are in the minority...and they are on shaky ground.
“I have noticed it many times, women get along great with fags.”
Yeah. I hadn’t thought of this in decades. But he seemed non-sexual and my conclusion was that women felt safe; so safe that they could be aggressive. And, after all, if he’s gay it’s not like he’s going to try to be my boy friend! Whatever it was, he had it down to a 95% foolproof routine.
The "logic" I hear from liberals these days goes something like this:
"Social Science is a real science, just like biology. Social Science proves that genes don't determine gender. The person's "identity" is what determines gender."
Naturally, these same people complain that Republicans don't believe in science because they don't go for "global warming" theories.
I absolutely dread what’s in our future.
“Where are they? The family unit today is all but fractured for the most part. Devoted families are in the minority...and they are on shaky ground.”
I agree this is why marriage today dead among most of our population. But we can and must bring it back, and to do that we will have to ‘reinvent’(reintroduce) it, perhaps under a different name (free from the corruption attributed to the old now defunct one).
A new practical understanding of this union will have to be established in firm association with its name, and as famly members & elders we shall shift our support and recognition to this meaningful union in place of the currently meaningless one.
Let’s just rename it with a snazzy new name and the libs will buy it. Lifelong sacred hookup?
The gay and trans population is tiny. The fact that so much time is spent talking about them and their problems is amazing to me.
On the issue of Jason Collins, gay basketball player. The point about locker rooms was brought up today by Geraldo on his radio show. His guest, a gay sports announcer, said that although he was sexually attracted to males when he went into the locker rooms he was in “professional mode” and he never did so much as take a peek. While this may be true I think that he missed the point of Geraldo’s question which was basically: if a gay man can go into a male locker room than why can’t a straight man go into a female one? He had no answer to the question.
Here’s my solution: facilities should have a third bathroom for gay men, gay women and gay or straight transgenders. It makes perfect sense. The gay guys will NOT be looking at the lesbians. The lesbians will likewise NOT be looking at the gay men. The transgenders, who are by definition “in between” genders should share facilities with gays and lesbians because the are in transition. Straight men and women are not in transition, they have already settled on their sexual orientation and their gender. Therefore it is unfair to them to group them with individuals who are not “settled” because they will not know the true orientation of the trans person based upon physical attributes or professed preference in regards to orientation.
This arrangement would put the issue to bed. But, something tells me that it might not go over with some on the gay-trans side of the equation. But why?
The problem is that traditional groupings of men and women are based upon normal physical endowments and sexual preferences. The reason that a bunch of guys can be naked around each other is because they do NOT desire males sexually. Vice versa for the women. When you start to define sexuality on alternates to this basic, natural arrangement you inevitably open a can of worms.
Think about it this way. It is unfair to straight males to have gay males using the same locker rooms. But at the same time putting all gay males into a separate room is the same as putting straight males and straight females into a shared room, based upon the sexual attraction. Ditto for lesbians. So you have a problem as to where to put them. This is why my idea for Homo-Trans bathrooms makes sense because the presence of the opposite GENDER combined with the opposite ORIENTATION would basically cancel everything out with the Trans individuals bridging the gap between the two diametrically opposed camps.
The best way to get out in front of this issue would be to start a campaign by hetero people to force facilities to create these 3rd type bathrooms/locker rooms. They would not have to be as large as hetero rooms because as a percentage of the population gay/trans individuals represent a small proportion... maybe 5% total. The average man or woman on the street would find it hard to argue AGAINST having separate rooms based upon existing gender and orientation differentiations: i.e. Men and Women bathrooms and locker rooms. For instance “we already divide genders and orientations” so why would you be against further divisions that seek to address additional differences which everybody accepts as being real and legitimate... the fact that gay/trans people exist.
I think this approach solves a real problem for the hetero community and also makes a salient political point at the same time.
“Let’s just rename it with a snazzy new name and the libs will buy it.”
I’m not interested in the lib’s buying it. I fact I would very much prefer if we could find a way to keep them disinterested in this union.
The last thing we want is them working to redefining(and thus destroying) this marriage just like the last one.
” Lifelong sacred hookup?”
Somehow the word ‘hookup’ does not convey the practical propose as NOT being sex but raising children.
Morn the death of the word & union of marriage but also look toward this death as an opperunity for a rebirth of a true and faithful marriage among those both willing and needing.
Lets face it marriage has been dying for 50 years, and even as it was 5 years ago it was not real marriage so much as meaningless social statement trying on the trappings of a meaningful & ascent institution which no longer exists among most of our population.
Let us recognize what is(as not being marriage as it needs to be), and re-invite(reintroduce) what was and what is needed.
You’re not irrationally fearful of all those things you mentioned. In fact, you are rationally against them.
I fear what these idiots are doing to our country.
Yes. But that is not an irrational fear. That fear is real, and justified.
RE: Here’s my solution: facilities should have a third bathroom for gay men, gay women and gay or straight transgenders. It makes perfect sense. The gay guys will NOT be looking at the lesbians. The lesbians will likewise NOT be looking at the gay men.
Can I pretend to be gay so that I can go to the women’s lockers and ogle at them? I promise to be in “professional mode”. :)
It’ll probably evolve to unisex facilities with water closets only in individual enclosures. The old fashioned urinal will go by the boards.
The current and tide is against that....
People will continue to Marry, no doubt, but the family unit will not get better IMO.
Kids today are “connected” via twitter, etc. but they are not having ‘relationships’. There is a difference.
So no, I cannot see the family unit , as we have known it, coming back.
They are not idiots. They know exactly what they’re doing. And they are winning.
They are idiots if they think they want to live in a communist state.
“Democracy is the theory that common people can vote for what they want and deserve to get it. Good and hard.” H L Mencken.
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.