some help on Prop. 8

[B. W.]

I usually don’t like these types of threads but I’ll inject something I learned during college days in the Social Science and Social Worker Field in upper division classes. These are liberal field held by progressive left.

The Professors at the university I attended had no issues explaining the need for change and collective salvation that needed to come by the total destruction of the tradition family unit, destruction of Christianity was of paramount importance.

In fact, anything that held traditional America together, history, unity, patriotism, conservatism, etc was deemed as tyrannically oppressive and must be eradicated at all cost so a social collective salvation could be made manifest by a benevolent heavy handed Government needed to enforce this salvation. (Back up by at least five to three major corporations who set up monopolies of goods and services enforced by Govt to serve the needs of the ignorant masses)

Yes, these were the topics in many of my classes. The progressive left does not care about Gay Rights but only view to use the issues as the means to tear down the opposition too achieve their ultimate goals: Absolute power - a real Borg Collective. Just a stepping stone – the ends justify the means kind of thing. In other words as the proverb (either Chinese or Arabic) – says – The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

The left will side with anyone that poses a threat to traditional values, and use them, to attain and solidify the all controlling power of their ever fruitful benevolent Government (sarcastic comment intended).

You see, people are trained in leftist ideology to go after traditional values and promote alienation between people, leaving people to cleave to Government alone for their collective salvation. I see this in the main stream media. I see it in many of the elites today. Pit classes of people against each other.

Man, just think of all of us who have not yachts like Senator John Kerry has! We need to mobilize, organize and demand that, we, the Have Not’s – get the Yachts form the haves - don’t we?

How about all you parents who can’t give a decent wedding to your daughter, or women who dream of an ultimate wedding. You have not, but Bill and Hillary Clinton gave a multi-million dollar wedding to their daughter- is that fait to all us Have not’s – NO! We must mobilize, organize and demand that equality of weddings for all women!

You see, I leaned to dish it out – learned from school to do. We need to expose the left. They are abusing homosexuals for political gain. That is not fair or just, is it.? I do not condone homosexual behavior for many of the reason cited already. There is only one unforgivable sin and it is not homosexuality.

People can repent of that. Those that practice such will answer to God alone. We can warn them and help those that repent –live repented and just let the others go into perdition. That is fair and true choice. Christian offer a true choice but using homosexual to destroy individual values solely to gain political power is a far greater crime.
Let me add one other thing. The left views health care as Governments responsibility to enforce. Anything like fat to smoking is taboo. Any life style that increases the cost of health care must be curtailed. Homosexual lifestyle causes diseases and a high rate of mental issues too as medically documented. These are costly. In the long term range in the future, if the left wins such total power, they will turn against the Homosexual in due time. Too costly a life style for the all controlling power of an ever fruitful benevolent Government to maintain collective salvation…
-
-
-
Enough of my soap boxing – and see why I do not spend time on these kinds of threads

[BavarianWheels]

I can't support gay rights for two reasons...

1. God created man for women and the woman for man Genesis 2:24. Ultimately God knows what works best for both the believer and unbeliever, not he world.. It is sinful according to God Lev 18:22-23, Lev 20:13, 1 Tim 1:9-10, Rom 1:26-27. Therefore would you want an unbeliever to waste themselves away in sin or possibly go to hell for it? I really don't think anyone would.. Also beware, we will be judged on how we handle this issue..

2. Regardless what the Bible says about it, it's a perverted lifestyle.. And I can't consciously vote for something that I think could harm someone. The body was not designed for doing things that they shouldn't belong. Despite what the liberal media says about it, this type of lifestyle...

1. Eliminates procreation.
2. It promotes diseases (some deadly). See here.
3. Many forms of sexual behavior prevent blood from being accepted through the Red Cross and other agencies.
4. It destroys traditional male/female family units.
5. It could promote polygamy and other alternatives to one-man, one-woman unions. One being man-boy perverted unions. (NAMBLA)
6. Public schools in the nation will be required to teach that this perversion is the moral equivalent of traditional marriage between a man and a woman.
7. Courts will not be able to favor a traditional family involving one man and one woman over a homosexual couple in matters of adoption.
8. Promotes psychiatric, mental and emotional disorders. See here.
9. Raises insurance costs for everyone.
10. Children will be placed in homes with parents representing only one sex on an equal basis with those having a mom and a dad.

Bottom line, it shouldn't be supported for any reason...

Source: http://www.nogaymarriage.com/tenarguments.asp

Gman, I can almost say I agree with you 100%, however this includes many such things.

