Support Gay Marriage, Support Religious Freedom

One of the most common arguments against same sex marriage in the United States is that it will destroy religious freedoms and increase government interference in churches and other religious organizations by forcing churches to marry gay couples, even if they oppose gay marriage/

The problem is, the exact opposite is true.

Religious freedom laws are completely separate from marriage laws in this country. The United States Constitution protects the right of churches and other religious organizations to refuse to marry same sex couples on religious grounds. This is not going to change if same sex marriage becomes legal throughout the nation. In fact, it's written into the Bill of Rights itself, and you can't get much more set in stone in this country than that.

Here's the funny thing, though. Because marriage laws in most states prohibit same sex couples from marrying, churches and other religious organizations that DO support same sex marriage are prevented from marrying same sex couples in accordance with THEIR beliefs.

Strangely enough, I don't hear a lot of "religious freedom" advocates complaining about that!

So, by legalizing gay marriage, you actually get the best of both worlds:

  1. Churches that DON'T want to marry same sex couples don't have to, and
  2. Churches that DO want to marry same sex couples can!

Photo by pinquino
Photo by pinquino

Do you support same sex marriage?

  • Yes
  • No
  • I haven't made up my mind
See results without voting

Personally, I believe government should stay out of the religious aspect of marriage altogether.

Many straight couples (myself and my husband included) are already choosing to forgo a religious ceremony in favor of a civil one. The state and federal benefits of marriage are available to straight couples regardless of which type of ceremony they choose. The important part is the marriage certificate, not the type of ceremony.

I propose that current federal and state benefits, based on what we currently call a marriage certificate (it could be renamed to civil union certificate if people are more comfortable with that), should be available to both straight and same sex couples. If the couple wishes to have a religious ceremony as well, then should be entirely between the couple and the prospective church or other religious institution.

Voila! Problem solved!

Before I finish, I'd like to point you to this excellent video, which goes into more detail about some of the legal history relating to same sex marriage. I hope you find it as interesting and enlightening as I did.

More by this Author


Comments 326 comments

TurnipTornado profile image

TurnipTornado 7 years ago from Michigan

THANK you!!! This is what I've been saying--how can you support democracy and outlaw same-sex marriage based on religious views at the same time? I don't think people know how important to the idea of democracy religious freedom is.


MindField profile image

MindField 7 years ago from Portland, Oregon

THUMBS WAY UP on this one, Kerry! It's plain, simple, easy-to-understand and, with the help of the video provided, carefully and correctly delineates the situation. 

For all their sanctimony, those on the right feel no compunction about trying to batter the doors of truth down with outright and frequently ludicrous lies. Not only in the long run but in the short term, they will lose ignominiously with such tactics.


C.Ferreira profile image

C.Ferreira 7 years ago from Rutland, VT

Finally! Someone with the right idea on this! Too many people argue either or...doesn't make sense! This is a great Hub!


Ralph Deeds profile image

Ralph Deeds 7 years ago

I'm with you on this on. One way to handle it would for everyone to be married civily and, if they so desire, married by a priest, rabbi, minister or Imam, as well. The civil ceremony would confer identical legal rights to everyone.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Marriage is between a man and a woman. Society rejects a new definition for an institution that has been around for thousands of years. Gays have other avenues to commit to each other such as civil ceremonies or unions. Sorry, but marriage, by definition, is not for you.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

braudboy, society has accepted many new definitions of marriage over the years. As recently as the 50's in the United States, marriage was defined as "one man and one woman of the same race." Today, there are many interracial couples. As recently as the 19th century, a married woman in the United States was essentially the property of her husband - she had no control over the property she brought with her into the marriage and would lose it (and her children!) if the marriage dissolved. In other societies and cultures of the past and present, marriage is defined as one man and as many women as he can afford to treat equally (or up to four, in the case of Islamic societies). In at least one culture, marriage is defined as one woman and two or three brothers. In Ancient Greece, marriage was viewed purely as an exchange of property and a means of producing heirs. Heterosexual sex was viewed as rather animalistic and uncivilized, and homosexual love was valued as the higher form.

I could go on, but I think my point should be clear. The "definition" of marriage has changed frequently throughout history and there are many different definitions used in the world even today. One more is hardly worth fussing over.

Moreover, in many states gay and lesbian couples do NOT have other avenues to commit to each other in the eyes of the state, and even in those states which do offer them civil unions and other options, these ceremonies convey the full range of state marital benefits and responsibilities in only a few states, and convey none of the federal marital benefits and responsibilities. If me and my husband moved to Colorado, our marriage would automatically be recognized as valid by the state. If my aunt and her partner moved here to Nebraska, their union would immediately lose all legal status. Seperate but unequal wasn't constitutional in the 1950's and it's not constitutional now.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg, if you pay attention as you cite examples, you will notice that the main definition of marriage stays constant throughout. Marriage is between a man and a woman. It is important for many reasons. I think society has lost its way in confronting this assault by homosexuals. We have tried to be accomodating, but their radical movement keeps pushing harder. Society should probably go back to taking a harder stance in common sense that realizes that homosexuality is foolish behavior. We are not doing gays any favors as we encourage this lifestyle, and our societal values as a whole is decaying as a result. The problem is that as society tries to be sensitive to this small percentage of Americans, the gay movement keeps making more demands that are not in step with mainstream society.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Well, between one or more men and one or more women, possibly with some hetero or homosexual lovers/concubines on the side.

I really don't see how it decays our societal values to allow people who are in a loving and comitted relationship to have their love recognized by the state with benefits such as the ability to visit during "family" hours in the hospital. I see it as an *affirmation* of marriage in a time when the institution of marriage is increasingly under threat from high divorce rates, "starter" marriages, etc., not a desecration of it.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Probably the main decay for societal values is in the area of family. The institution of marriage is the instrument that family is based on. It is important to the continuance of our society to nourish and encourage family and to value it and protect it. Gay marriage is an assault on these ideas and needs to be confronted as it tries to bully its way into the mainstream. There is nothing constructive or useful in their agenda and is only self-serving so they can convince themselves that their behavior is "normal", Society has repeatedly rejected their claims and rightfully so.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

As I said above, the fact that gay and lesbian couples want the right to commit to each other in the eyes of the state and/or church is not a rejection of traditional family values at all, it's an embrace of them! They WANT to get married and start a family. How is that a bad thing?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

How will they start a family???? It is physically impossible for them to do so. Probably a good indicator that their relationship and their behavior are foolish. So, after we allow them to marry, we must then allow them to raise children???? THat is why society is not in favor of this nonsense. The whole concept of same sex relations flies in the face of common sense and common decency. I think most gays realize the wrong they are doing and it is why they fight so hard to get confirmation or approval from society.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Are you familiar with the concepts of adoption, in vitro fertilization, and surrogate mothers? If people really want kids, they generally find a way to have them. There are lots of gay and lesbian couples who have children.

In fact, that's part of the reason why I support gay marriage. In many states it's hard for the non-biological parent to gain any parental rights whatsoever, even if the child is the result of a trip to the sperm bank and has no contact with its real second biological parent at all. If the non-biological parent of the child is the one with the insurance, that includes getting the child covered by his or her plan. Additionally, Arkansas just made it impossible for homosexual couples (as well as unmarried heterosexual couples) to adopt a child even if one of them is the child's only surviving relative - because apparently the foster system is better than family if the family happens to be homosexual or "living in sin". It's disgusting. This hurts children far more than seeing a couples guys holding hands on the street ever will.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Exactly my point as to why society does not want the definition of marriage changed. The gay movement does not just want marriage, they want society to choke down the ridiculous assertion that same sex couples are just a normal activity in progress. They want society to pretend that all is well as they parade their bizarre lifestyle all around us when every common sense instinct in our being screams out that this is not so. To expose children to this sideshow in the form of adoption and artificial fertilization is sad.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

That depends entirely on your definition of "normal." Obviously, it you define normal to be "majority" than homosexuality is not "normal." However, homosexual behavior is well-documented in the animal kingdom, including among our closest living relative, the bonobo. (In fact, homosexual behavior is not so much well documented among bonobos as rampant - you can scarcely watch a troupe for ten minutes without witnessing some form of homosexual sexual contact.)

And as I touched on earlier (and also in my hubs on sexuality and gender identity), there are and have been human societies where homosexuals are a recognized "third gender," or where it is considered completely normal.

Among them, as I said above, were the classical Greeks on whose ideas many of our own societies principles of democracy are based. The Greeks believed heterosexual intercourse, with its emphasis on procreation, to be uncivilized and animalistic, and valued homosexual love as the purest form of love.

IMHO, that's taking it a little far, but the point remains that when you describe homosexuality as abnormal and "bizarre" you are speaking from a very narrow and specific perspective that is not shared by all human societies, and not even by all people within your own society.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

I don't define normal....society does. Homosexuality is well-documented in the animal kingdom??????? In my casual observations of animal behavior in my 48 years on this earth, I have yet to encounter a gay dog or gay cat or gay anything animal. I have, however, encountered numerous sexual activity of the "normal" kind. Maybe they are still in the closet or just dont think their lifestyle will be accepted. It is not even worthy of discussion to call a gay lifestyle anything but abnormal. Without getting too descriptive, I will just say that it is obvious that male and female are natural partners and same sex activity requires some bizarre behavior with the assistance of lubricants and extra equipment. Your examples of some human societies that recognize gays as normal dont hold water. History has shown the opposite to be true. The only real gains by gays have been made recently and only because of their aggressive, in your face agenda to push this insanity down our throats.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Homosexual behavior has been documented in no less than 1500 non-human animal species, from flatworms to bonobos.

Dolphins, another of the planet's most intelligent species, is another with a particularly strong sex drive that often expresses itself in homosexual activity. Male dolphins have even been observed sticking their penises in each other's blowholes.

Most "homosexual" activity between domestic dogs and cats (and I would be astonished if you've genuinely lived 48 years on the planet without ever seeing a dog hump another dog of the same sex - I've lived on the planet 27 years and saw it practically daily growing up, when our two female dogs were young and playful) is actually a dominance display, but male lions are well known for their bisexual proclivities.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_i...

Give me evidence to support your claim that my examples of human societies that accept homosexuality "don't hold water" please. I do not claim Greek society is the model we should be basing ours on, given their taste for pederasty and the fact that they typically married 30 year old men to 15 year old girls. (And then complained that the girls were not the intellectual or spiritual equals of their husbands. Gee, fellows, this comes as a surprise?) But the fact is that homosexuality was not only accepted but viewed as preferable.

Some more interesting examples (both of societies that accepted homosexual behavior as "normal" and those that didn't):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_history

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_gender


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

If you are talking about a dog going through the motions of humping....then of course. A dog will hump a human leg, but I don't categorize this as bestiality. WHen you say that 1500 animal species have been documented as homosexual activity, the studies are skewed. I have given my male friends a hug, I have kissed my son, my father, and even close male friends at emotional occasions. THis is not the homosexual behavior that is being discussed as we speak of a lifestyle and of marriage implications. THe gay movement has tried everything to convince society that this is normal behavior, but we know better. I can cite far, far more instances of societies throughout history who have shunned homosexual behavior as sinful and wicked and abnormal. The laws of almost all of civilized societies throughout history condemned this behavior as forbidden.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Yes, the studies are skewed... AGAINST the true prevalence of homosexual behavior in the animal world. The Wikipedia page gives one of many examples:

[Concerning a study of mating giraffes] "Every male that sniffed a female was reported as sex, while anal intercourse with orgasm between males was only "revolving around" dominance, competition or greetings."

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2006/10/23/20718....

The only thing "unnatural" about human homosexuality is that it is viewed by so many as unnatural. The rest of the animal kingdom obviously has no problem whatever with accepting and practicing it.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Are you actually typing these comments with a straight face???? I think the gay agenda is as follows: It is to repeat their insanity enough times and they will begin to believe it. Then, to keep repeating the absurdity even more times to get the world to buy into it. I am not so sure about that giraffe anal intercourse unless someone is passing around K Y jelly out in the jungles. You are spouting absurdity and I feel a need to call you on it. This is a hopeless cause. Gays are getting their way because they are bullying people into acceptance. But society knows they are misguided.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Sorry, but lube, although helpful, is not absolutely necessary for anal intercourse. (Or so I have been told.) Nor is "extra equipment" necessary. Female bonobos get by quite happily with tribadism.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

If you have ever had sex, you certainly understand the importance of lubrication for intercourse. It is naturally produced in normal relations of male and female. Probably because this is our design and what is meant to be. Butt (pun intended), gays can continue to push in the wrong direction if they wish.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I'm married with kids, thanks. I'm aware of it. I was simply pointing out that synthetic lube, though certainly helpful, is not an absolute necessity and the idea of a pair of male giraffes getting it on under the African sun not as absurd as you choose to believe.

Nor is anal sex the only sexual activity available to gays (and certainly not to lesbians!) In fact, I saw a study somewhere once (don't remember where or how scientific I'm afraid) that suggested that as many as 15 or 20% of gay couples never bother with it at all.

They say gay men give the best blow jobs, after all, and it makes sense, if you think about it. I've never experimented, but I'd assume women give the best cunnilingus as well. If nothing else, they know the plumbing more intimately than anyone of the opposite sex ever could.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Why assume, if you are missing out on the best sex, why deprive yourself. Your arguement is lame. The more logical arguement is that male and female are designed to be partners and therefore make the best love partners. Your convoluted logic does not hold water and is just another bruised attempt to justify the abnormal lifestyle that most sane people realize it to be.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

~shrugs~ Adultery is as firmly against my morals as homosexuality seems to be against yours, and anyway, just because a woman is likely to have more natural talent at cunnilingus doesn't mean a man can't be trained. ;) I have no complaints!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

I am just wondering why you settled for this opposite sex slacker when you could have had that wonderful same-sex expert partner. Well, anyway, I am glad you have no complaints......except you do seem to be complaining that society is rejecting this insanity.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Being a supporter of LGBT rights does not necessarily mean that I am LGBT myself. Homosexuality is not contagious, you know, and you don't have to be a member of a minority group to believe that they deserve the same rights you yourself enjoy.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

It is not a group, but a behavior....and of course it is not contagious. It is, however, being pushed down society's throat and we are a little tired of "outrageous behavior" being labeled as "normal". They get no "minority" status anymore than a "smoker" or any other activity. Society has tried to be accomodating, but this movement has gotten way out of hand. They want to "re-write" what is taught in schools, and what is known to be the commonplace, traditional, family values. This movement is a loud, obnoxious, drunken voice of gibberish and society will reject it based on its lack of merits.


Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn 7 years ago from UK

Kerry, civil unions between gay and lesbian couples are widely accepted and practised here in the UK. I have brought my children up to understand that whilst the majority of people are attracted to the opposite sex, there are those who are not. Should they find an attraction to a same sex partner later in life, then I intend to be as loving and understanding towards them as I have always been. I am very glad that in the eyes of the law in Britain, all loving couples are given the right to celebrate committment publicly, and that homosexual partners in such arrangements have all the legal rights and protection afforded to heterosexual couples.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Sorry, braudboy, but the biological basis of homosexuality is well known and accepted by all but the most homophobic corners of society. Unfortunately, America happens to play host to a particularly large and vocal contingent of people who reject science and the principles of equality and justice this country was founded on in favor of their own personal prejudices.

Amanda, that seems a much saner and more just way of doing things to me than all this fuss about different people's different definitions of "marriage." Just give everyone a civil union and let those who want the religious ceremony add it at the discretion of themselves and their church.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

What do you mean, if your children find an attraction to a same-sex partner later if life.....I thought this movement was selling the idea that you are born this way and had no choice but to feel this way. Of course most sane people do realize that it is a choice and society is better served to discourage such foolishness and encourage better behavior. BUt, you will always have deviants who want to try the different and offensive behaviors. Just don't insult our intelligence in the process of making fools of yourselves.


Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn 7 years ago from UK

Braudboy, if you are 100% secure in your sexuality, then that's great. Other people will not necessarily be cut from the same cloth as you, and no more should they be. We are all individuals. I have known several homosexuals. They didn't plan to be that way, and some even tried to hide it, making their own lives, and the lives of those around them, very unhappy in the process. 'Society' embraces the full spectrum of possibilities. A mindset of intolerance is only one example amongst thousands.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

It is not about being secure in your sexuality. It is about knowing the difference between right and wrong. We should not celebrate deviant behavior and society has an obligation to uphold decency, standards, and traditional values. It is not intollerant to have certain expectations of behavior and moral code to maintain a civilized, honorable life for future generations. Society has an obligation to protect a respectable way of life.


Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn 7 years ago from UK

Sorry Braudboy. If you were banging the drum for an end to war, an end to guns, an end to terror, an end to violence against women, an end to political corruption or a fairer, more just society, I'd be right there with you, shoulder to shoulder. Homosexuality, for the most part, is not a lifestyle choice, and should never be persecuted on that basis.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

It certainly is a lifestyle choice. You are being dishonest with yourself. You should be more aware of how sexual deviancy and outrageous moral behavior is decaying society as a whole. You dont have to look hard to see the devalued product on television, movies, our school rooms, and everywhere. Standards and morals are necessary to maintain a stable and worthwhile society. The gay lifestyle does not fit into the equation. Individuals can do whatever they wish behind closed doors, but to force society to accept their depravity in the public square or the open boundaries of societal law is another story.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

It is NOT a lifestyle choice. In fact, there is a known genetic component, as well as significant evidence that hormone exposure in the womb may play a role.

I don't see a whole lot of graphic homosexual content in mainstream media so I don't know where you're getting that claim, unless you think heterosexual sex is deviant as well.

In fact, it's hard to find ANY positive portrayals of homosexuals in mainstream media who aren't reduced to stereotypes such as the heroine's gay best friend.

As for "outrageous moral behavior," I'm considerably more concerned about the outrageous moral behavior going on in our country's boardrooms than its bedrooms!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

THe boardrooms are a different subject and one I probably agree with. However, the radical gay movement is a decay on society and the bogus claim of being "born" gay is just the latest attempt at legitimacy. There are many recorded cases of gays who have given up this destructive lifestyle and have established a normal relationship and gone on to raise a family. What happened to being "born gay" in these instances. There are many documented cases of abused women from bad marriages who then turned to lesbianism. I guess the suddenly realized they were "born" gay. Much of the homosexual scene is just people acting on impulse and on bad judgement and wanting to experience deviant and rebellious behavior. Society is not fooled by it.


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

Great article covers many good questions God Jesus care less about people who love God Jesus are love humanity builds walls by naming people with human titles. God Jesus are walled by man religions yet God Jesus are the real birth right human holy faith.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

So, you are saying that there is genetics involved and we can detect homosexuality in the womb. SO, I can go get a test done on my 7 year old daughter and determine if she is gay?????? Or maybe, we can do pregnancy tests done and determine if our babies will be born gay????? You do realize that this is a ridiculous statement!


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I didn't say it could be detected in the womb, I said it might be influenced by factors in the womb. That is an entirely different thing. At this point there is no "test" for homosexuality. At least not until the child begins to experience sexual attraction! I know some GLBT people who claim they knew from about age 9, most knew by 15 or 16, though some tried to suppress their feelings. I've heard of some transgender individuals recognizing that they were "different" as young as age 3.

The biological basis of homosexuality is not well understood, but a few things we do know:

Studies done with identical male twins raised seperately suggest that there is a genetic component, because roughly 52% of twins who have a gay twin brother are gay themselves, a rate far higher than in the general population.

It has also been shown in studies that the more older brothers a boy has with the same biological mother, the more likely he is to be gay (every older brother a boy has increases the likelihood that he will be gay by 33%), and scientists have speculated that after repeated pregnancies, the mother's immune system may begin to attack androgenic hormones as foreign invaders (in the same way Rh incompatibility does not affect the first pregnancy but becomes an increasingly serious problem with later ones), leading to higher rates of homosexuality in younger brothers. (I should note that this is a controversial explanation, but the higher rates of homosexuality among men with multiple older brothers is well established.)

These are just a few of the theories about the biological basis of homosexuality currently being tested.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_or...


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

HOw do we know people are born this way if we cant detect it in some way? YOu have allowed yourself to be fooled by this gay movement and are swallowing all of their excuses as truth. It has always been a lifestyle choice. I am not saying they dont have urges.....but they are urges and not birth defects.


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

People are people let them live any dam ways they


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

People are people let them live any dam ways they


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

braudboy, I am pretty sure you are just willfully misreading my words now. There is currently no test because the biological basis of homosexuality is still poorly understood, but there are a significant number of factors associated to one degree or another with homosexuality, some of which could be used in the future to develop a "test." For example, it's been noted that the brain of homosexual men tends to resemble that of straight women and the brain of homosexual women that of straight men, so a brain scan probably could be used to detect a homosexual right now with a fair degree of reliability. It's just.... why? The "test" for homosexuality happens naturally sometime during puberty, so why spend the money doing an expensive test like a brain scan unless it is for science?

Or you could go around measuring finger lengths of girls and younger brothers of brothers - http://www.unl.edu/rhames/courses/readings/homofin... - but again, why?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Of course homosexuality is poorly understood! It is called denial! You cannot predict the behavior of people and you do not know who will succomb to deviant desires. It is probably no different than a person who chooses a life of drugs, or any other poor behavior. There is no "natural" transformation as you suggest and it is a "choice". I actually had a co-worker who was "gay" and became involved with a 30 something year old divorced woman with 2 kids. I suppose, by your standards, she was just in denial for the past 20 years after her "natural puberty transformation" into homosexuality. If you paid attention to the real world, instead of the "homosexual handbook" you would know that a big percentage of gays have chosen this lifestyle. Their are various reasons for their choice, some being mistreated by a spouse, some clouding their decisions with drugs, others are curious of this mysterious lifestyle, and many other reasons. It is also why you see many leave this lifestyle and return to normality.....because it is a CHOICE and not a "birth defect" as you suggest.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

And some people really do go into denial for 20 years after their "natural puberty transformations" just as you suggest, because of precisely the kind of attitudes you exhibit. Very few people voluntarily choose to be perceived as a "birth defect" and a "deviant" by people like you, especially considering that some people like you take the belief far enough to beat, rape, and murder LGBT people for nothing more than the crime of being born "different."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_against_LGBT...


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

You are ignorant! THere is no one like me who would rape, and murder LGBT people! You want to believe that people with the common sense and common decency to stand up for morals and principles are "extremists". I would never murder or rape anyone. Today' society has done an injustice to its people by trying to coddle and "baby" people for the poor choices in life. Instead, we try and tell them they are "born" this way and then excuse their poor behavior. It does them and society no good.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I didn't say you personally, I said people with beliefs like you. You yourself might limit your hate to language such as "bizarre" and "deviant" and "birth defect," but some people are crazy enough and filled with enough hate to lash out violently against "deviants." The torture and murder of Matthew Shepherd is merely one of the most famous of these cases.

In some cases, it's misdirected self-loathing. They say the men with the strongest homophobic beliefs are the ones with the strongest homosexual leanings in penile plethysmograph tests. ;) In other cases, it's apparently a sincere belief that homosexuality can and should be "cured." In South Africa, for example, they believe the "cure" for lesbianism is gang-rape.

Regardless, assuming you are in fact straight and not a self-loathing homosexual or bisexual who's managed to "cure" himself, let me ask you this. Did you "choose" to be sexually attracted to women or was it a "natural transformation" you went through sometime around puberty? I know I started noticing boys when I was 12 or 13, no conscious "choice" about it. Why would homosexuals be any different? Why is it SO hard for you to believe that some people are just naturally attracted to the same sex in the same way you and I are naturally attracted to the opposite sex?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

You have a losing argument and you resort to idiocy. As you try to make sense of the senseless and try to pursuade the sane that they are insane you look foolish. The real hatred comes out as you answer to those who point out your silly beliefs. YOur aguement holds no water. To bring your logic to its full conclusion, why couldnt any behavior by man be labeled as normal. Why cant we say that men who kill or rape or cheat on their spouse, or any deviant behavior is just their natural response to the way they were born. It is the way society is heading, but it is wrong. People are making choices in life and there are consequences. To say they are born that way is ignorant and does no one any good. Gay people know the score, but they also know they will get further in their radical movement if they can sucker people like you into thinking they have some "birthright"!


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Unlike people who rape and murder other people, sex between two consenting adults doesn't hurt anybody else, as long as they are responsible about it.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Individually, you are right.....two consenting adults having sex does not hurt anyone else. It could be depraved sex, adulterous sex, incest or whatever. Here's when it does hurt. THe gay movement is much more than two consenting adults having their perverted way behind closed doors. THey have pushed this on society and brought the debate to the public square and have demanded that society redefine its morals and it standards. THis is unacceptable.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

"Depraved," adulterous, and incestuous sex don't really fit my definition of "responsible," but whatever.

(In case it's not already obvious, I don't consider homosexual sex inherently "depraved.")

I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree on your main point here, because homosexuals openly admitting their existence doesn't bother me in the slightest. Love is love. Better two homosexuals in a loving, committed, long term relationship than two heterosexuals sleeping with different people every week and spreading their unloved, unwanted babies and their STDs around! There are responsible and irresponsible members of all orientations and irresponsibility bothers me far, far more than which particular sexual organs the irresponsible people in question happen to be combining.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Responsible and "gay" activity do not really belong in the same sentence. It has always been a rebellious and irresponsible activity and society will always view it as so. You seem to think that all gays are loving, committed, and pure in their relationships and that all heterosexuals are uncommitted, irresponsible and spreading sexual disease. YOur view of our society is warped. If you want to look at the real statistics, the risky sexual behavior gets awarded to the gay community.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

"You seem to think that all gays are loving, committed, and pure in their relationships and that all heterosexuals are uncommitted, irresponsible and spreading sexual disease."

Not at all. I've been happily married for 6 years to the only man I've ever slept with, my mother for 31! My surviving set of grandparents celebrated their 50th anniversary a few years ago, and most of my aunts and uncles on that side are pushing 20 years of marriage. On the other side of the family, we have two divorces with successful second marriages and a three time widower now on his fourth marriage, as well as an aunt with a successful marriage of over 30 years. If anything, I think I have an above average perception of how successful heterosexual marriage can be!

I also have a lesbian aunt who has lived with her partner for over 25 years (long outlasting her two divorced brothers' marriages) and I really can't for the life of me see why their relationships deserve legal recognition when hers doesn't. Love is love.

