Raving Conservative

Google

Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Proof That I am Right About the Gay Marriage Agenda

For those of you who have been swearing that all of the dire consequences of homosexual marriage are nothing more than the paranoid rantings of a Christian bigot, I present the following form the website BeyondMarriage.org, the website of a group of homosexual activists seking homosexual marriage . . . and more.

BEYOND SAME-SEX MARRIAGE A NEW STRATEGIC VISION FOR ALL OURFAMILIES & RELATIONSHIPS
July 26, 2006
We, the undersigned – lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) and allied activists, scholars, educators, writers, artists, lawyers, journalists, and community organizers – seek to offer friends and colleagues everywhere a new vision for securing governmental and private institutional recognition of diverse kinds of partnerships, households, kinship relationships and families. In so doing, we hope to move beyond the narrow confines of marriage politics as they exist in the United States today.
We seek access to a flexible set of economic benefits and options regardless of sexual orientation, race, gender/gender identity, class, or citizenship status.
We reflect and honor the diverse ways in which people find and practice love, form relationships, create communities and networks of caring and support, establish households, bring families into being, and build innovative structures to support and sustain community.
In offering this vision, we declare ourselves to be part of an interdependent, global community. We stand with people of every racial, gender and sexual identity, in the United States and throughout the world, who are working day-to-day – often in harsh political and economic circumstances – to resist the structural violence of poverty, racism, misogyny, war, and repression, and to build an unshakeable foundation of social and economic justice for all, from which authentic peace and recognition of global human rights can at long last emerge.
Why the LGBT Movement Needs a New Strategic Vision
Household & Family Diversity is Already the Norm
The struggle for same-sex marriage rights is only one part of a larger effort to strengthen the security and stability of diverse households and families. LGBT communities have ample reason to recognize that families and relationships know no borders and will never slot narrowly into a single existing template.
All families, relationships, and households struggling for stability and economic security will be helped by separating basic forms of legal and economic recognition from the requirement of marital and conjugal relationship.
U.S. Census findings tell us that a majority of people, whatever their sexual and gender identities, do not live in traditional nuclear families. Recognizing the diverse households that already are the norm in this country is simply a matter of expanding upon the various forms of legal recognition that already are available. The LGBT movement has played an instrumental role in creating and advocating for domestic partnerships, second parent adoptions, reciprocal beneficiary arrangements, joint tenancy/home-ownership contracts, health care proxies, powers of attorney, and other mechanisms that help provide stability and security for lesbian, gay, bisexual, and heterosexual individuals and families. During the height of the AIDS epidemic, our communities formed support systems and constructed new kinds of families and partnerships in the face of devastating crisis and heartbreak. Both our communities and our HIV organizations recognized, respected, and fought for the rights of non-traditionally constructed families and non-conventional partnerships. Moreover, the transgender and bisexual movements, so often historically left behind or left out by the larger lesbian and gay movement, have powerfully challenged legal constructions of relationship and fought for social, legal, and economic recognition of partnerships, households, and families, which include members who shatter the narrow confines of gender conformity.
To have our government define as “legitimate families” only those households with couples in conjugal relationships does a tremendous disservice to the many other ways in which people actually construct their families, kinship networks, households, and relationships. For example, who among us seriously will argue that the following kinds of households are less socially, economically, and spiritually worthy?
· Senior citizens living together, serving as each other’s caregivers, partners, and/or constructed families
· Adult children living with and caring for their parents
· Grandparents and other family members raising their children’s (and/or a relative’s) children
· Committed, loving households in which there is more than one conjugal partner
· Blended families
· Single parent households
· Extended families (especially in particular immigrant populations) living under one roof, whose members care for one another
· Queer couples who decide to jointly create and raise a child with another queer person or couple, in two households
· Close friends and siblings who live together in long-term, committed, non-conjugal relationships, serving as each other’s primary support and caregivers
· Care-giving and partnership relationships that have been developed to provide support systems to those living with HIV/AIDS
Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationship, and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others. While we honor those for whom marriage is the most meaningful personal ­– for some, also a deeply spiritual – choice, we believe that many other kinds of kinship relationship, households, and families must also be accorded recognition.
An Increasing Number of Households & Families Face Economic Stress
Our strategies must speak not only to the fears, but also the hopes, of millions of people in this country – LGBT people and others – who are justifiably afraid and anxious about their own economic futures.
Poverty and economic hardship are widespread and increasing. Corporate greed, draconian tax cuts and breaks for the wealthy, and the increasing shift of public funds from human needs into militarism, policing, and prison construction are producing ever-greater wealth and income gaps between the rich and the poor, in this country and throughout the world. In the United States, more and more individuals and families (disproportionately people of color and single-parent families headed by women) are experiencing the violence of poverty. Millions of people are without health care, decent housing, or enough to eat. We believe an LGBT vision for the future ought to accurately reflect what is happening throughout this country. People are forming unique unions and relationships that allow them to survive and create the communities and partnerships that mirror their circumstances, needs, and hopes. While many in the LGBT community call for legal recognition of same-sex marriage, many others – heterosexual and/or LGBT – are shaping for themselves the relationships, unions, and informal kinship systems that validate and support their daily lives, the lives they are actually living, regardless of what direction the current ideological winds might be blowing.
The Right’s “Marriage Movement” is Much Broader than Same-Sex Marriage
