Skip to comments.GAY PRO-LIFE LEADERS ARRESTED AT NATIONAL PRO-LIFE MARCH
Posted on 01/23/2002 6:22:00 AM PST by helmsman
click here to read article
Does it surprise you to know that entire civilizations have been unable to see this inherent injustice? People have sacrificed individuals to their gods (which is what abortion is), allowed individuals to die so the social group would be stronger, eaten people for food (although that was often ritual), etc. etc. If you think I am only talking about ancient cultures without the benefit of modern science, I will point to the holocaust, black slavery, (much of which is going on today in sub-Saharan Africa), and the many examples of ethnic clensing that the last century delivered.
In Hinduism there are people who will allow a child to starve to death before touching him because the child is of the untouchable caste. They don't know the logic you are talking about.
The sanctity of human life is a concept that comes from G-d. It is not uniquely Judeo-Christian, because all peoples are descended from Noah and so all have some knowledge of G-d. But not all have acknowledged these concepts and many have found very rational, logical reasons to support their beliefs.
The fact that your logic doesn't agree either means you are of an inherently superior intellect (not impossible but it wouldn't be my first guess) or that your reasoning is influenced by the culture in which you were raised. Or, as it was put to me in my H.S. moral theology class, your viewpoint determines your point of view.
I thought you were a big Constitutionalist. If a law was in place before a president was sworn into office, the president can NOT summarily break laws by not enforcing existing laws, even if he and/or the head of the Justice Department don't agree with those laws.
Besides, you must have it all backward. Pro-choice mouthpieces were on TV yesterday accusing Bush and Ashcroft of doing exactly the opposite: NOT going after people and/or groups which target abortion clinics.
I agree with the decision to ban homosexuals from the march. God Bless Ms. Gray for standing tall and not allowing this blantant misuse of the rally.
This issue is about Abortion, not homosexuality. We need to stop dilluting the marches to the point at hand. Homosexuals that proudly display their immoral behavior are sidetracking the issue. If homosexuals keep their choices behind closed doors then it's a private affair and no one's business. They do not need to use a good honest, moral protest against murder to support their own agenda.
As far as I know, that is incorrect. Nellie Gray organizes the march and decides who will speak. The K of C only provides volunteers for the countless tasks that are involved.
I question the contention that the homosexual group was merely there to assert their Pro-Life views. If that were really the case, why did they find it necessary to carry a banner addressing their sexual proclivities, which in reality are a danger to life in both a physical and moral sense.? I don't think I saw any banners proclaiming, "Heterosexuals for Life".
IMHO, although I will not question their dedication to Pro-Life, I will question there assertion that it was their primary motive for attending the march. If they truly were only concerned with promoting the Pro-Life movement, they would have left the "sexual orientation" banner at home and joined hands with the contingency of all Pro-Lifers assembled.
I think this was a photo op for Plagal and they got the attention they wanted, I.E.: We homosexuals are persecuted even when we adopt honorable causes.
One need only view how the homosexual community attempts to disrupt New York City's annual St. Patrick Day parade. They ain't there because they're all of Irish descent.
Good one. :-)
For what it's worth, I don't think their motives were purely for the protection of unborn babies, either, but not sure if this was the way for Grey to make whatever point she was making.
If they were pro-life first then why is it necessary to march as a gay group? Sure they can organize, arrange transportation, etc through their gay organization - but at the march, blend in. But the fact that they insist on being a gay group, despite a history of being warned, it suggests to me that they have an agenda which is not primarily about pro-life. I don't think that this is an example of intolerant Christian morality - its more like someone putting lessons learned into practice.
And I'm guessing PLAGAL they gave her one.
Well, the holocaust occured in mid 20th century Germany, a Christian culture. The slavery which currently exists in Africa, let's take Sudan for an example, is committed mostly by Muslims. Islam is, of course, a religion that shares a common ancestry to that of Judaism and Christianity, with very similar moral teachings. Christian America, prior to the latter part of the 19th century, condoned and practiced slavery. The Roman Catholic Church conducted a mass extermination of defenseless fellow Christians (including women and children) in the Albigensian Crusade against the Cathars. And, of course, it's abuses in regard to the prosecution of the Inquisition are well known to all.
Christian cultures have been, in many ways, just as barbaric and and inhumane as the pagan cultures that preceded. Now, I am thoroughly glad to see that modern Christians respect life.
What correlation is there between "deeply held pro-life convictions" and the inability to display those convictions without associating them with a homosexual orientation? I pray their Pro-Life convictions are sincere, but based on their behavior and refusal to put aside their "homosexual banner" in order to participate in the march (which was organized to display the deeply held pro-life convictions of all participants) I condend their motives are very suspect.
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.