1. Celebacy eliminates procreation
2. Smoking, drinking promote deadly diseases.
3. There are many reasons unrelated to homosexuality that could keep one from donating blood
4. I think we've done this all by ourselves. One can look at the divorce rate and see there's a problem outside of homosexuality.
5. Polygamy is nothing new. Other unions? Well, nothing society wouldn't approve first.
6. Probably right, but don't forget it's the duty of the PARENT to teach their child in the ways of God...not the school's.
7. Can they now? I agree more here though.
8. I'd argue there are far more situations besides homosexuality that promote this, i.e. Child abuse, Spousal Abuse, Rape...
9. Smoking, drinking, drugs...welfare...bureaucracy (sp?)...all raise our insurance costs.
10. Single parent families doesn't do this already? The divorce rate causes this already.

Smoking and drinking are at least two things that shouldn't be supported for these same reasons, yet I don't see any Christian organizations or individuals doing this...and if they are, no one supports them because smoking is legal...and drinking is legal. Many Christians smoke, and many Christians drink...

The problem with your stance (and not that it's wrong, please understand) is that you're bringing a religious argument into a secular arena. Therein lies the crux of the problem. We are not living, nor are we governed, under religious law and/or ideas (outright). So within this context, while we may disagree, the disagreement is almost moot because of the position we find ourselves in.

This is why, to me, it's MORE important to keep teaching our children the right thing to do and trust God. We seem to think it is our duty to change the world/people. It's not.
The world may go astray but...

Train a child in the way he should go,
and when he is old he will not turn from it.

It is not the duty of our schools to do this, it is our duty. If we do THIS, maybe THIS will change the world. We cannot change the world by making laws to keep people from doing what WE think is wrong, even if it is right.

I agree with B.W.

There is only one unforgivable sin and it is not homosexuality.

While I understand his position and the evil in using one thing to gain power in another, the above point still stands (me thinks) that it is not through the promotion of laws that "we" change the world. Let God do His work...our work is our children and the spreading of Good News.
.
.

[Gman]

Gman, I can almost say I agree with you 100%, however this includes many such things.

1. Celebacy eliminates procreation

God only asks for celibacy before marriage.. Nothing wrong in that..

2. Smoking, drinking promote deadly diseases.

Likewise it should be banned too.. As it is now in restaurants, airplanes, etc.. Drinking is banned while driving but actually small amounts is good for you..

3. There are many reasons unrelated to homosexuality that could keep one from donating blood.

Aids has killed thousands of people.. Keeping it out of the bloodstream is good for people..

4. I think we've done this all by ourselves. One can look at the divorce rate and see there's a problem outside of homosexuality.

God says that marriage should be between a man and a woman.. God knows best. Not the liberal media.. Not the National Enquirer.. Not hollywood stars.. etc..

5. Polygamy is nothing new. Other unions? Well, nothing society wouldn't approve first.

Some say that polygamy should be reinstated.. Gay organizations, in the beginning, were very supportive of NAMBLA. It could happen again.

6. Probably right, but don't forget it's the duty of the PARENT to teach their child in the ways of God...not the school's.

Yes, but if the schools teach something different, who it is say what's right? Religion, as taught by the parents is considered a superstitious belief by the public..

7. Can they now? I agree more here though.

Again it could change..

8. I'd argue there are far more situations besides homosexuality that promote this, i.e. Child abuse, Spousal Abuse, Rape...

Again I would say God knows best.. The best family units occur in male and female units. And that is the way children want it.

9. Smoking, drinking, drugs...welfare...bureaucracy (sp?)...all raise our insurance costs.

Then they should be banned too.. And in many cases they already are.

10. Single parent families doesn't do this already? The divorce rate causes this already.

Again.. God knows best. For both the believer and non believer..

Smoking and drinking are at least two things that shouldn't be supported for these same reasons, yet I don't see any Christian organizations or individuals doing this...and if they are, no one supports them because smoking is legal...and drinking is legal. Many Christians smoke, and many Christians drink...

Smoking and drinking are not legal in all cases..

The problem with your stance (and not that it's wrong, please understand) is that you're bringing a religious argument into a secular arena. Therein lies the crux of the problem. We are not living, nor are we governed, under religious law and/or ideas (outright). So within this context, while we may disagree, the disagreement is almost moot because of the position we find ourselves in.

I believe the media has painted it into being a more accepted lifestyle.. Which it is not. And it is not exactly a religious argument either.. As shown here.. http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual ... _Lifestyle

[quote="BavarianWheels"This is why, to me, it's MORE important to keep teaching our children the right thing to do and trust God. We seem to think it is our duty to change the world/people. It's not.
The world may go astray but...

Train a child in the way he should go,
and when he is old he will not turn from it.
It is not the duty of our schools to do this, it is our duty. If we do THIS, maybe THIS will change the world. We cannot change the world by making laws to keep people from doing what WE think is wrong, even if it is right.

We can keep our laws now.. If we vote for them.. Laws are made to protect people, not harm them. Our duty is to do good to all people Galatians 6:10

[BavarianWheels]

, but if the schools teach something different, who it is say what's right? Religion, as taught by the parents is considered a superstitious belief by the public..

