'Gay' threats target Christians over same-sex 'marriage&#3

[Alta4ever]

Which is understandable in this case because the desires of both groups are mutually exclusive. We (humans?) need to figure out why or why not gay people should be allowed to engage in this human idea called 'marriage'. Are gay people not human?

It's not necessarily about tolerance from the perspective of gay people. As Marksman said, they just want to be treated equally. So what reason do people... society, as you called them... have for voting against allowing gay people to marry?

They have no rational reason, it is a completely emotional decision based on their veiw of what marriage is. I would imagine that for those who have the emotional reaction to that it comes from their faith and what they beleive the definition of marriage is which extends from that faith.

[marksman]

You know what I appologise this didn't turn into the debate I wanted it to. I was looking at where these votes were and linking them to political ideologies I would assume they support due to very basic profiling. To debate a human reaction, group a won't tolerate group b and vise versa, and they hypocracy of one side being able to spit out hate speech, because they lost. It was never about the subject of the vote just the reactions of group a and group b and how one can't respect the other even though they both claim higher moral value.

Again sorry I never should have bothered I was wrong to have even tried.

Thanks for the humbling guyser and marksman, I can say lesson learned, not a good way to try to start a debate.

I was posting out of frustration which was my mistake. There is a bit of a double standard these people probaby will never be prosecuted for these statements but if had been the opposition that made these statements you bet their would be an investigation and they would all be charged and convicted of uttering hate speech.

My post wasn't meant to stifle debate. It's just that your post seemed very 1 sided to me. In a way it even implied that people with left political views aren't part of society. The thing is there're extremists from all ideologies and political groups and it seems all of these extremists end up spouting some hypocrisy. As Kitch pointed out hate speech from all corners can go without punishment or investigation. You can't assume this behaviour only comes from 1 side in any debate.

The other thing is I don't think you can talk about that hypocrisy without looking at the underlying debate. The arguments for and against gay marriage have to be looked at to see if someone is actually being hypocritical. Most anti gay marriage people want to impose their will on others by stopping gay couples from marrying. Whereas most pro gay marriage people wouldn't be imposing their will on others in the same way. Religious groups opposing gay marriage would still be free to marry and not marry who they want.

I also think that in this case there can be some leniency in how we see things. Gay couples in California finally had official recognition that equality applied to them as well and then a few months later they narrowly lost that recognition in a vote where you had all sorts of people coming from out of state and ads that were essentially lies. Frustration the day after that happens can be expected. It doesn't excuse those comments. But it also doesn't compare to people like that church group that wanted to come to Canada and protest the funeral of that kid who died on the greyhound bus because "God was punishing Canada for allowing gay marriage".

[M.Dancer]

Its funny the left has problems doing as it preaches. They want you to be tolerant of them, but they do not want to be tolerant of society.

The Thing about Rev. Sun Young Moon's World Nut Daily is...well, it's the web equivilent of grocery store tabloids.

Now I fail to see how the left, right or centre are involved, approved or tollerates the rants from what I can tell, are TWO obscure blogs....that would be akin to some rabid Quebec nationalist ascribing Leafless's posts to All Anglophone Canadians....except that Leafless probably has more readers.

[Sir Bandelot]

It's easy to say, "Look at what they do, they are thus and thus", but the truth of these matters is, its only a few loudmouths who make the most noise get the most attention. Same goes for those who boo loudly when McCain mentions Obama in his conciliation speech. Fact is, people who are moderate tend to stay quiet and mind their own business, while intolerant ones go stomping through the playground making a lot of noise. The loud ones need to be further marginalized, not made to be representative spokesmen for the group. The problem is, no one stands up and tells them to shut up.

[Nocrap]

Sounds like the comments were a knee jerk reaction to the outcome of the vote. I doubt they would actually burn down churches. It's puzzling to me that in a time of economic crisis, religous organizations were able to put up 74 million dollars (25 million from the Mormons alone) to fight something that really should have no impact on society. We need to remove 'sex' from the equation.

