I stand for Liberal Democrats against gay marriage
1) Being gay is not natural. Real Americans always reject unnatural things like eyeglasses, polyester, and air conditioning. Also apparently those homosexual animals have picked up some unnatural behavier
The first sentence is correct and determinative. As human beings we can distinguish between discoveries that are welcome like air conditioning and a celebration of deviancy that hastens our decline as a nation. We are all here because of normal sexual behavior. We honor that ability to procreate by creating the institution of marriage. The fact we have adultery, fornication, and the rest attacking our culture is bad enough and needs to be addressed. However we shouldn't continue to define deviancy downward by using the acceptance of one evil to justify the tolerance and embrace of an even worse one. It's worse, because at least adultery and fornication don't threaten the natural notion of human procreation.
2) Gay marriage will encourage people to be gay, in the same way that hanging around tall people will make you tall.
Obviously, the purpose of allowing gay marriage is to encourage people who have inclinations to follow them. Also, for others to not only tolerate the existence of gay people and their relationships, but to celebrate them officially as equals. All of this is predicated on the notion that there are "gay people" rather than people who choose to engage in homosexual conduct. A good democrat can reject the notion of a "gay community" and talk about the immorality of homosexual behavior.
3) Gay marriage will change the foundation of society; we could never adapt to new social norms. Just like we haven't adapted to cars, the service-sector economy, or longer life spans.
The sad fact is we can adapt to almost anything. The question is whether we should change the foundation of society, and why. Should we teach children that we have been wrong for thousands of years when we had a preference for "heterosexuals" and their marriages. We should teach ourselves and children that we were/are correct to have preferences for real marriages and need to support male/female relationships even more.
4) Straight marriage has been around a long time and hasn't changed at all; women are still property, blacks still can't marry whites, and divorce is still illegal.
This is nonsense. Blacks marrying whites didn't change the nature of procreation, definition of marriage, etc. On the other hand, the prevalence of no-fault and easier divorces has harmed marriage. We need to work to strengthen marriage by making it harder to get married, support on-going unions, and make it harder to get divorced. People should know that marriage is not to be entered into lightly and won't be dissolved easily.
5) Straight marriage will be less meaningful if gay marriage were allowed; the sanctity of Brittany Spears' 55-hour just-for-fun marriage would be destroyed.
Point well taken. We have devlaued marriage. The response shouldn't be to make it worth even less by redefining it to mean other things. It is to make marriage more meaningful and special. We need to bring the shame back for pre-marital sex. We need to argue against "living together". We need to support aggreived spouses who want to save their marriage. This is a movement to get "gay" people acceptance. The gay rights lobby is ruining marriage so as to feel better about themselves.
6) Straight marriages are valid because they produce children. Gay couples, infertile couples, and old people shouldn't be allowed to marry because our orphanages aren't full yet, and the world needs more children.
One main reason marriage matters is because it is a stable institution for children. Kids should live with both biological parents. Research has shown the dangerous effects of the last generation when this tenet has broken down. It is dangerous to take the exceptions and abnormalities and turn them into a rule. Older people, infertile coulples, etc. exist but we don't make policy based on them. There are people with 4 or 6 fingers, but we don't change our whole world because of that.
7) Obviously gay parents will raise gay children, since straight parents only raise straight children.
No rational person wants their child to grow up and be gay. Even if people are born "gay", which is debatable, it is not desirable. It would be similar to a person born with an enlarged heart. The first rule of life is to live. In order to live you have to procreate. If you don't you won't live because once you die then no one carries on through you. To try and promote an alternate view as normal and equally valid is ridiculous. That's right sometimes you have to call some things what they are.
8) Gay marriage is not supported by religion. In a theocracy like ours, the values of one religion are imposed on the entire country. That's why we have only one religion in America.
The key is whether we the people are allowed to disagree with the gay rights agenda. Is it ok to think that men should have relations with women, and women with men. Are we allowed to vote that way, develop policy, etc. Are people allowed to be religious and against gay rights, and are they allowed to be secular and against gay rights. What about both?
9) Children can never succeed without a male and a female role model at home. That's why we as a society expressly forbid single parents to raise children.
The writers must be getting tired repeating the same arguments. Since one thing bad is happening, then we should add another? No thanks. Single parent homes are not good for children. They are better than no parent homes though. I will stipulate that if there is no other choice, living with 2 women is better than nothing. But what we are talking about is planning a society where the problem becomes a desired outcome. No thanks. We should be planning how to produce stable nuclear families.
10) Legalizing gay marriage will open the door to all kinds of crazy behavior. People may even wish to marry their pets because a dog has legal standing and can sign a marriage contract.
They laugh. But anything is possible from this crowd. We have people who want to offer human rights to animals. We have people who think incest, polygamy, etc. is right around the corner. There are no standards for them. We need standards. Even though we all fall short and fail, it doesn't follow that we should eliminate the standard.
3 comments:
That's been posted many other places before over the last several years. If you're going to be offensive/satirical, at least be original.
Craig, all of your "cut and pastes" are absolute rubbish. I don't appreciate the insults of those who disagree with you; but, honestly, you're totally obsessed with this. Any one with a basic understanding of psychology would agree that someone who is so obsessed with this topic is most likely a "in the closet, homosexual." Craig, when did you choose to be a heterosexual. I didn't. When I was 7 or 8 and got an erection looking at Barbara Eden from I Dream of Jeanie, I suppose I can remember when I REALIZED that I wasn't a homosexual. Tell us your story. If you realize that you are "gay" don't be so self-loathing as to make the mistake of not letting homosexual couples, at least, join in to a civil union, or get a civil marriage license.
BTW. Standards? Standards are in the "eye of the beholder" & liberty means the right to set one's own standards, UNLESS they are imposed upon those that are vulnerable, like children. Pedophiles, heterosexual and homosexual, should punished severely; and if it is of a violent nature, like assault and rape, they should be executed. I wouldn't argue, if they executed rapists, period. I did agree with you about unsuitable content in advertising, BTW. I wouldn't go so far as to extend "human rights" to animals; but, I detest people who wish not to extend more rights to them than exist already. Michael Vick would have spent no less than 20 years for his villainous acts. I think most people, "liberal" and "conservative" are fighting the wrong battles. There is TRUE EVIL out there and people seem to get all upset over fairly trivial things.
Post a Comment