« Profiles in Countermoonbattery: Ted Cruz | Main | The Reconquista and LA's Blacks »

I don't get the antagonism towards gay marriage. Can someone point it out to me (I'm an Australian trying to learn about Conservatism)?

Bert and Ernie ...

Teletubbies ... well, maybe there ...

Don't even ask me to go into my Barney analogies

Exactly!

This is another fine moonbat mess youve gotten us into

Despite what you read here, not every conservative is against gays, or even gay marriage. Some of us even have gay friends and we believe that gay people are born, not recruited. Some believe it is a choice. If it were really a choice then every straight person here would know when they made their decision to be straight. Of course, they never made such a decision. Being straight was something that was with them from birth, just like the color of their eyes. It is the same with gay people.

Of course, I'll probably be crucified by those who believe it is strictly a choice. Oh, well.

Fair enough, thanks Mack.

Well,

I believe that homosexuality is an addiction, along with being a choice that people make. Bible believing Christians believe that it is a sin, not because they decided so, but because God says so. Hate gays? definitely not. Hate the the lifestyle and practices that go with it? absolutely.
The very worst thing though, is 'the gay agenda', trying to force homosexuality as a normal condition onto the general public. Every major civilization in history that has fallen has displayed an acceptanced and 'normalisation' of the 'gay' lifestyle. While it is probably not the cause of the failure, it appears to be a symptom.

Wrong according to God, wrong according to nature, how can anybody claim it is a legitimate lifestyle?

Back to you......

RE: Posted by: Mack at June 11, 2009 9:40 PM

"Of course, I'll probably be crucified by those who believe it is strictly a choice. Oh, well."

No, you won't be "crucified", although I personally believe people are homosexual by choice, as do a lot of others on this site. They will disagree with you, as do I, so don't be surprised.

Going further, if someone makes that choice, they should keep it to themselves. Contrary to the shrill shouts of the political Left, Libertarian Conservative Constitutional Fundamentalists (Christian, Jewish or otherwise) really don't care what people do in their bedrooms.

What we DO object to is the "HomoLeftist Agenda", where homosexuality is constantly pushed to the forefront of every conceivable issue, is on constant public display, and is trumpeted ad nauseum and ad infinitum as somehow "mainstream".

One trend I find particularly galling is the HomoLeftist obsession with trying to revise our past to create a historical precedent for homosexuality. Recent efforts have focused on Colonial America, with Jamestown baselessly declared a "Homosexual Community", and on Civil War Era history, with wild and unsustainable claims that Abraham Lincoln partook in sodomy.

As I pointed out in an earlier post here, not even historical literary characters are immune - there are some that opine (incorrectly, if they actually read the stories) that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's beloved Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson were (Gasp!) "Gay!!"

There actually IS such a thing as a "conservative homosexual". I can think of three lesbians in my own social circle that are pretty d#mn conservative - and they just want to be left alone. Some of their friends, however.....

Former Vice President Dick Cheney has a lesbian daughter, and Conservative radio personality Tammy Bruce comes to mind as well.

My personal view of the situation is quite simple: The physical act of sodomy is unnatural, unhealthy, and unneccesary, and if a person's sexual orientation (heterosexual or homosexual) is the defining theme in their life, that is not healthy either. We have a word for that: Pervert.

With many homosexuals, it has gone far beyond personal perversion - it's almost like a collective hysteria, with the constant need to display their "orientation" and affirm their "lifestyle" in public.

There's more - but I think we've made a good start on this.

The trolls will be here in ....5....4.....3....

I personally don't agree with gay marriage and I think sex between two people of the same sex is disgusting. However as a libertarian what does someone does in their bedroom is none of my business - just don't give me a hard time if I don't agree with your lifestyle.

On the other hand - I don't like how these gay activists made all these hateful remarks against Miss California Ms. Prejean. These were mean spirited hateful remarks against a woman who just declared how she personally felt without malice.

