Poll: 92% of Iowans Say...

[Lonestar_logic]

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

Anyone who has studied history knows that homosexuality became rampant whenever a society or culture was in decline or collaspe.

The main question to me is:

Does homosexuality 'cause' the decay and downfall of nations?

Or is it just a 'symptom' of a dying and sick society?

I would think it's a major factor.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

First of all, the definition of marriage is incorrect. Marriage has always been a civil union between two people. It should not have anything to do with gender. Why? Because two men or two women have proven that they can love each other just as strongly as a man and a woman. They can raise children and the children flourish. They can do every single thing a heterosexual couple can do. In fact, I would argue that they would do it better because the divorce rate amongst homosexuals is in the single digits while amongst heterosexuals is over 50%.

And #2 - there is no such thing as a homosexual society. Society is too large. Looking at the homosexual demographic of America, they're flourishing -- they're doing great. They're getting bills passed, they have their own cable networks, magazines... they're a flourishing demographic of America and society is becoming more and more accepting of them. So the number of open homosexuals in our society will continue to grow and hopefully with that, the ban will be lifted and the definition of marriage will be changed.

I suggest you research the origin of marriage. How you think it should or should not be defined is irrelevant. Again name one homosexual society that has flourished? Oh that's right there is no such thing, I wonder why that is? You think it's flourishing because as the population of the US grows so does the number of homosexuals.

At least you admit what the true definition is and it will not be changed just so you homosexuals can validate your abominal lifestyle.

If homosexuals cannot be married then they cannot be divorced, besides even in the states where civil unions are recognized the number of homosexuals engaging in civil unions is nowhere near the number of heterosexual getting married. So it's not a fair analysis on your part.
.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

Since gays comprise only between 2 and 10% of the population thru out history, how can we have a homosexual society?

You can't. Homosexuality is a mental sickness not a lifestyle. IMO

 

[Newby]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

THIS is the center of the hypocritical core of the social conservative movement. It is IMPOSSIBLE to say "Get the government out of our lives" and to have the government imposing moral laws and bans.

Yeah, they should allow adults to have sex with children too. And if I think it's okay to take someone else's things then I should be able too. I mean, what right does the government have to impose any moral laws or bans on anything?

 

[bodecea]

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

They (homos) can do every single thing a heterosexual couple can do.

They can??

Gays can make babies, 'mud babies'

I guess thay can raise them and love them, and send them to school.

But most people just flush them down the toilet.

I wonder if gays consider that abortion???

Gay couples such as ourselves use the same methods to conceive as was created for and used by straight couples who have trouble conceiving the missionary way. Are you saying their children are "mud babies"? Are you saying they should flush their children down the toilet?

 

[bodecea]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

THIS is the center of the hypocritical core of the social conservative movement. It is IMPOSSIBLE to say "Get the government out of our lives" and to have the government imposing moral laws and bans.

Yeah, they should allow adults to have sex with children too. And if I think it's okay to take someone else's things then I should be able too. I mean, what right does the government have to impose any moral laws or bans on anything?

Let me know when children can give legal consent.

I swear. You people need to come up with some new stuff.

 

[bodecea]

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

Since gays comprise only between 2 and 10% of the population thru out history, how can we have a homosexual society?

You can't. Homosexuality is a mental sickness not a lifestyle. IMO

Actually, I think they are finding that irrational hatred and fear of that which does not affect or harm you is a mental sickness.

 

[Newby]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

First of all, the definition of marriage is incorrect. Marriage has always been a civil union between two people. It should not have anything to do with gender. Why? Because two men or two women have proven that they can love each other just as strongly as a man and a woman. They can raise children and the children flourish. They can do every single thing a heterosexual couple can do. In fact, I would argue that they would do it better because the divorce rate amongst homosexuals is in the single digits while amongst heterosexuals is over 50%.

And #2 - there is no such thing as a homosexual society. Society is too large. Looking at the homosexual demographic of America, they're flourishing -- they're doing great. They're getting bills passed, they have their own cable networks, magazines... they're a flourishing demographic of America and society is becoming more and more accepting of them. So the number of open homosexuals in our society will continue to grow and hopefully with that, the ban will be lifted and the definition of marriage will be changed.

So, you're okay with groups of people marrying each other? One man married to many women? One woman married to many men? People marrying their pets? A Father marrying his daughter? After all, morals shouldn't be shoved on people, right? You should be able to do anything that makes you feel good?

 

[Newby]

THIS is the center of the hypocritical core of the social conservative movement. It is IMPOSSIBLE to say "Get the government out of our lives" and to have the government imposing moral laws and bans.

Yeah, they should allow adults to have sex with children too. And if I think it's okay to take someone else's things then I should be able too. I mean, what right does the government have to impose any moral laws or bans on anything?