Do they believe that people will now return to the church? If anything, it will just drive them further away and draw attention to the fact that the CHURCH actually had 74 million dollars to throw away like that. Maybe the athiests are right and religion IS all about money.

One argument against SSM in California was an incident where a Grade One class was taken to a Lesbian wedding. Whether true or not, who cares? When six year olds go to a wedding they like the fact that they can dress up...for a party...and there's CAKE! They don't look at the bride and groom, two brides or two grooms, and say they're going home to do it. Did I mention, there's CAKE? It's adults who bring sex into it and confuse their children.

The most popular argument against SSM however, is that God created marriage for procreation. So if a one man, one woman decide not to have children, what then? Do we need to pass a law forcing them to reproduce?

Marriage is marriage. Get over it.

[kengs333]

Perhaps you're right, but there's a history of 'gay bashing' whereas I'm not aware of any examples of 'religious bashing' by gay people. So maybe threats by the "opposition" would be taken a little more seriously.

Sexual deviance was the norm in Imperial Rome, so you could look there for starters.

Most minority groups don't engage in behaviour that could lead to a backlash, so it's just a matter of Christianity being reduced to a status where they will be victimized as they were in Imperial Rome, or other parts of the modern world. Look at Christian minority groups in India or Iraq, for instance; they are routinely murdered, but it rarely makes the news. Also, there have been a number of instances of widespread arsons against churches in North America, and it NEVER gets characterized as a hate crime; so my guess is that deliberate attacks by gays against Christians are either not openly revealed as hate crimes, or are just not reported as such.

Also, one could also look at it this way: since homosexuality is a sin, the fact that homosexuals engage in their lifestyle and actively try to promote and normalize it, thus making this world an evil place, they are from a Christian standpoint engaged in hateful activities. You not being a Christian simply don't recognize it for what it is, therefore you can claim that you are not "aware" of such behaviour.

That being said, I've seen and heard people say MANY derogatory and threatening things to and/or about gay people without investigations.

Only a handful of gays are victims of violence, and many of them are at the hands of other gays. Domestic violence within the "gay community" is something that is not made an issue of, largely because the gay community doesn't want to make known just how extensive the problem is.

[kengs333]

One argument against SSM in California was an incident where a Grade One class was taken to a Lesbian wedding. Whether true or not, who cares? When six year olds go to a wedding they like the fact that they can dress up...for a party...and there's CAKE! They don't look at the bride and groom, two brides or two grooms, and say they're going home to do it. Did I mention, there's CAKE? It's adults who bring sex into it and confuse their children.

The gay lifestyle is all about sex.

Whatever the case, though, the fact remains that the majority in California voted against SSM and the majority rules. And this is California, of all place, where morality--in some parts--is unheard of.

It's funny how these people (gays) believe that if the laws are changed in their favour, these laws for some reason are set in stone and should never be changed; that's not how it works.

[AngusThermopyle]

The gay lifestyle is all about sex.

Did you really say that?

Are you serious, or even sane?

Listen bud, I love women, very much, but I'd never say something so stupid as that, no matter how foriegn to my nature it is.

Do you honestly believe gay couples can't be together for the same reasons Hetero couples are?

Are you saying that they can't love each other? Because they're gay?

Have you ever known a gay person in your entire life? Ever had a friend who was gay?

I highly doubt that you ever have.

[eyeball]

It's funny how these people (gays) believe that if the laws are changed in their favour, these laws for some reason are set in stone and should never be changed; that's not how it works.

Gay people believed it was their rights that were being set in stone. Now, imagine if this proposition that just passed was about banning guns.

[kengs333]

Did you really say that?

Are you serious, or even sane?

Just goes to show how warped our society has become if someone who defends the gay lifestyle considers people who disagree to be insane.

Listen bud, I love women, very much, but I'd never say something so stupid as that, no matter how foriegn to my nature it is.

So Agnes thinks that whoever doesn't agree with his/her opinion is "stupid". How quaint.

Do you honestly believe gay couples can't be together for the same reasons Hetero couples are?