And irresponsibility is irresponsibility. I know plenty of people of both orientations who I consider sexually irresponsible as well. However, the gays and lesbians actually have an advantage where irresponsible behavior is concerned - at least if they have stupid, unprotected sex they can't get anyone pregnant! Maybe if you look at homosexual behavior as a way to reduce the number of abortions you'll approve of it more! ;)

Regardless, one final point and one more thing I really don't understand about homophobes. You obviously object strongly to irresponsible sexual behavior, but then you deny homosexuals any responsible outlet for their sexual urges except "conversion." I know you'd much rather have homosexuality eradicated from the planet, but given that this seems unlikely to occur, doesn't it make more sense to ENCOURAGE them to settle down into nice monogamous couples like everyone else. Civil unions conferring ALL the rights and responsibilities of marriage, instead of just some of them, would do that.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Civil unions are a different debate. THe radical gay movement is pushing for a re-definition of marriage. YOu need to stay focused on what this movement is trying to do and not be so gullible as they push these changes on society. I am glad for your aunt and I am not saying that gay people cant live together and have a relationship with another. What is unacceptable is for a movement to try and redefine society and society's regard for holding up certain morals and standards.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Did you ever actually read this hub? The whole point was that I believe we should switch to a system where hetero and homosexual couples both receive civil union status from the government with equal state and federal benefits, and leave "marriage" to the churches.

If you watch the video, you'll note that the gay man in it agrees with me, and he is not alone in doing so.


Enelle Lamb profile image

Enelle Lamb 7 years ago from Canada's 'California'

I think everyone has the 'right' to marry and divorce (lol) just because someone prefers potatoes to tomatoes is not a justifiable reason to withhold that 'right'.

I too, had an aunt who defied society and lived with her partner for 20 some years.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

No....your hub specifically speaks in favor of gay MARRIAGE!!! A civil union and marriage as defined by our society are 2 totally separate and different debates. Redefining marriage is totally unacceptable and it is what the "gay movement" wants. THey cannot receive the same status as heterosexual couples because our society has defined the heterosexual marriage and the resulting family as the standard and the acceptable behavior to maintain any semblance of a decent society. Society will not re-write the laws of decency to make a deviant group feel better about themselves.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

......and everyone does have the right to marry. The courts have already decided that the laws of marriage does not discriminate. This is because homosexuality is a behavior and a choice.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Direct quote from the main body of the hub:

"I propose that current federal and state benefits, based on what we currently call a marriage certificate (it could be renamed to civil union certificate if people are more comfortable with that), should be available to both straight and same sex couples. If the couple wishes to have a religious ceremony as well, then should be entirely between the couple and the prospective church or other religious institution."


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

In this form, you are trying to redefine marriage. Unacceptable. There are already civil options available to gay couples. There is no way to have a religious ceremony, at least not the Christian religion based on the Holy Bible. It is clearly forbidden and I dont know why any gay person would want to even participate, while not abiding by the true principles of the religion. Certainly, any church that is true to its principles could and would not allow a religious ceremony based on a gay union. ....and you clearly state as the title of your hub "Support Gay Marriage"


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I'm not trying to redefine marriage. There is a civil aspect to marriage and a religious aspect. I'm saying the government should get out of the religious aspect entirely and stick with the civil aspect, which is easily done. Whether you choose a religious or a civil ceremony, the thing that makes you legally married in the eyes of the government is the marriage certificate. Rename it a civil union certificate and give it to both gay and straight couples. Leave marriage to the churches. Then the majority of churches that don't support gay marriage would not be required to perform them and the minority that does is not prevented by the government from exercising their own religious belief that gay marriage is acceptable.

The civil options currently offered to gay couples are not acceptable. They may or may not confer the full range of state benefits to gay couples, and convey none of the federal ones. For example, if my husband and I moved to Connecticut, our marriage would be immediately recognized as valid, no questions asked. If my aunt and her wife moved to my state, their marriage license would immediately revert to a worthless piece of paper and they would have no more legal rights or recognition in the eyes of the state than a pair of unusually long-lasting roommates.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

LOL, hey braudboy, somebody coincidentally just pointed me to this: http://www.geocities.com/patrick_farley/gayMarriag...

Shall I set it up as a bingo card and see who wins first? :)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Yes, it has turned into a crazy debate.....because common sense has been thrown out the window. THere should be no debate at all. It is obvious that gay activity has always been a behavior and a deviant one at that. Society has always rejected it. What people do behind closed doors is their business. But, when you bring your radical and wrong behavior to the public square, it will be confronted by decent people who will protect the morals and principles that the future of that society depend on.


Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn 7 years ago from UK

Kerry, I just stopped by to see where the comments were going on this one since I bowed out. I can see that no ground has been won or lost here!


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

So, in other words you're saying that gays and lesbians should thank us for allowing them to exist at all, but that they're only allowed to exist as long as they exist in secret and never remind us of the fact that they do.

Plus, society has the right to condemn them for promiscuous and sinful behavior while simultaneously denying them any legitimate outlet for their attraction.

Nice, braudboy, nice. Perhaps you should move to Saudi Arabia. You might find its morality more to your liking.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Again, where you are mistaken is this. THese are men and women....not gays and lesbians. You try to give them status that does not belong. It is a behavior. You dont say that we enfringe on the rights of smokers....because it is not a race of people, but a poor behavior choice. Society has always put up standards and principles that are needed to uphold a decent society. There are people who like to be nude.....do we allow them to do freely as they please and take their behavior to the public square???? Of course not. You have signed on to their bogus claims that they are born this way and that they are separate gender. How silly! Again, what they do in private, just as smoking, nudists, and others, is OK with me. However, society as a whole has an obligation to uphold its standards and principles....and when this gay movement tries to bully its way into re-writing the rule book, they should be stopped. We are not talking Saudi Arabia....your dramatics do not work. We are not talking about throwing people in prison or stoning them. What we are talking about is the common sense and the common decency of society. This radical movement will not be given any normalcy or prominence that it does not deserve. Their behavior is ridiculous and they will be called on it. They will not be allowed to redefine the rules of society. Sorry!


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I ask you again, did you CHOOSE to be heterosexual? Did you wake up one day and think, "gosh, it's high time I started noticing how beautiful women are?" Or did you just start noticing?

Why do you assume that same-sex sexual attraction works any differently than opposite sex attraction?

You can argue that it's a behavior in the sense that they're not forced to ACT on their natural sexual attraction to the opposite sex, but why should 10% of the population be forced into celibacy against their will just because they're different? (Or forced into a lifetime of sex with someone they're not actually attracted to - have you ever noticed how many letters to Dear Abby are some variation on the themes "my spouse NEVER wants to have sex with me" or "my spouse wants to have sex ALL THE TIME and I can't handle it anymore?" Some of these cases are just incompatible sex drives, but I guarantee you that many of them involve one spouse who is either hiding or suppressing homosexual tendencies.)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Your logic is faulty. There has to be a norm. We do not choose to be hetorosexual...it comes normally. A good example is this...you do not choose to breathe, but instead it comes instinctively to you. YOu can choose to hold your breath and not particpate, but I do not recommend it to you. Also, you will instinctively eat and drink, but you can choose to not do so, but, again I don't recommend it. There is normal behavior and abnormal behavior. Most sane people realize a need for cleanliness and hygeine and will take care of those needs. Others might choose to be a nasty, sloppy mess and ignore these needs. Society realizes the normal functions of the human body and they will not give in to insanity, even as it is bullied on them. THe psycho-babble of the gay community is their only arguement for their raunchy behavior, but it fails the test. It is similar to the insanity pleas of criminals...you know the " I was born with a desire to kill, or rape, or steal". Society does not buy it, we understand that man has behaviors and urges, but he also has self control and the ability to know right from wrong.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

My logic isn't faulty in the least. You simply refuse to accept that homosexuality is "normal" behavior for some people. A minority of people, yes, but "minority" is not inherently "deviant." For example, one of my brothers-in-law has green eyes, which are rare in the world as a whole and almost unheard of in his particular ethnic group, which is almost universally brown eyed. Nobody considers his eyes to be a "birth defect."

For a slightly more related example, consider left-handedness. In many cultures (including ours until quite recently), the left hand was considered the hand of the devil and left handed children were routinely beaten for using their left hands. Many families tied their children's left hands behind their back to force them to use their right hands instead. Like homosexuality, this is an example of an inborn characteristic that was treated as a "behavior" (and a deviant one at that) and punished on the grounds that a child should have "self control and the ability to know right from wrong."

(Lefthandness, by the way, occurs in roughly the same percentage of the population as homosexuality - roughly 7-10% of adults - and like homosexuality, is more common among males than females.)

We now view this treatment of left handed children as ridiculous, and I am optimistic that modern society's treatment of homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgender individuals will one day be viewed as equally ridiculous.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

You can list many things that are out of the ordinary....green eyes, left handed, red-hair, these are undeniable physical charecteristics. You, however, admitted earlier that there is no marking or genetic imprint that identifies a gay person. THe real truths are this....gay activity is a behavior, and a bad one at that. There have been many cases of gays who have left this lifestyle choice and those who enter this lifestyle choice in later years. ...and speaking of inborn characteristics....the sexual equipment we are all born with is designed for the opposite sex. THat tells me we are all born straight.


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

gay people are here to stay. All people need to stop worrying about other peoples life. They have the God given human right to live free in all choices of life without life bothering to worry about why people are gay.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

And in the 19th century the "undeniably physical characteristic" lefthandness was believed to be a behavior, and a bad one at that. Now we realize that it's not and people were wrong to beat and marginalize left handed people. Science marches on.

There is no single "test" for homosexuality *at this time*, but there is strong (and growing) evidence that genetics and fetal hormonal exposure each play roles in deciding future sexual orientation. As for people who "realize" that they are homosexual later in life, I would bet a lot of money that in the majority of these cases there were early signs which were ignored or suppressed.

Here's one such story if you care to read it: http://hubpages.com/relationships/The-Princess-In-...

Our equipment may be "designed" for the opposite sex, but it works just as well with the same sex. Just ask a bonobo!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

The equipment does not work just as well with the same sex. You are not being honest with yourself. And you also ignore the facts that many people have entered and exited the gay lifestyle. It is clearly a choice, but one that everyone is free to make. What they cannot do is get society' blessing for their deviant behavior. That is what it comes down to. If gay people would leave it at that, there would be no more to discuss. BUt the gay movement is trying to re-write society's rules and guidelines that it has set forth for its people, ....this wont be tolerated. People are free to make choices about being gay...but, as in all of life, choices usually have consequences and/or benefits.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

As I said above, some who come out later in life do so after ignoring or suppressing their true identity for years, or even decades.

Most who leave do so after relgious conversions that convince them homosexuality is a sin, God hates fags, etc. Some of these gay->straight conversions are successful, some are not.

For simplicity's sake in this discussion, I have also been ignoring the existence of bisexuality.My suspicion is that most of the successful "conversions" were actually of people who leaned homosexual, but were technically bisexual. (3 or 4 on the Kinsey scale, for example, rather than 5.) Likewise for people who came out later in life after one or more successful heterosexual relationships.

For bisexuals, homosexual behavior can be the "choice" you claim it is for everybody. I'm about a 1 on the Kinsey scale (primarily heterosexual, only incidentally homosexual) - I have had same sex "urges" that I've "chosen" to ignore because I'm married to a man I love and don't want to ruin that, just as both of us avoid inappropriate relations with members of the opposite sex for the same reason. However, if I had fallen in love with a woman first, the story might have turned out very differently, even though 95% of my attractions are still directed towards men. I honestly can't understand why such a love, if it had lasted as long and been as deep, has any less right to exist and be recognized.


pgrundy 7 years ago

kerry--Amanda told me about this essay. I'm sorry I missed it. You forcus in on the key issues and you do it with remarkable clarity. The video clip is awesome. I wish I could show it to everyone I know. I do think that gay marriage will be legalized. Most Americans want it and are sick to death of religious intolerance smearing our country's reputation on the world stage. Once gay marriage is legal, people who are filled with hate and fear will be free to continue their disgusting orientations--toward hate and fear. Most of us will not be hanging out with them. :)


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Thanks, Pam. Barring some freak backlash, I think it could even be legal in most of the US within the next ten years or so. Nate Silver ran the numbers awhile back and it looks like there will be a plurality of support for gay marriage by the early 2010s in most states:

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/04/will-iowans...


pgrundy 7 years ago

Nate Silver usually gets it right. Already we see state by state adopting it. It's very encouraging. :)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

How do you figure that most Americans want gay marriage legalized?. Are you paying attention to what is happening. THis idea was defeated on the ballot in California, the most liberal state in the union and the home-state to homosexuals. THis is not supported by the majority of Americans and rightly so. Society has an obligation to uphold certain principles in protecting the integrity of its future. I am sure you have sympathy and compassion for these people and it is admirable. We would be doing them much more good to point out that "the emporer has no clothes on" than to let them masquerade around and make utter fools of themselves. It is not hatred to prevent someone from falling off a cliff or to venture into danger. It is much more compassionate to show them the path to a good life, and not encourage deviant behavior.


pgrundy 7 years ago

Five states have legalized it, three just recently. Forty five to go. Don't worry, you'll be able to stay and be mad about it. :)


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Check the link above to fivethirtyeight.com. Nate Silver is pretty darn good with numbers. Not infallible, but pretty darn good. Opposition to gay marriage is highest among the older generation which is, as older generations do, steadily dying off. Even young evangelical Christians support gay marriage at greater rates than older ones do.

As for California, conservative Catholic, Protestant, and Mormon churches sunk millions of dollars into misleading ad campaigns in the state in the months and weeks leading up to the election. Some of their lies are busted in the video linked in this hub.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

pgrundy....in those 5 states, how many were voted on by the people and how many were implemented by activist judges. The people just do not want it....and for good reason. THe implications to a society's moral principle and standard of behavior is severe. It is clearly a behavior and a choice and that is what is society has every right to monitor. It is a clever move to try and change the debate to the idea that this is some kind of third gender, but it will not work. Society as a whole sees this as the nonsense that it is.

And the problem with your "older generation" theory is this. As the younger generation get older and wiser, they become the older generation and start gaining the wisdom and principles instilled in them by their fathers, mothers, aunts, etc. THen they discard their youthful indiscretions and foolish ways, and take their place as the elders of society, safeguarding it against the radical attacks by groups such as "the gay movement".


jreuter profile image

jreuter 7 years ago from Portland, Oregon

ahh, that old tired argument pgrundy, that anyone who disagrees with same-sex marriage is filled with hate and fear. Wow. Pretty convenient to label and judge those you disagree with, isn't it? It would appear, despite popular thinking, that both sides are capable of self-righteousness. Thanks for making that so crystal clear.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

kerry - Thank you for addressing these matters, and for patiently coversing with the inevitable close-minded person that tries to argue from all angles except reason. They're always vocally against things they conveniently wouldn't do themselves (hence the obsession with homosexuality and abortion).

jreuter - Not true. Sometimes they're filled with the promise of a spot among 144,000 reserved in heaven, or 72 virgins, instilled by their preacher/imam. But, if the response is not an emotional one (fear), it's always a self-serving one.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- its not closed-minded. Its called having principles and holding to them. When you are guided by character and conscience, instead of popular opinion or "feelings", you can stand strong and, as a society, weather the storm created by the many attacks of those who want to be reckless with the traditions and ethics of the commonwealth. This "gay movement" is a small minority with a big mouth who are trying to re-write the laws of decency and it is they who are self-serving. They want their way, even at the expense of society as a whole.


pgrundy 7 years ago

I'm not the one trying to abridge the rights of another group solely on the basis of relgious beliefs that are not universally shared. But keep up the sarcasm. You don't really have much else.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

This is not a religious issue but it could be one. The HOly Bible certainly has plenty to say on this subject. THis is not the sole basis for rejecting this deviant behavior. It is counter-productive behavior to the continuance of a decent society with strong implications of decaying the traditional family and putting children at risk who are subjected to this abnormal family situation. Society has a right to limit or shun certain behaviors that it sees unfit for the continued future flourishing of said society. THose such as yourself who try to promote this "gay movement" as a group of people are misled. These are men and women....not some third gender of people. They are men and women who choose to engage in risky and deviant behavior and society has always rejected a public acknowledgement of acceptance for this conduct. Their best bet, if they wish to continue this behavior, is to do so in the privacy of their bedrooms. To try and validate this nonsense by strongarming society into re-writing its laws of decency and moral code will not work.


williamblake profile image

williamblake 7 years ago

Nice hub, but I don't understand that why the men wants to sex men, or why women want to sex women. It really confuses


thurstjm profile image

thurstjm 7 years ago from Mysterious

I don't believe I read through all of those comments. Braudboy, I know that it's already been proven to you, repeatedly, that being Gay is not a choice. However, I feel that it's necessary to repeat that. Being gay is not a choice. Your whole argument is that being Gay is immoral, that it is somehow wrong to be gay. Do you have any actual explanation as to WHY it is wrong, or WHY it is immoral? You say that it is immoral because it will somehow destroy the traditional family and damage our society. BUT, you say the reason that gay rights will damage those things is because it is immoral. That is circular logic. I challenge you to give even one, intelligent reason as to why being gay is immoral. It doesn't hurt anyone. It's not immoral. The reason you think it's immoral is because of one line in Leviticus that says a man should not lie with a man as he does with a woman, and you take that line as an unquestionable authority. Have you actually read the Bible, or even the entirety of that chapter? Leviticus goes on to give many other outrageous orders, most of which no one claiming to be a christian would support. My favorite goes something like, if a child should disrespect his mother or father, he must be killed. Leviticus also says that all adulterers should be killed. So, as long as you accept the bible as the infallible guide for mality, if you see a child talking back to his parents, or find out that someone you know has committed adultery, it is your moral duty to murder them.


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

By God Jesus humanity freedom of choice thought love life are of God Jesus given to all people. No person has the right to judge other wise. New world birth right human holy Faith God Jesus humanity. God Jesus mean all people on earth


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Its the rewrite the Bible crew in action with alittle Dr. Doolittle mixed in. Is there any doubt what the Bible says on the subject? As I've said before, please don't put your square block in our round hole.(absolutely no sexual innuendo intended)

Look marriage is sacred. homosexual behavior should not be in the same sentence, not to mention the same church! Keep it away from us and its fine, do whatever. As far as the videos concerned wheres the rebuttal? Its easy to pick apart someones opinion when you won't be scrutinized or challenged. Marriage is about a man and a women coming together to spend a life raising the next generation. It has nothing to do with Discos and Turkish baths.

Thurstjm lite'n up, Where did you read in the the Bible that homosexual relationships are approved of? Seriously, please help me change my position. Even if I could understand whats right about homosexuality, I would be completely put off by the ranting.

Don't call homosexual unions marriage because we consider it an insult to something very sacred. Most Christians consider this a sin and at best an insult. Work for the rights and benefits you should have but please do it quietly.

Hey Thurstjm what are you wear'n boy? Is that polyester? Its ok Christians still love you and I wonder if homosexuals would say the same thing. Peace.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Thurstjm-NO one has proven to me that gay is not a choice......because this cannot be proven. You will have to sell that malarkey to someone more gullible. Most of society realizes the poor behavior involved with the gay lifestyle and they are tolerant to a point. Society is probably willing to allow this foolishness as long as it is behind closed bedroom doors. But, the problem is that this radical "gay" movement has decided to confront society and shove their perverted rules down our throats. They want to re-write the laws of decency and common sense. THis is not acceptable. THis is when decent people will stand up and call them on their insanity. Gay is not a gender, it is a behavior and is most certainly immoral. As to what makes it immoral, I would say that the evidence of societies throughout history condemning this conduct is probably the proof you are looking for. And you can certainly find more references than Leviticus if you want more confirmation from the Holy Bible. Look, it is not even worthy of debate. Homosexuality is poor behavior and is not acceptable for a decent society.


GRIM REAPER 7 years ago

Politics ......Gay Marriage...........Religion ...........How pathetic are people.....Do Gays think they are special ....even more special..... that there should be a marriage, and hopefully Gods blessing whatever..People want to be allowed to do whatever they want then seek some sort of conscience......and do it right in a church....Crap crap crap.

Why don't all the Gays and whatever you want to be called just go ahead and do what you do without asking for people to accept your distortions as part of their lives..

If you dont believe in God why do you want to have marriage......bit of a Dork mindset... OH I forgot you want to show each other how committed you are to each other, you are doing it already without marriage so how will it change anything....

If marriage doesn't work for straights why should it even be considered for gays


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Indeed you can find other mentions of homosexuality in the Bible, few of them positive, but the Bible's portrayal of marriage is not much more appealing to modern sensibilities than the ancient Greeks' notions about it! You have widespread polygamy and concubinage practiced even by godly men, sex slavery, incest....

For example, the Bible never states explicitly that the sin of Sodom and Gomorrah was homosexuality - that was codified only later, by the Byzantine emperor Justinian - but if it was, the majority of the modern world would vastly prefer a bunch of flaming homosexuals to Lot, a man who first offered his daughters up to be gang-raped and later had sex with and impregnated them!

Speaking of flaming homosexuals in the Bible, don't forget this passage: "I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women." (2 Samuel 1:26)

;)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Kerry...please dont try to use the Holy Bible to make sense of your cause...it will only seem sillier than it already is. If you studied your Bible, you would know the context David speaks about Jonathan in your Bible quote. David speaks of his loyalty. Another translation of this Bible verse from the contemporary English version states " JOnathan, I miss you most! I loved you like a brother. You were truly loyal to me, more faithful than a wife to her husband."

NOw, if you step into the new testament, where Paul is setting up the Church, you will see the importance of having upright leaders for the Church. He instructs TImothy in 1 TImothy 3:12 - " A deacon must be the husband of but one wife, and must manage his children and his household well." It is clearly a wrong behavior, this homosexuality you endorse. It is not something honorable or worthy of a societys approval. So, homosexuals must do this in private if they must, and as they try to re-write public laws, they will be pushed back. ....and this is not a hatred of gay people. HOwever, society has a right to uphold its laws for the greater good and cannot compromise its truths for the whims of every fringe group trying to change them to feel better about its own foolish behaviors.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I know the context very well. I was just messing with you. However, that English translation is laughable. Talk about revisionism! Please tell me that's not the only version you own.

Who's talking about making gays deacons? We're talking about according them equal rights of legal kinship with their civil unions/marriages so that they can, among other things, be on the same insurance, make next-of-kin decisions in hospitals, and have their relationship be legally recognized when they cross state lines. These are basic, basic rights. If a gay couple chooses to commit to each other and lives together for 50 years, why should the family of one have more legal rights during a final illness and death than the man he chose to spend his life with? That's crazy, and deeply unjust.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg- it is funny that you criticize revisionism as laughable.  Because this "gay movement' has truly made themselves a laughing stock as they parade their deviant lifestyle into the public eye and try to revise society's laws of decency and respectable behavior.  Urged on by people like yourself, this "gay movement" has embarrased themselves and lied to themselves in trying to legitimize an abhorrent lifestyle.  Society is not buying the lies and realizes that we are made up of men and women, and not some third gender called "gay".  It is merely a choice and a behavior and it is in poor taste.  I believe some basic rights do exist to gays where they exist for any man and woman.  When you try to redifine what a man and woman are is where you are going astray.  Society is not going down that wrong path with you.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Hypocritical revisionism IS laughable. Somehow "continuing revelation" has allowed polyester and cheeseburgers to be perfectly okay, while continuing to condemn gays and lesbians as abominations.

Or, to take another example, slavery. Paul is the only one to specifically condemn homosexuality in the New Testament; he also condones slavery. Yet I don't see any modern Christians arguing that slavery is a-ok.

We don't take Paul's 1st century values into the modern world where slavery is concerned, why should we where homosexuality is concerned? What is it that makes his condemnation of homosexuality "right" when his condoning of slavery is "wrong?"

It's awfully convenient if you ask me.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

You misinterpret Paul and his teachings. He doesnt condone slavery as much as he teaches people how best to live their lives with the reality that slavery was commonplace in those times. The main problem with the "gay movement" is that they are trying to re-write the laws of decent society. It is being rejected. Gays have presented their case and it has been denied. Common sense has won out. Society has the right and even the obligation to set up the rules for which its people should live. THroughout history this has been the case and throughout history the homosexual lifestyle has been rejected. Of course homosexual activity has always existed, but only as a deviant behavior and never given any acceptance as normal. Sorry!....and your comparisons are apples and oranges. Here is a comparison for you. Should our society allow nudists to be as free as they want to be in our public square. These people obviously believe in their lifestyle and who are we as a society to limit their freedoms. Of course, you can see the absurdity here, and you might say the comparisons have nothing to do with the other. Exactly my point!


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Hmm, Paul's writings and behavior at several points easily support the idea that he condoned slavery, as was made graphically clear during the 19th century, when slavery advocates and abolishionists alike circulated pamphlets arguing their cases with Biblical scriptures.

Even if we do accept your interpretation as the correct one, you're basically proving my point. The Bible cannot be taken out of the context of its own time and applied indiscriminately to the modern world. Many of its teachings can, it is true, but others are as alien to modern society as our computers and airplanes would be to the 1st century shepherds and tradesmen the Bible was intended for.

In Biblical times, the Jewish and Christian peoples were oppressed and threatened races forever under threat from hostile neighbors. It made sense to outlaw homosexuality, birth control, masturbation, etc. and to practice polygamy and sex slavery/concubinage because they needed all the children they could get to fight against their enemies in wartime and work the fields/tend the flocks in times of peace. Plus, infant and child mortality rates were so high that most families could expect to lose anywhere from 1/4-3/4 of all the children they ever had. A woman might bear eight children, but only two or three would survive to adulthood.

Today, we are the most powerful nation in the world, and threatened more by too many people than too few. (Or, if you prefer, by uneven distribution of people in areas with rich and scarce resources, even within our own country. Think of the lush and fertile Midwest versus the growing bitterness of the water rights debates in the Southwest.) Infant and child mortality rates have never been lower. It no longer makes sense for every woman to have 5-10 children as was common in Biblical times, so use of birth control is widely accepted by the people, if not the religious elite. Similarly, acceptance of homosexuality is on the rise.

