Comments on: NOM Marriage News: January 29, 2010

By: petey

petey — Fri, 19 Feb 2010 03:52:58 +0000

Thanks Samantha. Well said.
Another point - ssm does affect me . I will have to teach it's correctness in school , even though it is contrary to my personal social beliefs. In places of worship, eventaully, it will become illegal to read the and discuss the Bible and its lessons , because it will be a hate crime. I foresee that , very quickly, another's "rights" will deny mine.

By: Chairm

Chairm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:12:10 +0000

David,

What does the B mean in "H8BERS"?

Also, before you comment again, please cut the yelling with all caps.

Thanks.

By: Chairm

Chairm — Fri, 05 Feb 2010 23:09:45 +0000

Richard, the record will show that I stood for the social institution of marriage and against the assertion of supremacy in the name of gay identity politics.

I stood against the racialist kind of identity politics and am proud of having done so for about two decades before the Loving decision.

That hasn't changed. Your version of identity politics is proving itself little better than what I fought against back then.

By: Samantha

Samantha — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 20:24:19 +0000

In the early 1970s, during the U.S. civil rights movement, which sought for much-needed racial and gender equality, almost no one considered people with homosexual attraction as a distinctive demographic group. The main legal goal of homosexual activists then was to eliminate criminal penalties against homosexual acts, as a first step toward their goal of greater public acceptance.

In the early 1970's, the public, and most lawyers, doctors, and therapists saw homosexuality, not as normal adult behavior, but as a psychological disorder.

So what has happened to cause the legal and cultural spasms we face today? Simply put, we have witnessed an aggressive political movement that has outstripped any substantive change in the medical or legal evidence. In 1973, in response to increasing political harassment by homosexual activists, the American Psychiatric and Psychological Associations removed homosexuality from their official list of disorders. This action was taken by simply putting the issue to an open vote in their professional convention meetings. The change was passed, not because of any change in actual medical findings, but as a political statement. A friend of UFI, psychologist Dean Byrd has written, "This was the first time in the history of healthcare that a diagnosis was decided by popular vote rather than scientific evidence."

The activists have used similar methods in the years since then, trying to prove that they are a legitimate demographic group with fixed and immutable, or unchangeable, characteristics. They must convince us of this way in order to justify their demand for the same legal protections now given to race and gender. It is a crucial point in understanding both the agenda and the tactics of intimidation used by these activists.

We have seen unrelenting pressure from advocates of the homosexual lifestyle to accept as normal that which is not normal. Disagree with them and be labeled as narrow-minded, bigoted, and unreasonable. These advocates are quick to demand freedom of speech and thought for themselves, but even quicker to attack those with a different view. Their hope is to intimidate opposition and, if possible, to silence them by applying labels like 'homophobic.' This is more than a social issue. It may ultimately be a test of basic religious or other freedoms.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 19:50:34 +0000

"young teen lesbian", why are you writing this? You have same sex attractions so therefore you allign yourself with a political cause that will do nothing for you? A few years ago, there were a lot of "young communists" and yet the world did not inevitably all become communist, did it? People change their minds and traditional marriage is not a "drowning movement". It is what the world has done for years and years. It is the backbone of a stable society.

By: pope

pope — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:27:57 +0000

Sorry young teen, but the goal of the homosexual agenda is well known.

By: young teen lesbian

young teen lesbian — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:56:32 +0000

What's nice is that same sex marriage will eventually happen regardless of the bigotry and twisted lies spewed on these blogs. I'm just waiting on all of these old, mean, insecure, out-of-date traditionalists to die off one by one so the younger more enlightened generation could take their place to pass it. 52% to 48% on a scale that has been increasingly tilted for gay marriage? How long do you think it'll take to gain those last few percentage points as the country becomes less and less religious?

Yes, I am a lesbian after your children. I find this drowning movement of yours laughable.

By: bystander

bystander — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:51:23 +0000

Dont worry David, the courts will resolve this situation.

By: Raynd

Raynd — Wed, 03 Feb 2010 00:11:00 +0000

We know that married intact natural families are the gold standard. This fact has scientific consensus. Same-sex parenting lacks a scientific consensus because there simply are not enough good studies on which to base a conclusion.

You are the one with the burden of proof.

By: Raynd

Raynd — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 23:58:33 +0000

Actually David, you've done a pretty good job of describing yourself. Seriously? This is the face of the activist gay movement. You can't refute, so you make threats and call names. Is it so hard to come to the table with ideas instead of bawdy intimidations?