No. Because I think that that some "hetero couples" have the same warped perception of love and marriage that gays do. In part it usually has to do with the confusion caused by deviance that exists in society.

Are you saying that they can't love each other? Because they're gay?

So if gays "love" one another, that means all people of the same sex who claim to "love" one another are in fact gay? What about gays who engage in pederasty? Is that "love," too?

Have you ever known a gay person in your entire life?

Yes, several--which is why I don't buy any of the nonsense surrounding the gay rights movement.

Ever had a friend who was gay?

I don't associate with anyone who engages in any form of deviant sexual behaviour.

I highly doubt that you ever have.

Don't tell me that you actually consider it some sort of criteria or qualification that one has to associate with people of deviant lifestyle in order to be what? modern? progressive? cool? not stupid? If you're such a ball-less twit that you have to conform to whatever society dictates, that's your problem; I make up my own mind based on my own assessment of an issue or situation, and nothing that I've seen about the gay lifestyle or gay movement indicates that there is anything good or right about it. In fact, the fact that they've latched onto legitimate civil rights issues and have managed to coerce people such as yourself into accepting their deviant lifestyle as legitimate just goes to show how evil these people are.

[kengs333]

Gay people believed it was their rights that were being set in stone. Now, imagine if this proposition that just passed was about banning guns.

Every human being has fundamental human rights. Engaging in deviant sexual behaviour is not a fundamental right, and if the majority wish to consider it unlawful then that's how it is.

[charter.rights]

Every human being has fundamental human rights. Engaging in deviant sexual behaviour is not a fundamental right, and if the majority wish to consider it unlawful then that's how it is.

Homosexuality is not "deviant" sexual behavior. It is morally (based on the majority of our society) and legally acceptable to be homosexual and to love another human being regardless of their sex, orientation, age, or abilities. Homosexuality IS about having the right to love and choose who one wants to be their life partner.

Now as far as "deviant" sex goes, white heterosexual males are the worst offenders when it comes to child predation. If we are choosing sides, people like you are more prone to deviancy than any homosexual person. Maybe we should tell people in Glanbrook to keep their children in at night? Personally I wouldn't worry about it. If there are predators in your small town it is likely you would already know about them.

Edited November 8, 2008 by charter.rights

[AngusThermopyle]

Homosexuality is not "deviant" sexual behavior. It is morally (based on the majority of our society) and legally acceptable to be homosexual and to love another human being regardless of their sex, orientation, age, or abilities. Homosexuality IS about having the right to love and choose who one wants to be their life partner.

Well said, spot on and undeniable.

In Kengs post we see the classic reaction of the intolerant. Why shouldn't a consenting couple be together, how does it harm you in the least way at all Kengs? As for deviance, well after spouting that fundamentalist style diatribe about evil Homosexuals I would suggest you be more carefull about where and when you use the deviant word, many would say that the thought process involved in such a rant could indicate deviance.

Now as for all the nonesense about being fooled by the gay lifestyle, how absolutely wrong you are. I haven't been fooled or brainwashed or any of the other crap you want to believe. I just happen to know that gay people are much like the rest of us, some are good, some are bad, and quite frankly what they do together is none of my business, nor yours either.

What is strange is your venomous reaction to gay people, one could very easily believe that its a result of conflicting feelings and uncertainty.

In fact, the fact that they've latched onto legitimate civil rights issues and have managed to coerce people such as yourself into accepting their deviant lifestyle as legitimate just goes to show how evil these people are.

Pure garbage, nothing more. Slaughtering innocents is evil, oppressing and controlling people is evil. Two consenting loving adults being together is not evil. Wanting to live your life as you see fit is not evil. In fact if we use your rather tenuous measure of evil then your very words would appear to indicate an evil intent.

Given that, what would you propose we do about the "evil" gay people? Stick em all in a camp? Ship em off to some deserted island? Reprogram and condition them for their own good? What are your thoughts on this matter?

Edited November 8, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

[Kitch]

Sexual deviance was the norm in Imperial Rome, so you could look there for starters.