Let me know when children can give legal consent.

I swear. You people need to come up with some new stuff.

Why should children have to be able to give legal consent? You're imposing morals on a situtation that goes against someone else's morals. I don't see how it's any different at all.

 

[Sunni Man]

They (homos) can do every single thing a heterosexual couple can do.

They can??

Gays can make babies, 'mud babies'

I guess thay can raise them and love them, and send them to school.

But most people just flush them down the toilet.

I wonder if gays consider that abortion???

Gay couples such as ourselves use the same methods to conceive as was created for and used by straight couples who have trouble conceiving the missionary way. Are you saying their children are "mud babies"? Are you saying they should flush their children down the toilet?

Are you that dense?

Two homo men in a comitted relationship can only give birth to mud babies.

If they want to raise them, love them, and hug them. It's OK by me.

 

[bodecea]

Yeah, they should allow adults to have sex with children too. And if I think it's okay to take someone else's things then I should be able too. I mean, what right does the government have to impose any moral laws or bans on anything?

Let me know when children can give legal consent.

I swear. You people need to come up with some new stuff.

Why should children have to be able to give legal consent? You're imposing morals on a situtation that goes against someone else's morals. I don't see how it's any different at all.

For the same reason that children are not allowed to enter into any legal contracts on their own. An extention of civil law. Or are you saying it's ok for an 8 year old to sign a contract for a car?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Since gays comprise only between 2 and 10% of the population thru out history, how can we have a homosexual society?

You can't. Homosexuality is a mental sickness not a lifestyle. IMO

Actually, I think they are finding that irrational hatred and fear of that which does not affect or harm you is a mental sickness.

People who practice homosexuality experience higher rates of many diseases, including:

Human Papillomavirus (HPV)
Hepatitis A, B and C
Gonorrhea
Syphillis
Gay Bowel syndrome
HIV/AIDS
Bacterial vaginosis

People who practice homosexuality have higher rates of:

Alcohol abuse
Drug abuse
Nicotine dependence
Depression
Suicide
Domestic violence (20 times more common than among heterosexuals)

Ah, but maybe these problems are the result of society's discrimination against homosexual people. Not true. If we look at places in which homosexuality is accepted, such as The Netherlands (gay marriage is legal there) and San Fransisco, we find that the greater the acceptance of homosexual behavior, the higher the rate of the above negative consequences. Accepting homosexual behavior makes it worse!

What about the effect of homosexual behavior on society?

In addition to a domestic violence rate that is 20 times higher than among heterosexuals, these are some of the negative effects homosexuality has on society:

Higher rates of child molestation*
(Nearly 1/3 of the child abuse cases are homosexual in nature, and homosexuals are only 3% of the population.)

Daughters of lesbian "parents" are more likely to engage in risky sexual behavior and experience the consequences of that behavior.

In areas in which homosexual marriage has become accepted (The Netherlands and areas of Scandinavia, for example), the fundamental building block of society--the family--has fallen apart. In some of these areas as many as 80% of the children are born outside of a family.

Children of homosexual "parents" do the worst in 9 of 13 acedemic categories when compared with both married heterosexual couples and cohabitating couples.

Homosexual behavior is linked with higher rates of promiscuity, physical disease, mental illness, substance abuse, child sexual abuse and domestic violence--all things that impact society negatively. Don't try to say homosexual behavior doesn't hurt society--it is a major force that tears down society and harms children.

Does Homosexuality Pose a Threat to Society?

Homosexuality Harms Society

 

[Newby]

Let me know when children can give legal consent.

I swear. You people need to come up with some new stuff.

Why should children have to be able to give legal consent? You're imposing morals on a situtation that goes against someone else's morals. I don't see how it's any different at all.

For the same reason that children are not allowed to enter into any legal contracts on their own. An extention of civil law. Or are you saying it's ok for an 8 year old to sign a contract for a car?

They are all morally based, the laws protecting children, the laws protecting your posessions. To say that one thing is morally based and therefore should not be a law is ridiculous. You apprently missed the point, which is not surprising.

What's sad is that your only argument against having sex with children is because they cannot give legal consent.

 

[Sunni Man]

Why should children have to be able to give legal consent? You're imposing morals on a situtation that goes against someone else's morals. I don't see how it's any different at all.

For the same reason that children are not allowed to enter into any legal contracts on their own. An extention of civil law. Or are you saying it's ok for an 8 year old to sign a contract for a car?

They are all morally based, the laws protecting children, the laws protecting your posessions. To say that one thing is morally based and therefore should not be a law is ridiculous. You apprently missed the point, which is not surprising.

What's sad is that your only argument against having sex with children is because they cannot give legal consent.

