Originally Posted By: BobKay
Originally Posted By: 2x6spds
Well, I don't know what it is but it's not marriage.

The central institution of human society from literally time immemorial is the heterosexual family unit. It is the institution upon which all other institutions stand.

In all of human history, no society has ever condoned homosexual marriage. Marriage is a creature of the state, rooted in culture. I can understand why homosexual couples would want all of the economic and trust benefits of marriage. But why marriage?

Why adoption? Why the propagation of the homosexual lifestyle in everything from popular culture to grade school text books?

Personally, I don't think this is a good thing for civilization because it undermines the central institution of our culture.

Just my opinion.


Marriage wass about lineage and the rights of legitimate succession. It was power brokering. Ask a coulpe of dead Russian nobles why they were sent there from "civilized" Europe.

You know, Dave, I called out your predictable repsonse to someone at about 1 o'clock this afternoon. That puts it 6 whole hours ahead of your actual post. Surprise me sometime, why dontcha? "Rooted in culture" is meaningless, as culture is fluid, especially now, globally.

Slavery was rooted in culture. Women and children as possessions to do with as a man pleased was (is) rooted in culture. Xenophobia is rooted in culture. Forced genital mutilation is rooted in culture. It's a very long list. Hell, one could call Nazism "rooted in culture." Culture is an explanation for why/how things are in a given place and time. It is based neither in fact, nor in the immutably physical. The only thing that it does for certain is change.

Propagation of a homosexual lifestyle? I'm afraid you'll have to own that fearful and misinformed belief. Being homosexual is not a lifestyle. You probably engage in more of a lifestyle than I do. I don't even know what that means. And if you think gay people who adopt or become parents in some other way are raising gay kids, then you're beyond ill-informed. I know of not one person raised by a same sex couple who is gay. You can't inculcate gender proclivity.

Rooted in Culture...let's see; rape, murder, incest, bigotry, intolerance, anti-Semitism, racism, sexism, violence. You know, you're right. I think we should keep it all just the way it is. Just don't call any of us for assistance when they come for you. What? That will never happen to you because you're just like everyone else? Congratulations! Liar!

In case you're looking for a new career position, I hear that Reverend Phelps is looking for a new PR person.


Well said, bud. I too saw an ignorant response like this coming from him the moment I read your post. I also suspect that most of those whom withhold comment are of the same ilk.

Regarding no society has embraced homosexual marriage - I've read that there's historical evidence that gay marriage was common as far back as medieval times.

"Remember, we have not established a revolutionary value system; we are only in the process of establishing it. I do not remember our ever constituting any value that said that a revolutionary must say offensive things towards homosexuals, or that a revolutionary should make sure that women do not speak out about their own particular kind of oppression. As a matter of fact, it is just the opposite: we say that we recognize the women's right to be free. We have not said much about the homosexual at all, but we must relate to the homosexual movement because it is a real thing. And I know through reading, and through my life experience and observations that homosexuals are not given freedom and liberty by anyone in the society. They might be the most oppressed people in the society.

And what made them homosexual? Perhaps it's a phenomenon that I don't understand entirely. Some people say that it is the decadence of capitalism. I don't know if that is the case; I rather doubt it. But whatever the case is, we know that homosexuality is a fact that exists, and we must understand it in its purest form: that is, a person should have the freedom to use his body in whatever way he wants.

That is not endorsing things in homosexuality that we wouldn't view as revolutionary. But there is nothing to say that a homosexual cannot also be a revolutionary. And maybe I'm now injecting some of my prejudice by saying that "even a homosexual can be a revolutionary." Quite the contrary, maybe a homosexual could be the most revolutionary.

........

We should be willing to discuss the insecurities that many people have about homosexuality. When I say "insecurities," I mean the fear that they are some kind of threat to our manhood. I can understand this fear. Because of the long conditioning process which builds insecurity in the American male, homosexuality might produce certain hang-ups in us. I have hang-ups myself about male homosexuality. But on the other hand, I have no hang-up about female homosexuality. And that is a phenomenon in itself. I think it is probably because male homosexuality is a threat to me and female homosexuality is not.

We should be careful about using those terms that might turn our friends off. The terms "fa**ot" and "punk" should be deleted from our vocabulary, and especially we should not attach names normally designed for homosexuals to men who are enemies of the people, such as [Richard] Nixon or [Attorney General John] Mitchell. Homosexuals are not enemies of the people." ~ Huey P. Newton

One thing that Huey mentions is how he has no problems with female homosexuality, and this is virtually always the case with men against gay marriage. If they were asked to be in a threesome with two very attractive ladies, the guy wouldn't turn it down if they were married or not...

Or you could be a homophobe that's a self-loathing gay person..... linky.

The only reasonable argument for owning a gun is to protect yourself from the police.