To look for examples of gay people attacking the church in an organized way? The burden of support (because I dislike the word proof... largely because it rarely can exist) is on your shoulders bud.

Most minority groups don't engage in behaviour that could lead to a backlash, so it's just a matter of Christianity being reduced to a status where they will be victimized as they were in Imperial Rome, or other parts of the modern world. Look at Christian minority groups in India or Iraq, for instance; they are routinely murdered, but it rarely makes the news. Also, there have been a number of instances of widespread arsons against churches in North America, and it NEVER gets characterized as a hate crime; so my guess is that deliberate attacks by gays against Christians are either not openly revealed as hate crimes, or are just not reported as such.

That's an assumption. I have indeed heard of attacks on christian people on the news. Perhaps there are more (maybe you are privy to them) instances than are reported, but this does not in any way support the notion that gay people have attacked, physically, anything to do with the church.

Also, one could also look at it this way: since homosexuality is a sin, the fact that homosexuals engage in their lifestyle and actively try to promote and normalize it, thus making this world an evil place, they are from a Christian standpoint engaged in hateful activities. You not being a Christian simply don't recognize it for what it is, therefore you can claim that you are not "aware" of such behaviour.

Actually, bud, I was raised catholic. I am well aware of the reasons religious people have for advocating against homosexuality. My catholic upbringing is one of the reasons that I decided that there is no god and that organized religion is bad for the world. And I sincerely 'believe' that... religion is bad for the world. BUT do you see me out there promoting hate for religion? No, because a belief in a god is an individual's choice and who am I to tell a person what they can/cannot believe? Even though collectively believers do harm to the planet and society (in my opinion).

But, and this is important.... what you are saying is that existence of gay people makes the world more evil. Or, that they promote their chosen lifestyle.

Well, in reality, they don't 'promote' it. They don't want to make more people gay, at least from what I've seen/heard. They just don't want to have to keep their chosen lifestyle a secret.

Only a handful of gays are victims of violence, and many of them are at the hands of other gays. Domestic violence within the "gay community" is something that is not made an issue of, largely because the gay community doesn't want to make known just how extensive the problem is.

Are you gay? I'm going to guess no. So then may I please point out the glaring hypocrisy of you telling me that I don't understand something about the 'religious side' because I"m not christian, while you, a non-homosexual, claim to know something about the motives of the gay community?

And yes, somebody called you dumb so it MUST be simply because you disagree with gay lifestyle. Not at all because you pretend to know something about it that you just don't. Angus said that you said something stupid anyway... not that YOU are stupid.

So if gays "love" one another, that means all people of the same sex who claim to "love" one another are in fact gay? What about gays who engage in pederasty? Is that "love," too?

Wow are you trying to distort what was said. If you really want to be taken seriously, take your time and make a better attempt.

Dude, quit talking about 'deviant sexual behaviour'. The catholic church preaches against tugging your tube-steak, so that's considered deviant in the minds of some. And I'm sure you twisted a few out in your day.

But let's bring it back to the foundation of your argument. 'Gay = evil because being gay makes the world more evil'.

Care to justify this? And remember I WAS catholic.

[marksman]

Sexual deviance was the norm in Imperial Rome, so you could look there for starters.

If it was the norm then it wouldn't be considered deviant. Ancient Rome doesn't help this discussion.

Most minority groups don't engage in behaviour that could lead to a backlash, so it's just a matter of Christianity being reduced to a status where they will be victimized as they were in Imperial Rome, or other parts of the modern world. Look at Christian minority groups in India or Iraq, for instance; they are routinely murdered, but it rarely makes the news. Also, there have been a number of instances of widespread arsons against churches in North America, and it NEVER gets characterized as a hate crime; so my guess is that deliberate attacks by gays against Christians are either not openly revealed as hate crimes, or are just not reported as such.

Reality seems to disagree with you. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,...1171196,00.html

In recent years, church burnings in Alabama have become a disturbing, all too common event, viewed primarily as hate crimes of one kind or another.