The left wants to the right to be tolerant of everything - it's a one-way relationship - the left will not even contemplate that one thing the conservative movement says makes sense.

I read left leaning blogs daily to see what the rest of the wingnut liberals are talking about. But I would not go on a left wing blog and bash all the liberals because they don't feel the way I do.

Jason - that seems like a baited question to me. All I can say is "they" can call it what ever floats their boat. If they wish to consider it "marriage" it's all semantics. But it's NOT Holy matrimony recognized by God. For all I care they can call themselves president and first lady.

Calling a lie truth, doesn’t make it true. Let the bitches “marry” – it means absolutely nothing to me. BUT – that’s just the point: “They” WANT it to mean something to me. They want to force me – through whatever means is at their disposal – to “recognize” them and even consider them superior. My saying “okay – you’re equal” doesn’t cut it. They believe I should sincerely cheer them. They won’t let me just tell them “whatever – just stay out of my face.” They want it IN my face and they want me to like it.

They can suck one another’s semen out of one another’s butt holes in public until the sun comes up. I will never like it, and they will never – according to the Bible I read and believe – be bound in Holy Matrimony.

But if the sick sons of bitches want to CALL it “marriage” – BFD.

Well I'm an Atheist so all that Bible stuff doesn't mean anything to me.

But at least now I know where Conservatives are coming from, so thank you to everyone who posted.

I still think banning gay marriage is silly - like Goldwater, I want to repeal laws, not make them.

Honestly, I think heterosexuals... especially liberal heterosexuals... are to blame for this situation. I doubt that gays would even want marriage if it weren't for no-fault divorce laws and an end to the expectation of life-long commitment, fidelity to one partner, and chastity prior to marriage.

As for how low we sink from here... I don't think nature has much tolerance for stupidity. And just like racking up massive debt with no conceivable way to repay it, there eventually comes a reckoning. You can't defy the laws of nature indefinitely and not expect sever payback.

It is all a bit silly I have to agree.

There is also not much in the bible about homosexuality being wrong unless of course you want to read it that way.

According to Leviticus 18:22: 'You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination.' But Daniel Karslake, director of For the Bible Tells Me So, says the word 'abomination' comes from the Hebrew word 'to'evah', meaning contrary to ritual. 'Leviticus was the holiness code, designed to further the tribe of the Jewish nation. Which is why it didn't look very kindly on men having sex with men, since sex was needed for procreation.' Nothing, in short, about divine judgement.

Also I don't think it would be mandatory to attend a gay wedding so it's not really in your face.

The only reason it becomes newsworthy is because people want to stop such things.

High five, V the K! I agree 100% with everything you said on marriage. I also think that homosexuality is more complicated than the born vs. made debate would indicate. To date they have found not apparent gene or genetic reason that a person would be gay. However, we all know of boys who seem effeminate from an early age, or girls that seem a little too masculine. This syndrome has been labeled gender identity disorder and it does not mean the child is homosexual or MUST become homosexual. However, it can be a source of social alienation, which makes these children more prone to homosexual grooming and molestation by older homosexuals who "accept them for who they *are*". And you can't tell me the fact that about 80% of all homosexuals admit to same sex abuse as young adolescents doesn't play a role, either. Chas Bono, her/himself, was molested by a bisexual babysitter when she/he was 11. Coincidence that she/he became gay? I think not.

80% of all homosexuals admit to same sex abuse ..

not sure using 'about' means you get to make up random statistics that are not based on any fact... now come on please try harder

One thing I have to laugh at everytime someone who is debating the "pro-side" of gay marriage is they bring up the divorce rate. It's laughable because why do they think that it'll go down if gays were to marry? I think that number would quadruple if that were the case.

Anyways, if gays want to have a civil union or whatever... fine... just don't call it "marriage", because that's not what it was intended to be.

TonyD hits the nail on the head with:

"if a person's sexual orientation (heterosexual or homosexual) is the defining theme in their life, that is not healthy either."