Nudism, by the way, is accepted without the bat of an eye in many European countries. I myself was shocked to see advertisements with pictures of topless women while walking down Nevskii Prospekt when I lived in Russia, and of course the beaches of France are famous for their cheerful acceptance of nudity. Last time I checked, European society had not collapsed into moral anarchy. In fact, they have lower rates of divorce, teen pregnancy, and a number of other moral problems than the US does!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Wrong...there is the part of the Bible where Paul and others are talking directly to the people and their direct needs and circumstances, and there are other parts of the Bible that are teaching principles and conduct that are for all times. And, by the way, the more I confront you, the more I expose your position as lame and grasping for straws. Your nudist comments are more confirmation of my point that society does not allow this practice and so designates certain areas where this is permitted and not fully on parade throughout the public square. Nudism is certainly not accepted. Your view is distorted. At some points we are all nude, but there is no widely accepted society where nudity is the norm at all times. There is a difference between sunbathing nude on an exclusively nude beach, and allowing nudists to parade around wherever they choose. Society says no to this and it is for very similar reasons that they do not allow the "gay movement" to re-write the rule book either.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Er, the bulk of Paul's comments on both homosexuality and slavery are contained in 1 Corinthians and Timothy, which are indeed letters "talking directly to the people and their direct needs and circumstances." Jesus, who was better at "teaching principles and conduct that are for all times" than his legalistic follower, never commented on homosexuality.

Nevskii Prospekt, by the way, is the most famous street in Russia. It is the equivalent, say, of Pennsylvania Avenue or the Champs Elysee.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Kerryg, you are a clever debater and you seem to believe what you say. Just consider the phrase, coming out of the closet, this in it self says the guilt associated with the behavior has kept it in the dark, behind closed doors. The shame of this behavior should not be flaunted, or minimized. If you feel the Bible supports behavior worse than this so its ok, you are only rationalizing your position to add some meat to your argument. The real question is would you stand before JESUS and explain this activity. I'm sure one look in his eyes would tell you don't go there. As a Christian I can say I love my fellow man not his sin.Peace.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

The nudist point is well made and you lose this arguement. As to Jesus teachings, I think they are quite clear. Remember that Paul's writing are inspired by the Holy Spirit! Paul, in building the CHurch as instructed by God, went on to lay out guidelines for the followers and, well, you know the rest.


thurstjm profile image

thurstjm 7 years ago from Mysterious

First of all, thank you for completely ignoring my challenge to give any actual reason or explanation as to why homosexuality is immoral. I am truly impressed that you can not only tell me I'm wrong, with no other explanation besides "God says so," and then go on to personally insult me. You guys are real intellectuals.

And seriously... that comment about coming out of the closet is just retarded. Yes, people often feel ashamed or afraid to admit their sexuality. That does not in anyway justify that it is wrong. Galileo was afraid to spread his (now proven to be correct) ideas about our solar system, because the religious tradition threatened to kill him if he did. Homosexuals are afraid to admit their sexuality because they are afraid of being degraded, insulted, or even physically harmed by people like you who take the bible out of context to support their prejudices. Just because they are afraid of being harmed by society does not mean that they believe their sexuality is wrong.

I do not accept the bible as a guide to my morality, and have no reason to. Please, for the love of God, give me an intelligent reason as to why you oppose homosexuality, instead of referencing two lines from the bible to support what you believe, while ignoring the rest of it. Didn't Jesus preach about not judging others? Let ye who is without sin cast the first stone, all that jazz?

If a church disapproves of Gay people, THEY DO NOT HAVE TO MARRY THEM. All of the gay bashing churches can exclude and discriminate against gay people all they want. But, they are still people! They deserve to be treated equally in the eyes of the law.


thurstjm profile image

thurstjm 7 years ago from Mysterious

Something I missed on my first reading. You said that your proof was that societies have condemned it? First of all, that's called the band-wagon fallacy. Just because lots of people believe something is right, doesn't make it so. For thousands of years pagan religions worshipped many Gods, even before christianity was thought of. Does that mean that we should all be polytheistic?

Second of all, that is simply untrue, as Kerry has pointed out to you again and again. Alexander the Great, like many people in his time, had a young servant who's main duty was to sexually service his master. The greeks had no qualms about homosexuality. Many tribes that developed apart from the modern Christian world also practice and endorse homosexuality. One tribe believes it is necessary for young men to first orally receive teh semen of an elder before he can produce hsi own semen.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dear Thurstjm, Pagans? Greeks? Tribes? Are you really serious or are you kidding? Look you have an outsie and an outsie needs an insie. Lets keep it simple if you have a plug and an outlet, Bingo! Now if you have two plugs their absolutely useless and the same can be said for two outlets. Hell, even magnets know to attract opposites and repel like poles. Quit trying to legitamise your sin! We know its a sin you and the people who believe like you know its a sin. Please the only hope you have to gain credibility is if Heavenly Father came down and changed the Bible. C'mon is it polyester or not? Peace.


thurstjm profile image

thurstjm 7 years ago from Mysterious

People are not outlets, nor are they magnets. Making up some jack ass, completely invalid anology does not in any way support your claims.

Quit calling it a sin.. You do realize that you just keep repeating that, over, and over, with out saying anything even moderately intelligent. Why don't you try to explain yourself like a big person, instead of continually saying "Nuh-uh" like a two year old.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

braudboy, if Paul was inspired by the Holy Spirit, then you have to accept that the Holy Spirit condones slavery. (Or opposes it in terms weak enough that generations of slaveholders have been able to point to Paul's words as validation for their beliefs.)

Seriously, dude, the Bible was a book written by men, for men. They were men striving towards God and holiness and good, but they were only men, and some of them suceeded better than others. That is the only acceptable explanation for the evil openly condoned in some sections of the Bible, because if you take it to be the literal, inspired word of God, then you have to accept that God was perfectly okay with Lot impregnating his own daughters, a bear mauling a bunch of bratty kids to death for taunting a prophet, multiple Hebrew war leaders conquering cities and putting every single man, woman, and child within them to the sword, etc.

God isn't a monster. That kind of evil only comes from humanity.

Paul said many good and inspiring things, but he was nevertheless a man of his times, a time in which homosexuality interfered with the Jewish race's chances of survival, and acceptance (or lack thereof) of homosexuality was a useful way for the Jews to differentiate themselves from their Roman overlords.

In case you haven't noticed, we are not living in 1st century Israel. Nor, I think, would any one of us wish to. You still haven't offered any explanation for why tolerance of homosexuality is inappropriate for TODAY's society, beyond claiming that it must be wrong because Judeo-Christian societies have traditionally treated it as such. As thurstjm pointed out above, that's circular logic and wouldn't stand in a debate.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

This is a great chart....will probably be ignored by the "homosexuality is an evil abomination!" commenters here:

http://www.geocities.com/patrick_farley/gayMarriag...


adb 7 years ago

You people deserve the harshest punishment from society as well God. Even death penalty would not suffice. Burn in eternal hell forever.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg- we can have a bible study if you like. Paul did not endorse slavery. However, slavery was a reality of those times. He gave instructions to the people of how best to deal with this. They were a conquered people. Ephesians 6:5 "Slaves. obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart." He goes on to give instructions to masters "and masters, treat you slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him." You see, the bible is teaching men how to live in a world that is full of sin and wrong. We must be able to deal with these things. It does not mean an endorsement of the sin. Just as the bible teaches to stay away from the sins of homosexuality. THe bible deals with the reality that homosexuality exists and teaches that is wrong. We can do another bible lesson soon.....and by the way, homosexuality interferes with any society's chance of survival, as this type of relationship has no chance of procreating.

And I have certainly offered many reasons why we should not tolerate the "radical gay" movement in today's society. It is a perverted behavior that threatens the breakdown of traditional families, puts children at risk who are placed in this deviancy, it is an attack on the institution of marriage which is a central builiding block of decent society, it is an insult on the intelligence of normal society, and it is and has always been rejected by the common-sense of the masses. Again, it is not about tolerance. If gays choose to behave poorly, they are allowed to do so in their private quarters. THey, however, have chosen to attack society with their filth and deviancy and have demanded a place at the public table. THis is absurd and their re-writing of decency laws and principles will not be permitted. Society will not stand for this to happen. SOciety has the right to reject any inappropriate behavior in the public square. These people have lost all shame and all capbality of good judgement as they promote this abomination and try to sell it as normal.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

You're not seeing my point.

Slavery was indeed a reality of the time, and Paul did try to teach people how to live better within that reality. But he never said it was wrong.

Homosexuality was also a reality of the time, but Paul did not try to teach people how to live within that reality. He just said it was wrong, full stop.

Therefore, it is clear that Paul views homosexuality as morally worse than slave-holding.

Now, he can be partly excused because the Roman system of slavery was, as a general rule, more benign than the systems that later developed in North America and the Caribbean, but I hope it is more clear to you why I do not consider Paul himself be a shining star of morality, or his moral teachings to be particularly relevant to the realities of today's world.

Frankly, the more specific the rules laid out in a holy book, the more easily they become irrelevent and even counterproductive. Look at Islam. In 6th century Arabia, Islam offered the most progressive view of women's rights in the world. But Mohammad was too specific, and his rules trapped Islamic women permanently in the 6th century. Today, in Muslim countries under Sharia law, women are little better than slaves. Likewise, Paul threatens to trap Christians permanently in 1st century Israel, while Jesus's teachings offer us a way of life that is far more relevant to our own society:

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

Notice he doesn't say anything about judging people (for example, claiming homosexuals "attack society with their filth and deviancy") on the basis of your own moral superiority, perceived or otherwise. In fact, he made kind of a point of the opposite:

"He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." John 8:7

"Judge not, that ye be not judged." Matthew 7:1

Do I need to continue?

As for your argument that homosexuals hurt society, do they not hurt society more when they are promiscuous than when they are settled in a committed relationship? And if they do settle in a committed relationship, why should they continue to be punished as if they were promiscuous, by being refused, for example, the right of hospital visitation as a family member if one partner becomes ill? What possible benefit does it offer to society to punish them in that way? I would argue, in fact, that it encourages them NOT to seek commitment, which is far more damaging to society than granting gay couples the rights of legal kinship would ever be.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

livelonger, LOL, yes, isn't that great?

I fear if that chart were a bingo card, we'd have both filled it several times over by now, though at least he hasn't tried to pull the ridiculous "Adam and Steve" argument on me yet. ;)


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

adb, you are a prime example of what I was talking about above regarding human evil creeping into the Bible. (And any other holy book you could name, to be fair.) You, my friend, are one sick puppy.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg- the point you are missing is this. No one is condemning anyone. You can condemn the behavior without condemning the person. BUt here is where it gets tricky. THe gay radical movement, has pushed their behavior onto the public square of society and have demanded a re-writing of the laws of decency and "good behavior". THis is where they have forced society into a corner and have demanded a confrontation. On this basis, society must retain its boundaries and put them into their place. THe gay movement, partly from encouragement from misinformed citizenry such as yourself, have tried to label themselves as some separate gender of people. THis ridiculous assumption does not hold water. THese men and women are just delving into deviant behavior and trying to claim some kind of status for their insanity. Society does not buy it. Society has an obligation to point out their bad behavior and to point them in the right direction. Without boundaries and moral principles, societies are doomed. You try to raise this poor behavior into some lofty status, but you do so in vain. It is rather embarrassing to see such conduct that tries to make sense out of such senseless behavior.

....and adb's comments are ridiculous. YOu can be an idiot and still be on the right side of an arguement. Just as many of those in favor of the "radical gay movement" spew hatred and accuse of religous fanatacism. In the civil debate of the facts and common sense, the gay movement has no merits when it is reduced to its bare content. Poor behavior and poor life choices that are trying to be forced into society's mainstream and accepted as normal.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Calling them "deviants" sounds pretty judgmental to me.

Regarding the "third gender" issue, other cultures have recognized third, fourth, and even fifth genders, and would consider our binary gender system as ridiculous as you consider the notion of a third gender.

And again, homosexuality is not going away, no matter how much you may want it to.

You have a choice. You can:

a) encourage homosexuals to enter into committed relationships by providing them benefits equivalent to those given to heterosexual couples, or

b) marginalize them on the fringes of society and, in doing so, encourage them to live promiscuous lifestyles with the potential to spread disease among themselves and the general population

What benefit can society possibly gain by continuing in the latter path?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

How about a 3rd choice. SOciety can encourage a return to normal behavior. How about some real honesty with them that this is a destructive lifestyle that has no future. How about letting them know that poor choices have consequences and that society's laws cannot be re-written at the whims of those who want to make up their own rules or have no rules. And kerryg, you keep mentioning that other cultures do this and that, but you are not being honest with yourself or me. The mainstream societies do not accept this behavior and certainly do not rewrite their marriage laws to accomodate them. Yes, the behavior will always be around, that is not the reason to legitamize it.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

We're not talking about *society*. Even you must understand that society is composed of a variety of individuals who don't move in lockstep with each other.

I for one always resist calls to "return to normal behavior". You might like the time when minorities were herded into ghettos and butchered every 50 years or so? Or when crusades were launched and widespread bloodshed was perfectly acceptable? Or people were burned at the stake or lynched by mobs? With the passing of time, society has evolved to become less violent, more prosperous and far more moral. You are delusional if you think the past was a time of justice and high morality.

The only choices that are bad ones are those with negative consequences for yourself or others, not counting bigots' sensibilities. (If we were to avoid offending bigots, we would not progress at all) Gay people are going to be gay no matter how much you fulminate against it. Straight people are going to be straight no matter how much fearmongering you put out there. Gay people in committed relationships are bricks in the latticework of stability and interdependence that our society is built upon. Continuing to treat certain classes of people as second-class citizens because of a self-serving moral code is a *bad* choice. More and more people are realizing this, even if there's no hope for some.

What you're really arguing for is continued discrimination and bigotry, because you personally don't like people unlike yourself: an incredibly weak argument.


thevoice profile image

thevoice 7 years ago from carthage ill

Great write very true God Jesus love no less by race religion or sexual preferances


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- you try the same deception as kerryg. This is not bigotry or discrimination, but a disapproval of an unacceptable behavior. It is no different than a nudist demanding to roam the public square or a smoker demanding that he can smoke wherever he wants, or drug user demanded that he be able to smoke pot or many other examples. Society has the right to monitor and limit certain behaviors that is sees unfit for the common good and the upholding of society's principles and future flourishing. These are just men and women experimenting and delving into deviant behavior. In their private quarters, this is permitted. Society refuses to re-write the laws of decency and common sense to appease their appetite for poor behavior.

Certainly you understand that society must have laws and principles to prevent lawlessness and "anything goes" actions. History has shown that societies that falter in this duty are doomed to failure. It is quite possible that the U.S. eventually follows this pattern as well. For now, in the instance of approval of the deviant lifestyle of "gay marriage" , society is saying no.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

I support gay marriages. I am straight, but, I feel when it comes to matters of the heart, it should solely be up to the two involved. No one else should have a say, not even for religious purposes.

True religion teaches that none of us has the right to judge, as we all have a cross to bear. If anyone does anything wrong, only they will have to be judged accordingly by the supreme being. If others judge them and say they are wrong, they too will be judged accordingly by the supreme being.

I just think we should leave gays/lesbians alone to make their own decisions. Its their life! If gay marriages make them happy, then they are entitled to be happy just like the rest of us.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

braudboy: Smokers cause harm to themselves and to the people around them (second-hand smoke). Same with drug users. As for nudity: this actually *is* a behavior that applies equally to all people, regardless of who they are born. So, these are poor analogies.

Regardless, homosexuality is not a behavior. If you want to get technical and refer to certain sexual acts, then you can talk about behaviors, but society as a whole and the Supreme Court a few years ago have decided that privacy trumps meddling, so you should not concern with private behaviors that don't concern you.

I'm not sure how a legal process that extends equal rights to all of its citizens is a case of "lawlessness" and "anything goes", but I suppose that's the way your mind works. And, fortunately, if you check the opinion polls, fewer and fewer people think the way you do. (Probably because this is the United States and not North Korea, a country that prides itself on strict application of repressive "law & order" principles that you might find yourself more comfortable living in!)

iamqweenbee: I agree with you. The "religious arguments" are a distraction; the real issue is personal discomfort with people living their lives in a different way.


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

A man with his wife and child were arrested at a gay pride parade In Minnesota this weekend . Because they had the nerve to be handing out free Bibles at the event I guess open mindedness and tolerance are selective !


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

The issue wasn't free bibles. They were not given a table at the event, and distributing materials without a table was in contravention of the event's rules.

At any rate, they were not displaying "open mindedness and tolerance" at all. Do you think people should be allowed to express hatred at every public venue? Think carefully before answering.


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

Whatever happened to the first Amendment ? I guess It was OK to graffiti churches after the Prop8 vote back In November .

And where you there livelonger ? You can twist It anyway you want to fit your principles . They are merely expressing opinion but now we call It hatred , how convenient !


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger, you make no sense as do most who try to make sanity out of insanity. Homosexuality is a behavior, just as is heterosexuality or abstinance, or any other sexual activity. It not a gender of people. THe real question is "does society have the right to limit and put boundaries on peoples behavior for the common good of the society. THe answer is YES, whether you like it or not. ...and in regard to marriage, it has a narrow definition for a reason. It is the union of a man and a woman. THis has been the definition for over a thousand years, and it makes no sense to change it for the selfish motives of a small percentage in our society with deviant behavior issues. When you start giving in to every small group, no matter what their perversion or deviancy, you lose your identity as a society and it is "everything goes" mentality. Marriage is specifically designed to give protections and benefits to the family unit and encourage the continuance of society. The "radical gay" agenda offers nothing to society but to assist in the rotting of its core values.

livelonger....pay attention. THe courts have already ruled that marriage laws do not discriminate against anyone. It is the union of a man and a woman. Anyone can marry, they just must find a mate of the opposite sex. THis applies to EVERYONE and does not discriminate. THere is no defense of the outrageous behavior of "gay acts" and certainly no defense of their aggressive and blunt attacks on society's rules of decency and core values.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dearest Thurstjm and Livelonger, We, Christians, love you and you can call us anything you think will make you feel better we forgive you.(seriously) I think the homosexuals I've met are responsible mature individuals and not once in our transactions has their sexual preferences or partners been an issue. This would be no different with the heterosexuals I associate with, in fact most aspects of sexual behavior is considered inappropriate in public. Forget the Biblical aspects, talking about sex around members of the opposite sex could have legal ramifications.

I personally have three issues: 1. I don't want to know what anybodies sexual preference is period. 2. You can call legal unions anything but marriage, thats an insult to everything we believe in. Now if you are as mature and intelligent as you profess you know human relations are a series of compromises. You have to give to get. All supporters of gay unions know the use of the term marriage grates on us and its a sticking point. Why not use that vast intelligence and maturity and give some ground to get some. The only thing that possibly motivates you to continue on this path is a desire to rub our noses in it! 3. Stop trying to make it appear that your behavior is normal its normal for homosexuals its not normal for the majority, let me restate for emphasis, not normal for the majority.

Now lets stop our little fits and name calling and get a grip. Your position is only emotionally defensible there is no Biblical basis for your behavior and that is the moral guidepost this country was founded on, period. I'm sorry for you but I don't hate you. I wish I could help you but I can't. You know and everyone else knows you can only help someone whose willing to help themselves. All I ask is you leave the children out of adult matters. Trying to indoctrinate children in schools is an abomination and Jesus made it quite clear how he felt about children. The position that the end justifies the means is completely irresponsible on every level about every subject.

Now gentilmen I don't hate you , infact I enjoy the debate. If our government said it was so then my religion says I'm obligated to obey. Give Cesar what is Cesars. I would not destroy other peoples property for any reason because I don't want to be done that way myself. I don't think you're stupid, misguided, but not stupid.

Ok, I've done my part is it polyester or not! C'mon I got to know!


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

tony: Of course I don't support vandalism of churches! And, conveniently, you didn't answer my question.

braudboy: I'm afraid your perspective on what homosexuality is is so diametrically different from mine (and, more and more, others) that dialogue is meaningless. I'll leave you to Kerry or others.

sneako: No one is trying to indoctrinate children. More fearmongering by the right. And all the intolerance couched in the language of love isn't fooling anyone...


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

I think I was pretty clear ones mans convictions Is another mans hate speech !

I just did not give the answer you want !


Martin Marcher 7 years ago

@braudboy

physically impossible to have children -> no marriage -- Then what about hetero couples that can't have children but are married and adopt children? How about people that for any reason chose to get an operation to change their sex?

family: By your definition a hetero coupled married with no children is not a family (I need to be married to be part of a family?). How about unmarried couples with children? How about single parents with children?

normal behaviour: Could you define that please? There are parts in the world where beating women is still considered "normal behaviour", Is a matriarchy "normal" behaviour for you? Is mass suicide normal behaviour (see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_suicide#Notable_... - quite a few people found that normal it seems)?

"the bible is teaching men": What about women? Why would I keep to a document that has not a single fact in it based on scientific research? Exactly why is the bible right and not another religious document. Why do the people like you think that I have to adhere to what you consider normal.

Personally I think you are very narrow minded, you should try for a month or so to avoid the words man, woman, boy, girl (or "man"kind, or hu"man" for that matter to get extreme) or anything indicating sex or psychological gender. Rather use the word person, subject or something that doesn't associate any gender or sex.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- You are quite misinformed if you do not know that the radical gay movement is attempting to indoctrinate our children in the public schools. There is a major campaign under way, through circulating videos and letters to school administrators in an attempt to get on campus. They are trying to find ways to tell children about gay issues and promote their agenda. THis is going on in our elementary and middle-school classrooms. They are trying to influence the hearts and minds of young children on a subject that many parents object to. Just another way that this gay movement has interfered and bullied its way into the mainstream and stirred the wrath of middle-America. Decent folks are fed up with this trash being shoved down our throats and certainly it has no place in a young teen or pre-teen's school curriculum.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Martin Murcher- I dont define normal behavior. But society does. I suppose they do it from instinct and common sense. How does anything get defined. Why is murder wrong? Why is adultery wrong? THe solid fact and truth is that society has ruled on the "gay" behavior and has ruled it deviant behavior. Anyone with any common sense and decency agrees. It is society who has defined marriage and family. YOu can complain because it does not meet your selfish desires, but society cannot take every deviant group's insecurities into account when it makes the rules for the greater good. ..and my goodness, dont tell me you base your life on scientific research? Scientists have changed their positions on many health issues repeatedly. YOu would become dizzy if you followed the popular science theories. And of course you would become a pawn of the "global warming" gang. Good luck with all of that.


Matt 7 years ago

Braudboy: Repeatedly claiming that "homosexual behaviour is foolish" is downright ignorant. This is one of my first comments ever, because I just had to give my two cents towards your ignorance. Basically, people like you are the problem, not gays.

I am having a heterosexual marriage in September and I DJ weddings for a living. I strongly feel that there should be equality. While I am not extremely opinionated (like yourself) about whether or not marriage is the answer to this situation, I am certain that their lifestyle choice isn't "foolish behaviour". You are basically trying to elaborately post here, that if people choose a different life than what you choose, that they are wrong.

Reading over your comments, I must say you are probably the most ignorant person I have seen comment on hubpages. Here is some food for thought:

What if you are wrong? What if your special little jewish god doesn't exist? What if he never loved you because he never existed? Did you know that Jesus is simply a depiction of the ancient Egyptian sun god Haurus? I am sure this is "science" which you choose not to listen to because they change their stance. There are more facts supporting that your religion (which backs your ignorance, probably taught it to you) is false, than it is truth.

So why am I attacking your religion? Because it was good Christian people putting their kids on street corners in California with signs saying save our children from gay marriage. If they wanted to save their children from this, then why are they using them as slaves to promote their ignorant ideas? This is the most ignorant thing I have ever seen. Christians and the people who brought down Prop. 8 in California are some of the biggest hypocrits in the world. Whatever happened to "Thou shall not judge" but then they turn around and TEACH people and their CHILDREN to judge by putting them on a street corner to promote their propaganda against gay marriage. That is just absolutely ridiculous. You are judging a lifestyle that is different than yours and trying to conserve social-evolution from even happening. What are conservatives conserving? If you were a good Christian, you'd probably not judge. You'd probably mind your own god-damned business and say "To each their own".

As far as the school agenda to teach kids about gay marriage: Show me the evidence. So far, this is propaganda backed by the 22 million dollar investment against prop 8. and the bible belts of California and middle-america. It's been blown out of proportion don't you think? It's as if people against gay-marriage don't have a whole lot of "fuel" in their arguments so they have to spread lies to get their point across.

You should answer me this question: Why do close minded people open their mouths?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Matt-surely all dont agree that the homosexual behavior is foolish, and you are one of them. However, most of our society seems to fall on the side of reason....which is....that it is foolish behavior. And, I do agree with you that myself and others who think like me are the problem....we are definitely the problem for the "gay radical movement". We are the problem because we are the voice of reason and sanity that shines a light of truth on their absurd movement and their angry attempt at re-writing the laws of decency. Matt, society has always had barriers and principles to behavior and it is how you accomplish an orderly and decent society. I dont know you, but I can tell from your brief comment that you are empty-headed, angry, and crude. To answer your question, "why do closed minded people open their mouths?"....

I would think you might be able to answer that one yourself!


Matt 7 years ago

Empty headed? Not going to justify that one with an argument. It's clear that the points I made simply ignored, because you just can't fathom being wrong about your religion and all of the subsequent moral decisions that you've inhereted because of it. Probably wise. I am crude. I am angry that people think it's okay to live a double standard and by people I mean the conservative judgemental hypocrits that I have to deal with day to day.

Christianity: ...the belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...

The funny part is Braudboy, is that I kind of agree with you in the sense that marriage isn't really the answer. The problem with legalizing gay-marriage is that it probably won't stop there. Once you give someone an inch they take a mile. But I would never condone a man claiming to be Christian (which if you'd educate yourself on the origin of Christianity and other world religions you'd probably empathize that it's hard to respect people's opinion when they believe in such a unlikely Dr. Suess tale) to call people's sexual preference "foolish acts".

What about the scientific evidence that is saying a small percentage of people might be born gay? What about those born with a penis and a vagina? What about animals that have some gay members like Monkey's and Dolphins? Don't believe it? Google it. It's not a foolish act and for many it's not a decision, it's just how life panned out for them.

Ultimately I feel the best thing to do would be to respect the religious groups wishes (as much as it kills me, but it would hypocritical to take this away from them as much as it would be to teach your children about gay marriage by giving them a sign that says "save our children from gay-marriage") and keep marriage between a man and a woman.

