|
Author
|
Topic: Not Like Everyone Else
|
becauseHElives
Advanced Member
Member # 87
|
posted
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; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13
--------------------
Strive to enter in at the strait gate:for many, I say unto you will seek to enter in, and shall not be able. ( Luke 13:24 )
Posts: 4578 | From: Southeast Texas | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged | 
|
|
MentorsRiddle
Advanced Member
Member # 2108
|
posted
I have never supported same-sex marriage, as I believe it is simply an attempt at destroying the sanctity of marriage.
Upon further thought into the homosexual lifestyle, it becomes abundantly clear that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not something you are born with.
Many activists will claim that they can’t help the way they feel, nor who they are sexually attracted to – and simply put: they believe they are born gay.
However, I can’t believe and refuse to believe this is the case.
There is no animal on the entire planet that practices homosexual unions. There are some species that exhibit homosexual traits, yet they are not homosexual. It is poor science to give to animals human characteristic and likenesses. Any good animal behavior expert will attest to this, as homosexuality in any animal has been expertly debunked.
Even homosexuals have admitted that it is a choice.
For same sex partners to get married is an abomination and should not be allowed.
The original idea for marriage was for one man and one woman.
If homosexuals are allowed to get married, then why can’t people who are sexually attracted to their animals get married to their pets?
It is the same principle – simply a sick choice that is spawned in a warped mind.
Even at the political level, tax benefits of marriage are in place because of two reasons:
1. It is more expensive to have a family.
2. It is an incentive for people to have children.
For any politician to even consider this disturbing behavior is beyond me and I would call for them to be ousted out from their position.
--------------------
With you I rise,
In you I sleep,
kneeling down I kiss your feet,
Grace abounds upon me now,
I once was lost
but now I'm found.
The gift of God dwells within,
To this love I now give in.
Posts: 1337 | From: Arkansas | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
|
|
WildB
Moderator
Member # 2917
|
posted
Not Like Everyone Else
Same-Sex Couples and Marriage
May 21, 2010
Same-sex couples just want the right to be married like everyone else, or so the argument goes. They call it a civil right. You could hardly find a more innocuous argument, perfectly designed to appeal to all of us who believe in equal rights and fair play.
The only problem is that it's not true. A significant percentage of same-sex couples do not want to get married "like everyone else." Many of them want to create a whole new paradigm for marriage that has serious implications for the institution and for the rest of society.
Now, if you think I'm being bigoted about this, then perhaps you haven't checked out the latest scientific research on the subject. A recent three-year study of homosexual couples in San Francisco—where many gay "marriages" have been performed—shows that half of them are in open relationships.
The New York Times wrote in its report on the study, "Some gay men and lesbians argue that, as a result [of their open relationships], they have stronger, longer-lasting and more honest relationships. And while that may sound counterintuitive, some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage—one that might point the way for the survival of the institution."
At the same time, the Times reported, "few [homosexuals] will speak publicly about it.... They...worried that discussing the subject could undermine the fight for same-sex marriage."
Prominent gay activists—even those who have spoken approvingly of open relationships in the past—are criticizing the Times article and the study itself.
It seems that, even though they might be all in favor of "an evolution in marriage," they're afraid that mainstream America just might not be ready to deal with such a radical evolution.
Imagine that.
So when activists argue that what same-sex couples want to do is no one else's business and would affect no one else's marriage, they're being disingenuous at best and outright deceitful at worst.
As Mollie Ziegler Hemingway explains in a new article in Christianity Today, "Consider changes in divorce laws. The spread of no-fault divorce in the 1970s didn't just make it easier for men and women to get out of troubled marriages. It also changed people's ideas about the permanence of the institution and the responsibility parents have to their children."
Hemingway then points out that marriage rates fell and cohabitation rates increased "as men and women lost confidence in the institution."
Hemingway concludes, quite rightly, that "legal changes have consequences."
Part of the reason for that is that at the heart of our marriage laws is our belief about what marriage really is. To legalize same-sex "marriage" is to introduce a whole new set of beliefs about what marriage is and expectations of what it ought to look like—with potentially devastating consequences.
So the next time you hear somebody argue that marriage is just a civil right, and why shouldn't same-sex couples have the same rights we do, point them to this research. And then make the case for what many of them are really about, and that is redefining marriage for everybody.
--------------------
That is all.....
Posts: 8775 | From: USA, MICHIGAN | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