Which is one of my main problems with the homoleft agenda. It's ALWAYS in your face, and they want special protections due to this proclivity. Do we straights here go on and on about whether we like it missionary or girl on top, or doggy-style or whatever? Of course not, it's nobody's business and it's damned unseemly.

We don't talk about such things to kindergartners, either.

Jason,

Personally, I don't really care that much about gay marriage. It makes no difference to me if they can get married, it makes no difference to me if they can't.

What I object to is the attempts to legalize gay marriage by fiat. Rather than wait for people's minds to change, rather than trying to legalize gay marriage through legislation, the left has attempted to legalize it through the court system, by determining that it is a "right." Just like all the other suddenly-discovered "rights" (like health care), the left doesn't give a damn whether or not the people of the country believe that gay marriage is actually a right. Time and again they try to force change through the legal system, which is an abuse of its powers.

The United States was never intended to have a ultra-powerful federal government or an activist court system. The Founding Fathers intended that states should run their own affairs with only very limited interference from Washington DC, and I believe we need to return to that system.

If a state (like Vermont, for example) legalizes gay marriage through their elected representatives, I have no problem with that. This is an issue (again, like health care) best left to the states, through their legislatures, to decide. The courts need to stay out of it, and the federal government needs to stay out of it. This way, if a gay couple wants to be married, they can live in a state like Vermont that permits it, and if someone objects to gay marriage, they can live in a state that doesn't. Neither side is going to be perfectly happy about it, but compromise is often a requirement in life.

Fact Checker, I don't care exactly what the precise percentage is of homosexuals were abused as teens, but even common sense should tell you that it's high given that homosexual celebrity after homosexual celebrity has revealed that they were abused as children (and every homosexual I've ever personally known was molested in their teen years, and I worked for restaurant where I was in the minority as a heterosexual, so I've met a few).

I should, however, retract my earlier statement that implied that all childhood abuse of people who became homosexuals was homosexual in nature. Some homosexuals like Rosie O'Donnell and Ellen Degeneres were abused by heterosexuals, but they were abused, nonetheless.

Here IS a citation you can follow up on, though. According to the 1998 peer-reviewed study, "Sexual Abuse of Boys," by William C. Holmes, M.D. and Gail B. Slap, M.D., sexually abused young males are "up to 7 times more likely to self-identify as gay or bisexual than peers who had not been abused." So don't tell me that sexual abuse has nothing to do with the origins of homosexuality, because the evidence suggests there is an exceptionally strong correlation.

Thanks Judith. A lot of narrow-minded leftists think, "You wingnuts just hate fags because you're stupid," but I think we on the right by and large appreciate the complexity of human sexuality, and are more honest about the amount of dysfunction in the gay community that lefties who insist on viewing it all through a simplistic gauzy haze.

Exactly, V the K. I have never hated a person because he or she was homosexual, but I do hate the way some activists try to force people who approve of their lifestyle under penalty of sanctions. I also hate the fact that libs ignore the very real physical and mental health consequences of living a gay lifestyle. A person can have same-sex attraction and as long as they don't act on that attraction live as healthy a life as any heterosexual. If they act on that urge, though, they put themselves at risk for all sorts of diseases, and really, if you think about some of their more common sex practices, is it any surprise they are at risk?

MIND Over glands

The defenders of homosexuality continue the oxymoron
contradiction of attempting to use the mind to justify the
rule of carnal glands.

Thinking Americans still don't give 'a tinkers-sham' what
homosexuals do with their body-parts. An individual or
a society which is by law and tradition committed to the
natural human hierarchy of mind over body will not, how-
ever, ever sanction glandular rule over the human mind.

Undisciplined human desire can induce distorted perception.
The disturbed personality or inverted character can be
considered to be cognitively confused. This description is
confirmed by the work of English psychoanalyst Money-
Kyrle, who indicates that it is more accurate to recognize
such a condition as the result of distorted perception.