LGBT movement strategies must be sufficiently prophetic, visionary, creative, and practical to counter the right’s powerful and effective use of “wedge” politics – the strategic marketing of fear and resentment that pits one group against another.
Right-wing strategists do not merely oppose same-sex marriage as a stand-alone issue. The entire legal framework of civil rights for all people is under assault by the Right, coded not only in terms of sexuality, but also in terms of race, gender, class, and citizenship status. The Right’s anti-LGBT position is only a small part of a much broader conservative agenda of coercive, patriarchal marriage promotion that plays out in any number of civic arenas in a variety of ways ­ – all of which disproportionately impact poor, immigrant, and people-of-color communities. The purpose is not only to enforce narrow, heterosexist definitions of marriage and coerce conformity, but also to slash to the bone governmental funding for a wide array of family programs, including childcare, healthcare and reproductive services, and nutrition, and transfer responsibility for financial survival to families themselves.
Moreover, as we all know, the Right has successfully embedded “stealth” language into many anti-LGBT marriage amendments and initiatives, creating a framework for dismantling domestic partner benefit plans and other forms of household recognition (for queers and heterosexual people alike). Movement resources are drained by defensive struggles to address the Right’s issue-by-issue assaults. Our strategies must engage these issues head-on, for the long term, from a position of vision and strength.
“Yes!” to Caring Civil Society and “No!” to the Right’s Push for Privatization
Winning marriage equality in order to access our partners’ benefits makes little sense if the benefits that we seek are being shredded.
At the same time same-sex marriage advocates promote marriage equality as a way for same-sex couples and their families to secure Social Security survivor and other marriage-related benefits, the Right has mounted a long-term strategic battle to dismantle all public service and benefit programs and civic values that were established beginning in the 1930s, initially as a response to widening poverty and the Great Depression. The push to privatize Social Security and many other human needs benefits, programs, and resources that serve as lifelines for many, married or not, is at the center of this attack. In fact, all but the most privileged households and families are in jeopardy as a result of a wholesale right-wing assault on funding for human needs, including Medicare, Medicaid, welfare, HIV-AIDS research and treatment, public education, affordable housing, and more.
This bad news is further complicated by a segment of LGBT movement strategy that focuses on same-sex marriage as a stand-alone issue. Should this strategy succeed, many individuals and households in LGBT communities will be unable to access benefits and support opportunities that they need because those benefits will only be available through marriage, if they remain available at all. Many transgender, gender queer, and other gender-nonconforming people will be especially vulnerable, as will seniors. For example, an estimated 70-80% of LGBT elders live as single people, yet they need many of the health care, disability, and survivorship benefits now provided through partnerships only when the partners are legally married.
Rather than focus on same-sex marriage rights as the only strategy, we believe the LGBT movement should reinforce the idea that marriage should be one of many avenues through which households, families, partners, and kinship relationships can gain access to the support of a caring civil society.
The Longing for Community and Connectedness
We believe LGBT movement strategies must not only democratize recognition and benefits but also speak to the widespread hunger for authentic and just community.
So many people in our society and throughout the world long for a sense of caring community and connectedness, and for the ability to have a decent standard of living and pursue meaningful lives free from the threat of violence and intimidation. We seek to create a movement that addresses this longing.
So many of us long for communities in which there is systemic affirmation, valuing, and nurturing of difference, and in which conformity to a narrow and restricting vision is never demanded as the price of admission to caring civil society. Our vision is the creation of communities in which we are encouraged to explore the widest range of non-exploitive, non-abusive possibilities in love, gender, desire and sex – and in the creation of new forms of constructed families without fear that this searching will potentially forfeit for us our right to be honored and valued within our communities and in the wider world. Many of us, too, across all identities, yearn for an end to repressive attempts to control our personal lives. For LGBT and queer communities, this longing has special significance.
We who have signed this statement believe it is essential to work for the creation of public arenas and spaces in which we are free to embrace all of who we are, repudiate the right-wing demonizing of LGBT sexuality and assaults upon queer culture, openly engage issues of desire and longing, and affirm, in the context of caring community, the complexities and richness of gender and sexual diversity. However we choose to live, there must be a legitimate place for us.
The Principles at the Heart of Our Vision
We, the undersigned, suggest that strategies rooted in the following principles are urgently needed:
Ø Recognition and respect for our chosen relationships, in their many forms
Ø Legal recognition for a wide range of relationships, households, and families, and for the children in all of those households and families, including same-sex marriage, domestic partner benefits, second-parent adoptions, and others
Ø The means to care for one another and those we love
Ø The separation of benefits and recognition from marital status, citizenship status, and the requirement that “legitimate” relationships be conjugal
Ø Separation of church and state in all matters, including regulation and recognition of relationships, households, and families
Ø Access for all to vital government support programs, including but not limited to: affordable and adequate health care, affordable housing, a secure and enhanced Social Security system, genuine disaster recovery assistance, welfare for the poor
Ø Freedom from a narrow definition of our sexual lives and gender choices, identities, and expression
Ø Recognition of interdependence as a civic principle and practical affirmation of the importance of joining with others (who may or may not be LGBT) who also face opposition to their household and family compositions, including old people, immigrant communities, single parents, battered women, prisoners and former prisoners, people with disabilities, and poor people
We must ensure that our strategies do not help create or strengthen the legal framework for gutting domestic partnerships (LGBT and heterosexual) for those who prefer this or another option to marriage, reciprocal beneficiary agreements, and more. LGBT movement strategies must never secure privilege for some while at the same time foreclosing options for many. Our strategies should expand the current terms of debate, not reinforce them.
A Winnable Strategy