The resolution isn't black and white. More than likely the most logical solution would be to create a completely new bind of love that is just like marriage, it's simply not called marriage and that would be for gay people. Of course this won't work on either sides, because on one end you have gay people who want equality and have gotten lost in what equality exactly is and on the other end you have bull-headed blind people, so blind they believe in a guy named Jesus, who won't stop until gay's stop their "foolish behaviour".

It's rhetorical.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

matt- Wow! YOu are truly moronic. It is amazing that someone such as yourself is able to communicate in person without being pulverized by any sane person in the same room. Your arguements are straight out of the school yard from the 6th grade. Your examples are extreme and have no point. YOu attack Christianity with no validity and without cause. YOu obviously have issues and I am afraid I cannot help you over the computer. I suggest you seek professional help and quickly. Just for kicks, why dont you enlighten me on how all the complexities of life and nature, with all of the intricate and delicate balances and interactions of life forms came into existence and how it keeps procreating and flourishing and reflourishing in concert with everything around it. I suppose you subscribe to that wise old theory that 2 rocks collided in space and created all of this wonder. Anyway, tell me more.


MartinMarcher profile image

MartinMarcher 7 years ago from Europe/Vienna

@braudboy

You are the most ignorant person I ever had any kind of conversation with. Your point of "It's not me, it's society" I something I can only file under a certain kind of self defense.

Since you are part of "the society" you are the one defining what you think is "foolish behaviour". I can follow the line of argumentation that it's not you who is against gay marriage but it's society. Nonetheless, YOU are society, you are influencing it everyday with everything you say or do. So telling all the people here "It's not me, it's society" is actually nothing less than lying to yourself and all the other commenters (I apologize if my wording sounds too hard, I'm not a native english speaker so try to get the essence of the message and don't get upset about the wording)


MartinMarcher profile image

MartinMarcher 7 years ago from Europe/Vienna

On another thought:

How about equally offending everyone and removing any kind of marriage or partnership from the laws.

Of course this is just a mind game, but it's quite an interesting mindgame to think of. What would happen to all the lawyers specialised on divorce? What would happen to criminals using marriage (and divorce) as their main source of income, what about all the industries depending on the stuff a marriage needs (thinks it needs). And last but not least: What about the legal implications if every person is a legal entity of it's own, no implications from any kind of partnership, nothing.

At least all would be equally offended :)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Martin- I say society to show you this is a time-tested decision and that society has rules that we must abide by to ensure the decency and the continuance of our citizenry. I wholeheartedly agree with its stance against homosexuality. It is a very poor behavior and, if you were honest with yourself, you would agree. BUt, the main point is this. I have no real gripe with a gay person and I even know a few, if they are living this lifestyle in private. However, this "gay movement" is instead trying to shove this lifestyle down the throats of society and attempting to re-write the laws of decency and moral behavior. THis is unacceptable and the citizens of society are fed up with this nonsense. You can play all of the mind-games you want, but the fact remains that normal, sane people understand what the definition of marriage is and the importance of this institution to the continuance of decent society.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

Martin: Eventually, you'll get tired of trying to reason with this troll, too. Nice effort, though.


Matt 7 years ago

Read my post and then his. pwnd.

You call yourself sane, but then you are a Christian? You say that society is fed up with gay's, but the popular vote is waying in favor of gay marriage. You need to wake up and realize that the world will evolve, just like we all evolved (probably doesn't believe that one either) and eventually if it's tomorrow or ten years from now, gay's will marry eachother.

The sheer nature of the word conservative just seems counter-productive to me. You are essentially resisting natural social evolution.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger-I suppose it makes you feel better to call me names. Well, go ahead. It makes more sense than trying to argue the case for a re-writing of the laws of decency for society.

Hey Matt- as you mock Christianity, you lose your place. Your hatred is obvious and you dont even realize that Christianity had a strong influence on the founding and early development of America. THe Christian principles helped make this country great. ALso, the erosion of these principles in recent years are helping to ruin this country. You see Matt, it is important to make a stand and hold firm to principles and morals. A society must have stewards to protect the values of its people so they are not destroyed by reckless individuals who have only selfish motives of their own pleasures and wants and have no regard for the common good.


Matt 7 years ago

You are calling homosexuality indecent but it's been around and documented as long as humans have.

I don't mock christians, I mock hypocrits like yourself who can't follow a basic fundamental of their own religion by casting judgement on people who are different. Furthermore, you can't even defend your beliefs; you'd rather call me names and repeat the same mindless banter like a broken record.

Watch this and be at peace:

http://vids.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=vids....


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Matt- you see, I am at peace. It is you and those like you who are not at peace and trying to look for some approval from mainstream society. Probably from the guilt of living a deviant lifestyle. And, yes, homosexuality has been around forever as sin has been around that long as well. But I dont judge the sinner. However, when the activity tries to take over society's guidelines and tries to re-=write the laws of decency and common sense, it is time to stand up and put them back in their place. I dont judge you as you have judged me, I do, however, notice your ignorance and it makes me sad.

Bad behavior has always been the concerns of a society and it is important to have standards and morals with which to govern by.


fishupstream profile image

fishupstream 7 years ago from Milky Way Galaxy

It's even simpler as I see it; If you can find a religious institution that will agree to marry a same sex couple then the government, under the first amendment should recognize your marriage. If a church doesn't want to marry a same sex couple then fine, that's their choice but if your religious beliefs allow for it then the government should constitutionally be REQUIRED to acknowledge your marriage.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Your premise is false and braudboy is right.  There are NO documented cases of homosexual animals in the whole world.  That is a lie.  Homosexuality has not been established as biological by any means.  By whom?  Tell me what scientist says so.  There aren't any.  There has never in human history been marriage between same sex people any where on this entire planet with thousands of different cultures.  Does that not tell you anything about the human species.  How easy you would throw away the human family.

And if you won't think it will affect religious people—wrong again.  Christians have been arrested and sentenced to jail terms in Canada and Europe already for SAYING they think homosexual behavior is wrong.  Catholic Charities are being closed down if they don't employ and adopt children to those who are inclined to this behavior.  That is greater religious freedom to you?  How on earth can anybody think that to have a desire to make love to the human exit for feces is a normal desire? 


Sufidreamer profile image

Sufidreamer 7 years ago from Sparti, Greece

James - do you have any sources for your claims that European Christians have been jailed for denouncing homosexuality. I have not heard anything about that, so would like to check it out.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

One of your other commenters says it should be accepted because it has been around a long time.  Hell, murder has been around longer.  You brag about ancient Greece where rape of children was not only legal but widely accepted?  Even they only had MARRIAGE between a man and a woman. Another guy above says the popular vote is in favor of gay marriage?  Nonsense.  In every state where it has been voted on by the public it has been voted down 33 to zero.  You don't see this is a pile of staggering lies to legitimize perversion? 

A well known genetic component my ass.  They are looking for a gay gene; none has been found.  It is a choice to have sex with anyone.  It is a chosen behavior.  People may have inclinations and compulsions to do all sorts of things.  So what?  Prisons are full of people who were inclined to do things.  That doesn't mean anything.  One imbecile above says God doesn't care.  What God might that be?  Not the God of the Jews!  Not the God of the Christians!  And most certainly not the God of Islam.  The average lifespan of a "Gay" (talk about an oxymoron) is 42 years.  Does that sound natural to you?  And enough of these terms phobes and phobic.  Who in the hell is afraid of homos?  Nobody.  Don't you see every single point including that last is a lie. 


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Sufi, there have been many. I just found one in 5 seconds

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/jul/04070505....


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Another writer above says Jesus said not to judge others. Utter nonsense. He says not to judge others if you do the same thing yourself. Jesus says it is our duty to rebuke others for their sins and to only forgive them if they repent.


Sufidreamer profile image

Sufidreamer 7 years ago from Sparti, Greece

I followed that case closely, James. Quite rightly, he was acquitted by the appeal court :)

Try this one - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/i...

Personally, I believe that, as long as a sermon does not incite outright violence, then freedom of speech applies. That works both ways :)


Garrett McLee profile image

Garrett McLee 7 years ago from Florida

Marriage is a legal thing, not a religious thing.

Why can't they (if they choose) get married in a courtroom instead of a Christian/Catholic/Whatever church? Isn't it the church's decision whether or not to allow a marriage to happen on their property? Why can't the religious anti-gay's just leave the decision to their church. Legally, they should be able to sign a piece of paper saying they are married. I don't understand why so many religious people are freaking out over this.

America is freedom.

We were founded on principals of escaping the opression of religion.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Garrett- this is not just a religious issue. This is a societal issue. Marriage is the cornerstone and the building block of society. You are mistaken that only Christians or "religous" folk are disturbed by this "gay movement" to radically change the definitions of decency and the "family unit". When you get back to basics, you will realize that this is poor behavior and deviant behavior that should never be accepted as normal. A society that has any hopes of thriving realizes a need for a moral code, a standard of behavior, and a level of decency for its citizenry. Once you just allow everyone just to do what ever they want without boundaries and principles, your society is doomed.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

"A society that has any hopes of thriving realizes a need for a moral code, a standard of behavior, and a level of decency for its citizenry"

*Thousands of soldiers goosestep to an anthem to the beloved Kim Jong-Il*


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

I've got news for you, America was founded on these principles. I dont see the comparison. We only grew to be the greatest and most successful country in history. And now, over the past 40 or so years, liberals and gay activists have tried to destroy this. You make a poor comparison to Kim Jong...unless you refer to Obamas socialist and communist policies...but this is not what we are discussing.


oscarwms profile image

oscarwms 7 years ago from PA

braudboy and James you are right on :) I find it funny that GLTB community always talk about their lifestyle is the new black civil rights movement. I'm a Native/Back American. Don't mix me in that. They say we should be more tolerant but at the same time they don't want to tolarate the Christain view. We as Christians have a right to our views under the constitution without having our churches burned down or our gospel message toned down to exclude preaching what the Bible says about homosxuality.


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

yay oscar


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

Oscar: Far be it for me to deny you the right to speak on behalf of all "Back" Americans, but I would love to hear about LGBT people burning down churches and asking the government to stop churches preaching whatever form of bigotry they like. Is this part of the right-wing fantasy where gay people "recruit" small children into the fold? (Actually - don't answer that. I can already guess your answer.)

And I have to say that right-wingers rank hypocrisy in condemning both draconian Communists and fundamentalist Muslims is not lost on the other 65% of the country...which, of course, is why the GOP is tiny and continuing to shrink. Maybe we don't want our country to become something like the USSR or Iran, a nominally-Christian version of which Republicans seem all to interested in turning our country into.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dearest LL, There's quite a few Independents that have problems with homosexual marriages. I appreciate your thoughts, however; the introduction of the books showing a mom/mom or dad/dad is indoctrination. It indoctrinates children to a mindset that its normal, its not. Its not a minority race either, its a lifestyle, no more or no less.

My church has a doctrine. We have never once in our chapel spoke against homosexuality. We believe it is an illegitimate lifestyle according to Gods Laws. We would offer to help someone understand what they don't and set a good example for them to follow.

LL I don't care what lifestyle you choose but quietly please. Don't vandalize, don't insult, and leave the kids out of it. I think since the subject is about sex we don't need them involved. Peace.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

livelonger— Only an utter nincompoop would say Christians want the US to be like the USSR—an offically ATHEISTIC state. Crack open a history book and get back to us. Gee Whiz.


Mighty Mom profile image

Mighty Mom 7 years ago from Where Left is Right, CA

Gays deserve the same rights under the law as straights. And churches can choose to perform religious marriage ceremonies or not. The reality is gays to live in long-term committed relationships. The reality is gays do have children and adopt children and raise children.

Denying gays these rights makes about as much sense as saying that brown eyed people or people under 5'5" should not be allowed to marry.


Karen Weir profile image

Karen Weir 7 years ago from Alberta Canada

I'd like to hear from James and braudboy about the day they CHOSE not to act on their homosexual feelings. I have to assume that they have had them since they are so adamant that it is a choice - they must have made it?


Janardhanakiran 7 years ago

As per human rights its can be supported for their will. A boy or girl can do what they want up to limits with out hurting themselves or others or rules of society and culture you live. But its not required to make it legal. Society & culture is public sence where we are going to give the foot steps in political sence. If need we need to hide the most famous literature's chapters.

"Its my personal openion."


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

Karen since when does a person have to justify being hetero ? That was ridiculous ! And by the way LiveLonger the Alameda School District Is now shoving a cirriculum down 2nd graders throats to be taught about gay lifestyles . Even the liberal LA Times agreed that was a bit much .


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Karen- All sexual lifestyles are a choice. YOu can even choose abstinence as well. It is not a gender of people. How can you be so ignorant. The sad reality is this is a deviant lifestyle which has trends of raunchy, wild orgies as more of the norm than some suburban family raising kids. It is also dangerous, as the spread of sexual disease is rampant in their circles. BUt, again the real arguement is not the hatred of gays or the tolerance of gays. THe arguement is do we allow their radical movement to bull doze over our society's well established principles and standards for their selfish desires. Do we allow a small minority to suddenly tell us that we must change our definitions of decency and stand quiet as they trample over our ideas of traditional family and of right and wrong. I think not. Most sane people see their behavior as ridiculous. We could leave it at that, but they keep pushing for a fight to actually gain mainstream status as normal and accepted behavior. This is where decent folks say, "put your dukes up" . YOu can only have sand kicked in your face for so longe before you say "ENOUGH"


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

tony724: And the entire population of gay people has to "enjoy" secondary citizen status because you can find isolated cases of school districts going too far? "See, a gay person in Duluth said something bad against churches; I'm glad gay people aren't entitled to the 1100+ rights afforded to straight people through civil marriage." What do you have to say about the police officers that harrassed and beat one guy within an inch of his life in Ft Worth?

braudboy: If you're going to quote the Ayatollah Khamanei in your last few sentences, you ought to at least provide attribution. Or has the Ayatollah cut his beard and learned how to get online?


calidaweb profile image

calidaweb 7 years ago from Spain

Marriage, in a church, is a RELIGIOUS ceremony, created to join a Christian MAN & WOMAN, in the eyes of god.  I have no problem with civil gay marriage, because to me, it has nothing to do with religion.  Little more than a financial contract, or insurance policy.... and yes, everyone should be entitled to the same economic benefits and protection this contract provides - regardless of their preferences..

As stated, "I propose that current federal and state benefits, based on what we currently call a marriage certificate (it could be renamed to civil union certificate if people are more comfortable with that)"

But sorry, gay marriage within the church is a Hypocrisy. As were the gay couple who wanted to use the grounds, but were refused (as the guy was moaning about in the video), This was just a shallow attempt to raise the red flag, on the Church's own ground I might add. There must be a TRILLION beautiful places to have a ceremony, why here?

When it comes to religious freedom, the church has the right to be exactly that, FREE....and not be forced to bow down to political pressure from people who probably haven't been inside a church since communion...if that...

Also, the church has the right to refuse ANYONE - heterosexual or gay


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

"But sorry, gay marriage within the church is hypocritical and un-neccessary."

No one is asking for that. People are talking exclusively about civil marriage.


calidaweb profile image

calidaweb 7 years ago from Spain

Yes, they are....uhummm...

"So, by legalizing gay marriage, you actually get the best of both worlds: Churches that DON'T want to marry same sex couples don't have to, and Churches that DO want to marry same sex couples can!"

Plus, I don't know HOW MANY times the Church and Religious Freedom is mentioned in this article, exactly, but it is a lot. If no-one is discussing whether gays should be allowed to marry in the church, why mention them? In fact, it is the underlying fundamental 'fodder' of this article... or are you reading and voting on an entirely different hub to me?


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Karen Weir— I played in a rock band for 20 years and half of that time I was on the road, miles from home where nobody knew me. I had women throwing themselves at me every night and never once did I take them up on it. I was married. My wife would have never known. But I would have known. And God would have known.

Adultery is a sin. I actually felt regret about all the sex I passed up in a way. After all, our current culture tells us—whatever it is: if it feels good do it! Did I have impulses and inclinations to go for it? Countless times yes! There is something known as self control. When so called gays say, "I can't help myself!" that's just weak. A stable society is all about not acting on every thing that comes to mind.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Mighty Mom— You know I love ya.  But everybody has the same rights now.  Any man or woman can get married to anyone of the opposite sex (unless it is their mom, daughter,  sister . . . oh boy—I guess people should have those "rights" too).  We all have the same rights. Marriage is a word.  The word has a meaning. It means when a man and a woman get married.  This is more than about some newly thought up "rights."  This is about an attempt to take advantage of the good nature of  a free people to change the meaning of the English Language and the very foundation of society.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

calidaweb, the point is that some churches oppose gay marriage and some support it, and the government shouldn't prevent those that support it from exercising their beliefs and marrying gay couples any more than it should force those that oppose it to go against their beliefs by marrying gay people.

The government should provide civil unions with equal rights to gay and straight couples and stay out of the religious aspect of marriage altogether.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Sufi— He may have won his appeal, but he reimbursed him for his time lost and his legal expenses? It is financial intimidation at the least.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Kerry G— So why only gays? Why not 3 way marriages? How about when a man comes along who wants to marry his sister? How about marriage with a 10 year old? Should the government stay out of marriage? The government has a vested interest in an orderly society.


calidaweb profile image

calidaweb 7 years ago from Spain

The point is - Individual country churches in America DO NOT decide whether they allow gay marriages or not - the Church has a head who decides what the 'law is', and while it says NO, it's NO.  Also, the Church should not, and is not held to ransom by laws of any country, or any such other president or so such leader... who will be long gone when the church is still here.  Just because governments change their rules, like most change their knickers, usually, to gain themselves a few votes, doesn't mean that the church has to change thousands of years of belief to bow down to such flippancy.....

I have no problem with gay civil marriage... what's wrong with that?  livelonger seems to think this article is ONLY about that issue...in which case, nothing seems to be clear... It seems to me, most people who are lobbying and passing comment don't even understand what the issue is, or religion. But then, this is a sad reflection of society as a whole...no belief, generally confused, therefore, lacking direction....

Regardless, I do not agree with gay marriage in the church...until the church tells me otherwise.. and that does not include, for me, the local presbi whatever, of the strangest light, located in the back streets of presbitania, in the good old US of A...


Matt 7 years ago

James,

You are one of those people who claim to know everything and be smart, but you are actually in your own little world. Why don't you do some research buddy? I googled "homosexual animals" and the first thing that pops up?

National Geographic story dipsh*t:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/07...

Oh but they must be lying. They must not be a credible resource either. You anti-gay conservatives keep believing your own lies. Why don't you do some research!?


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

Matt we are animals , but we are not labrats , that argument Is so ridiculous !


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Society has the experience that individuals cannot possess. Societies have been around for thousands of years and so has the definition of marriage. It has a specific definition and a designed purpose for society. It has been well thought through and needs no make-over, especially by a small minority of miscreants who only have their selfish desires in mind and not the common good. Society has an obligation to safe guard the institutions that make a society great, and marriage is one of those. Now, that defeats the "gay movement" even before you examine the total insanity and disgusting behvior they try to impose on us. Once this is calculated, the whole arguement becomes even more absurd. It is almost laughable as these people try to defend such an indefensable position. The real truth is that gay people are an embarrasment to society with their poor behavior. We would do them a favor to expose this as such as ask them to re-join normal society. It is not discrimination to point out bad behavior. It is much different than holding a position of contempt against someone based on race, as you are hating the person and not a behavior.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

calidaweb: You can believe whatever you want. If you don't believe that gay marriages should be allowed in church, then all you have to do is join a church that doesn't allow them. Others might (I know Reform Judaism does). Maybe I'm misunderstanding you again.

I understand Kerry's point about the government staying out of religious matters altogether and I support that. If a religion (or even all of them) forbade religious marriages for gays, that would be fine with me. It's civil marriage - i.e. in the eyes of the law - that matter.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Matt— I stand corrected. I see your point. I have observed animals for 54 years and I have never seen any homo animals. Have you? Try this article.

http://www.narth.com/docs/animalmyth.html


eovery profile image

eovery 7 years ago from MIddle of the Boondocks of Iowa

Wow, this hub is hotter than the forums. Well, I just need to put in my 2 cents worth. I fully agree braudboy and James Watkins totally.

1. Homosexuality is a choice and a live style, the same as being a christian, jew, or what ever.

2. I am from Iowa where we had a law forbidden gay marriage. The court job is the decide if the laws are constitutinal or not...not to make laws. Where does the courts saying a law is unconstitutional all of a sudden make it a law to do the opposite? That has happend here in Iowa. We have no law saying marriage between gays is legal and can get married, etc. We have asked for the congress to put it to vote for an amendment, but the liberal Democrat congress will not, they are afraid that it would pass, even in a Democrat state because Iowas are very religious and conservative.

3. God recongnizes civil marriages. DAH! It is as much sin to commit adultery out of a civil marriage as it is a church marriage.

4. Homosexuality is here to stay. How do we deal with it? No matter how we feel it is a sin or not, I believe having sex with anyone beside the one you are legally married to is a sin. Yet many feel pre-sex is okay, as I look at it as a sin. Point is sin or not, it is here and how do we address it. There is going to have to legislature and laws to address then needs of these people. Forget the sin, love the people!

5. Yes we have to judge. I judge everyday what I believe is wrong and right and try to do the right. I do not pass sentence, not stopping loving on the bad. But we have to judge. Is murder good? no, oops, I judged. This is a scripture so miss quoted. We have to judge, or in other words decide what is right and wrong constantly. And if someone says different, I just point out that they are judging right now. We are to not judge unrighteously.

6. I would like to protect my children from this until they are old enough to understand. I wish the gays and staights (and I believe most do) would show restraint to not harm my and other children out there until they are old enough to understand. We filter TV and internet to protect the exposure of this stuff to my children.

7. I do not want a school teaching my children any thing about sex and relationships, and allow me to teach my children at home. However because of the degradation of our society, many children are not taught anything at home, and by the bad example the do see, their innocence is compremised. Therefore, it has become necessary to teach these things in school. However, when it comes to how to homosexaulilty, the do not need to teach anything about it. Only the birds and the bees, please.

8, And the day when my child is told that he cannot call me daddy, or father at school, because some other child will feel bad, because the child has not father, but to mothers. I will go crazy. I may have to start home schooling. It goes so much to the left that my child cannot call me dad, one of the basic principles of life, and the gays can do what they want. Sorry, until the gays back down on wanting to take away my believes, I will fight againts him. I will fight for my rights, and he.she had better stay away from them.


Matt 7 years ago

James, it was an interesting read. I can see how relating human nature to animal nature can be decieving. Cannibalism and so many other things aren't accepted in human nature, so homosexuality could be in that category. I am a heterosexual male, getting married to a woman in a couple of months and I can say that I will always support gay marriage, and so will my wife.

Why? It's a matter of compassion and respect for other peoples opinion. If you look at your religion (Christianity from what I have read) it was founded on ideals that many of it's followers choose not to follow. Like casting judgement to these gays, priests molesting little boys (this is sin in many ways, not just homosexuality) or think about all of the millions of people that have lived in the last 2000 years that have been KILLED in the name of Jesus Christ.

I was raised Christian and thank god that I have educated myself about religion to a point that I am agnostic and am free from the deception of Christianity or any other organized religion. Ignorance is not bliss in this matter, I assure you.

I still don't and will never understand, why those opposed to Gay Marriage are so opinionated on something that frankly doesn't concern them. I would VOTE and protest tooth and nail to have your children and mine, anyones, from being taught about homosexuality too young, or in a manner that encouraged them to be homosexual. But why do you people who are from a religion that isn't supposed to judge, judging so much?

Why not trust your God and have faith that he will sort it out? Why not go about your business and put effort into voting and protesting the things that DO affect you and that is keeping your kids safe and ignorant to homosexuality.

The argument has been turned from whether or not gays should be allowed to get married to whether or not gays have a choice in being gay, or if they are acting foolishly as Braudboy so ignorantly states over and over again. The issue with conservative politics is simple. You have a small group of people that are heavily opinionated that end up governing the larger population of people that frankly no how to pick their battles, or simply don't care.

You don't have to marry gay people. If you continue to vote and pay attention, your kids will be safe from being taught about gays (but if you were smart you'd realize that educating them about gays yourself is stronger than not allowing gays to be married).

I'm not a democrat, but I'm surely not a republican and it's because of people like you guys. Why can't your religion and it's self-righteous beliefs (I say this because when I was in the church, I was TOLD that my religion is the only one that is correct and everyone else is in turn going to hell, seems a little self-righteous to me) learn to say to each their own?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Matt-you list things such as priests molesting children, people killed in the name of religion as your arguement for supporting gays. THe main difference is that most all sane people do not try and argue that these bahaviors are right and there is no outcry or movement to support the child-mollesting priest or the murdering Christian. Cant you see wrong behavior when it stares you in the face????...and Matt, you miss the point when you say the Christian church is being self-righteous when it tells you about hell. It is the most loving action that you will witness, it is one where someone cared enough about you to warn you of the danger of losing your life. Now, you took offense because it was something you did not want to hear as it would interfere with your sinful ways and you chose to reject it. This is your choice, but Christians, out of love and a desire to see you in heaven one day, do have an obligation to tell you the truth, no matter how much it hurts.


usmanali81 profile image

usmanali81 7 years ago

Same sex marriage is just not more than a RUBBISH


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Matt- you have a bad habit of stereo-typing people. If you are going to insist on being so opinionated yourself, I would suggest a better attempt at some intelligence. YOu say you have educated yourself on religion and freed yourself from the deception of Christianity, but you have only rationalized your sins and rejected the teachings that bring these sins to light. It is why you are so angry about homosexuality not being accepted. Religion and society does not conform to your whims. Right and wrong are already in place and you must be able to recognize the difference. In some matters it is more difficult, with this issue of gay behavior, that is an easy one.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

I speak out because I have as much right as a person who enjoys homosexual sex to do what I can to form a decent, wholesome, healthy future society for my descendants.  Are you saying the society I live in is none of my business? 