And just because a church is burnt doesn't necessarily mean hate crime

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/natio...es/churches.htm

Members of the group told police they picked churches generally because they were easy targets, isolated and empty.

"If they didn't find any money, they'd pay them back by vandalizing the church or burning it," said Homer Kaedle, the Georgia Bureau of Investigations agent in charge. Sometimes, to throw police off their trail, they also would spray-paint obscene or racist language on the churches.

Also, one could also look at it this way: since homosexuality is a sin, the fact that homosexuals engage in their lifestyle and actively try to promote and normalize it, thus making this world an evil place, they are from a Christian standpoint engaged in hateful activities. You not being a Christian simply don't recognize it for what it is, therefore you can claim that you are not "aware" of such behaviour.

Crimes aren't defined based on the religious views of some individuals. Otherwise if I believe assault happens when someone smiles at me I could go around charging lots of people with assaulting me.

Even if you think making the world evil is a crime you'd have to prove that gay people living the same as hetero people actually makes the world evil. For crimes you've got to show that beyond a reasonable doubt so good luck with that.

Only a handful of gays are victims of violence, and many of them are at the hands of other gays. Domestic violence within the "gay community" is something that is not made an issue of, largely because the gay community doesn't want to make known just how extensive the problem is.

Don't make up facts. There is domestic violence within the gay community but that doesn't mean there's only a handful of incidents of violence against gays and definitely doesn't mean that violence is mostly done by other gays.

In 2004 15.6% of all hate crimes with a single bias were because of sexual orientation. Of that number only 33 of the 1200 incidents were anti hetero. And that's just hate crimes.

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_re...rime/index.html

The gay lifestyle is all about sex.

That statement is misinformed at best. It's like saying the college lifestyle is all about sex. No matter how many people want you to think that it's true it isn't.

Whatever the case, though, the fact remains that the majority in California voted against SSM and the majority rules. And this is California, of all place, where morality--in some parts--is unheard of.

It's funny how these people (gays) believe that if the laws are changed in their favour, these laws for some reason are set in stone and should never be changed; that's not how it works.

They're not talking about laws they're talking about equal rights. Rights shouldn't change based on mob rule otherwise they mean nothing.

[GostHacked]

The gay lifestyle is all about sex.

I think the 60's was alll about sex .. or was it weed and lsd...

It's funny how these people (gays) believe that if the laws are changed in their favour, these laws for some reason are set in stone and should never be changed; that's not how it works.

At the same time, traditional laws/rule sets/morals/standards can be changed as well. That is how it works. Things change, get used to it. Humanity is dynamic and can't ever fit into one mold.

[Kitch]

Crimes aren't defined based on the religious views of some individuals.

I think a major problem is that some people would disagree with you here. For example:

America is not state the seperates religion and state. The country was form undered calvinists.

Unfortunately, Thomas Jefferson wouldn't have agreed with THIS statement:

http://www.usconstitution.net/jeffwall.html

I could be wrong, but wasn't he one of the FOUNDING fathers of the U.S.A.? I'm pretty sure that the principles that America was formed on are not at odds with gay people that want to get married.

[GostHacked]

Keng333

Don't tell me that you actually consider it some sort of criteria or qualification that one has to associate with people of deviant lifestyle in order to be what? modern? progressive? cool? not stupid?

Actually, it might be helpfull to actually know a few gays to understand them. I know many gay people, fags and lesbians. And you know what? They are a good bunch to hang out with. I am straight myself, but if we all want to be considered equal, then equality laws and morals need to exist between all people. Live and let live (as long as it does not harm me or my family).

If you're such a ball-less twit that you have to conform to whatever society dictates, that's your problem; I make up my own mind based on my own assessment of an issue or situation, and nothing that I've seen about the gay lifestyle or gay movement indicates that there is anything good or right about it.

But since you do not associate with these so called deviants, you have no clue what you are talking about. You don't want to know about their lifestyle, and yet you say it is bad. Since you don't want to know or even understand gay people, you can take a seat with your ranting. And actually, in this case, society had dictated they do not want SSM, so you are not making up your own mind, you are going with what the majority ruled. I know this is facetious at best.