Rhetorical question: How is it possible children from Christian families that attend(ed) public schools still believe in creation and/or God as adults?
.
.

[jlay]

While I understand his position and the evil in using one thing to gain power in another, the above point still stands (me thinks) that it is not through the promotion of laws that "we" change the world. Let God do His work...our work is our children and the spreading of Good News.

Sadly, for many Christianity has simply become a politcal view. You are right, we can not honestly expect state run, state funded schools to train up our children. Sadly, there are some Christian politicizers who want to force prayer into school, and have teachers teach biblical principles. It is foolishness to think that these teachers are even qualified to do such. Christians need to become personally accountable.

Wheels,
Homosexuality is an instant disqualification for blood donating. Yes, there are other disqualifiars. But they are diseases, and illegal drug use. I doubt a HS would want to be lumped in with either.

[BavarianWheels]

While I understand his position and the evil in using one thing to gain power in another, the above point still stands (me thinks) that it is not through the promotion of laws that "we" change the world. Let God do His work...our work is our children and the spreading of Good News.

Sadly, for many Christianity has simply become a politcal view. You are right, we can not honestly expect state run, state funded schools to train up our children. Sadly, there are some Christian politicizers who want to force prayer into school, and have teachers teach biblical principles. It is foolishness to think that these teachers are even qualified to do such. Christians need to become personally accountable.

Agreed.

Wheels,
Homosexuality is an instant disqualification for blood donating. Yes, there are other disqualifiars. But they are diseases, and illegal drug use. I doubt a HS would want to be lumped in with either.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this.
.
.

[jlay]

My point was in reply to your comment.

3. There are many reasons unrelated to homosexuality that could keep one from donating blood.

Sure there are. But they are all related to bad things. Disease or Drugs. No one, as far as I know, would try and force Medic or Red Cross to accept blood from homosexuals. So, in this sense homosexuality is being identified with disease and criminal drug use. Both of which we are trying to irradicate. Not that we are trying to eliminate diseased people. But gays don't think of their desires as diseased. I think the decisions by these groups does verify that gay lifestyle is a danger to the general welfare. If HS is a disease, (mental, genetic, or otherwise) then why don't we treat it as such?

I understand what G is saying. He is pointing out that there may be very valid reasons to not allow gay unions, gay adoption, or afford gays with recognitions reserved for married couples. And none of these reasons are trying to force anyone's religion on another.
Likewise, we can't just try to limit gays through the legal system because, "the bible says so." That is coercing people to follow a religion.

God says that marriage should be between a man and a woman.. God knows best. Not the liberal media.. Not the National Enquirer.. Not hollywood stars.. etc..

That's correct. But a lot of those people don't agree with you, or even believe in God. And the laws of this land do not allow you to force our religious postion on others. When we do, we only come across as dogmatic and unloving.

Yes, but if the schools teach something different, who it is say what's right? Religion, as taught by the parents is considered a superstitious belief by the public.

I agree. I think there is enough non-religous reasons to insist that gay lifestyle not be mainstreamed or taught as normal by the public school system.

Again I would say God knows best.. The best family units occur in male and female units. And that is the way children want it.

Yes, and we can prove that without the bible. It is inherently obvious, and there are stats to verify. If we envoke the bible directly into secular laws then we run into an issue of freedom of religion. We can't have a law in this country that says, 'because God knows best,' no matter how true it actually is. We are not a theocracy, and our constitution makes it illegal to do such.

[BavarianWheels]

My point was in reply to your comment.

3. There are many reasons unrelated to homosexuality that could keep one from donating blood.

Sure there are. But they are all related to bad things. Disease or Drugs. No one, as far as I know, would try and force Medic or Red Cross to accept blood from homosexuals. So, in this sense homosexuality is being identified with disease and criminal drug use. Both of which we are trying to irradicate. Not that we are trying to eliminate diseased people. But gays don't think of their desires as diseased. I think the decisions by these groups does verify that gay lifestyle is a danger to the general welfare. If HS is a disease, (mental, genetic, or otherwise) then why don't we treat it as such?

I understand what G is saying. He is pointing out that there may be very valid reasons to not allow gay unions, gay adoption, or afford gays with recognitions reserved for married couples. And none of these reasons are trying to force anyone's religion on another.
Likewise, we can't just try to limit gays through the legal system because, "the bible says so." That is coercing people to follow a religion.

Not all...There's age and weight restrictions. Tattoos (defer for 12 months) and even simple dental care, tooth extractions if there is infection. I have personally not heard of a push from the HS community to accept their blood into the mainstream. If there is, it's news to me and definitely something I'd be opposed to. I also am not sure, but I don't think the HS community denies the risk factors of their lifestyle (AIDS being at the forefront).