Neurosis, psychosis, stunting of growth, etc., are all, from
this perspective, cognitive diseases contaminating not only
perception but thinking, learning, remembering, valuing, and
decision- and choice-making.

Money-Kyrle affirms that scientific truth is not attained by a
trendy self-serving fashion, confession of inadequacy,
abdication, or collective majority-vote. There is no excuse for
professional ignorance willfully maintained.

By definition, a standard that is flexible is not a standard at all.
The human mind requires a standard of comparison that is
invariable. A criterion must be greater than the value measured
in order to supply value-meaning in a predictable direction of
survival and progression. The mind thus equipped is enabled
to maintain a natural dominion over the body and its appetites.
The very survival of the body itself, therefore, depends upon this
maintained intellectual authority. See Romans.

Our posterity cannot respect what it does not perceive, and it
cannot perceive that which has been abandoned or inverted to
an appetite of physical expediency by the equivocal person.

With confidence in the laws of human nature, we can know that
in the clash between carnality and intellect, the 'man of the mind'
will always prevail.

That is nature and GOD's way and intent all along.



"No one is smarter than their criteria." selah jfb

Jim Baxter
Teacher - 30 years
pointman/follower of The Lion of Judah
Santa Maria, CA

semper fidelis
Sgt. USMC
WWII & Korean War

+ + +

Consider:
The missing element in every human 'solution'
is an accurate definition of the creature.

The way we define 'human' determines our view of self,
others, relationships, institutions, life, and future. Many
problems in human experience are the result of false
and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised
in man-made religions and humanistic philosophies.

Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe.
The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human
reason cannot fully function in such a void; thus, the
intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it
perceives and measures values.

Humanism makes man his own standard of measure.
However, as with all measuring systems, a standard
must be greater than the value measured. Based on
preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal
nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton
task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appe-
tites, desires, feelings, emotions, - and glands.

Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament,
cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist
lacks a predictive capability. Thus, his man-made criteria
rises no higher than eyebrows - and too often, no higher
than pubic hair! Without instinct or transcendent criteria,
humanism cannot evaluate options with foresight and
vision for progression and survival. Lacking foresight,
man is blind to potential consequence and is unwittingly
committed to mediocrity, collectivism, averages, and re-
gression - and worse. Humanism is an unworthy worship.

The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with
a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the
foot-dragging growth of human knowledge and behav-
ior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and
validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcend-
ent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philo-
sophies and religions are man-made, humanism, and
thereby lack what only the Bible has:

1.Transcendent Criteria and
2.Fulfilled Prophetic Validation.

The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival
equipment for today and the future. Only the Creator,
who made us in His own image, is qualified to define
us accurately.

Human is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by
nature and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of
Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive
characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural
foundation of his environments, institutions, and re-
spectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is orien-
ted to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the
universe. selah

That human institution which is structured on the
principle, "...all men are endowed by their Creator with
...Liberty...," is a system with its roots in the natural
Order of the universe. The opponents of such a system are
necessarily engaged in a losing contest with nature and
nature's God. Biblical principles are still today the
foundation under Western Civilization and the American
way of life. To the advent of a new season we commend the
present generation and the "multitudes in the valley of
decision."

Let us proclaim it. Behold!
2009 AD: The Season of Generation-Choicemaker Joel 3:14 KJV

THE QUESTION AND THE ANSWER
Q: "What is man that You are mindful of him, and the son
of man that You visit him?" Psalm 8:4
A: "I call heaven and earth as witnesses today against
you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing
and cursing; therefore choose life, that both you and
your descendants may live." Deuteronomy 30:19

Q: "Lord, what is man, that You take knowledge of him?
Or the son of man, that you are mindful of him?" Psalm
144:3
A: "And if it seems evil to you to serve the Lord, choose
for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the
gods which your fathers served that were on the other
side of the river, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose
land you dwell. But as for me and my house, we will
serve the Lord." Joshua 24:15