No movement thrives without the critical capacity to imagine what is possible.
Our call for an inclusive new civic commitment to the recognition and well-being of diverse households and families is neither utopian nor unrealistic. To those who argue that marriage equality must take strategic precedence over the need for relationship recognition for other kinds of partnerships, households, and families, we note that same-sex marriage (or close approximations thereof) were approved in Canada and other countries only after civic commitments to universal or widely available healthcare and other such benefits. In addition, in the United States, a strategy that links same-sex partner rights with a broader vision is beginning to influence some statewide campaigns to defeat same-sex marriage initiatives.
A Vision for All Our Families and Relationships is Already Inspiring Positive Change
We offer a few examples of the ways in which an inclusive vision, such as we propose, can promote practical, progressive change and open up new opportunities for strategic bridge-building.
· Canada
Canada has taken significant steps in recent years toward legally recognizing the equal value of the ways in which people construct their families and relationships that fulfill critical social functions (such as parenting, assumption of economic support, provision of support for aging and infirm persons, and more).
o In the 1990s, two constitutional cases heard by that country’s Supreme Court extended specific rights and responsibilities of marriage to both opposite-sex and same-sex couples. Canada’s federal Modernization of Benefits and Obligation Act (2000) then virtually erased the legal distinction between marital and non-marital conjugal relationships.
o In 2001, in consideration of its mandate to “consider measures that will make the legal system more efficient, economical, accessible, and just,” the Law Commission of Canada released a report, Beyond Conjugality, calling for fundamental revisions in the law to honor and support all caring and interdependent personal adult relationships, regardless of whether or not the relationships are conjugal in nature.
· Arizona
The Arizona Together Coalition (www.aztogether.org) is currently running a broad, multi-constituency campaign that emphasizes how the proposed constitutional amendment to “protect marriage” will affect not just same-sex couples but also seniors, survivors of domestic violence, unmarried heterosexual couples, adopted children and the business community. The Arizona Coalition highlights the probability that the amendment will eliminate domestic partnership recognition, by both government and businesses. They also point out that DOMA supporters are the same forces that wanted to keep cohabitation a crime. As a result of the Coalition’s efforts, support for the constitutional amendment declined sharply in polls (from 49% to 33%) in the course of a few months (May 2005 - September 2005). Accordingly, should the amendment make it onto the November 2006 ballot, Arizona is poised to become the first state to reject a state anti-gay constitutional marriage amendment in the voting booth. We suggest that the LGBT movement pay close attention to the way that activists in Arizona frame their campaign to be about protecting a variety of different family arrangements.
· South Carolina
The South Carolina Equality Coalition (www.scequality.org) is fighting a proposed constitutional amendment with an organizing effort emphasizing “Fairness for All Families.” This coalition is not only focused on LGBT-headed families, but is also intentionally building relationships with a broad multi-constituency base of immigrant communities, elders, survivors of domestic violence, unmarried heterosexual couples, adopted children, families of prisoners, and more. As we write this statement, the Coalition’s efforts to work in this broader way are being further strengthened by emphasis on the message that “Families have no borders. We all belong.”
· Utah
In September 2005, Salt Lake City Mayor Ross Anderson signed an Executive Order enabling city employees to obtain health insurance benefits for their “domestic partners.” A few months later, trumping the executive order, the Salt Lake City Council enacted an ordinance allowing city employees to identify an “adult designee” who would be entitled to health insurance benefits in conjunction with the benefits provided to the employee. The requirements included living with the employee for more than a year, being at least 18 years old, and being economically dependent or interdependent. Benefits extend to children of the adult designee as well. While an employee’s same-sex or opposite-sex partner could qualify, this definition is broad enough to encompass many other household configurations. The ordinance has survived both a veto by the Mayor (who wanted to provide benefits only to “spousal like” relationships) and a lawsuit launched by anti-gay groups. The judge who ruled in the lawsuit wrote that “single employees may have relationships outside of marriage, whether motivated by family feeling, emotional attachment or practical considerations, which draw on their resources to provide the necessaries of life, including health care.” We advocate close attention to such efforts to provide material support for the widest possible range of household formations.
We offer these four examples to show that there are ways of moving forward with a strategic vision that is broader than same-sex marriage, and encompassing of all our families and relationships. Different regions of our country will require different strategies, but we can, and must, keep central to our work the idea that all family forms must be protected – not just because it is the right thing to do, but also because it is the strategic and winnable way to move forward.
A Bold, New Vision Will Speak to Many Who are Not Already With Us
At a time when an ethos of narrow self-interest and exclusion of difference is ascendant, and when the Right asserts a scarcity of human rights and social and economic goods, this new vision holds long-term potential for creating powerful and vibrant new relationships, coalitions, and alliances across constituencies – communities of color, immigrant communities, LGBT and queer communities, senior citizens, single-parent families, the working poor, and more –hit hard by the greed and inhumanity of the Right’s economic and political agendas.
At a time when the conservative movement is generating an agenda of fear, retrenchment, and opposition to the very idea of a caring society, we need to claim the deepest possibilities for interdependent social relationships and human expression. We must dare to dream the world that we need, the world that has room for us all, even as we also do the painstaking work of crafting the practical strategies that will address the realities of our daily lives. The LGBT movement has a history of being diligent and creative in protecting our families. Now, more than ever, is the time to continue to find new ways of defending all our families, and to fight to make same-sex marriage just one option on a menu of choices that people have about the way they construct their lives.
We invite friends everywhere to join us in ensuring that there is room, recognition, and practical support for us all, as we dream together a new future where all people will truly be free.