In fact, the fact that they've latched onto legitimate civil rights issues and have managed to coerce people such as yourself into accepting their deviant lifestyle as legitimate just goes to show how evil these people are.

It is a legitimate issue for them. I think it is more evil to make them fit into a mold that they know is not them.

[Oleg Bach]

I think the 60's was alll about sex .. or was it weed and lsd...

At the same time, traditional laws/rule sets/morals/standards can be changed as well. That is how it works. Things change, get used to it. Humanity is dynamic and can't ever fit into one mold.

Let's get this straight - sorry about the pun. Same sex marriage is in reality, no sex marriage. Sensual interaction between the same sexes is hedonism at best and maybe love in some cases. The definition of sex is literally opposites. Male - Female = sex. That is a fact of life and a reality in the physical world we live in. There is nothing wrong with men loving men in a deep and even sensual way - but due to the misinformation and twisting of ancient Christian doctrine - People now believe that Christians of old rejected so-called homosexuals...Not so - in scripture there is a most clear picture of a male that was totally attatched to Christ in a loving way - the reality was - sodomy was not exceptable - but love of the same sex was.

The gay lobby likes to perpetuate the myth that the ancient Greeks were sodomist and hence "gay" - The Greeks thought it lowly to take it up the butt - because they looked at woman as inferiours and to be penetrated by a male was "to much like being a woman" so it was frowned upon. There are human creatures that for the most part born raving queens - these are non-breeding asexuals. They are not to be persecuted. There is also in scripture a description of the eunuch factor - to para-phrase. There are eunuchs made by God who's purpose it is to glorify God - there are those made by man - (conditioned or casterated) (usually abused in childhood) Then there are those that are sexless out of choice - in order to serve man and God ( celebate priests).

Homo-sexuality has been engineered in part by society and propogated (this type of homo-sexuality is akin to sexual interference of our young) I do not have a problem dealing with those that are creations of nature (God) - I do not trust or like those that are sodomist abusers and users that take on the life style because it is politically useful and easy lazy sodomistic hedonism - in other words those that are straight and capable of sleeping with woman... I have met many of these types - and they keep it secret for the most part that they are not really gay - because they like the power that gay produces in our liberal society - so in some cases it's about dominance and power abuse . We have leftist like Mayor Miller of Toronto who uses the gay population for political gain - From what I understand the most intelligent in the gay community - dispise people like Miller and have no use for the so-called gay movement or "community" .

Christians that attack gays are fundamentalist doinks - Those that attack so-called Christians for their anti-gay and over the gay marriage issue are also infidels that lack an intelligent understanding of the phenomena. Also I have debated the gay lobby in San Francisco - what I found out after a few months ...was a lot are "Gay by choice" and their ultimate goal is the total destruction of humanity - pure evil foolishness.

Gays have made an error when they entered the political and legal realm of same sex marriage - instead of maintaining their privacy and freedom - now they are products and property of the state - Lawyers just love the thought of gays entering into the family law system that is totally abusive and corrupt..they lost their freedom in an attempt to gain it...more duping...seems that some who control the left just love to dupe - the left does not care or love gays anymore than they love the children they supposedly love to protect.

[GostHacked]

Let's get this straight - sorry about the pun. Same sex marriage is in reality, no sex marriage. Sensual interaction between the same sexes is hedonism at best and maybe love in some cases. The definition of sex is literally opposites. Male - Female = sex. That is a fact of life and a reality in the physical world we live in. There is nothing wrong with men loving men in a deep and even sensual way - but due to the misinformation and twisting of ancient Christian doctrine - People now believe that Christians of old rejected so-called homosexuals...Not so - in scripture there is a most clear picture of a male that was totally attatched to Christ in a loving way - the reality was - sodomy was not exceptable - but love of the same sex was.