Q: "What is man, that he could be pure? And he who is
born of a woman, that he could be righteous?" Job 15:14
A: "Who is the man that fears the Lord? Him shall He
teach in the way he chooses." Psalm 25:12

Q: "What is man, that You should magnify him, that You
should set Your heart on him?" Job 7:17
A: "Do not envy the oppressor and choose none of his
ways." Proverbs 3:31

Q: "What is man that You are mindful of him, or the son
of man that You take care of him?" Hebrews 2:6
A: "I have chosen the way of truth; your judgments I have
laid before me." Psalm 119:30 "Let Your hand become my
help, for I have chosen Your precepts."Psalm 119:173

References:
Genesis 3:3,6 Deuteronomy 11:26-28; 30:19 Job 5:23
Isaiah 7:14-15; 13:12; 61:1 Amos 7:8 Joel 3:14
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8

DEDICATION

Sir Isaac Newton
The greatest scientist in human history
a Bible-Believing Christian
an authority on the Bible's Book of Daniel
committed to individual value
and individual liberty

Let us proclaim it. Behold!
2009 AD: The Season of Generation-Choicemaker Joel 3:14 KJV

CONTEMPORARY COMMENTS
"I should think that if there is one thing that man has
learned about himself it is that he is a creature of
choice." Richard M. Weaver

"Man is a being capable of subduing his emotions and
impulses; he can rationalize his behavior. He arranges
his wishes into a scale, he chooses; in short, he acts.
What distinguishes man from beasts is precisely that he
adjusts his behavior deliberately." Ludwig von Mises

"To make any sense of the idea of morality, it must be
presumed that the human being is responsible for his
actions and responsibility cannot be understood apart
from the presumption of freedom of choice."
John Chamberlain

"The advocate of liberty believes that it is complementary
of the orderly laws of cause and effect, of probability
and of chance, of which man is not completely informed.
It is complementary of them because it rests in part upon
the faith that each individual is endowed by his Creator
with the power of individual choice."
Wendell J. Brown

"These examples demonstrate a basic truth -- that human
dignity is embodied in the free choice of individuals."
Condoleeza Rice

"Our Founding Fathers believed that we live in an ordered
universe. They believed themselves to be a part of the
universal order of things. Stated another way, they
believed in God. They believed that every man must find
his own place in a world where a place has been made for
him. They sought independence for their nation but, more
importantly, they sought freedom for individuals to think
and act for themselves. They established a republic
dedicated to one purpose above all others - the preserva-
tion of individual liberty..." Ralph W. Husted

"We have the gift of an inner liberty so far-reaching
that we can choose either to accept or reject the God
who gave it to us, and it would seem to follow that the
Author of a liberty so radical wills that we should be
equally free in our relationships with other men.
Spiritual liberty logically demands conditions of outer
and social freedom for its completion." Edmund A. Opitz

"Above all I see an ability to choose the better from the
worse that has made possible life's progress."
Charles Lindbergh

"Freedom is the Right to Choose, the Right to create for
oneself the alternatives of Choice. Without the possibil-
ity of Choice, and the exercise of Choice, a man is not
a man but a member, an instrument, a thing."
Thomas Jefferson

Judith, I know a few gay couples who have been together for a long time... and more than a few gays who are just messed up beyond all repair. Like the guy who sang in my son's band for a while, then one day just jumped into a car with some stranger, went to another state and disappeared... leaving behind his clothes, his job, his apartment, his life... everything.

That's pretty much been my experience, too, V the K. I've really liked most of the homosexuals I've known on a personal level, but they tend to be a very troubled lot.

Jason, & Evil Otto,

There is a saying that is appropriate here, on rare occasions even a blind squirrel finds a nut. Evil O is right about one thing, and believe me I thought I would never say that phrase, it is not the business of the federal government.