So, at least parts of the homosexual community freely admit to the desire to wipe out the family as we know it and turn mariage into a mad free-for-all just like I have been telling you all for two years now. And you should know that the court battles tomake this list has already begun because there is now a movement to use the courts to legalize polygamy the same way the courts are being used in an attempt to legalize homosexual marriage. Which, you may recall, I told you would be the first of the additions to this movement.

Chew on this for a bit and think hard before you call me paranoid for talking about the homosexual activist community trying to destroy the family.

16 Comments:

  • If this is your evil Gay Agenda then I don't know why you are bothered! All it says (for those of you who can't be bothered to read a huge amount of text) is that there are many kinds of families in America and they wish to be legally recognised and repected in an equal way to your more traditional 'two parents and a couple of children' families. They don't mention polygamy anywhere so stop being hysterical! I don't know how you drew the conclusion that it shows "the desire to wipe out the family as we know it and turn mariage into a mad free-for-all" because I cannot see it. But then, unlike you, I am a rational kind human being who believes in respect and equality.

    P.S. I still think that this blog is a spoof.

    By Blogger DanProject76, at 11:46 AM  

  • DP76,

    It says marriage righs should be extended to every group of people who live ogether in existence. Including plygamy, plyamory, same sex couples and groups, people living in a etirement community, and every other concievable group of live-ins imaginable.

    If you are unable to see the difference between this and an actual family unit thn you are quite far gone.

    If you agree with this group of people then you are one of them, and further proof tht I am right.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:03 AM  

  • If you want to preserve the holy family then the government should forbid divorces completely. It's the only way to protect families. I'm tired of blaming gays when the real problem is that men want younger prettier wives and women want men with money and great bodies. It's not about the gays, it's about how easy it is to blame some other group for what is failing marriages.