100 Million people were killed as a result of 4 atheists in the 20th Century.  That is 10 times more than were killed in religious wars in the previous 1900 years so don't even go with that canard. As Nietzsche predicted, the loss of belief in God creates chaos.  Why not?  If we are mere animals, it is survival of the fittest yes?  Why shouldn't we kill babies and euthanize the old and infirm?  Grab all the pleasure we can in pure hedonism because this is all there is.  And then there is towering over the past 2000 years the Person of Jesus and instead of chaos—He offers Hope, brother. Hope and Love.


tony0724 profile image

tony0724 7 years ago from san diego calif

Well actually Matt the argument Is not about gays being gay . If they would quir promoting It with those stupid ass parades , most people would leave them alone . They have civil unions now , but that Is not good enough they need to have It called a marriage , because In thier eyes that way society at large not just here but around our globe will have to rubber stamp their chosen lifestyle as normal . Sorry It Is not .

The gay community Is not working for equal rights , that Is not what the upheaval Is about .What this Is about Is they want those lifestyles seen as legitimate , because I do believe most gays have alot of self loathing . So If society says Its OK maybe It will quiet those Insides of theirs . That may sound harsh but I am sure there Is more truth to my last statement , then people might want to acknowledge .


Anu 7 years ago

Excellent Hub! Every Individual has the right to live the way he/she wants. One should not be differenciated because of his/her sexual preferences.


calidaweb profile image

calidaweb 7 years ago from Spain

Livelonger - THE CHURCH does NOT allow them - exactly - REFORM Judaism - emphasis - REFORM

PS: If you consider yourself an animal then you shouldn't even be free thinking...because that's what seperates Animals from Humans, they are purely instinctive, they do not reason, philosophise or have religions - unless of course you live in the land of Walt Disney...go Kung Fu Pandas everywhere lol.... crikey, were scraping the barrel here to justify an argument....


calidaweb profile image

calidaweb 7 years ago from Spain

Actually tony - I think you have made some excellent points, as does James...  If gay people stopped trying to REFORM everyone who isn't gay, they may well achieve more acceptance. Therefore, more respect.

That is half the battle, if they dare to accept they are different, people would be more prepared to ALSO accept they're different. That does not mean we have to CHANGE OUR beliefs to accept theirs. it means we allow them to get on with their own...  

However, I doubt wearing a thong and throwing petals over each other will do it...

Why don't they set up their own Church? Rewrite the Bible? or the Koran? Perhaps they can invent their own Buddha?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

It should come as no surprise that almost 50% of all HIV infections currently occurring in the U.S. are from male homosexual activity and another almost 30% coming from high-risk heterosexual activity (meaning drug users and alot of the so-called homosexuals who are also bi-sexual, spreading their disease to unsuspecting partners). You can google it and verify if you want. BUt, hey, this is just a harmless activity that deserves our acceptance......NOT! It is ridiculous that this is still occurring with all that we know about the dangers of AIDS! THe problem, as written by a gay author, is that the male gay movement is a"sexual brotherhood of promiscuity" and a commitment to having multiple sex partners. Well, there is more to say here, but why? The whole "gay movement" needs to be called for the sham that it is.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dearest Mark, What?! I'm confused. You are entering into an agreement that is based on love, honesty and trust. You don't know what to believe in.(agnostic reference) However, you know that what ever homsexuals believe in hasgot to be alright. Look if marriage isn't a sacred union and any relationship will do why bother that way you can go what ever way the wind blows you.

Oh yea, Mark I'm an independent but decent behavior is not a political party. Gay pride parades are weirdly obscene and easily 'R' rated. This is what you want in our streets in front of our children?

Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman.Do you understand the responsibilities ? Do you understand what decency means? Peace.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

1. Someone must have screwed up stats (opinion polls) somewhere. From where I sit, I was informed that AIDS is prodominantly in the black community. Where did you get that from that it is amongst homosexual? That's why I don't believe in stats because one poll will relfect one thing and another poll will reflect something altogether different on the same situation. I don't know where AIDS is most. In fact, considering the various outcome on stats, I don't think no one knows. All we know for certain is, it is prevalent.

2. We need not create a law to control who can marry. If that is the case, then we need to control some of the straight marriages that ends in rapid divorce. Since you feel gay marriages are wrong, some straight people are marrying the wrong people and marrying for the wrong reasons. Who is stopping them? Now, THAT is wrong!! However, if two gays are in love, whose business is that besides their own? Why should the governement create laws to intervene?

3. Second hand smoke and drugs doesn't have anything to do with gay marriages. Apples and oranges! Second hand smoke and drugs are detrimental to anyone's health. Marrying someone you love is not. Therefore, since gay marriages poses no direct threat of any kind and does not effect anyone else's life in any way, then why should we be concerned? What gays/lesbians do effects their own life, as the same for straight people. If there are those who don't like to see gays together, I would like to suggest closing their eyes to it. It is their right, their choice, and their life. I wish for them happiness. lol.

4. I think there are far more important issues to be concerned about than who a gay person is marrying.

5. You said to Karen in a previous post that sexual lifestyle is a choice. So, allow them to make their own choice. It is theirs to make.

6. Bigotry is a loathing for another race, religion, gender, and sexual preference. There is no valid reason to have ill-feelings towards gay marriages unless a person is being a bigot. No pun intended.

Livelonger kudos to your posts!!! :)


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Calidaweb you wrote:

If gay people stopped trying to REFORM everyone who isn't gay, they may well achieve more acceptance. Therefore, more respect.

IamQweenBee writes:

I don't think the gay community is trying to reform anyone. All they want is equal rights as being who they are. I for one, think they should have it.

Anytime you have a movement for positive change, you have to present your case, tell the facts, give details, and be active. How else is anyone going to know what the movement is about? In order for me or anyone to support their cause, they have to convey it. They have my full support.

Straight couples aren't doing anything different, so why should all the rights be given to only straight people? Heck, you have churches aren't even marrying straight people.

When I got married, we couldn't find a church to marry us because at the time, neither of us were in church.  I see that churches are not biased about putting stipulations on who they will marry, as they place stipulations on straight couples, too. So, its not just the gay couples being rejected.

Gays/lesbians are people, too. They deserve to be happy and live just as we all do. Far be it from me to stop anyone's happiness. Why would we not acknowledge their situation the same as any straight person?

I read a post where someone said mom/mom or dad/dad parenting. Well, what about the kids who have no mom or no dad? That is bad for a child. At least they have two parents, whether straight or gay. Growing up with two gay parents could be enlightening. One thing for certain, they will surely grow up not hating gays/lesbians. We really don't need anymore hate in the world.

Kids need LOVE, ATTENTION, FOOD, CLOTHING, SHELTER, ETC

Gay parents can provide that just as much as straight parents. Kids/We live in a world where gay/lesbianism exists. Kids should not be sheltered from that, as they should be taught about that. When I say taught, I mean it in a way that they will learn to understand and respect gay/lesbian views, as well as, views of others. Not so much as taking on the same persona unless they choose to do so for themselves.

I also never believed in censorship because whatever you shelter a child from, they will be exposed to it anyway. So, I figure I might as well be a parent and talk to them about it when the time is right. Its better coming from the parent than from a video, or commercial, or a neighbor, or a song, or a movie, or the streets. Same with gay/lesbianism

 

I'm a straight woman and I talked to my kids about everything. Even gay/lesbianism! They have an open mind about it and they have gay/lesbian friends whom I have grown to love as my own. I could not raise my children to hate someone because of their color, religion, sexual preference, etc.. So, children will be alright with gay parents. Its the closed minded adults that need help. :)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenbee-You misread your stats.  HIV is higher statistically in blacks, but because they are a small percentage of our population, it is not a high percentage of the overall population.  There is a definite problem there also, I assume with promescuity or lack of protective sex.  BUt, in the overall population of the U.S., homosexual men win the prize.

And you mispeak when you say we need a law about marriage at all.  No one is asking for that.  Society just understands that the definition of marriage is not up for revision.  It is the union of one man and one woman.  It is not discriminatory.  YOU cannot allow every deviant group to re-write the laws for society as they please. 

ANd you are wrong again, when you say that this is not harmful.  Your thinking is shallow.  There is more than just physical harm.  THere is spiritual and mental harm as well.  THis is a moral issue as much as anything.  THe harm to the children exposed to this outrage and to the spiritual wellness of the community would be devastating.  THe people, instinctively know this is wrong, and it is why you cannot get a majority to go along with this foolishness, even in today's world that is swelling up with liberal attitudes.

...and these people have many choices and options in front of them. THey  could choose to continue their deviant lifestyle...just dont force it on society, they can re-enter the world of normalcy and discover the wonderful opportunities there, but there is no option to re-write the decency laws for their community.

...and you are wrong again, you cannot be a bigot over disapproval of someone's behavior. Wow, you were wrong alot.  That's OK, we can talk you through this.  You see, if my child is sticking his hand in the toilet, I will correct them, and not just try to find a way to justify his behavior.  If my neighbor is peaking in my window, I will confront him and shame him, not just try and understand his feelings on the matter.  The worst thing we ever did, is try to understand this behavior and accept it, when we knew it was diplorable and unacceptable.   I suppose we did not imagine how bold they would become in trying to force this down our throats as some normal activity to be paraded into our neighborhoods and all over the public square.


oscarwms profile image

oscarwms 7 years ago from PA

Wow this topic is hot. I wish eveyone was zealous enogh to speak on those things that are true. Idont' get it. Just beause society has a change of heart on what the difines marriage does not make it right. It just proves what the Bible.Mans minds will wax worse and worse. They will call right wong and wrong right. The heart of man is desperatly wicked. who can knwo it. There is a way that seemeth right unto man etc.I do agree hat under the constitution we all have the right to do what we want. But you do not go into a crowded building and yell fire! There is something wrong with people who think they have a right to do wrong. Next thing you know sombody will be promoting "man boy love" and wanting to have their rights under the constitution. When does it all stop.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

iamqweenbee —  

We don't needs laws to regulate marriage?  None?  So bigamy, polygamy, incest—any combination goes?  That is what a healthy society looks like to you? 

Everybody knows AIDS started in the gay community.  When it hit, they should have been quarantined.  Get mad all you want, but is that not what we do with other pandemics?  The "Gay Movement" stopped it and spread it to innocent women and children—they are responsible for the deaths of millions of innocent people. 

I am no fan of Fidel Castro but he called this one thing correctly. He quarantined everybody with AIDS in their own village he built for them. How many new cases of AIDS we reported in Cuba after that? The answer is obvious, isn't it. ZERO


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Any sociologist will tell you the most mentally healthy child is a child with a mother AND a father in their home. Not 2 of one and none of the other. I am sorry, but I can't believe the level of ignorance and lies on this page.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

1. See, there you go with the stats again and I just explained why I do not believe in them. This country's population is not a small percentage of blacks. Blacks make of a way bigger portion than you think. stats are not counting blacks that are incarcerated. Now, do you understand why I say stats can be manipulated? Most stats are just opinion polls, which mean everyone has one.

2.  No one isn't askjng for anything that isn't fair and just. Society has no right to tell anyone who they should marry. If that is the case, society should have a say in you marrying your wife. How would you like it if there was a stipulation on who you should marry? Wouldn't you feel it not their right and none of their business. Sometimes, society gets too deep in affairs that doesn't have anything to do with society.

I am not wrong on anything. Whatever you feel about gays is your own opinion. Others do not share your sentiment, therefore, what makes what you say most acceptable? We are not a communist country like China who dictates to its citizens how many children they can have. Since America is a democracy, it would be hypocritical to dictate who can marry whom.

How is gay marriages effecting your life, your finances, your credibility, your marriage, your lifestyle? How is their life so intertwined with your own that it is effecting you any way? I apologize, but, I am not buying what you are attempting to sell. What is so wrong about the gay culture? I will tell you that judging them is just as wrong. What gives any of us the right to judge them or even make decisons for them for that matter? A gay person can probably be a better spouse than most straight people. 

They are not forcing it on society.  They are, in fact, part of society and free to be themselves just like you and me. Why should they change who they choose to be just to suit any of us? You wouldn't and neither would I! If you lived in a gay society, would you change being straight for any of them or would you continue to be yourself and tell society this is who I am and I am just as important to have the same dignities as everyone else on the planet? I see nothing wrong with that! Blacks had to do it!

If you abhor the gay community because of their lifestyle, that makes you a bigot. There is no valid reason to feel that way.

If you look up bigot in the dictionary...it says,

a person who is utterly intolerant of any differing creed, belief, or opinion.

That does not fall short of sexual preference. You can be a bigot towards a donkey if you dislike them enough. Most bigots are like crazy people. They don't know they are crazy because its like an illness. So is bigotry.

James,

Most people know AIDS started in the gay community? I read somewhere the first case of AIDS was in Africa. See how we are getting mixed signals here? Even if that was the case, straight people have AIDS too now. So your point is?

Yes, we should not control marriages in the sense of who a person should marry. If you read my post, then you would know that is to what I was referring. I don't have anything to do with what Castro did. All I am saying here is AIDS is a disease anyone can get. Regardless of the supposed way it is prodominantly gotten.

.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenbee- you become irrational as you get confronted with the truth. How can you say that society has no rights in who gets married??? Marriage has a definition, and for good reason. DO you think you should marry your sister, or your dog????? HOw about getting married at 14???? Well, there are many more examples of absurdity to show you that marriage must be defined inside a society and is designed to benefit society's future growth!

...and in your haste and ignorance to support the"gay movement" you have missed the real truth that, once someone has reached the proper age and found a mate of the opposite sex, the opportunity is there for everyone and, therefore, there is no discrimination in this area. You have foolishly allowed the gay propaganda to convince you that they are some separate gender of people whose rights are being trampled. NOnsense! THey are men and women who have ventured off into a deviant behavior that normal society rejects.

Queenie- others do not share my opinion on the gay lifestyle???? It has been voted down everywhere it is tried! Wake up! Society does not want it pushe down their throats and certainly dont want it the public square as normal. Most sane people understand this is unacceptable behavior!!!!

I can see that when you run out of arguement on this subject, you resort to name-calling! It is understandable, as this issue has no arguement. This is a free country and you are free to be mis-guided. It still remains that these people are way over the boundaries of decent behavior and society does have an obligation to have boundaries. DO you really need a lesson on this as well??? As you stubbornly defend the "gay movement" you miss that it is a behavior and a sexual desire, not an ethnicity or gender of people that are involved.

...and please dont speak of AIDS in defending the gay movement, as it makes you look foolish.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

One true gay story to illustrate- I have a co-worker who is active in the gay lifestyle. She has a partner, who was previously married and has 2 kids. They, together formed this malfunctioning family. THey have been together for more than 8 years, and the 2 kids are now 19 and 13. The 13 year old son is in all kinds of trouble and is in rebellion. He is constantly being suspended from school and is now getting in trouble with the law. He has no male influence in his life and is very confused. The 19 year old got knocked up at 16 and had a baby. She got knocked up again at 18 by a different boy. At this point, being disillusioned by the men in her brief life, she has now turned to lesbianism, just like mom. She turned over the latest child in adoption to a "gay" woman who is friends of my gay co-worker. Meanwhile their relationship began falling apart and my co-worker's so-called lover left her and returned to another man, deciding she was not gay after all. Meanwhile she has left her children permanently scarred, putting them through 8 years of this deviant lifestyle and with much confusion of how a family normally functions. The 19 year old now does not know if she wants to be gay like she thought her mom was until her mom recently went back to a man. ALso, she has given up her youngest child to a gay woman who she thought would be a part of their lives until her mom left my co-worker and broke off that relationship. Now, this story sounds like it came from a soap opera or some bizarre TV show....but the sad reality is that this is a true story. How many more family tragedies are going on as this radical gay agenda gets pushed onto American society.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

It is you being irrational.

1. Who said anything about marrying siblings or dogs? Excuse me, but, I thought the topic was GAY MARRIAGES!

2.  Gay people contribute to society just like you and me. So why shouldn't they have the same priveleges and rights? They are making the same contributions, however, don't have the same rights. That's not just or fair.

3.  With all the activists (straight and gay) who supports them, that alone should indicate to you that others do not share your sentiment. I am sure there are others who do, however, the truth (as you speak of) is there are others who do not.

4. Are you saying that gays/lesbians cannot be secure in the institution of marriage because they are gay/lesbian? They can keep their vows, take care of their family, and everything else a straight couple can do. It is no one else right to tell them if they should get married or not. If they are doing wrong by getting married, who will suffer consequences? Certainly not you or I. So why should you or I have a say? Who has to live their life? Certainly not you or I so why should any of us have a say?

5. I apologize if you feel this way, but, I did not resort to name calling. What I said was, "if you abhor them because of their lifestyle that would mean you are a bigot." Accordong to the dictionary, that is what a bigot does. You do the math. That is just like abhorring a black person because they are black. Or abhorring a Catholic because she/he is catholic.

6.  Since you are adamant about making your points, then why can't you answer my questions that will help to understand what you really mean. If you can state why and how gay marriages is effecting your life, maybe it will be understood why you feel the way you do. Otherwise, it looks biased. Honestly, I don't think you can give valid examples of how gay marriages effects your life.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Oh and Braudboy,

You stated I resorted to name calling when in reality it was you with your comment of "haste and ignorance." pot calling the kettle black. lol

That's alright because I know I am not being hasty or ignorant. I am not so sure about you, though. lol. I can tell you why I support gay marriages. You cannot state why you don't...and you call ME hasty and ignorant? lol

Take care Braudboy! LOL!


Amanda Severn profile image

Amanda Severn 7 years ago from UK

Braudboy, quoting a single, undeniably poor example of Lesbian parenting, does not justify tarring thousands of same sex families with the same brush. There seems to be some confusion between opinion and fact in many of these comments. Opinions are held by individuals, whereas facts are substantiated by actual evidence and/or statistical proof.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Amanda-you are looking for facts. OK here we go. Fact 1 is that males and females are created for sexual activity with each other. THe design is undeniable. Fact 2- society has repeatedly rejected any notion of acceptance for "gay marriage". Everywhere it has been put to a vote by the people, it has been soundly defeated. Well, there are many more facts to quote, but I guess we could hear some of your facts first.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Hey Braudboy,

What facts do you have that is indicative to gay marriages negatively effecting the lives of others? That's what I've been waiting 15 posts for you to answer.

:)

Stats?! If that's all you have is stats, then that is NOTHING! Stats is not proof of anything. Or else, it would be accepted in a court of law.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- you are still not on the right page. When you say "gay people contribute to society just like you and me, you miss the point. As people, they certainly do contribute to society. In their behavior of a gay lifestyle, they also contribute to society, but in a negative way. It is the POOR BEHAVIOR that is being scrutinized. Society has a right to have boundaries and roadblocks for the behaviors it deems counter-productive to the success of that society. It is a behavior. These are men and women straying into a deviant lifestyle. Society has every right to withhold approval and to deny any endorsement of this filthy conduct.

...and queenie, gay couples cant do anything a straight couple can do. They can not reproduce and they cannot be normal. If, God forbid, they are in charge of children, they cannot raise them in a way that shows a normal family. It is just not possible, sorry.

...and queenie, gays do not affect my life directly. I have a sound family with traditional family values and am raising my daughter to love God, and to look forward to a husband and children one day. However, it is society in general that is being bombarded with this deviant lifestyle and the "radical gay movement" is trying to rewrite the decency laws and rules of normalcy and this will have a profound effect on the future of society where me and my offspring will reside.

Oh, and queenie, haste and ignorance are not name-calling. Haste is being quick, and ignornace is a lack of information or a lack of knowledge. I am glad to help.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

Yet, you continue to not see my point. I get what you are saying, I simply just disagree.

1. Whatever poor behavior you are referring, is not the point. Many straight people display the same behavior. Why is it worst when gays do the same? No one is setting the same boundaries for straight people. I guess because it is more acceptable, but, that's not being fair.

Define a "normal family." We have absent parents in the home, which is not normal. We have orphaned children, which is not normal. At least if a child has two people who love them and will steer them correctly and take good care of them, that is normal , as well as, expected. No matter if the couple is gay. Just because a child is raised by gays, does not mean the child will be corrupt in any way. If that's the case, white people should not raise black children for the same reason.

Gays pay their taxes, take on their civic duties, etc just like the rest of us. They are contributing positively to society, thus, deserve the same rights. They are just as productive to society as you claim they are unproductive. Same as straight people.

2. Gay couples may not be able to reproduce, however, they can raise children just as good as any straight couple, if not better.

3. So, if gays do not effect your life directly, why worry about what they do? I can understand if they effected you in any way, but, that's not the case. I think its about time society is dealing with the realities of the gay community. These people exist and are not going anywhere. We mightest well accept that and allow them to have the same rights.

Haste and ignorance is not part of my character, however, you made reference to them as you feel it is associated with me. In other words, you branded me, which is another form of name-calling. That said, feel free to call me anything you want. All I ask is you spell it right! lol. BUT, calling me these things will not make me agree with you any more or what you say truth. Thanks braudboy! lol


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

straight people certainly display poor behavior-it might be spousal abuse, having an affair or whatever.  The difference is that no one is promoting these behaviors as a normal activity and wanting it praised in the public square.  It is totally the point and you refuse to see it because it ruins your cause.  The boundaries are the same for all people. we are speaking of behavior, not people. The sane among us will not let you redefine who men and women are. THere is not a 3rd gender called "gay"

queenie= the simple truth is that you are ignorant about gays raising children as well as their "birth" parents.  YOu lose this arguement hands down.  Society has always recognized that the "unbroken"" home with mom and dad in place is the ideal setting for children.  It is why marriage is a sacred institution for our society and is in need of protection.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

The AIDS virus first spread from the tearing of anal tissues from a large object being shoved in there where it didn't belong.  That is well known.  If the anal sex men had been quarantined right then millions of innocent people would still be alive today.  It later spread to normal people through blood transfusions, sharing needles and bi-sexuals. That is the truth.  It has nothing to do with bigotry or hate.  Everybody has right to their opinion but not everybody's opinion is right.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

1. Whatever the reason straight people display uncouth behavior, it is no different or better than when gays display uncouth behavior. Don't make excuses or justify it. lol.  Whatever behavior is not praised in public, talk to straight people about that also. Uncouth behavior is a personality trait!! Not a gay trait.

Sorry to disappoint you dear, but, broken homes are not an ideal setting for children. Talk to any child from a broken home or their social worker. It might be on the rise, but, it is in no way ideal.

Speaking of such, broken homes amongst straight people are becoming predominant.  GEE, I wonder why? So that means this marriage stuff isn't even working out for straight people! And you want to put a stipulation on who should marry!

OK Braudboy! Whatever you say! How do I lose this argument hands down when many people are already successfully raising children that are not their biological children? Many of them are GAY!!! So, I guess you lose hands down! lol.

As far as ignorant...I'll be that if it makes you feel good. LOL!

James,

Thank you for that biological assessment! By your post, I have come to the conclusion that I need biology 101! LOL! Or science or whatever it is! lol.

I also come to the conclusion that when I communicate with Braudboy, there is an echo, which is YOU!!! lol.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

queenie dear- you logic is flawed. Society's role is to find the best solutions for family. We need to be promoting the whole family, not broken families. And the "gay activity" IS the bad behavior we are discussing and it does not deserve any recognition in society. SORRY. Uncouth behavior is a "personality trait". It is exactly my point. Gays are just experimenting in a bad behavior, and you have been suckered into believing some outrageous excuse that they are born that way. It is much like a child caught in some act of forbiddance, and listening to the outlandish excuses as he tries to explain his poor behavior. Dont be so gullible.

Queenie....I understand you are investing in this insanity and will make sense out of the senseless. Just dont try to bring the rest of us there with you. We need some sane people to help guide society through this ugly mess.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Oh Queenie- Just a little more info that you like to ignore. When you wonder what society' concerns are involving homosexual activity. Health studies reveal that 50% of all syphilis cases occur in homosexual or bi-sexual individuals. Also, hepatitis B studies found it is 13 times more frequent among homosexual men. Another related study showed 68% of homosexual men had intestinal parasetic infections while only 16% of heterosexual men showed these infections. This is not even to mention the HIV and AIDS epidemic that occurred and is still occurring in the homosexual activities. You see, queenie.....society has a responsibility for the public health and health costs associated with various activities. It is why there is a crackdown on smoking and there needs to be a crackdown on this repulsive behavior of homosexuality as well. If you would pull your head out of the sand and put away your foolish thoughts, you would see the dangers, both physical and morally, associated with this deviant lifestyle.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dearest Queenbee, Lets ease up on the coffee before someone gets hurt! You do understand that we can have differing opinions without being bigots? No ones afraid of gays or gay marriage we just don't believe in the dilution of our society with immoral behavior. I personally don't see how indoctrinating children into this lifestyle has anything positive to add to America. Instead we're opening Pandora's box. Gays are nice and productive members of our society but they should remain celibate if they can't behave in a normal manner. With that said there is no need for the marriage debate.

I'm sorry they are gender challenged. After they had high school health class they should have realized their fantasy was not properly equipped. It would have been obvious that the charts didn't provide for an alternative sexuality. With that knowledge we can see why theirs is a deviate lifestyle. Yes, there are alot of gays but numbers don't always equal right.

Whats at stake is morality. Everything about this lifestyle reeks of immorality so we have to ask do we rewrite the Bible to make them feel legitimate? They want a pass in our reality and they are not welcome with that behavior in tow. We can tolerate them quietly but in they choose to be militant they have to accept they will be under fire for their positions. Some gay members have chosen to be radical over this issue and it will only lead to problems for their community. If they go too far their are enough nuts on the other side to make them a target for hate.

I hope they repent but I know they won't. I do think straight people have to keep the oppotunity open for them to repent but should not be badgered into changing their feelings on this volitale issue. Peace.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

My logic is flawed? I guess maybe it is to you because you are not thinking straight.

1. Society does not have a role for my family or need to find the best solution for my family. My husband and I does that. So, speak for yourself. lol

2. Why are you so adamant about branding GAYS as bad behavior? You said yourself they don't effect your life. So, how can you say they display bad behavior? I would say someone is bad or displays bad behavior if they've done something TO ME! You may not approve of what they do, which is same sex relationships. When did they need yours or anyone's approval? I'll bet someone somewhere feel the same about you for some reason. When you point your finger at someone, four are pointing back at you. None of us are no better, as all of us are far too fallible to talk about the next person about anything

3. I am not suckered into believing anything I choose not to believe. I never said I believe they were born that way, I believe they acquired this as they got older. How ever they became gay makes no difference to me as I still see them as people who deserve to be who they are and be happy. My mother always told me to be myself. Why shouldn't they?