The problem with homosexuals getting "married" is the way they've convoluted our language. For centuries the word marriage is the state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual and contractual relationship recognized by law. The reason the government has to get involved is for the children, because these consensual relationships, more times than not (especially before the pill), produce offspring. When this happens the couple is now responsible for the child's care. Most couples are willing and waiting for this new responsibility, however not all. Thus some enforcement is at times required. So when homosexuals can have their own offspring, PTL that is a physical impossibility, than let them be married. However it would still not be Holy Matrimony.

Now with all that being said I have a question for you Jason. Have you ever feared for life? Been in bloody battle were your friends or enemies for that matter died? Or perhaps a highway wreck? If so, did you cry out to anyone or anything? Would anyone's life be any less by your absence? In these situations an appeal to the Divine is all you have. When I was in the infantry we had another saying, there are no atheists in a fox hole. Agnostic perhaps, because they don't know Him or His name, yet cry out do they all, Amen. Fear is the common enemy of us all, but there is a way to victory.

Van Helsing,

Thanks for posting that Laurel and Hardy clip, it was amusing.

Evil O is right about one thing, and believe me I thought I would never say that phrase, it is not the business of the federal government.

Wonderful. A lunatic who thinks that giving terrorists Miranda rights is a great idea is agreeing with me.

Liberals are the biggist slimeballs around worse then any kind of vermin

You can't really talk, so go blow up something. You make more sense when you're doing that.

Oh and thanks to Solomon for that beautiful version of marriage which is only there to keep people from running away from their child rearing responsibilities. Yes, that is a blessed version of "holy matrimony"

The way we define 'human' determines our view of self,
others, relationships, institutions, life, and future. Many
problems in human experience are the result of false
and inaccurate definitions of humankind premised
in man-made religions and humanistic philosophies.

Human knowledge is a fraction of the whole universe.
The balance is a vast void of human ignorance. Human
reason cannot fully function in such a void; thus, the
intellect can rise no higher than the criteria by which it
perceives and measures values.

Humanism makes man his own standard of measure.
However, as with all measuring systems, a standard
must be greater than the value measured. Based on
preponderant ignorance and an egocentric carnal
nature, humanism demotes reason to the simpleton
task of excuse-making in behalf of the rule of appe-
tites, desires, feelings, emotions, - and glands.

Because man, hobbled in an ego-centric predicament,
cannot invent criteria greater than himself, the humanist
lacks a predictive capability. Thus, his man-made criteria
rises no higher than eyebrows - and too often, no higher
than pubic hair! Without instinct or transcendent criteria,
humanism cannot evaluate options with foresight and
vision for progression and survival. Lacking foresight,
man is blind to potential consequence and is unwittingly
committed to mediocrity, collectivism, averages, and re-
gression - and worse. Humanism is an unworthy worship.

The void of human ignorance can easily be filled with
a functional faith while not-so-patiently awaiting the
foot-dragging growth of human knowledge and behav-
ior. Faith, initiated by the Creator and revealed and
validated in His Word, the Bible, brings a transcend-
ent standard to man the choice-maker. Other philo-
sophies and religions are man-made, humanism, and
thereby lack what only the Bible has:

1.Transcendent Criteria and
2.Fulfilled Prophetic Validation.

The vision of faith in God and His Word is survival
equipment for today and the future. Only the Creator,
who made us in His own image, is qualified to define
us accurately.

Human is earth's Choicemaker. Psalm 25:12 He is by
nature and nature's God a creature of Choice - and of
Criteria. Psalm 119:30,173 His unique and definitive
characteristic is, and of Right ought to be, the natural
foundation of his environments, institutions, and re-
spectful relations to his fellow-man. Thus, he is orien-
ted to a Freedom whose roots are in the Order of the
universe. selah

"NO ONE IS SMARTER THAN THEIR CRITERIA." JFB

Amen! Brother Jim. May the Lord grant you increase.