I don't get it. Even marriage between a man and a woman can turn into a no sex marriage. Your definition of sexual activities is pretty narrow based on part of this post being a bible post. Even a divorce goes against 'till death do us part' pledge. And with the divorce rate being as high as it is these days, I fail to see how allowing gays to marry will further the corruption of the 'christian moral values'. And guess what, I have sex for fun. I can get it on with a gal, and really I probably don't even love her, I may not even like her. I don't need to love someone of the same sex to have sex. Sure, sex between man woman is sex. Man and man is not... If they love each other, it is more than just sex.

Homo-sexuality has been engineered in part by society and propogated (this type of homo-sexuality is akin to sexual interference of our young) I do not have a problem dealing with those that are creations of nature (God) - I do not trust or like those that are sodomist abusers and users that take on the life style because it is politically useful and easy lazy sodomistic hedonism

Being anything than what you are is just stupid no matter how you look at it.... because.

- in other words those that are straight and capable of sleeping with woman... I have met many of these types - and they keep it secret for the most part that they are not really gay - because they like the power that gay produces in our liberal society - so in some cases it's about dominance and power abuse.

Traditional marriage is basicly making the woman the man's servant. If you really want to tout those christian values, you will also know where the woman should be and what her role is. Dominance and power. But most of us are smart enough to know and understand that a marriage is an equal partnership/relationship. Give and take and make compromises.

We have leftist like Mayor Miller of Toronto who uses the gay population for political gain - From what I understand the most intelligent in the gay community - dispise people like Miller and have no use for the so-called gay movement or "community".

I have no use for that either. The same way I would not tolerate the religious 'right' to tell me how to live my life, because they have somethig to gain .. or lose. I have had a greade 8 teacher admit he was gay. Came out of the closet so to say. He was married with a woman, had a couple kids, but always had to deal with the turmoil inside that he was not being faithful to himself. He got the divorce and started to really come out of the closet. I mean in the sense that the man was happy, in a better mood, even was more enthusiastic about teaching. And none of us in that class (from what I know) gave two shits about the fact that he is gay.

Gays have made an error when they entered the political and legal realm of same sex marriage - instead of maintaining their privacy and freedom - now they are products and property of the state - Lawyers just love the thought of gays entering into the family law system that is totally abusive and corrupt..they lost their freedom in an attempt to gain it...more duping...seems that some who control the left just love to dupe - the left does not care or love gays anymore than they love the children they supposedly love to protect.

I guess it sucks that people of the same feather flock together to change the world. We would not have women's sufferage, we would still openly practice slavery. Of course there are asses in every lobby group that wants to make people aware of something that make it for their own gain. And that is not tolerated.

[Oleg Bach]

Those that persecute woman will also persecute men. Those that persecute gays will also persecute straights. Having said that. My definition of marriage is not biblical. I like to study the ancient origin of words and gay marriage is not marriage. Nor is civil marriage or religious marriage a true and holy union. To be honest with you I don't believe in the institution - It is much like being a dog and getting a licence to breed. It is state and religious control of the population ( that was the original intent of the institution) - I do enjoy the saying of Christ - "They will not be given or taken in marriage - for they will be like the angels" _ I like the idea of couples living like angels and being in love - BUT - gay marriage is not by civil or religious definition marriage nor by the dictionary definition.

Frankly I really don't believe in the whole gay thing either - I have asked a number of gays this question - IF - I took you and the most beautiful angelic woman and put you on an island - and returned in two years would there be a child? All said yes - Lesbians dispise men that act like aggressive self serving monkeys - as do gays who in their hearts dispise aggressive man like woman who are abusive.

[kengs333]

Keng333

Actually, it might be helpfull to actually know a few gays to understand them. I know many gay people, fags and lesbians. And you know what? They are a good bunch to hang out with. I am straight myself, but if we all want to be considered equal, then equality laws and morals need to exist between all people. Live and let live (as long as it does not harm me or my family).

Actually, I believe I've already stated that I've "known gay people" and this is the reason that I don't buy into their lifestyle.