How do you heal genetics, if it is as I think it may be for the most part,? Can we "heal" a HS into a hetero and vice-versa? Maybe. We do know God can. But the question is, does He? There are instances of change, I have never denied that. Is that change a full change or is it a choice made to abstain? Is the "new" person fully hetero and no longer has even the slightest twinkle to the opposite? Again, I'm sure people have changed/abstained.

Why don't we treat it as a "disease"? Because God forbid sin has the power to make such a change. Afterall, sin is not the cause of all our other diseases rigth? I reject that. We deny sin any such power. And yet we agree and promote we are sinful from conception. Where is the logic in that?

I understand what Gman is saying also, but that still does not remove the fact that it is a religious argument/moral against secular vote.
.
.

[jlay]

How do you heal genetics,

There are all kinds of genetic defects that are treated. Further, we simply don't know that HS is genetic. You are making an assumption. I have friends who have CS, and it is certainly treated. And further, you even agreed with me in another thread that HS tendencies can be the result of emotional or physical abuse. Those things can most certainly be treated.

Why don't we treat it as a "disease"? Because God forbid sin has the power to make such a change. Afterall, sin is not the cause of all our other diseases rigth? I reject that. We deny sin any such power. And yet we agree and promote we are sinful from conception. Where is the logic in that?

I'm not talking about as a church. I'm speaking regarding why doesn't the secular society consider it a disease. If you will recall I said, "these groups." And please keep in mind that this was a question that I did not provide an answer for. Regardless, I'm not sure I'm following you here.

[BavarianWheels]

How do you heal genetics,

There are all kinds of genetic defects that are treated. Further, we simply don't know that HS is genetic. You are making an assumption. I have friends who have CS, and it is certainly treated. And further, you even agreed with me in another thread that HS tendencies can be the result of emotional or physical abuse. Those things can most certainly be treated.

Yes, I've mentioned it myself that it is not a proven fact that HS is genetic. An "assumption" has certain conotations of a "wild guess", however it does fit. I like to call it more of an educated guess...based on life education, that being most, if not all, HS individuals mention that they knew from a very early age they were different. I do agree, you're right, it is quite possible that HS can result from emotional and/or physical trauma or abuse. I dont' deny that at all. It's well within my mix. My feeling, based on this educated guess, is that the majority is genetic. I have no proof other than what HS individuals say.

Why don't we treat it as a "disease"? Because God forbid sin has the power to make such a change. Afterall, sin is not the cause of all our other diseases rigth? I reject that. We deny sin any such power. And yet we agree and promote we are sinful from conception. Where is the logic in that?

I'm not talking about as a church. I'm speaking regarding why doesn't the secular society consider it a disease. If you will recall I said, "these groups." And please keep in mind that this was a question that I did not provide an answer for. Regardless, I'm not sure I'm following you here.

I have a feeling my words sounded harsh...I apologize. Maybe I'm not following you either. I'll just leave this and go with what I mentioned above.
.
.

[jlay]

We would definately disagree then as to the origin of HS tendencies. still, I would never rule out genetics. I've been very priveleged to witness to several gays over the years. I am amazed how some have opened up to me. For one thing. Do NOT confront them on their lifestyle. Not directly, at least. You will get no where.
Reports of sexual abuse in childhood were common. Reports of emotional trauma from a parent. I could go on. You typically see some deep childhood trauma.

[Human]

Reports of sexual abuse in childhood were common. Reports of emotional trauma from a parent. I could go on. You typically see some deep childhood trauma.

And those without will have other environmental--not genetic--factors in play. Genetics has been ruled out as a 100% marker for homosexuality through various studies of people with identical genetics.

GMan, I find it odd that you list your 10 "nonreligious reasons" against homosexuality, then when questioned support it with Christian views. That seems somewhat inconsistent to me.


To the issue at hand, I think everyone needs to note that the legislation for marriage(as far as I know) is purely a legal and financial contract. Unless I'm missing something, neither love, sex, nor any emotion is needed to get the contract and nowadays it can be broken in seconds just as it is formed. It's a simple legal union like any business contract. The point then, should be to remove the idea of homosexuality from same-sex marriage. Ever seen the movie "I Now Pronounce You Chuck and Larry"? if not, it's basically a guy's wife dies and someone has to take care of his kids if he(a fireman) dies himself, so he marries his best friend, who happens to also be male. The ability to form a civil union between two people of the same sex is not inherently wrong; it only becomes wrong when tied to homosexuality when that need not always be the case. There are many other reasons to want to, say, pool two net assets together, or share insurance benefits. The biggest issue, then, is distinguishing between a civil marriage and a God-ordained marriage. Ideally one term would switch(state marriage to civil union or God-ordained marriage to holy matriomonial union) as to make things easier to distinguish between. Within a generation, maybe a generation and a half, nobody would notice the difference.
You can't legislate love.