    Gays work and pay taxes like everyone else. Gays should not be permitted to have endless relationships without rules. Gays should be held to proper community standards that encourage monogomous and stable relationships. Not fair for gays to have fun without any penalty (alimony, child support). If God had an issue with gays, he would have created the 11th Commandment. Instead, He clearly said that one should not covert another's wife or spouse. We disregard this and socially permit and encourage infidelity and make divorce easy. The same insecure conflicted idiots are the first to blame someone else for their own failings, shortcoming, misfortune and bitterness. God reaches all. He is about love and compassion. The sick conservative movement has created a wedge of intolerance and indifference - Something that God never intended. He spoke to all, He did not say, excuse me, because you're gay, you are not invited into the House of God. Strong happy families (regardless of composition) produce strong and happy children.

    - Straight Republican and completely fed up with excuses!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:38 PM  

  • Anonymous,

    "If you want to preserve the holy family then the government should forbid divorces completely."

    Agreed. The no-fault divorce is a great tragedy and should be ended. Divorce should only be allowed in the event of adultery, in which case the adulterer loses everything to the aggrieved marriage partner, and clearly demonstrable abuse, in which case the abused person gets everything. Finally, if one marriage partner simply abandons th eother, the abandoned person should be get everything, be granted a divorce, and the abandoner should lose all marriage rights til death. Any other grounds for divorce should absolutely be outlawed.

    "I'm tired of blaming gays when the real problem is that men want younger prettier wives and women want men with money and great bodies."

    I was not aware that there was an organized movement of women forcing men to be rich to be marriage material and I was definitely not aware that there was an organized movement of men demanding that all men abandon their wives for younger women. Wait . . . never mind, there isn't one.

    "Gays should not be permitted to have endless relationships without rules."

    Are you saying that homosexuals should be FORCED to marrry against their will?

    "Not fair for gays to have fun without any penalty (alimony, child support"

    You mean just like everyone else who sleeps around and manages to not make a baby in the process?

    "If God had an issue with gays, he would have created the 11th Commandment."

    other than the fact that homosexuality was one of the chief sins that motivated God to wipe out Soddom and Gammorah, He also made it quite clear that all sexual activity outside of marriage is a violation of His law. And anyone who bothers to pay attention will note that all references to marriage relationships in the Bible are restricted solely top male/female marriages. HAd God approved of homosexual marriage then there would not be anywhere in the cmplete Law of Moses, which is God's Law that called for homosexuals to be put to death. I would call that a rather strong condemnation of homosexuality and a definite strike against any argument for God approving of homosexual marriage.

    "We disregard this and socially permit and encourage infidelity and make divorce easy."

    This "We" you speak of does not include me or anyone else of a like mindset to me. Come to think of it, everyone I spend time with outside of work condemns divorce, infidelity, and even fornication among a whole list of other socially destructive behavior.

    "He is about love and compassion."

    He is also about ritcheousness, justice, holiness, wrath, and wisdom among many other attributes. Remember that the greatest Hellfire preacher of all time is Jesus Christ.

    "He did not say, excuse me, because you're gay, you are not invited into the House of God"

    Correct, He just commanded those who truly follow Him to obey Him and sin no more. To willfully live a life of sinful activity is contrary to His commands, and proof of hyppocrisy among those who claim to follow Him.

    "Strong happy families (regardless of composition) produce strong and happy children."

    You left something out . . . homosexuals are incapabe of reproducing with each other and not amount of medical iintervention is able to change this. The only way for homosexuals to have children is through adoption, or in the case of lesbians, artificial insemination. As to your assertion that the composition of the family does not matter, all evidence is absolutely contrary to that. All evidence shows that the most likely family unit to produce children who grow up to be well adjusted adults are, by far, a traditional family of a mother, a father, and children. Specifically, a female mother, a male father, and children. (I had to make that distiction due to the commonness of male homosexual relationships where at least one partner is a drag queen who prefers to be referred to in female terms.)

    I appreciate your passion, but your facts are rather mixed up.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:48 PM  

  • Daniel, I find your obsession with the gays bewildering. You blog about it far more than I do and I am one!

    I don't think the article was about polygamy at all. It was about the different types of partnerships and families in America, i.e same sex, opposite sex, married, unmarried, step families, adopted children etc. Polygamy is one of those mad 'slippery slope' arguments people like you use to scaremonger and avoid the real issue that your country openly discriminates against a section of its population. Like Anonymous said, marriage is weakened by easy divorces and afairs. Opening up marriage to couples of same sex increases your marriage rate.

    I had to smile at "the commonness of male homosexual relationships where at least one partner is a drag queen who prefers to be referred to in female terms" as I love these 'facts' that you make up!