4. Dear Braudboy, I am not trying to bring anyone anywhere. I am only doing the same as you, which is posting my thoughts. If you don't like what I've written, then don't read it. What makes what you say more sane than what anyone else says? This is America for Christ's sakes! America is a melting pot of an array of cultures, characters, mindsets, upbringing, etc. That said, there will be many people at many times who might disagree. How is that INSANE?

5. There you go with the stats, again! lol! Well, I guess I wouldn't have to worry about that and neither should you if you are faithful to your wife. If you are angry with gays because of all the STD's, why not be just as angry with the bi-sexuals and straight people, too. They are getting these diseases and spreading them (per your stats). So your point is?

6. You have absolutely nothing nice to say about the gay community. All your rhetoric sounds hateful as you describe them with words like repulsive, deviant, etc...I agree that society has a responsibility to control the STD epidemic (and it does not start/end with gays because it is widespread), however, society does not have a say in who should marry who.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid,

Read my post again! Better yet, read Braudboy's! I never called anyone a bigot directly and already clarified that! Besides, was I talking to you? You jumped into a conversation I was having with Braudboy and didn't have all the specifics. There was a post he made in reference to a bigot and I responded. Either you are just trying to throw a fit over NOTHING or you are not reading the posts. I like communicating with Braudboy because it is challenging and am not trying to call names like he does. You didn't say anything about that.

According to the DICTIONARY, a bigot does what Braudboy was/is doing. I was attempting to show him the connection as we saw it. Which is probably why bigot came up in a previous post by someone else. Maybe he didn't realize that is how he came across. Get it now?

As far as the threat you issued, you be careful, too!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie....Well if nothing else was accomplished here, I think it was established that the best way to promote the gay agenda is with nonsense and you do this quite well. You are all over the place in your arguements and you have no real intelligent thought to bring to the debate. It is quite amusing, however, watching you stumble over this subject in trying to make sense of the senseless.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

iamqweenbee: The reason people like these two obsess about homosexuality and abortion is those are two "sins" that straight men will never commit (because they can't!). It's easy to pretend you're the moral arbiter when you cherry-pick the sins to condemn others for.

You will never see people like them, for instance, trying to make divorce illegal, even though Jesus condemned it in no uncertain terms 7 times (while never once mentioning homosexuality). Why? They might want to get a divorce one day, if they haven't done so already.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Livelonger,

Great point! Double Kudos to you! That is a fine assessment/observation.

Braudboy,

You think I am all over the place, huh? Well, at least I can answer questions. Amanda posed a question to you, but, you need her to reply first before you can answer. I asked you a question and it took 29 posts before you tried to answer...so what does that say about you? lol.

Bottom line...I do not agree with you on this subject, therefore, you painted me hasty, ignorant, etc. I reiterate, just because you call me names will not make me agree with you or what you say true.

You have to learn to disagree with someone without being disagreeable. That means, you have to learn to communicate with people who don't agree with you without getting indignant about it. When you get indignant, you start to look irrational, erratic, and etc.. They have medication for that, you know. You might need a double dose. lol.

If you cannot stay focused on the topic and stop TRYING to bash my character, then we have no real conversation. You are not hurting me, but, I don't want to stir up others on this blog. You obviously have nothing valid to say so you have to resort to attacks. So let's try to keep it clean. OK?! If you doubt what I say...read the posts!

Still I say, gays deserve the same rights!

Everyone won't agree with you all the time. I don't agree with you on this issue.

At the end of the day...gays should be able to marry who they love.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

livelonger—If you smart enough to count the number of times Jesus mentions divorce in Scripture you also ought to be smart enough to know why he didn't mention gay sex. He was Jew. They killed anybody on the spot caught butt f*****g. Hell, everybody knows that. If he was in favor of it He surely had ample opportunity to say so. He spoke of divorce because it had been allowed as legal by Moses and he wanted to change that. If He wanted to change the execution of anybody caught having gay sex He would have said so.


thinking out loud profile image

thinking out loud 7 years ago

James, as usual you are right on target.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Livelonger- what are you talking about??? I am not for any sins, including the ones I committ. No one has claimed any righteous position.  THe difference is that I recognize my sins and I dont wallow in them.  Another difference is that I dont try to promote my sins as virtue and get society to accept them. That makes as much sense as you and others posting in favor of gay behavior because you want to participate in this nonsense.  Well, maybe you do, I dont know for sure. ....and queenie, what question did I leave unanswered on this subject.  I will be glad to answer it for you.  YOU definitely need some enlightenment on this matter.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Thanks TOL!


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

James: What about the New Covenant? I'm assuming you, braudboy and the others carrying on about homosexuality are Christians and not Jewish. Or are you not shaving or eating shellfish either?

braudboy: Listen, if you want to consider gay people immoral, go ahead. No one cares except people who think exactly like you. If you want to support second-class status under the law and use Christian morality to do so, you better not cherry-pick what Jesus said and ignore other things he said when it's convenient to you.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Oh poor misunderstood Queenbee! Lets start with a fact this is an open forum if you post it there's a good chance you will hear about it. So toughen up and don't spout off unless you can take it. Now my wise and wonderful friend lets review your statement,"If you abhor the gay community because of their lifestyle that makes you a bigot." Lets see I think that is pretty direct and pretty clear you said in an open forum and I believe you directed to people who have a problem with gays.

I have made comments on this subject repeatedly, there here for your viewing pleasure. I have read your contributions and they read like a child who doesn't know what shes talking about and tries her best to scream it at you. As far as a threat, What? My comment implied be careful what you wish for you might get it.

My concern is as always the moral health of America the country our children live in. My feelings about homosexuals are unimportant but how they impact our children is the only thing that matters. They are not a good example their community is full of exhibitionists, degenerates, and malcontents. If they wanted to merge in to this society they would learn to work with and respect our morals. As they demand us to respect them.

Now to finish, I'm not here to interfere with your very personal relationship you share with Braudboy. I happen to agree with about 90% of what hes published and I'm still trying to figure out where you're coming from. Oh yea, whats the deal with the numbers and the capital letters? One more thing, how you approach people is not very ladylike you might want to work on that. Peace


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid

Let me help you out. There isn't anything you or anyone can say that can or will ruffle my feathers. You just misunderstodd what I said. You can quote me all you want, but, again if you've read the post, I clarified exactly what I meant. Take from that what you will, it makes no difference to me.

Now, the part about a public forum, then you should listen to your own advise because it was you who fired the first torpedo at me about the word bigot and spewing threats that you know you cannot keep. Since this is a public forum and Braudboy speaks like a bigot, then, he nor you can get testy when someone calls it how they see it. So, my dear, I say to you...toughen up yourself. You put yourself out there first by trying to reprimand me on something I said. Now, you tell me to toughen up. Typical!

The rest of your comment, I didn't even waste my time reading because where is all this going?! I am not going there with you. lol. But, I understand you have to get in where you fit in. LOL

That said, how do you feel about gay marriages because that is what this topic is about. It isn't about whatever ego you might be trying to gain by attacking me. lol. Have a good day.

 

James and Braudboy,

Gays are no different than straight individuals. We all have issues, problems, etc. Their sexual preference should have no bearing on what you think about them...and until you can come up with a VALID reason why they should not marry, your gripes have no merit. I honestly don't think you have a valid reason. Thus making your position biased. Happy sneakorocksolid? I said biased instead of bigot this time. LOL! Its all the same anyway. lol.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy you wrote:

I am not for any sins, including the ones I committ. No one has claimed any righteous position. 

IamQweenBee writes:  How can you say that when all you've done was judge gays/lesbians? Did you know judging others is a sin? Did you know when you see fault in everyone else, but, neglect to see your own fault is self-righteous which is also a sin? So, what's your point? The self-righteous don't make into heaven. Why? Because they think they are so dam perfect that they don't stop and make necessary improvements. Thus, they continue sinning as they are.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Livelonger- You have been greatly deceived, so I will spell it out one more time. Their is no gender of people that are "gay". You try to establish a 3rd genger and claim they are discriminated against. THere are not 3 sexes of people, only 2...male and female. This is a sexual behavior, and a bad behavior at that. Society has every right to limit and have boundaries on bad behavior as this in not discriminating against a person, but his actions!

It is very simple, once you open your eyes to their deception. As to the "New Covenant" .....do you really want to get into another Bible lesson. I mean, we can, but I dont think you or anyone who supports the "gay agenda" are paying too much attention to what the Bible is saying. We certainly have a promise of "forgiveness of sins" when we accept Jesus as our Savior! To wallow in and promote our sins as virtue, to try and get society and re-write the laws of decency so men and women can act as fools, this is not part of the covenant. DId you hear when I called them men and women???? THese are men and women, not some new gender of homo sapien, that are just experimenting with immoral and poor behavior. SOciety sees it for what it is and rejects it. THey are certainly invited back into society with open arms, just dont force their filthy, disgusting ways on us ....and please dont insult our intelligence and demand that we approve and accept it as normal.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

I'm so thankful that your inhumane, cruel, and ignorant attitudes toward people who are different from you are gradually going the way of the dinosaur. You speak on behalf of far fewer people than you think.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- as you accuse me of being inhumane and cruel, you only expose the attitudes of this radical movement. It has been very harsh, mean, and vindictive as it confronts the decent folk of our society. THis "gay agenda" foolishness has attacked those who want to preserve the principles and boundaries for our commonwealth and have done so with much arrogance as you have displayed. As you deny your own small numbers, you only look foolish and the majority of us only shake our heads in disbelief at your ignorance.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- It is not judgement to teach what is right and wrong. It is important to realize that there is both and that there must be guidelines and barriers for our citizenry to know the difference. Those of you who want to remove the barriers or blur the lines do no one any favors. It is not self-righteous to speak out against this poor behavior....it is probably more so to act as yourself, that you think you can re-write the laws of society to fit your own selfish desires and not the common good.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Ah, but, it is judgemental to speak out against what anyone does if it does not effect you. They are living their life and leaving yours alone, why can't you do the same? You might not agree with their lifestyle, but, its their lifestyle and they should live their own life the way they see fit, as long as they are not breaking any laws and hurting people. They have to live for them. They shouldn't have to live the way others think they should.

When you place a name or brand (as you have done) on the gay community, you are being judgemental. You are going even further by being self-righteous if you do not see that.

Now, the part that you said...

It is important to realize that there is both and that there must be guidelines and barriers for our citizenry to know the difference.

I agree with that and feel that the barrier on this topic should stop at dictating whom should marry whom. We just have different beliefs. I also feel there should be no barrier on gays rights, as it applies to straight people. The law is for the common good of all not just a select few, namely straight people.

 


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy you wrote:

livelonger- as you accuse me of being inhumane and cruel, you only expose the attitudes of this radical movement. It has been very harsh, mean, and vindictive as it confronts the decent folk of our society. THis "gay agenda" foolishness has attacked those who want to preserve the principles and boundaries for our commonwealth and have done so with much arrogance as you have displayed. As you deny your own small numbers, you only look foolish and the majority of us only shake our heads in disbelief at your ignorance.

Iamqweenbee writes:

1. When you called me hasty, ignorant, etc. was that also exposing the attitude of this radical movement or were you in self-righteous mode again? ;-)

2. What decent folk are you referring? I am decent and I don't have the same mentality as you on this subject. Yes, I want to preserve principles, morals, etc but I want to be fair and just about it. Without fairness, it is not a good principle, it is not moral, etc.

3. The only foolishness I see are from those who hatefully oppose it without valid reasons.

4. I think the arrogance came from you by branding everyone else who disagree. Not once did you repsect the fact that we have our own views, you went into attack mode when we did not agree. That is arrogance in itself, as if to say you are right and no one else has a say.

5. Gays/lesbians have an abundant amount of support. You, my dear are a minority on the subject. Stop listening to those stats and pay attention to what is really going on. Now, many people have more of an open mind versus the old days. Not too many people are gay bashing like it used to be. Gays had to make their case to society and many in society are listening.

 


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

livelonger— I agree with you.  We are in the New Covenant.  That is why you have not seen a single comment in here saying we should kill them immediately.  But the New Covenant also says "Go and sin no more" and warns of dire consequences for those whose words lead other people into a sinful lifestyle.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

And isn't divorce a sin?


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

queen— your difficulty understanding the reality of life is right there in these simple words you said: "Gays are no different than straight individuals. We all have issues, problems, etc."

There are two things about this statement that show a blindness to reality.  For anyone to say, presumably with a straight face, that there is no difference between man/woman love, with body parts that fit together for the perpetuation of our species—and two people with the same body parts borders on insanity.

Second, yes we all have problems.  But YOU miss the point about that.  Nobody else is having parades and asking for special rights because of their problems.  There is no parade for kleptomaniacs, no movement to teach kids in the 3rd grade all about sadomasochism, no demand for special laws regarding employment guarantees for alcoholics, no demand that churches stop calling adultery Sin, no demands for bestialists to get marriage rights, no parades for pederasts. 

I don't care what these people do. I don't want them hurt.  I want them to stop demanding that every citizen approve of their chosen behavior because we don't and we won't.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

Yes, divorce is a sin except in cases of adultery. That is why you don't see parades for divorcees.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

But divorce is still 100% legal (except in religiously observant countries like the Philippines) and you don't seem to be making any attempt to make it illegal (except, you say, in the case of adultery).


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

OK! Reading some of the posts, I gather that maybe I didn't make myself clear. Since it keep coming back that gay marriages is immoral...allow me to expand.

I am pro-choice! Except when it comes to abortion then I am pro-life, as life supercedes choice.

I believe that everyone has the right to make their own choice. The only time society has a right to interfere with the choices that people make is when a person is committing a crime or hurting others in any way. Gays marrying is not an instance of that.

Now, if we want to look at it from a religious point of view...God gives us the opportunity to choose for ourselves. If we make the wrong choice, there are consequences. If we make the right choice, we will be blessed. Whatever the case, He gives us the opportunity to choose for ourselves and so shall we give others the same opportunity. Heck, some of the choices we make as straight people others might deem as uncouth.

We may not always agree with what the next person chooses to do, but, we also should not judge or ridicule them. That, in itself is a sin.  If someone does wrong and we judge them, then two wrongs don't make a right.

I truly believe that the gay community has the right to live their life, make their choices, and be happy. These are common rights given to all. I am not going to put myself out there to stop any person from doing what they choose because I acknowledge they should be able to make their own choices.

No one truly knows what our Supreme Being feels about the gay community. We do know He loves them, too. There are many straight people doing immoral things to put a stipulation on the gay community. When we close our eyes to that, we are saying it is alright for straight people to be immoral, however, the ultimate sin is if gays are immoral.

The Supreme being knows our hearts. Being gay won't make the Supreme Being turn His back on us.

Gays/Lesbians are people, too and we have to ackowledge them as people and expect for them the same rights, choices, and priviledges. Also, we can expect from them the same as everyone else.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Queenbee I'm sorry you suffer from the 'selective reading syndrome.' You're all over the map with your opinions so it is hard to understand what you're on about. I've drawn this conclusion after reading and rereading your entries. Here's a suggestion, write down all your thoughts examine them to make sure they are valid and relevant. Then when you're sure about what you want to say then publish. As far as Gay marriage is concerned I've made my position quite clear on this Hub. Just so there's no misunderstanding, Giving homosexuals the right to marry is an insult to the institution that's cherished by so many. Gays have the right to exist but privately. Now a more pressing issue where did the numbers go? Peace.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

James,

That is not what I meant. I said what I meant and there is truth in it. Do you agree that there should be racial equality? If your answer is yes...I can go even further and say I believe there should be equality based on sexual preference. The point I made is clear...straight people have problems and so do gays. straight people have issues and so do gays. therefore, no group is better than the other that would mean one group deserve to have more rights. Sorry you misunderstood that, but any person who has a handle on life would agree if they are being fair. You are looking at the body parts in all this while I am looking at the fairness.

What a klepto or sadomasochism does is different from that of gay marriages.  What they do actually effects people in a negative way. How does gay marriages effect people in a negative way? Even Braudboy admits gays do not effect him. These are criminal acts you are comparing to a lifestyle. There is no crime in living the gay life, however, the crime is in stealing from others, giving alcohol to minors, etc. Apples and oranges, my dear!

Blacks had a parade on civil rights. Some felt, at that time, the same as you feel about the gay parade, but, it helped with the civil rights movement. This movement was set up so that blacks could have equal rights. They put the problem out front as it should be so that others can recognize it. I see nothing wrong with a parade for gay rights. Now, if pedophiles set up a parade, then there is something wrong with that. Who would actually support a parade designed for people who molest children? However, a parade for certain rights that should be granted is totally different.

If you've never fought for anything you believe in, then you would not understand all that it entails. Parades is a good way. We had a parade here in a fight against police brutality. We protested and paraded and it got attention. Some was negative, whereas, some was positive. Whatever the case, we succeeded in getting attention. In getting attention, you recruit others who share your sentiments, as your strength lies in numbers. I applaud the gay community for fighting for what they believe in.

I am not worrying about their body parts touching because I don't have to see it. I won't be in the bedroom with them...and what goes on in someone's bedroom is private and their own business. I cannot live my life concerned about what's in someone else's bedroom. That would make me nosy! Besides, I have my own bedroom life to be concerned with.

I don't care what they do, either and do not want them hurt either. I also don't think they are demanding anything but equal rights. This is America and everyone has the right to protest. So, now we want to take that right away from them, too?

Heck, if we protested abortion, there would be people who do not agree saying, "I wish they would stop forcing their views on us" Does that make them right? NO! That is the beauty of this country...being able to freely speak and protest.

Sorry I just don't agree. However, I do agree with what you said about divorce

 


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid,

I don't have to do all of that. My posts are understood enough that they have your attention, as well as, replies. Since you have a hard time sticking to the subject, I am inclined to believe you might be suffering with A.D.D which is attention deficit disorder.

Now, when you say I am all over the place...that's typical too! At least I am on topic and have not steered away from it. You might not agree with me, but, I am still on topic and making my position on this subject clear. I don't have to resort to attacks because I respect your opinion, as well as, the opinions of others. I have been called names because I do not agree, but, I am still here making my claim. :-)

 If you want to comment about my character, then I suggest you create another blog and we can talk about my character until the cows come home. However, on this blog we are discussing gay marriages. If you have nothing left to add but attacks then our conversation is over. OK? Thanks Hon!

Now, forgive me while I return to the topic of discussion. ;-)


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

James you wrote:

Yes, divorce is a sin except in cases of adultery. That is why you don't see parades for divorcees.

Iamqweenbee writes:

That's is true about the divorce, but, if divorcees did parade about it, what's wrong with that? They do need to make stricter divorce laws if they will make stricter marriage laws

Especially since its a sin to divorce


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie, you seem to have the attitude that people should be allowed to do whatever behavior and society has no right to intrude on these behaviors.

So, I guess you are in favor of allowing public nudity. I mean what would it hurt if people walked around in public in the nude. Is this really hurting anyone??? What about even having sex out in public??? I mean, if it feels good and no one is getting hurt, why should society have any say in stopping this behavior.

Of course this is not the case, because moral and decent people realized this is unacceptable behavior. These same people also realize the unacceptable behavior involved with gay sex. Queenie, you make no sense as you try to support a cause that has no merits. Society certainly does have every right to monitor and restrict certain behaviors for the common good of the society. ...and society is not preventing what ever goes on in their bedroom, that is not what is being debated. DO you even know what is being debated here. It is the public declaration of normalcy and the re-writing of society's decency and normalcy. If two consenting adults want to engage in a depraved activity, they certainly can do so. What they cannot do is get society to agree that this is normal behavior. This cannot be done without turning common sense on its head. Queenie, you are standing on your head.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

You seem to have the attitude that people should have a say on gays marrying.  You keep traveling on me. We are  not talking about nudity, we are talking about gay marriages.  Nudity is quite different than gays marrying. AGAIN, gays marrying does not effect anyone. You said it yourself. Nudity can effect children and others. As far as having sex out in public, I do not agree, but, straight people do that, too. You keep talking about gay behavior which is nothing short of what straight people do. Yes, society should stop nudity and sex in public but not gay marriages.

Moral and decent people also don't judge anyone. I am not the morality and decency police. I cannot stop every indecent and immoral act and neither can you.

Bottom line...when I see another person doing something immoral or indecent I usually mind my own business if no one is hurt or negatively effected. Or else I will be spending a great deal of time dealing with that if I did something about it.There are far too many indecent and immoral people and many of them are STRAIGHT.

Wasn't that the basis of my argument the whole time? I try not to worry about small stuff and I pick and choose my fights. Gay marriages is not a fight I choose to partake in because I am not against them and they have a right to choose like everyone else. Choosing to marry does not effect anyone, therefore, is not a concern for me. I am glad they stick up for themselves. Don't you and I have the right to choose who we marry? When we got married was nudity, sex in public, and etc a stipulation? No! So, out of fairness why should it be for the gay community? You might say marriage is for a man and a woman, but, considering the divorce rate, it doesn't look like its working out for straight people. Hell, if gays want to marry, its their choice, let them make their own choices. They don't need us to supervise them like little children and make decisions for them.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- you said that society had no business telling people what to do if they were not hurting anyone! How does nudity hurt anyone????The fact is that you do agree that society does have an obligation to regulate some bahaviors. How does nudity affect children???? Well, you are right, nudity does affect children, and similarly it affects children to send confusing messages about unnatural sex. You are very inconsistent in how you want society to perform its duties. YOu spin your wheels argueing the wrong points. Let me go slow. The gay agenda is not about men and women having the freedom to have their perverted sex. It is about these men and women demanding and shouting that society recognize their activity as normal and trying to gain a place of prominence in the public square. It is about these individuals trying to re-write the laws of marriage and decency and forcing their upside down world on everyone. Queenie, once again, they are not a 3rd gender....these are men and women. It is the behavior and the bullying of society to accept their behavior that is being rejected.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

I reiterate, I DO NOT AGREE THAT SOCIETY SHOULD HAVE A SAY ON WHO SHOULD MARRY WHOM!!! Take from that what you will, I spelled it out as plain as I could. You are the one that keep talking about all that other stuff.

How can I be inconsistent in how I want society to perform its duties when I NEVER stated what I think society should do except not decide who should get married. DUH! No one should have a say in matters of the heart. We don't have arranged marriages here in the USA. We are free to love and should be free to marry whomever.

How would children know of such unnatural sex? Are you now stating that gays will allow children to see them? Isn't that going a bit too far? I think I posted a comment about censhorship. I talked to my children about gays/lesbians and they have an open-mind about it. They will ultimately be faced with this issue anyway, therefore, they learned about it at home in the way I wanted them to learn. My children were taught not to hate anyone because of color, sexual preference, faith, etc. I taught my children to judge by the content of one's character. Sometimes, the parents have to step in and be parents and not get angry when a child see something or hear something they shouldn't have. Its all out there is this world we live in. Somethings should just be talked about with the parents because you cannot shelter them from everything. Someone, somewhere would introduce something to a child. BUt if a parent already instilled in them, the child will usually be fine. What about internet predators? Thats more of a concern because these people do not care and is more than willing to force their sexual fantasies on children...and they are out there at LARGE!!!

You keep talking about their behavior as though they are children and as though straight people don't display bad behavior. I would see your point if you at least tried to be fair about making it.

You heard that saying...an unjust law is not a law at all. Well, I think an unfair statement is not a valid statement. So far, all your remarks have been unfair, unjust, and totally unfounded.

There are gay doctors, gay lawyers, gay reverends, etc. they contribute to society so why can't we allow them their rights? Lets use your own analogies...what about the gay people who don't show public displays of effection, no nudity, etc. do you still feel they shouldn't marry?


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid  you wrote:

Iamqweenbee writes: speechless?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

No queenie- You said society should have no say in anything people do as long as they are not hurting anyone. I merely pointed out that you make no sense and I made you look foolish.  ...oh and queenie, if you dont think children are not curious or dont ask questions when a situtation comes to the public square like this subject has...(force on us by the radical gay agenda)....well, then you must not have any children.  This gay nonsense is already in TV shows, movies, books, and other areas of our lives. 

oh, and queenie, while I am pointing out the numerous misstatements you make, here is another correction.  Our society does not decide who marries whom, it only defines marriage as any other word has a definition.  Marriage is the union of one man and one woman.  Other than a few stipulations concerning age and immediate family ( I guess you dont want this either as you seem to think you can make marriage anything you want), You are free to marry any person of the opposite sex supposing you get them to reciprocate.  It is a very simple formula that has been around for more than a thousand years. 


Koby profile image

Koby 7 years ago from Ohio

I wish i could join the fray, but there are simply too many comments to read in order to get a good feel for each established position and counterarguement and so on and so forth.

I hereby nominate kerryg as my mouthpiece. Don't dissapoint me.


Koby profile image

Koby 7 years ago from Ohio

I wish i could join the fray, but there are simply too many comments to read in order to get a good feel for each established position and counterarguement and so on and so forth.

I hereby nominate kerryg as my mouthpiece. Don't dissapoint me.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Dearest I'm always on topic(Queenbee), I've spent some time reviewing your comments and its an interesting rollercoaster ride. Lets start with Hubs topic' support gay marriage, support religious freedom.' Queenbee lets examine your contributions:(I'm going to use numbers and it is truly exciting!)

1. 9 days ago you said you supported gay marriage you never once mentioned its possible affects on religious freedom. Let them be happy you said let them marry. You never once stated what the true definition of marriage is so you leave us to suppose your proposing a Bible rewrite and a reconfiguration of the definition. Still you say its their right but you never once mention that for this to happen we have to rethink religious freedom.

2. 4days ago you took off on your AIDS rant, followed by the problems in straight marriages, rounding the corner with government creating laws, homosexual lifestyles and you finished with the attack of the bigots. Wow! You move fast! You're right AIDS is here Merry Christmas! I believe that it started in Africa, however; I believe researchers have pinpointed it to a French(homosexual) flight crew and a party at a beach house. Gays, I concede, have no more or no less problems than straights in relationships. The laws are in place and they recognize marriage as a legal relationship between a man and a women. I believe the Bible and most churches recognize the same. So, we now have to examine the Bible rewrite to be more inclusive and I just don't think God gave us permission to change the definition of marriage. As for the laws, as long homosexuals abide by the law and follow the rule of law while working to either change the law or find a place for themselves. This also brings back the question of civil unions. Gays and their supporters, Queenbee, know that the term marriage is something we hold sacred. Why not leave our beliefs alone while you exercise your rights and settle for a civil union that assures gay rights. Gays and their supporters have to try to compromise our beliefs in a selfish attempt to ruin our view of marriage. You also stated it is a sexual lifestyle thus its a choice they chose their direction they knew the score so now they want us to validate their choice and if we don't we're bigots?

