[Yosemitest]

The Washington Post; NOT FIT FOR ANYONE TO READ !

[Yosemitest]

TO TOLERATE HOMOSEXUALS IS EVIL.
This is what we get when we FAIL to OBEY God.
For it is written:

“ For whosoever shall commit ANY of these abominations,
even the SOULS that commit them
SHALL BE CUT OFF from among their people. ”

Those who support homosexuals are against our Heavenly Father and His Son Jesus Christ.
These anti Christ people only bring destruction on us ALL.
I have NO sympathy for homosexuals!

Homosexuality is a "Mark" of disobedience.

It was given by our Heavenly Father to test us
to see ... if we will OBEY our Heavenly Father,
and abide by His commandments, statues, and ordinances.

Someone once asked

"Why are they [homosexuals] all so angry?"

The answer is in the definition of "REPROBATE".

rep·ro·bate \ˈre-prə-ˌbāt\ a. [L. reprobatus, reprobo, to disallow; re and probo, to prove.]

1. Not enduring proof or trial; not of standard purity or fineness; disallowed; rejected.


Reprobate silver shall men call them, because the Lord hath rejected them. Jer. 6.




2. Abandoned in sin; lost to virtue or grace.

They profess that they know God, but in works deny him, being abominable and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate. Titus 1.

3. Abandoned to error, or in apostasy. 2Tim. 3.

And the reason"why" is given in the Bible.

God has a cure for homosexuals.

But will we OBEY our Heavenly Father?

"Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect
that God is just,
that his justice cannot sleep forever."

[MortMan]

Our modern view of marriage — one that has generally predominated in Western societies over the past 200 years — is the outlier. Historically, marriage has been about finding good in-laws and securing economic advantage. And marrying for love is a thoroughly modern invention ...

But it has always been between a man and a woman.

The article is claptrap.

[2banana]

I guess all those Greek plays were made up.

The same for Anthony and Cleopatra!

Economics and family connections have always played a role in marriage.

And it still does to this day.

Romeo and Juliet would be a boring without the passion...

[MeshugeMikey]

well yes there always have been scattered PERVERTS....who dont follow the NORM....

a ROMAN? gee what a surprise that is huh?

[Captain Peter Blood]

The other thing that is true is that Government involvement in marriage is a rather recent event also in the last 150 to 200 years.

[DungeonMaster]

Conservatives say marriage has always been between a man and a woman. They’re wrong.

Christians say God intended marriage to be between a man and a woman.

[DoughtyOne]

Lucifer’s long-time mouth-piece reaches a new low in it’s quest for societal degeneration.

[Pollster1]

Emperor Nero married his boy slave Sporus and treated him like a woman . . . Similarly, some West African societies have allowed women to have “female husbands” . . . And some Native American societies made a sharp distinction between “woman’s work” and “man’s work,” allowing same-sex marriages where two gender roles were represented.

Interesting choice of the best examples to support his position: An emperor considered insane whose marriage was not generally recognized by his people, a West African tribe that has contributed nothing to the world or to history, and rare relationships in obscure North American tribes that also contributed nothing to the world. It's almost like productivity and gay "marriage" are incompatible in any society.

[maxwellsmart_agent]

It’s not wrong. Through all recorded history, marriage has been between a man and a woman, a contract that provides stability for the purpose of raising a family. That’s a fact!

Recorded history goes back more that 5,000 years. That is how long we have been civilized. Today, these clowns want us to revert to a period before that when people had no religion and no organized society to ascribe to. They want homosexuals to be normalized. They want the killing of babies to be accepted as normal. They seem to want all morality abolished and are working towards that end.

It seems with them as technology progresses, morality recedes. Not going to work well. People are acceding to their wishes some, but they will ultimately wake up.

[ReaganGeneration2]

Fails entirely to prove his point. No evidence. No historical record. No logic.

But reason or history, or law or states’ rights or Christian virtue for that matter, is not what this is all about anyway.

[IronJack]

There may have been myriad reasons in history for a man and a woman to marry, love being just one of many. But the institution of marriage — between a man and a woman — has not changed. No successful civilization has encouraged the sexual congress of same-sex couples, let alone elevated that perversion to the status of marriage.

[yefragetuwrabrumuy]

“Marriage is a constantly changing social institution...”

Socialists have long made this wrong assumption, based on a corruption of marriage, the dowry.

The truth is that marriage is a *biological* construct that humans innovated, that is far superior to what animals use.

That is, male animals have the prerogative to spread their DNA among many females. Female animals have the double prerogative to get the best male sperm donors (for more than a single offspring), *and* (at least some of them) to have a male present as a provider to *exclusively* help her raise her offspring.

The trouble begins when there is more than a few males around, so the best sperm donor is likely also not the best provider.

Marriage is a great idea to provide the best outcome to the man and woman, in exchange for monogamy, and the best provision for their offspring. As a biological system it is a brilliant idea.

However, it can be fouled up by the dowry, because the male is likely *not* the best sperm donor, even if they are a more capable provider. And the bond between the couple is financial, not monogamous. Which risks the prosperity of their offspring.

[mulligan]

Disgusting. Cato Institute should be ashamed.

[Buckeye McFrog]

yeah yeah yeah....we know that Bedouin herders in Biblical times had scores of wives. Still the exception and not the rule.

[bert]

All of that might be true, but bottom line, the marriage was between a man and “A” woman

The king of France never sent off to Austria for a Prince to cement relations between the countries while thwarting the power of a German king.

The “A” might be considered wrong because in many societies one man might have more than one wife, but each of those transactions is a single marriage

[Ray76]

This article is a farce.

[Mrs. Don-o]

The State has no real interest in licensing or regulating friendships or personal alliances per se, but only the ones that have procreative potential.

Nobody insists that the State set up conditions for initiating or terminating relationships predicated upon sharing bonsai or bicycling or classic British films. And relationships involving property land, homes, exchange of goods and services, can be readily taken care of by private contract.

I have often said this in relation to the irrationality of "gay marriage." What for? What friends demand legally enforced "twosiness"? It calls to mind a banner I saw in a crowd shot of the big pro-traditional-marriage march in Gay Paree: a couple of flamboyant self-described queers proclaiming "We're gayer without marriage."

So it seems marriage is primarily set up, not to secure the consortium and interests of adults, but primarily to secure the rights and interests of children.

That is why it is intrinsically applicable only to man-woman couples.

It might be objected, "Aren't there a lot of sterile man-woman couples?"

Yes; but to examine all couples for fertility would be an impermissible invasion of privacy. So the reasonable position of the State is to assume that man-woman couples are potentially fertile, since they are predicated upon the only kind of intercourse that can spontaneously produce offspring.

[Hetty_Fauxvert]

Okay, it hasn’t always been ONE man and ONE woman. The world has also produced polyandry and polygamy. However, we have NEVER had homosexual marriage until now. Lucky us.

[Tolerance Sucks Rocks]

FWIW.

PING!