    By Blogger DanProject76, at 3:04 AM  

  • Daniel said:
    "So, at least parts of the homosexual community freely admit to the desire to wipe out the family as we know it"

    Okay, it would seem you've posted a whole website. I read through most of it but found myself skimming the last part of it. Just the same, I missed their wording that says they plan to "wipe out the family as we know it." Could you offer a direct quote to help me figure out what has your panties in a wad?

    Now, I did notice plenty of wording like this:

    "to resist the structural violence of poverty, racism, misogyny, war, and repression, and to build an unshakeable foundation of social and economic justice for all"

    My God! You're right. These people are monsters! Standing against war, poverty and racism? How hideous of them.

    Daniel also mis-stated:
    "homosexuality was one of the chief sins that motivated God to wipe out Soddom and Gammorah"

    And Daniel, I am pretty sure I've pointed this out, but This quote is another incorrect biblical assessment.

    Nowhere. Nowhere. NOWHERE in the Bible is homosexuality associated with Sodom and Gomorrah. God says in Ezekiel (in God's own voice) that the sin of Sodom was her greed and her lack of concern for the poor and needy, along with many perversions (as evidenced by their desire to rape the two visiting strangers - rape is not the same as homosexuality).

    But NOWHERE is the word "homosexuality" associated with S/G in the Bible. I'll thank you not to bear that bit of false witness against God's own Word again.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 3:06 AM  

  • DP76,

    "Polygamy is one of those mad 'slippery slope' arguments people like you use to scaremonger and avoid the real issue that your country openly discriminates against a section of its population."

    Apparently you are unaware of the fact that the plymist community is already in the courts using the exact same arguments as teh homosexual community to gain polygamous rights and recognition. It is not a slippery slope argument without foundation, it is already happening.

    "Opening up marriage to couples of same sex increases your marriage rate."

    And teh divorce rate as well. In counries where homosexual mariage is legal the average homosexual mariage lasts less than 2 years with multiple infidelities during the course of the mariage. Opening up marriage to homosexuals has already proven to raise the divorce rate percentage as well as the adultery rate percentage.

    "I had to smile at "the commonness of male homosexual relationships where at least one partner is a drag queen who prefers to be referred to in female terms" as I love these 'facts' that you make up!"

    I made up nothing. I have seen this with my own eyes.

    Dan T,

    "Could you offer a direct quote to help me figure out what has your panties in a wad?"

    You must have misse dthe fact that thi group is seeking marital recognition for just about every social relationship imaginable, including homosexual, ploygamous (both straight and gay), polyamrous (both straight and gay), coommunes, and every other living condition they can name. This is a vast departure from one man and one woman being married and raising a family. Byus eeking theis radical redefinition of marriage this group is seeking the total destruction of marriage.

    "Nowhere. Nowhere. NOWHERE in the Bible is homosexuality associated with Sodom and Gomorrah."

    Wrong again. In case you didn;t notice, nobody was raped in any event recorded in the Bible regarding Sodom and Gomorrah. However, it IS recorded that every man and boy in town wanted to have sex with the two men and turned down Lot's two daughters in favor of some wild man lovin'. That would be one of those "other perversions" you seem unable or unwilling to name. On this We shall simply have to disagree since you can't even bring yourself to agree that teh Bible condemns homosexuality in even one verse even though it clearly calls homosexuality an abomination and a crime punishable by death in the Old Testament. If you can bring yourself to ignore this balatant statement of how much God dissaproves of homosexuality then you there is nohthing in the Bible that you will bother to pay attention that condemns homosexuality. Feel free to keep right on decieving yourself though.

    "I'll thank you not to bear that bit of false witness against God's own Word again."

    And I'll thank you not to bear false witness to God's own Word by telling the lie that homosexuality is not condemned repeatedly in the Bible, that God excuses this particular sin above others for no explainable reason, and what is far worse, to actually make yourself into a false teacher by teaching this lie to other people. Remeber what Jesus said about false teachers . . .

    Oh, and the word homosexual DOES appear in the Bible, as does he description of what homosexuality is. But lemme guess, if I say the words "lay with a woman" that does not mean have sex with her to you. It has to not mean have sex with her because if it does then the words "Thou shalt not lay with mankind as with womankind, this is abomination." no lonmger means "Do not have homosexual sex." HOwever, if you acknowledge that when teh Bible speaks of "lying with a woman" that it is talking about sex, then you are forced to accept that the Bible specifically commands us not to have homosexual sex.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 8:44 AM  

  • Polygamy and Homosexuality as as related at Christianity and Islamic Fundamentalism. They both involve a different kind of love/sex/whatever but they are at the same time rather different so don't compare them to do the usual scaremongering please!

    I barely have enough energy for one husband anyway. Why would I want more? It's just greedy.