3. also four days ago you wrote a bunch of reasons why gays would and do make as good of parents as straights. Now I'm not sure how that ties into the topic but ok. Making a devious sex practice legitimate is a very dangerous path. Would you if it leads to other perverse behaviors being accepted as normal be willing to fight to reverse your position and if so how would you fix the damage? To accept those possible outcomes would mean that religious freedoms would have to be compromised. So how would gay marriage in this situation work to support religious freedom? You also said it might be good to desensitize children to a gay lifestyle so it would reduce bigotry because they would consider it normal. You know Queenbee that sounds like indoctrination to me what do you think? Now lets explore religious freedom vs. gay rights in our schools. Well this is a moot point because religion has all but been banned in public schools while gay lifestyles are being introduced as normal. The entry you made closed with closed minded adults would that be for religion or gay rights as far as our schools are concerned.

4. two days ago you also mentioned judging gays, gay marriage would be no different, activists, taxes, normal families, and boundaries on behavior. I'm not real bright and I'm certainly not on your level of understanding human nature but help me how do these points strengthen religious freedom? You do have point on judging but doesn't every decision we make based on a judgement? I'm not sure but I think Jesus said love thy neighbor and wouldn't that apply to everyone including those with a different opinion? Now lets talk proposition 8. Did the people of California speak on the issue ? So it was done, and its what the majority in one of the most liberal states in this country said. Now how was the behavior of the losers, not so good. In fact it was kind of violent, kind of illegal, and kind of in poor taste. You know I never heard a Mormon disparage a gay in public but I know we can't say the same for the law abiding, normal, peace loving, parenting experts, and moral superstars on the gay side of the debate. Hmmmm! I wonder how that works?

6. 26 hours ago you made references to communication skills I'm trying real hard to figure how that plays into this Hub. You were chastising some one for their lack of control during a heated conversation. What topic were you addressing then? I know its very awkward to talk to someone who lives in Kum-bayah -land because they base they're position on feelings. Whoa, whoa, whoa feeeelings! The position that if we all gave each other a big hug everything would be all right is fantasy. The Sixties and Seventies proved that that's why all those peace loving people rioted.

7.19 hours ago you accused me of issueing threats..................WHAT?! Where in anything I've written do you read threat? That sounds more like the people you stand for, If you don't support our position we'll, we'll, we'll make a big mess and you'll have to clean it up, so there!

8. 8hrs ago you made reference to pro-choice and I just can't find the relationship between gay marriage and religious freedom. I understand your declaration I don't understand the relevance.

9. 6 hour ago you gave reasons for protests and why not. Well lets see if you hurt someone or damage they're property then I think that's about where your rights legally stop. So lets review these outstanding citizens who are not given they're rights to a vote are only acting out for religious freedom.

10.3 hours ago you made the same reference that it doesn't hurt anyone if gays marry. It tears at the fabric that is this society. This country was founded on Judea-Christian values and now we say it won't hurt anything how can you possibly attack religious values and not say it won't have an affect? The reality is you and the supporters don't care who it hurts as long as you get your way. The breakdown of religious rights are next because if churches don't participate they will either be threatened with loss of tax status or law suits. How will that increase religious freedom? If that is the out come how are you going to explain it to the people who are faithful and religious? Look out religious fools there's a new sheriff in town!

Well I believe I've demonstrated the flaws in your position. I know you won't change your opinion but at least with a quick review you'll see where my examples come from and they prove you argue like a drunk driver. I wish you the best Queenbee maybe we'll cross paths on another Hub we can agree upon. Peace.


James A Watkins profile image

James A Watkins 7 years ago from Chicago

livelonger— You are right. I am willing to let 6000 years of case law precedent stand, hoping the billions and billions of humans who inhabited this planet before also had wisdom. Especially collective wisdom.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

James - You're changing your basis for argument. But okay, let's look at the vast expanse of human history then, instead of the Christian Bible. For the vast majority of history, women were not allowed to vote where there was a democratic tradition. Were the first women suffragists in the 20th century, who defied millenia of tradition and "case law", supporting a radical agenda that we have collectively regretted since?

Looking at the countries that legalized voting for women, it reads broadly similar order to those that are legalizing marriage for same-sex couples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_suffrage#Ti...


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid  you wrote:

Dearest I'm always on topic(Queenbee), I've spent some time reviewing your comments and its an interesting rollercoaster ride.

iamqweenbee writes: yeah, you said that before! You can talk about someone on a roller coaster ride, huh? At least I don't leave blank messages. LOL. Hey, pass that stuff your smoking.

Braudboy,

I am through with this blog. I have said what I meant so many times that we are going in circles. Time to get off this merry go round. Still I am in support of gay marriages, though. That said, have to find another blog. I said all I could. Even said it 50 times over and said it different ways and you still don't get it. Can't get any simpler.

It was nice talking to you. Meet me on another blog


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Livelonger,

Hang in there! You are doing an awesome job and making very valid points. Some things they won't comprehend because they are lost in translation.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Qeenie- OK, lets be done with it. ANd, I have some good news for you and people who participate in gay activity. THe good news is this. After reviewing the definition of marriage, I see an avenue that is available to those who claim to be gay. Any gay man could certainly marry any gay woman of his choosing (as long as she chose him as well). Problem solved. Gays get their marriage and marriage is not re-defined. Well, I am glad to help.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

iamqweenbee: Likewise! The fact is reason and compassion eventually win over injustice and prejudice over the course of human history. It's sad to see their arguments get more and more ridiculous. I'm waiting for braud"boy" to tell us gays shouldn't marry because an angel told him so while he slept at night.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- Here is the point you are missing as you look over the vast expanse of human history. You want it to be about discrimination...but it is clearly not. Let me explain again,....and again I will go slow. Here is the definition of marriage "The state of being united to a person of the opposite sex as husband or wife in a consensual or contractual relationship recognized by law. "The social institution under which a man and a woman establish their decision to live as husband and wife by legal commitments, religious ceremonies, etc. " THe legal or religiouis ceremony that formalizes the decision of a man and a woman to live as husband and wife."

OK, now lets look at the definition of "wife" "A female partner in a marriage" "A woman joined in marriage to a man". Ok, now lets take a look at the definition of husband."A married man, when considered in relation to his wife"

THese are 3 of the key words involved....and word DO have meaning. These words have had meaning througout the vast expanse of human history. IT is clear that society adopted and developed these meanings to implement the clear order of man and womans purpose on this earth. Marriage does not discriminate, but clearly defines its purpose and place in society. It is the union of a man and woman. The gay agenda is a clear assault on this long standing institution and attempts to re-write the definition of at least 3 words in our dictionary, not to mention trying to re-write the principles of decency, morality, and common sense. As you sign on to this assault on sanity, you venture into uncharted waters where society begins to break down and words have no meaning anymore. It is a clear attack on society's order and their founding principles. This is unacceptable. There is no discrimination here, as marriage is open to all men and women....but it also has a definition and a meaning that cant be distorted and contorted to fit the whims of unnatural behavior.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queeneie- it is funny as you say that you make valid points, but we dont comprehend as it gets lost in the translation. It is probably because it is hard to comprehend or translate the jibberish and double-speak that you and livelonger are spouting.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid, Braudboy, and james

I just thought about something

Since all of you claim that I am all over the place...that is usually typical when you blog and communicate with someone you do not agree with. they might catch glimpses of what you wrote, while not trying to read all of it. I've done it and made misinterpretations, too.

So to help you out ONE MORE TIME, When any of you address the gay parade... I elaborated on the importance of the gay parade, when any of you talk about bad behavior...I elaborated that gays aren't the only community who do bad things...when bigot came up...I elaborated on how BB can be perceived as a bigot. I have read 59000 invalid reasons why gays should not marry and I address every reason given to me to shoot them down. Then you guys complained I was all over the place. Its one of the typical word games that happens on blogs. I have seen it too many times and it usually happens among people who do not agree. lol

sneakorocksolid , you said you read my posts over and over. Maybe you need to read all the posts. That's the only way you will know if I was in response to something and what. Just reading my posts and not the entire conversation would mean that you are missing something, right? And you say I am on a roller coaster ride? Whatever the case may be, I acquired your attention. I am just tired of going in circles because it seems I am saying the same things over and over. We are covering no new ground. It does not matter if I rephrase it and tell it different, then you guys play that other popular blog game and say I am inconsistent. Hell, I rephrased it because it didn't seem you understood me the first time. Or if I use analogies, then I am leaving planet earth. But you guys can attack, threaten, and the whole nine. All that takes the fun out of blogging. So have at it. Braudboy, we were really having a healthy debate. I am not sure what happened. lol


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

Well, as long as you continue insulting me and others who disagree with you, I'll simply remark that I find it amusing that a 70-year-old is using a moniker with the word "boy" in it.

You use very dramatic language to convey the fact that you think homosexuality is a choice, that it's wrong, and that gays/lesbians have a sinister agenda. The fact that science has properly studied this and is clear that it is a widely-observed, natural condition that exists in a minority of members of over 1,000 species doesn't seem to faze you. You continue to spout off about morality and decency like an ayatollah, when more and more people are realizing that treating gay people like human beings is the moral and decent thing to do. In fact, clear majorities in this country believe gays/lesbians should be entitled to equal rights under the law; the only sticking point for some is the term 'marriage.'

I'm currently reading a book on the history of Jews (My People, by Abba Eban) and am now approaching the 19th century, when Jews were finally given equal legal status after living in the Western world for millenia. Of course, anti-Semitism was (and is) still strong, people argued against equality for Jews, and accused them of being wicked and sinister, and said that they had never been considered equal under the law before. Many cited "science" claiming Jews were genetically inferior. They also accused Jews of working towards a sinister agenda to take over the world and eat the blood of Christian children (among other sensational accusations). Fortunately, attitudes like these ceased to be the majority opinion in most developed countries, as is yours now. Fight it all you want with whatever nonsense arguments you have; reason, understanding and *true* morality and human decency will eventually prevail.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

I should add that the definition of a democratic vote was understood universally, for millenia, to be that of a man. Of course, people "radically" changed this timeworn definition, much to the chagrin of people who resisted this. Reading this, it's clear the arguments of those fighting progress can sound similar, no matter what form of equality they're fighting:

http://www.learncalifornia.org/doc.asp?id=1646


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Livelonger- what world are living in that shows clear majorities support this gay agenda. YOu have twisted everything around. If you are talking about the rights for gays to get a job, or buy a house, or do whatever else in the realm of normalcy, of course you have clear majorities that support normal behavior. When it comes to gays trying to re-write our marriage laws and rewrite the definition of words like "marriage", "husband", and "wife", and trying to force society to accept their sexual deviancy as normal, you clearly do NOT have the support of the majority of society. Since when did you think we were talking about anything else.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Once again, you misspeak. You are trying to give rights to a "behavior" and this is impossible. Those participating in the deviant activity of "gay sex" are still men and women. There is no 3rd category. I never hear of gays fighting for their own status in the area of public restroom. I have seen the mens room and I have seen the womens room, but I have not seen the gay room. HOw do they choose which restroom to go in, as they seem to suggest they are not either men or women. Of course they are men and women, ....very confused men and women, I might add.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

We are speaking a different language when it comes to sexual orientation and it goes beyond your gender preference. Ah well, the disparaging way you describe homosexuality every time you mention it suggests you'll never understand that because you don't want to.

At any rate, to debunk your "Americans overwhelmingly are opposed to gay marriage and that will never change":http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/06/gay-marriag...


B-Zilla 7 years ago

1. I'm just wondering...I've read in the Bible about marriage and the overall meaning that I got out of it is for a man and a woman. I was just wondering if anyone had an example from the Bible (as early of a copy as possible, just to get the real meaning [Aramaic would work best]) of a man/man or woman/woman marriage. Or if not, maybe some passages where God said gay relationships are ok. I'm just wondering, not trying to bash. I just like proof.

2. Also, if I wanted to hold a parade about wanting to walk around naked, would I have many supporters? I mean its just the human body and there are naturally only 2 possibilities. The majority of the country would say its wrong but my little group of people would feel like everyone else is just being a bigot to our needs as individuals to roam the world naked. I don't remember anywhere in the Bible where God said it was wrong to live life butt naked in society. I mean the big issue is the children, isnt it? We wouldn't want to harm to children. But maybe if we show them at a young age what everyone looks like naked, and people walked around naked, this could desensitize them and it would be okay. Sure its against Human Law, but its not against Religious Law. If we can change a Religious Law to accomidate those who feel like its necessary to allow gay marriage, then it shouldnt be too difficult to change Human Law.

3. I'm not saying gays are wrong (but I'm not saying gays are right either), because right/wrong is entirely perspective and no one person should be allowed to say whether anything is right or wrong and it be so. I'm just saying that if GLBT supporters want the respect and consideration from the government, and to a lesser extent, the heterosexual movement supporters, they need to give respect and consideration back. Respect is something earned, not given. If gays want the government and everyone else to back off and give them the right to be together and recognized as a binded couple then they should be rewarded for their love together, but if it hurts someone else (like what many Christians here have stated about a sacred union between man and woman) then don't call it marriage. Call it a civil union, a legal partnership, or a bond between soul mates or something other than marriage. A rose by any other name would smell as sweet. Gays should be allowed to be together, but why the name marriage if it hurts other people? It's still the same union between partners. Just call it something else.

4. I'm pro-love. Let those in love have their way, but nothing is worth hurting someone else. There's no justification in doing so.

Sneakorocksolid was right though, numbers are fun!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

livelonger- it is you who do not understand and turn a blind eye to the obvious. We are talking about men and women here and not some third groug who needs some revision of the marriage laws. Our society has a definition of marriage and it involves a man and a woman. YOu are the one suggesting that we need some third group added to the definition. It is typical liberal behavior to try and throw out the rules of orderly society and to make up new rules as we go along. It is a long journey to set up a decent society and a very quick one to tear it down. Liberals have done a great job of destroying America's society, but I think a line has been drawn, finally, by the silent majority, to put a stop to this nonsense when it comes to marriage.

...and you have debunked nothing when you try and find some "gay friendly" poll to keep up the spirits of a lost cause. This "gay" nonsense was just defeated in California, of all places!!!! The most liberal and gay friendly state in the union, turned down the gay marriage proposal, and rightly so. I believe 11 other states have also turned it down at the voting booth. The gay agenda has won nothing at the ballot box. That is the most accurate poll you can take. Sorry!


B-Zilla 7 years ago

Facts are facts are facts. Numbers don't lie for anything.


jewlledpen profile image

jewlledpen 7 years ago

Let's see if we can bring some light into this little debate, Let's look at what the issue is really about.  You can sit here and argue about whether or not gay marriage is getting a lot of votes but it's a waist of time because popularity isn't the issue. The points are most clearly stated as,

Pro Gay Marriage: 

1 Freedom, simply stated, it is a person's right to be married straight or otherwise  

2 It is discrimination to disallow gay marriage.                                                                                                                     

Con:

  1  Religion :  Promoting gays is promoting sin

  2  Marriage by definition is between a man and woman

  While there are other smaller points we can debate about, that is the gist of it.  The problem with the argument is either side is in a totally different argument.  The conservatives are battling right form wrong, the liberals an argument of freedom.  Both are very noble points.  This country is founded on strong principles of freedom- right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness, so we should be able to marry whomever we choose, right?  Well, when our country was founded, it was done so on strong Christian values also, and whether we like it or not, that is our history.  Those values of honesty, kindness, love, responsibility have strengthened our country and the people.  At the same time this religion looks at gay action as a sin, just like it looks at adultery, and fornication.  We can't expect a religion to support what they believe to be sin.  

Mosaic Law states: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death."  

 It is a valid Christian belief, but they don't have the right to force their beliefs on others,  Although marriage itself is very plainly a man-woman thing, according to all definition, maybe a good compromise would be right to civil union.        


jewlledpen profile image

jewlledpen 7 years ago

One more thing, braudboy, I have really appreciated your comments until I heard the line "liberals destroy America" because not only is it untrue but the statement actually goes against conservative belief. When creating the constitution there were many different sides to many different issues. Coming to a compromise after hours and hours of debate is what made it so strong, we need liberals and conservatives to prevent rash decision, it is good to have an opposing opinion, otherwise their crucial points might never be addressed.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

jewlledpen- Sorry....it is one man's opinion, but the liberal movement has given us affirmative action, global warming, gay rights, god taken out of schools and in most public arenas, ACLU, abortion, and the list just keeps going on.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Hey Braudboy,

Since you like stats so much...considering the poll on this blog, the percentage of people who supports same sex marriage is higher than those who oppose it. Read it and weep! lol.

Do you support same sex marriage?54% Yes 46% No 0% I haven't made up my mind

46 people have voted in this poll.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- Wow! YOu mean Kerryg's fans supported her same sex marriage poll! THat tells me alot. THere is no doubt that Kerryg can muster a majority of her fans to support the cause. I am not impressed.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

I didn't "muster" anybody. The poll is there. Anybody who reads the hub has the opportunity to vote on it and in between search engine traffic and hubbers who found the hub via Hubtivity and the Hot Hubs section, I would guess a considerable majority of the people who've read this hub don't know me from Adam.

Granted, people who actually READ the hub instead of immediately skipping down to comments to inform me that all gays are immoral deviants might have been more likely to vote...


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg- dont be so sensitive. THe point I was making is that your fans were reading your hub and likely, they have similar views. I am just commenting on the evident lack of accuracy of such a poll based on the small number and the likely simlar view point of most that are reading your hubs. ....and, you are exactly right that if they did not read the comments and get properly informed by my comments and a few others who try to shine light on this nonsense, they probably did vote in favor of gay marriage.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

"properly informed"?

Considering your utter dismissal of peer reviewed science about the biological basis of homosexuality, that's pretty hilarious. The world does not always fit neatly into the little box created by a literal interpretation of a book written 3000 years ago for a bunch of shepherds who thought the sun revolved around the earth and stoning an appropriate form of execution for all sorts of things most modern people do every day.

It doesn't even fit into James's precious New Covenant, which conveniently allows people to enjoy pork chops and cheeseburgers, but not to spend their lives with the person they love if that person happens to be of the same sex.

The depth of your denial would be hilarious if it weren't so sad.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerrg- You sound ridiculous as you try to refute nature and the obvious design of man and woman. The real sadness comes from those such as yourselves that try to give credibility to insanity. You do no one any favors as you encourage behavior that is not only destructive to society, but denies those involved from experiencing the "true" love that comes from natural design. In that love they will find much more satisfaction in finding a true soul mate and the awesome experience of children. THis will produce the love that the "gay world" is missing and can never find as they wander lost.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

Sorry to upset you dear, but, wasn't it YOU who thought stats to be so important?  Now, that you don't like the results of this poll, you think it must be flawed in some way. See how unfair you are?!

I don't know Kerryg. I just particiapted in the poll using my own opinion. Kinda like the way you are voicing your monstrous opinion w/o knowing Kerryg.

I notice right before you open mouth and insert foot, you always start your posts with phrases like...you sound ridiculous or don't be so sensitive. Not realizing that is how you sound.

Anyway, since stats are usually viewed as proof by you, then this stat should tell you alot (quoting you)...and that is as I said earlier, which is everyone does not share your sentiments.

Finally, you got it!!! Or let me rephrase...its about time you were able to comprehend something!

Now, let's see if you can comprehend this...since you also speak so much of morality, then you have a moral responsibility to be humane to gays/lesbians or else all that morality hogwash you've been spewing was done in vain. Let me rephrase again...How can you talk about being moral, when you are not really practicing it? Hypocritical, if you ask me. Your morals should also be applied in the way you treat others.

By the way, nice picture of the baby.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

"obvious design" really says it all. We weren't "designed," we evolved, and evolution comes with built in redundancy.

Yes, natural reproduction among humans and other higher organisms requires one male set of genitalia and one female set of genitalia. However, penis and vagina are not the ONLY sexual organs.

The primary function of women's breasts is breastfeeding but I would be astonished if you had never caressed your wife's breasts during sex. The primary function of the mouth is eating and breathing, but if you have never kissed your wife, I will eat my hat. The primary function of hands is holding and manipulating objects but they also hold and manipulate your wife pretty well, don't they? And the anus, though it's primary purpose is obviously excretion, just happens to have a male equivalent of the G-spot.

All of these parts can and are combined in new and interesting ways by many heterosexual couples during sex, despite the fact that they were not "designed" for sexual purposes. Even among many higher animals, sex is at much about pleasure as reproduction, and sexual release without reproduction is commonly sought, especially among animals like humans that live in social groups. Hence the frequency of homosexual and bisexual behavior in bonobos, dolphins, lions, and many other higher order social mammals.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Also Braudboy, since you say the words " obvious design" there are some species of reptiles that can reproduce without male and female. So, the "obvious design" male and female theory is out the window there.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

jewlledpen ,

Stick aound long enough, Braudboy will say about 5000 more things you won't like or agree with. He ususally takes the indignant route to viewing things/people. HOwever, you have to enjoy his comments because they are comical.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

braudboy is our resident ayatollah.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Livelonger you wrote:

braudboy is our resident ayatollah.

Iamqweenbee writes:  hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha chuckles chuckles tehhehheh tehhehheh teeheehee teeheehee! :-0 Too funny! thanks for the laughter


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

OK, Braudboy! I found another stats since you feel this one is biased because we are all kerryg's fans. I copied and pasted it below...

Forty-two percent of Americans now say same sex couples should be allowed to legally marry, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds. That's up nine points from last month, when 33 percent supported legalizing same sex marriage.Support for same sex marriage is now at its highest point since CBS News starting asking about it in 2004. Twenty-eight percent say same sex couples should have no legal recognition – down from 35 percent in March – while 25 percent support civil unions, but not marriage, for gay couples.

According to your precious stats, it looks like you are out numbered, Pal! In the even that you would like to visit this website, you may do so via this link.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/04/27/politics/p...


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Wow! Can you feel the love from the "radical gay movement" crowd! I love to expose the hypocracy! Well, there is not much to say here. You can read the previous comments and evaluate for yourselves the futile attempts to make sense of this abnormal behavior called "gay sex"! We can start with kerryg, who thinks that man, in all his perfect wonder and complexity, was not created by an awesome God...but, instead, somehow, emerged from the swamps as some lower organism and evolved into the specimen we have today. Then, kerrg goes on to give examples that mouths and hands have several functions, so why not the anus??? This is brilliant stuff. By this logic, we could say that our hands might have a primary function of grabbing objects, but they can also be use to spank our children on the buttocks. Therefore, liberals must be wrong on the whole time out thing as spankings seem a normal function for our hands. Also , the hand comes in handy in slapping our spouse across the cheek when needed. kerryg must be endorsing this as she is noting the different functions of our body parts and thinking we need not examine the validity of their uses.

It does come down to this, when referring to the liberals, as they take on a cause against society. THey act as little children, whining and crying and behaving in such a loud manner as to demand society's attention. THese children are, of course very immature and lacking in substance and reason, but they often get their way, only because society wants to silence them and not because they have any merit to their actions.

Queenie- I speak of the design of man, not reptiles. And if you want statistics of how American feel about gay marriage, I have election results in at leat 11 states that tell you....hell no, we dont want gay marriage.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

This, I think, is one of the fundamental differences between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives base their morality on preconceived notions of what is repellant and "immoral." Liberals base their morality on what causes the greatest harm.

The Bible says "spare the rod, spoil the child," so many conservative parents I know beat their children with belts when they misbehave. I spank my daughter (2 1/2) when she deserves it, but I do not *beat* her. A sharp smack on the bottom if she is getting out of control says "Hey! Pay attention to me!" and is followed by a timeout to give her the chance to get herself under control. A beating says "Hey! Fear me!" One is a sharp reminder that she needs to get herself under control RIGHT NOW, the other is a lesson that bad behavior only needs to be avoided if there is somebody stronger than you around to catch you.

Beating my daughter would teach her sneakiness and resentment, and would do more harm than good to her character and our relationship. Allowing her to run wild would be equally harmful in the opposite way - I am not interested in raising a little monster who thinks the world should be handed to her on a silver platter. Spanking, followed by a timeout period to quiet her down, is a happy medium that encourages her to develop positive skills of self-discipline.

Likewise, you are correct that I *could* use my hands to beat my husband, but what benefit could this possibly give to our relationship? In contrast, there are a number of Biblical passages that are used as justification for the practice of wife beating, and some conservative Christians view it as A-OK as a result. Are you familiar with the "Christian Domestic Discipline" movement? http://www.christiandd.com/

If two adult men want to use their anuses for consensual sex, what possible harm does it do me, or society at large?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg-the harm comes into play when society is asked to endorse the behavior as normal and give a platform for this absurdity to pollute the morals and principles of the society. YOu,as a liberal fanatic, probably could care less about the integrity of the society and the well being of its citizenry, however, most good stewards of society know that the greater good is much more important than the selfish desires of a few deviants who would destroy the moral fiber of society just to satisfy their perverted lusts. Typical behavior of this "radical gay movement" is to trample all over the decency and principles that society tries to instill, and to try and re-write definitions of institutions and decent behavior so that they can try and convince themselves they are not crazy.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

I love that the ayatollah thinks all gay men use their anuses for sex, and that no heterosexuals do. And what about the lesbians?

And KerryG - don't expect any explanation of how what two consenting adults of any sexual orientation do behind closed doors hurts people, other than some vague references to the "moral fiber" of society being rendered apart (apparently love and commitment do that).


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

livelonger, lol, yes! It's not my thing, but I know several straight couples who are really into it. (Women talk much more about sex among ourselves than most men would believe. ;) )

He and I have been over the harm issue before and he has yet to give me a satisfactory answer for what harm granting equal rights to homosexuals will do to society. I am sure he would say the same of me, but on this one, I am pretty sure history is on my side. Reality has a well known liberal bias. :)


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

I have officially exposed the gay movement as a typical liberal arguement where you name call and attempt to bully your way into winning a losing effort. No explantation is necessary to describe a gay's physical manipulation to pull off any attempt at having sex with a partner who is not fitted for the activity. It is amusing, however, to hear kerrg and livelonger try to explain. And, of course, livelonger, misses the whole point of the debate, as she thinks we are talking about sex behind closed doors, when the "radical gay movement" is ALL about getting acceptance in the public square, and re-writing society's definition of traditional marriage, and redefining the principles of decency, and normal for society. THe ignorance of liberals as they make their arguements are astounding. They are the truly closed-minded people who demand change for their small world and do not care if they destroy the greater good in the process. THey are as spoiled children, having no wisdom or real consequences of their actions, they want to do whatever, without the shame of principles and morals to weigh them down.


illustros profile image

illustros 7 years ago from Washington, D.C.