But since you do not associate with these so called deviants, you have no clue what you are talking about. You don't want to know about their lifestyle, and yet you say it is bad. Since you don't want to know or even understand gay people, you can take a seat with your ranting. And actually, in this case, society had dictated they do not want SSM, so you are not making up your own mind, you are going with what the majority ruled. I know this is facetious at best.

It is a legitimate issue for them. I think it is more evil to make them fit into a mold that they know is not them.

try using valid logic in your arguments. I have no need or reason to associate with people who engage in deviant behaviour, and there is nothing to "understand" about them and their lifestyle. Sinful behaviour is sinful behaviour, whether its being gay, a pedophile, or a mass murderer. Do I need to associate with mass murderer before I have the right to consider them evil? Must I "understand" them first? If you would have been able to talk with real died-in-the-wool Nazis on an individual basis you probably would have found them to be "nice" people, but that doesn't change the fact that they represented an evil ideology. Just because on the surface gays are "nice" or "good bunch to hang out with" doesn't mean that their lifestyle isn't what it is: evil.

[GostHacked]

Those that persecute woman will also persecute men. Those that persecute gays will also persecute straights. Having said that. My definition of marriage is not biblical. I like to study the ancient origin of words and gay marriage is not marriage. Nor is civil marriage or religious marriage a true and holy union. To be honest with you I don't believe in the institution - It is much like being a dog and getting a licence to breed. It is state and religious control of the population ( that was the original intent of the institution) - I do enjoy the saying of Christ - "They will not be given or taken in marriage - for they will be like the angels" _ I like the idea of couples living like angels and being in love - BUT - gay marriage is not by civil or religious definition marriage nor by the dictionary definition.

So if you don't beleive in the institution of marriage, why would you care what the definition is, or even how it is defined?

Frankly I really don't believe in the whole gay thing either - I have asked a number of gays this question - IF - I took you and the most beautiful angelic woman and put you on an island - and returned in two years would there be a child? All said yes - Lesbians dispise men that act like aggressive self serving monkeys - as do gays who in their hearts dispise aggressive man like woman who are abusive.

Well, I guess it is all because, there are no other options, forget about birth control, no abortion doctor. Regardless of the fact that he was always thinking of his pal Jimmy while doing Shelly.

[kengs333]

Now as for all the nonesense about being fooled by the gay lifestyle, how absolutely wrong you are. I haven't been fooled or brainwashed or any of the other crap you want to believe. I just happen to know that gay people are much like the rest of us, some are good, some are bad, and quite frankly what they do together is none of my business, nor yours either.

Sure you have. You buy into their arguments, whether it's through fear or guilt I can't say; but one way or another their arguments have gotten to you and forced to believe that you have to accept their lifestyle because of issues in your own life.

What is strange is your venomous reaction to gay people, one could very easily believe that its a result of conflicting feelings and uncertainty.

Oh what was that? Didn't you just say you weren't "fooled or brainwashed" by them, yet you use one of their sham arguments. Whether you want to admit it or not, whether you recognize it or not, you're simply helping out with there recruiting. So anyone who expresses an "anti-gay" opinion may secretly be gay and hasn't come to terms with it? It would seem to me that this would actually be the case for people who defend the gay lifestyle.

[Oleg Bach]

Most of the time I don't "like" some gay people... it maybe the moral nutrality they live in. I said to a gay friend with aids...a real chipper and kind guy ----- "What do you think of that creep that is stealing my son's girl friend and causing him great distress". (Rich kid with a coke habit that likes to seduce and dispose of woman) - The gay guy says to me "I think he is really hot" - I said - the kid is evil - why do you think that an evil person is hot? He is taken back and attempts to recover and states "He's hot in a pornoghaphic way only" - I looked at the brave aids fighting gay and said - "Joey - you would think the angel of death was hot" - He laughed but was a tad disturbed by the comment - I have no problem with gays if they are ethical - but it seems that part of the life style is centered in self serving hedonism that is just fine with some and they don't care if other are being hurt - it was an eye opening conversation....I just wonder if he thinks killing a lover with aids is sexy.