    I am glad I do not live in your world where gay couples are always having affairs and splitting up. Most of my gay couple friends have been together longer than most of my straight friends. And none of them are drag queens or ask to be referred to as 'she.' They are normal boring people living their normal boring lives like everyone else.

    I think That Bible does hate the gays (as well as a lot of other outdated opinions) which is another reason why we shouldn't take everything we read as literal gospel. If you know what I mean...

    By Blogger DanProject76, at 9:48 AM  

  • DP76,

    "Polygamy and Homosexuality as as related at Christianity and Islamic Fundamentalism. They both involve a different kind of love/sex/whatever but they are at the same time rather different so don't compare them to do the usual scaremongering please!"

    Are you saying that you do not support of consenting adults who love each other to be married if it results in one person having more spouses than you get to have? After all that you have said about "consent" being the gold standard of adult behavioral rights in sex and marriage you have no place to criticize polygamy without being a giant hyppocrite! The fact is that that YOUR argument, and the argument of PEOPLE LIKE YOU serves more than just YOUR cause. OTHER PEOPLE can use the SAME arguments you use to promote THEIR agenda and WIN due to EQUAL PROTECTION. If consent is all that matters then every consenting adult can marry anyone, or any group of people he or she desires. Do not try to say that the evils of homosexual marriage and polygamy cannot be compared. the only comparison that is possible to be made is that polygamy is actually MORE permissible than homosexual mariage because it has historical roots going back as far a history records and continuing to this day in some cultures while homosexual marriage is less than 5 years old in all of human history.

    "I am glad I do not live in your world where gay couples are always having affairs and splitting up."

    My world? Those statistics are from Europe . . . where you live.

    "I think That Bible does hate the gays"

    And now you are going to the opposite extreme of Dan T, the Bible does not hate gays, it simply condemns the act of homosexuality the same way it condemns every other sexual perversion known to man. It does not support homosexuality, nor does it declare homosexuals to be beyond redemption . . . though the proof of redemtion is an abandonment of sin, so the proof of a redeemed homosexual is the homosexual turning straight.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 3:24 PM  

  • Once again, Daniel said:
    "So, at least parts of the homosexual community freely admit to the desire to wipe out the family as we know it"

    I asked you for the quote that supports your saying that they "desire to wipe out the family as we know it..."

    Your answer was this:

    "You must have missed the fact that this group is seeking marital recognition for just about every social relationship imaginable"

    So they desire to wipe out family by encouraging marriage? Encouraging adoption and loving families?

    Daniel, I'll point out again, you are twisting other people's words and the Bible itself in order to support your position.

    You didn't offer a quote from them to back up your position that they "desire to wipe out the family as we know it" because they said no such thing. They have come out in support of marriage and justice and love and you have construed that in to some horror.

    Granted, they indicate that they support a broadening of marriage - maybe even beyond what most Americans, including myself, desire. But this is hardly the same as desiring to destroy families as we know them.

    Thou shalt not bear false witness.

    Stop it, Daniel.

    You want to complain about them extending marriage and family rights to people beyond how you define it, do so. But your hyper hyperbole only undermines any rational position you might have.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 6:49 PM  

  • As to your defense of your bastardization of God's Word, I pointed out that nowhere in the Bible is homosexuality associated with Sodom and Gomorrah. Your response?

    "Wrong again. In case you didn;t notice, nobody was raped in any event recorded in the Bible regarding Sodom and Gomorrah. However, it IS recorded that every man and boy in town wanted to have sex with the two men and turned down Lot's two daughters in favor of some wild man lovin'."

    1. I didn't say anyone was raped. I said that the men of Sodom desired to rape the two visiting strangers (who, according to the Bible, were angels, but they were perceived to be men). If the angels had perceived to be women and the men of the town had wanted to rape her, would that have made heterosexuality a sin? No.

    They didn't want "wild man lovin'." They wanted to rape the strangers. Rape is wrong and no one disagrees with that.

    However, homosexuality is not anywhere associated with Sodom and Gomorrah and to say so is a lie.

    You've repeated a lie after it was pointed out, DL. A lie about God's Word. Open your ears and repent, son.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 6:56 PM  

  • Dan T,

    "So they desire to wipe out family by encouraging marriage?"

    Let me get this straight . . .you support plygamy, marriage rights for nonmarried polyamory, marriage rights being granted to live-in communites as whole, not to couples, but considering the whole community married to each other, and the lit of wierdness goes on. Are you out of your mind?

    "You didn't offer a quote from them to back up your position that they "desire to wipe out the family as we know it" because they said no such thing."