Gay Rights Movements are evident. Their presence and their impact to our present situation cannot be denied. But, at the same time, we need to remember that Freedom is not about doing anything we want. (Or else, to intentionally harm another individual will be a form of expression of freedom as long as you want it.) But, Freedom is a capacity to accept and to do what is good.

Same-sex marriage is a complex problem. It is not just about religion or civil rights. It's a about a significant change in culture or common/accepted practice of a particular society. Due to its nature, this issue involves almost all aspects of our social and personal life.

It is still early to say 'Yes or No' to this issue and it still needs to be examined. There must be a middle ground to this argument; and, that's what we, as a society, haven't found yet due some flaws we have on how we are dealing with it.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

livelonger is male, by the way.

As our brief discursion into spanking should have made clear, I believe rather strongly in consequences for people's actions. However, I also believe in science and science makes it rather clear that there is a biological basis for homosexuality, so in most cases I do not believe that homosexuality is an "action" rather than a state of being. I'm aware that you disagree with this but science disagrees with you, and I have considerably more respect for the scientific process than for your unexamined moral prejudices.

Like you, I view monogamous relationships as the ideal, but it really doesn't bother me in the slightest if they are hetero or homosexual.

Even if you oppose homosexual marriage/civil unions, as I know you do, you have to admit it's better than forcing homosexuals to marry the opposite sex and dragging another person into the issue. One of my husband's cousins, a good girl who lost her virginity on her wedding night and has never had any other partners, was given an STD by her husband after he cheated on her with another woman. Imagine how much more likely this is when the husband (or wife) isn't even attracted to his or her spouse! That is exactly what happened throughout much of history, and until about 100 years ago, it was nearly impossible for a woman to get a divorce, even in a situation like my cousin's where her husband was not only adulterous but irresponsibly adulterous and has now ensured her a lifetime of medical treatment and probably infertility.

If you bothered to read history, braudboy, you would know that there has never been some shining moral paradise of Christian goodness (or non-Christian goodness either) and that the most sexually prepressive societies also tend to have the most unhealthy methods of coping with the repression. During the Victorian era, for example, when you couldn't even say the word "leg" in polite company and Oscar wilde was sentenced to two years hard labor for sodomy, child prostitution (of children of both sexes) was rampant. In part because of the high rate of out-of-wedlock births and the social stigma of bastardy, there was also a high rate of infanticide. In fact, in England there was an entire cottage industry of people who would take babies from their mothers, for a fee, and quietly neglect them to death. Is this really the kind of "moral" society you want?


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

kerryg- your view of science is more like science fiction. A real endeavor into science will reveal no proof of a "gay" gene or any other evidence of gayness. "Gay" is merely a declaration of some preference and nothing more. Gays have ventured in and out of the lifestyle as they see fit. I know that you want to believe a "biological" reason, as it suits your purpose. Most reasonable people understand the lack of science in this whole charade....and kerryg, if you really want to talk STDs you should examine the scientific evidence that sexual disease is rampant in the homosexual community. Finally, kerryg, you give obscure and rare examples to try and promote an undesirable activity forced upon mainstream society and this makes no sense. Your logic is flawed and you are blinded by the fight of a losing cause with no redeaming qualities for the society it preys on. Kerryg, I certainly want to strive toward morality and principled living and not toward the depths of depravity and "anything goes" living that you promote.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

As I have said over and over again, nobody is claiming there is a "gay gene." There IS strong evidence of a genetic component, but a more significant factor appears to be exposure to hormones and other factors in utero.

People who venture in and out of the "gay lifestyle" are called bisexuals, my dear. They are quite common. In fact, many of the studies of homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom has found that bisexuality is more common among many animals than either pure heterosexuality or pure homosexuality. Nearly all bonobos, for example, are actively bisexual. (That's Pan paniscus, our closest living genetic relative, as you'll recall.)

I am aware of STD problems in the gay community. As I have laid out several times already, that is one of several practical reasons I support gay marriage. I believe it will reduce promiscuity among certain corners of the LGBT community. You apparently prefer to ghettoize them instead in the hope that they'll all kill themselves off with disease without affecting the rest of society, but history has shown exactly how effective that tactic is! (Not at all. Ignoring them won't make them go away!)

Finally, I hardly promote "anything goes" living. I'm probably more conservative in my personal lifestyle than you are! Sexually speaking, I oppose irresponsible promisuity quite strongly. Unlike you, however, I acknowledge that some heterosexual couples are just as irresponsible and promiscuous as some homosexual couples, and do not believe that just beause they are heterosexual, their irresponsible and promisuous behavior is somehow "better" or more okay.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

I do not prefer to "ghettoize" them as you suggest. I prefer to let them know how society disapproves of their poor behavior. As, this is a choice, many might choose to rejoin mainstream society, and gain their rightful place there. Poor behavior should always be shunned, especially when it is being pushed to prominence in society's forefront. Society has every right to reject those actions that do not characterize its principles and morals.

...and kerrg, you most certainly do promote "anything goes" living and there is no greater example than your approval of the gay lifestyle.

And kerryg dear, going in and out of the gay lifestyle is CHOOSING the activity and not some defect they are born with. I suppose you think there is a "drug addict" gene and an "alcoholic" gene, and a "homeless" gene. A definite flaw of the liberal mentality is they want to take away responsibility from individuals and remove them from any fault of their actions. When you give them the idea that they are born this way, you take away their need to make responsible decisions for their life...and you do them no favors when you deceive in this way. People certainly do have control over their lives and they do need to understand consequences for bad actions they choose to participate in.


kerryg profile image

kerryg 7 years ago from USA Author

Most western societies have "disapproved" of homosexual behavior for nearly 2000 years, yet homosexuals have not "rejoined" mainstream society. In fact, as I've said before, the percentage of homosexuals has remained remarkably consistent through past and present cultures where such data is available.

Are you familiar with Occam's Razor? The simplest explanation is usually the right one? Either an amazingly consistent percentage of people from all sorts of societies, including both those with greater acceptance of homosexual behavior than Judeo-Christian ones and those societies past and present where homosexual behavior is punished by death, just happens to "choose" to be homosexual, or maybe, just maybe it's biological in origin and a certain percentage of people are genetically programmed to be moresusceptible to the factors (such as hormonal exposure in the womb) that result in homosexuality.

There is, by the way, some evidence for a genetic component in alcoholism as well, and everybody knows that alcoholism runs in families. It runs in mine, and for that reason, I don't drink. Admitting a biological basis for a problem does not remove the duty of the afflicted person to control him or herself at all. In fact, in increases it.

Alcoholism is, however, and extremely poor example because alcoholism is inherently harmful to the individual and any loved ones caught in the crossfire. In contrast, homosexual sex, like heterosexual sex, is NOT inherently harmful, provided the people involved are responsible about it. Not all homosexuals are, it's true, but not all heterosexuals are responsible about sex either, and at least irresponsible homosexual sex can never result in an unwanted pregnancy!

Re: bisexuality and "going in and out of the gay lifestyle", I don't think you really understand the terminology here.

Bisexuals do "choose" to engage in homosexual activity but they do not "choose" to be *attracted* to both sexes. They just are. Sexuality, whether hetero, homo, or bi, is defined by attraction, not by action. I am technically bisexual, as I have been sexually attracted to women before and expect to be again, but in practice I am 100% heterosexual, as I've only had one sexual partner in my life and he is very much male. :)

Check this hub out, you might learn something: http://hubpages.com/politics/What-is-Your-Sexualit


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Kerryg- actually, many homosexuals have re-joined mainstream society. You, however, are in denial about this because it goes contrary to your cockamaymee theory that homosexuals are born this way. So you write them off as bi-sexual or confused as to who they really were. Your logic holds no water. The obvious truth is that sexual activity is a chosen one. People do have character flaws and weaknesses and we all have to battle these as we go through life. BUt, what we dont do is promote and celebrate our flaws and push them on society as normal. THis is the whole point that we are arguing. I don deny gays the right to engage in whatever actviity, no matter how vile I think it is. What I do object to, is the elevation of a wrongful behavior to a status of normalcy in the society's public square. A re-definition of decency and a tearing down of the cornerstone building block called "marriage" so they can feel better about the abhorrent behavior is unacceptable. Society must safeguard these principles and morals to be passed on for future generations and to assure the future flourishing of said society.

kerryg- you will find that man has all kinds of temptations in his life and opportuinities to stray off into "bad behavior". What really reveals good character is the ability to resist the opportunities and temptations that we know to be wrong or that are hurtful to others or to our own moral fiber. Liberalism has been a systematic attempt to tear down all of these character building moments, and instead, try to urge all behaviors and make them feel good in doing so. This "feel good" strategy is a lie and only puts these people into uncharted waters where they find themselves immersed in these "bad behaviors" and unable to escape back into mainstream society.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

You are always talking about the design as you feel it applies to men and women (male and female). I am just making a point that, that DESIGN does not apply in every situation whether reptiles or humans. Thereby, making your design theory a flop.

Let me remind you that I am straight, however, always have supported the gay community, as far as civil rights. It is my responsibility as a Christian and as a decent person with morals to try do right by all. That includes gays/lesbians.

When you say, "how society feels about this"...speak for yourself! I don't feel that way and neither do many others. I just don't see your logic in all this. 

Whatever stats you have, I would love to view how the other small portion of the country feel.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

braud: what you wrote is interesting. Do you think homosexuality tempted you? Were you seriously tempted by it? Do you have an attraction to the same sex that you fight off because you think it's immoral?

I can understand your perspective that it's a choice if in fact you have an inherent attraction to the same sex that you decided against acting upon.


illustros profile image

illustros 7 years ago from Washington, D.C.

This same-sex marriage issue is not being dealt properly by both its advocates and its oppositions. It just creates noise rather than enlightenment.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- if you are truly Christian as you say, then you know that you have an obligation to your brother to keep him accountable. I would check with your pastor for some much needed guidance. I suspect that you are one of those hypocrites who show up on Easter and maybe Christmas eve, but have no real concern for the teachings and principles of Christianity. I prefer the honesty of agnostics and non-believers to such behavior. Queenie-doing right by all is not condoning all behavior. Your principles are mis-guided if you think this is Christianity. You dont condemn the sinner, but you must speak out against the sins. Your watered down CHristianity is of no use to anyone. ...and the design theory is very much intact and fullproof. To deny our design for the opposite sex is futile and ridiculous.

Livelongr- if you comprehend what I write, you will notice that I state that man faces all kinds of temptations. Homosexuality has never been one of my weaknesses. BUt, here is a great example of the choice of homosexuality. THis behavior is very widespread in prisons as men give in to sexual frustrations and desires and have only other men to act out on. It is very much a condition of their surroundings and not something they are born with. We should be very careful in excusing behavior in people, and instead, hold them accountable for their actions. It is the only way society can keep order. To not do so is to assign a birth defect to everyone for every bad behavior and let everyone claim a disability and neglect their duties as decent humans.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

1. I am a true Christian and as a Christian I DO NOT judge others, which is a sin.

2. I don't have any obligation to MAKE anyone do anything. I have ONLY my cross to bear. When I stand before God on judgement day, I will only answer to what I have done wrong. Sorry,  but being a Christian does not mean to take the weight of the world on my shoulders. Christ did that and I am far from Christ. I guess you missed that in church or wherever you learn your religious lessons.

3. I don;t have to check with my pastor to formulate my own opinion on gay rights. I have my own mind and not even my pastor can change that. Besides, my pastor is not God and God instructs us to be decent to each other. God does not discriminate and neither should his followers.

4. Whenever I go to church, it makes no difference. You must be one of those hypicrits who go to church all the time, but, practice no Christianity. I would rather be a Christian who attends church less, but, practice Christianity regularly, than to be a Christian who attends church often and practice Christianity rarely. Christianity comes from your heart, not church. If you are a true Chrsitian, you would know that

4. I always try to do right by all because its the right thing to do. I truly believe gays should have the same rights. Especially since they contributing the same if not more. Our supreme being gave us ALL the right to choose. If they choose to marry, that is their right. No one has the right to take that from them.

5. I don't condemn any sinner simply because it is not my place to do so. Just like Jesus spoke to the crowd that was throwing stones...he said, "he who is without sin, cast the first stone"  I am too poor in spirit that I need God in my life. So poor that I, too sin. So I cannot throw stones and neither can you. A true Christian will be humble and admit that they are poor in spirit. Why? because none are perfect and they are a liar if they believe thay are without sin.

Sorry, I don't practice Christianity the way YOU think I should, but, through my journeys I have learned how to be a Christian. Condemning people and judging them is not a good way to become a good Christian. in fact, it is a self-destructive way. Keep living, it will come to you. If it haven't already.

Livelonger,

I was going to post this previously, but, I had a feeling that maybe Braud was feeling tempted in order for him to be so adamant about what he said. I thought to myself...hmm, its deeper than what meets the eye. Now, its all coming out


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

Qweenbee: I am not a Christian myself, but I can respect those people who live according to Christ's principles (Christians) while not liking those pharisees that couch all sorts of hatred in the language of their religion (Christianists). I think you expressed your point exceedingly clearly; if, like everything else, it falls on deaf ears with braud, then that's unfortunately his cross to bear (no pun intended).


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

LL, Christianist!? Christianist!? How many different hatreds are there? You WeeNee.Peace.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

I wouldn't go so far to say I hate Christianists, but I certainly don't like them, and know they are immoral people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianism


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Livelonger,

Thank you! lol. That's OK that you are not a Christian. I understand. Not everyone follows that faith, which is their choice. Get it Braudboy...their choice! Christianity has taken me a long way from where I used to be, so I stayed with it.

I used to be a Braudboy X 10. I had no love, understanding, compassion, etc. for no one. I was a mean and hateful little cuss. lol. All that has changed for me since becoming a Christian. I am fallible, therefore, I fall short many times. However, I still do the best I can to live up to what is expected of me as a Christian. Its hard (especially dealing with the Braudboy type), but, I am determined to do it right because it made me a better person.

One of the things is supporting gay rights.  I am active in my community/city on gay rights. I truly believe in my heart that the Supreme Being loves us all and gives us all the same opportunities. No one has the right to counter that. Gays/lesbians are people too and should have the same rights as any straight person. Some are but not limited to... to be free to make their life's choices, be happy, and prosperous. I will bet my life on that.  Some of my best friends are gay/lesbian and I DO NOT see the behavior that Braud speaks of. Neither do I feel any of the things Braud speaks of. But he has his opinion and I have mine and I am sticking to it like bees to honey.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braudboy,

I just thought of something else...

There are many, many, many men who claim to hate gays. But, in reality, they wish they had a gay man. I have learned that the people who talk so negatively about gays/lesbians are the same people who are secretly dating gays/lesbians.

So, if you think there are most people against it. Think again. There are people who are for it but are being secretive about it. I think one of those people is you. Sorry, if I offend, but, just telling my thoughts.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- If you are truly a Christian, this passage from the bible might help:

ROmans 1: 24-28- " So God let these people go their own way. They did what they wanted to do and their filthy thoughts made them do shameful things with their bodies. They gave up the truth about God for a lie, and they worshipped God's creation instead of God. God let them follow their own evil desires. Women no longer wanted to have sex in a natural way, and they did things to each other that was not natural. Men behaved in the same way. They stopped wanting to have sex with women and had strong desires for sex with other men. They did shameful things with each other, and what happened to them is punishment for their foolish deeds. Since these people refused even to think about God, he let their useless minds rule over them. That's why they do all sorts of indecent things."

Livelonger- you know morality from a heathen's perspective. It is of no use to me.

Queenie- Christianity is certainly a choice.....however, if you do choose it, it does help if you try to uphold its principles. You dont condemn people, but you certainly speak out against sin and not let it overrun the society where you try to raise your Christian family. I actually dont see how you combine a Christian faith and supporting gay rights. You try to have it both ways but you lose credibility.


livelonger profile image

livelonger 7 years ago from San Francisco

braudboy: Actually, my morality is from a Jewish perspective. Maybe that is still of no use to you. Thankfully, I'm not in the habit of caring what immoral people consider ethical behavior, no matter what they call themselves!

Qweenbee: You're right. The most important thing is to be a good person. Anyone can be bad and console themselves with membership to a church. It's a good thing that most people know the difference.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braud,

try these scriptures on judging other people, which is what you are doing

Helpful Not Helpful

Matthew 7:1-5 ESV / 43 helpful votes

“Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Helpful Not Helpful

Luke 6:37 ESV / 24 helpful votes

“Judge not, and you will not be judged; condemn not, and you will not be condemned; forgive, and you will be forgiven;

Ephesians 4:29 ESV / 16 helpful votes

Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.

Matthew 7:5 ESV / 8 helpful votes

You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother's eye.

Now a scripture on choices we have to make for ourselves. He gives us the choice to serve whatever faith,principle, etc.

24:15 But if serving the LORD seems undesirable to you, then choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve, whether the gods your forefathers served beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you are living. But as for me and my household, we will serve the LORD."

Now a lesson on brotherly love

PRO 10:12 Hatred stirs up dissension, but love covers over all wrongs.

The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born.

Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God

Now the last one about aliens, you can refer that to gays/lesbians. Not because they are alien, but, because their lifestyle is alien to some people. I would use the same principle


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- you are confused. i am judging no one. You deceive yourself as you spout your rhetoric. I confront the sin. I single no one out and I tell you that I sin also. What is very different here is this. There is a movement to promote this sin and to elevate it to nomal activity and to give it prominence in our society. THis cannot be tolerated....as any good Christian would know. Christianity has never been about telling everyone to live as they please, and to give in to whatever lustful desires come their way. Your Christianity is very distorted and I will stand up against it. You, however, have done some very good judging yourself as you paint all who speak out against the homosexual sin as haters, and bigots, and other names.

Livelonger- Your jewish religion is some brand different from the old testament. Your morality gives freedom to commit sin without rebuke and to rebuke those who speak out against sin. From a societal perspective, where we should have principles and boundaries, your way is useless.

Oh, and Queenie, there is forgiveness and love waiting for all who are pushing this"radical gay agenda" on America. They need only come to Jesus. But, until that day, while they are attempting on attacking Christianity and promoting the sinful destruction of decent society, they will meet resistance by those who are holding dear the morals that are in place for our citizenry.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braud,

As a Christian, you have to show yourself to be humble, loving, understanding, forgiving, etc. Otherwise, the things you have said do not sound Christ-like. How is anyone to believe that you are a true Christian if you are not carrying yourself as one?

If you feel what a person does is wrong...it is not your place to condemn them or judge them. You have a right to your opinion, but, not the right to condemn. As Chrstians, we pray for them.

It is my opinion that gays should have the same rights and should be able to marry if they decide to do so. If you feel I am wrong then just pray for me. I feel you are dead wrong, so I pray for you. But, to condemn and judge is a sin, too. So, you are in no better position.

Your hateful rhetoric towards gays resounds like an angry lynch mob. I am sorry, but, I will not hate along with you. So, if that means I am sinning, then, this is one sin I will uphold.

When I was a little girl, a lady got on the bus and started shouting out, "Hell is full of church goers!" I thought to myself...this lady is crazy.  Church goers are going to heaven.

When I became an adult, I realized she was probably right.  Church goers attend church all the time, but, not understanding the religious principles or applying it. Kinda like what you are doing on this blog. Be careful of that.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- I understand the need for humbleness, love, and understanding. THey have their place in dealing with people. But, you miss the total picture if you dont see the obligation of Christians to protect their society from being overrun by those who have no regard for these principles. It is a juggling . Act to be sure. BUt, Christians are to stand up for right and wrong as they give love and understanding for those in need. BUt, as they are confronted by those who try to tear down their religion and its principles, Christians are also directed to stand firm in their beliefs.

Queenie, you consistently miss the point when you say " If you feel what a person does is wrong..it is not your place to condemn or judge them"

On a one to one basis, I do not judge homosexuals, I understand they are misguided and in need of guidance. BUt, we are talking about a movement on a large-scale that is designed to redirect our society and to redefine our morals and principles, and it is on this basis that I make my stand. You need to be clear what we are debating here.


sneakorocksolid 7 years ago

Queenie and BB, you two still at it? This has to be a record!Peace.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

sneakorocksolid,

I guess we are still at it like two little kids. I'm the mature one, though. lol

Braud,

You always say what I missed. What about the 1000's of points you missed?

1. What principles are you referring? The ones that you, yourself disregard?

2.The only way Christians should stand for right and wrong is when someone is being done wrong. That is what I am doing. Gays/Lesbians are done wrong when they are denied the same rights and common decency.

3.Gays are not trying to tear down my religion or else I would stand firm on that issue. HOwever, since you say Christians should stand firm on their beliefs, then why do you condemn me for doing so?

4. I do not miss a point!!! You know what you should do as a Christian. Don't blame me if you don't!!!

5. You say you don't judge, yet you continue to brand them and say things that are uncouth. If that is not judging, I don't know what is.

How about this Braud...just say, "gays/lesbians live your life as best you can. No one has the right to judge you or take away your right to choose. I will pray for you if you make the wrong choice and I will pray that you make the right choices." If you cannot say that, then you are not a true Christian.

However, after that, you have placed it in God's hands in case they do make wrong choices. That is what a Christian does. A Christian does not talk abusively about anyone as you have done. As a Christian, you should check yourself before you wreck yourself. lol.

 


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- you especially must be condemned! YOU claim to be a Christian and, therefore a representative of CHristian values! You, however, ignore the teachings and principles of your faith, and become the biggest hypocrite of all. YOu have totally distorted your Christian beliefs. We are not talking about judging individuals....we are talking about standing up for what your faith sets forth as right and wrong. We are talking about safeguarding your society from a radical movement that attempts to destroy the principles and morals of decency, that demands approval an acceptance as normal for their obvious sinful behavior, that seeks to re-define society's definition of traditional marriage and family values. Queenie- you can be as loving, and as forgiving as need be as you meet each gay person individually.....but this "gay movement" is a broad attack on Christian values and an attack on the building blocks of our society. Queenie.....I again suggest that you speak with your pastor or any of your church brothers and sisters....but I suspect you have none and your Christianity is some fantasy in your mind.


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie...I guess your brand of Christianity has no desire to see others come to know Jesus. I suppose you have discarded the part of our faith that witnesses to others who are caught up in the ways of this world. We are not to accept this, but to "spread the good news" that others would put away their foolish desires and strive to live a righteous life. An occasional trip to "Sunday services" should be in order for you, Queenie. You see, Queenie, I do understand that this fight is about right and wrong and it is not a fight among Christians. THis radical gay movement has no interest in upholding Christian values or in even discussing the bible. This is a movement to destroy Christian values and to trample on the decent principles and morals that are rapidly decaying in our society. I, for one, will do my best to stand against this attempt. As evidenced by many state elections where "gay marriage" have been on the ballot, I am not alone.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braud,

There you go judging and condemning again. Didn't you get anything from the scriptures I posted?

Let me help you out...just because we have different views does not mean I should be condemned. Go ahead and condemn me if you want, it is your soul.

If they have no interest in upholding Christian values, that's ok. They can choose whatever faith they want to follow. Besides, you have a great many Christians who are not living up to Christian values.

You keep speaking of state ballots, yet you post no poll results so that we all can see. I guess it wouldn't matter anyway because there are people who agree with you, however, a good majority do not.

Braud, lets leave Christianity out of this because I would hate for you to go to hell being so self-righteous, judgemental, and condemning people. Just make your non-existent points without religion because you have not only lost your mind, but, you truly lost your religion.

Sorry, but I just didn't read the rest of your hogwash. Come back to Earth, then we can talk


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie....let's call it quits. Your mind is made up and so is mine. You make no sense anyway. How can you ask for polls on election results. They are THE RESULTS! At least 11 states have defeated the "gay marriage proposal" on the election ballot!!!!! Anyway..... I have said about all you can say on this issue. It is wrong to legitimize this behavior and I will always stand against it.


iamqweenbee 7 years ago

Braud,

Open mouth, insert feet! Just put both of your feet in your mouth.

Weren't you the one stating you had state poll results to prove what you say? All I did was ask to see them.

11 states? What about the rest, which is the majority?

You can stand agaianst it and I will stand for it because it is wrong to choose whom someone else can/cannot marry and judge/condemn them in the process.

So, you quit me, huh? Well, I guess this is the end of a debating relationship. lol! How sweet it is.

Now, lets debate another topic. This was fun!


braudboy profile image

braudboy 7 years ago from Long Beach, MS

Queenie- It is fact that 11 states have voted on the "gay marriage" issue and it was defeated 11 times. I am not going to go look it up for you.....I will let you do that. The research will be good for you. DId you hear that only 11 states have voted on this subject and 11 times it was defeated. That is 100% of the time, the American people voted down a "gay marriage" proposal. OK, now we are done.


CkhoffmanK profile image

CkhoffmanK 6 years ago from Las Vegas

I don't support religious views being forced down our throats. Gays have any right as straights do. We're all people, and we're all americans. Keep your church out of our laws! bottom line.


Danquebec 5 years ago

Wow braudboy is a very ignorant and scary person.

I'm not going to argue, especially since I'm tired of arguing on Internet and that it will be against a wall.

Just explaining it again for those who didn't understand.

- We legalise marriage for gays.

- Churches and other religious groups can choose to refuse to marry gays.

- Churches and other religious groups can choose to accept to marry gays.

- Equals.

- Religious freedom.

And you have no right to decide their religious ceremonies.

I'm not homosexual myself, but I'll fight all my life for the rights of every beings that haves feelings, until all are free.

Reason and only reason shall triumph.

(Sorry for possible grammar errors, English is not my mother tongue.)


Reg 4 years ago

Thanks for this nice post Hub! finally a post that is based on Gay marriage. in my opinion we should just accept them for what who they are. because they are still human beings that have a heart and a body like ours. so for me, we should let them live by their perspective of life.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working