    I did not offer up a quote because the whole manifesto states their desire to reshape the family into an all-inclusive, amorphous, unrecognizable blob. This is no marriage and it does not resemble marriage as it has ever been known in any way. Such arrangement would destroy marriage by eliminating the need and the desire for it. If you cannot see it then you are either blind or stupid.

    "Thou shalt not bear false witness."

    Right back atcha.

    "I didn't say anyone was raped. I said that the men of Sodom desired to rape the two visiting strangers (who, according to the Bible, were angels, but they were perceived to be men). If the angels had perceived to be women and the men of the town had wanted to rape her, would that have made heterosexuality a sin? No."

    Are you ignoring the part where they were offered two women in the place of the angels and the men of Soddom turned down Lot's offer? If it was all about raping poeple don't you think they men of that city would have gone for women as readily a smen? Lemme guess, this is not significant to you.

    "However, homosexuality is not anywhere associated with Sodom and Gomorrah and to say so is a lie."

    Again, you are wrong. If you want to pretend to know more than 4,000 years of biblical scholars and historians then you go right ahead. I for one do not pretend to be so wise as to call all of those men ignorant they way you are by making claims contrary to the wisdom established before the time of Christ.

    Oh yeah, note the words "and other perversion" you go on saying rape is the sexual crime even though no one was raped, but perversions is a plural word. So, what other sexual crimes do you glean fom the Bible? For me the there are three probale perversions, and only one that is provable beyond reasonable dispute.
    Probable:
    Rape - if the men of the city desired to rape the angels it can be assumed that it was not the first time something of this nature happened.
    Adultery - if we assume that least some of the men then we can include adultery in this list only if there was either consensual adultery or married men engaged in rape.
    Fornication - If we wassume there were unmarried men in teh city then any sexual activity whether it be consual or rape then fornication was occuring.
    Provable:

    Homosexuality - an entire city does not wake up one day and have every man decide that they are just gonna go butt-rape a couple of strangers. For every last man and male child in the city to go and make this demand then there must have been rampant homosexuality in that city or else the boys would not have been involved in it.

    So, 4 perversions, all at least hghly probable, but only one that can be proven beyond reasonable doubt. I am not bastardizing the Bible, you are, and you are doing it in order to justify sin.

    "You've repeated a lie after it was pointed out, DL. A lie about God's Word. Open your ears and repent, son. "

    Correction, YOU have. Again, let me warn you about false teachings and ones who perpetuate them. It won't be pretty for such men, do not continue to be one of them.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 10:59 PM  

  • Just because I believe in same sex marriage and not polygamy does not make me a hypoctire at all. They are totally separate issues. Don't be ridiculous! You see it as Regular Marriage or Anything Goes and nothing inbetween. It's not that simple.

    "the evils of homosexual marriage" suit me just fine. We are very happy together, thank you.

    You still do not get it that "the proof of a redeemed homosexual is the homosexual turning straight" is as ridiculous a fantasy as say turning water into wine. Er... How about cola into vodka?

    And as I keep thinking to myself, what business is it of yours if I get married? I couldn't care less about your marriage. It is wholly your business and none of mine.

    I can only conclude that you are rather obsessed with men's bottoms.

    :-)

    By Blogger DanProject76, at 12:52 AM  

  • I've pointed out repeatedly how you're twisting my words, others' words and the Bible to try to support your position. You will not renounce your lies.

    I wipe your dust from my feet on this one, DL.

    By Blogger Dan Trabue, at 4:17 AM  

  • DP76,

    "Just because I believe in same sex marriage and not polygamy does not make me a hypoctire at all."

    Au contraire! Your argument ever since I have known you has benn "consenting adults", polygamists are (usually) consenting adults. So by the standard you use to justify homosexual marriage you are forced to justify polygamy as well or you are a hyppocrite. Care to try to finda different way to justify homosexuality and homosexual mariage then?

    "And as I keep thinking to myself, what business is it of yours if I get married?"

    It is my business because I am interested in protecting thetraditional family from utter destruction.

    Dan T,

    ". . . You will not renounce your lies. . ."

    The problem here is that I am telling the truth while you are twisting the Bible to suit what you wish to believe instead of modifying your beliefs to suit the Bible. You claim that I am lying, but I am just telling it like it is without adding any personal spin to the Word of God. If the Word of God does not agree with your beliefs on a particualr subject then you have a serious problem.

    By Blogger Daniel Levesque, at 12:29 PM  

  • "It is my business because I am interested in protecting thetraditional family from utter destruction."

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA! What more can I say?

    Words fail me. I may as well talk to my cup of tea.

    By Blogger DanProject76, at 12:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home


 
Listed on BlogShares