The homosexual / pedophile organization known as NAMBLA wants to lower the age of consent to 8 years old.

 

[DavidS]

I suggest you research the origin of marriage.

I suggest you do the same before you actually post that here. Homosexual marriage was very common in ancient Greece, ancient Rome, Babylon, ancient China and so on. Homosexual marriage pre-dates Christianity and likely Judaism. In fact, it wasn't until the mid 300s that homosexual marriage was banned in the Roman Empire.

Homosexual marriage was rampant throughout ancient China and India. In fact, it is thought that the first religious ceremony for marriage took place in India nearly 6000 years ago. Hindus have many sacred texts and different communities give special importance to different texts. Even more so than in other religions, Hindus also foster disparate interpretations of the meaning of various texts. The Vedas, which form the foundation of Hinduism for many, do not refer explicitly to homosexuality, but Rigveda says Vikruti Evam Prakriti (perversity/diversity is what nature is all about, or, what seems un-natural is also natural), which some scholars believe recognizes homosexual/transsexual dimensions of human life. People of a third gender, not fully men nor women, are mentioned here and there throughout Hindu texts such as the Puranas but are not specifically defined.

The entire purpose of marriage in some Western societies during the Roman Empire was to bond a man and a woman to make children... and that's it. There was no love, there was no child support. Man would marry the woman and get her pregnant. She had no rights whatsoever.

Marriage never was about love until really only a few hundred years ago. When a man wanted a relationship in ancient society, he had it with another man as women were thought to be too weak to have a full relationship.

How you think it should or should not be defined is irrelevant.

I would say the same for you. Marriage has been redefined hundreds of times throughout the history of society. If marriage had not been, you would've been married to you 12 year old wife at age 30 and you would've gotten her pregnant by age 13. Aren't you glad we changed the definition of marriage??

Again name one homosexual society that has flourished? Oh that's right there is no such thing, I wonder why that is?

Because not everyone in society is born homosexual?

You think it's flourishing because as the population of the US grows so does the number of homosexuals.

Our growth rate is less than 1%. The number of gays and lesbians in the past 30 years has grown by leaps and bounds. In 1980, less than 1% of the country was estimated to be homosexual. Today it's over 10% and as acceptance of it grows, so grows the percentage. So you're postulation that because America is growing by .84% compared with the growth of homosexuality (over 1000%) in America is completely off base.

At least you admit what the true definition is and it will not be changed just so you homosexuals can validate your abominal lifestyle.

My abnormal lifestyle? I'm single and 30 because I can't find a woman who can actually keep my interest for more than 15 seconds. Maybe you're talking about my brother, a former soldier and a firefighter who was almost killed in 9/11. What's the matter -- you don't approve of his lifestyle? You don't approve of him putting his life on the line for us? You don't approve of him rescuing people and almost dying?

If homosexuals cannot be married then they cannot be divorced,

You should check the news. Homosexuals CAN be married in several states.

besides even in the states where civil unions are recognized the number of homosexuals engaging in civil unions is nowhere near the number of heterosexual getting married.

Of course not. That's because homosexuality is a genetic trait. It's something you're born with. It's in your DNA. I'd say it affects 1 out of every 8 people. Just because the percentage of homosexual Americans now is around 10%, doesn't mean it's going to stay there. I'd say it'll top off around 10% - 15%. And I include bi-sexuality and transgender in there as well. The reason why you don't see as many civil unions or marriages in states that allow them, is because there aren't as many homosexuals. That's like saying just because there state allows Jews to get married and there aren't as many Jewish marriage as there are Christian marriages..... you get my point, bub?

 

[DavidS]

Because marraige has been defined as a civil union between a man and a woman. What part of that don't you homosexuals understand?

Name one homosexual society that has flourished?

Since gays comprise only between 2 and 10% of the population thru out history, how can we have a homosexual society?

You can't. Homosexuality is a mental sickness not a lifestyle. IMO

Okay -- I know this is your opinion, but what facts do you base your claim off of? I mean, you can't just look up to a clear, blue sunny sky and say it's raining. You have to have facts. So, what facts using the criteria in which the DSM-IV-TSR defines a mental sick... well, in fact, I'm going to widen your definition.

We're going to say that homosexuality is not a sickness but a disorder, because that covers a much wider range of problems. Someone can have a psychological disorder but not have a mental illness (requiring hospitalization).

First, let me ask this: What is your criteria for having a mental disorder?

Second, how does your criteria differ from the Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC) and Feighner Criteria? Please remember both of which are the most widely accepted psychological criterias for assigning a mental disorder and both criterias are used to define a mental disorder in the DSM-IV and both of which have proven that homosexuality is not a mental disorder. So you must have developed a new criteria that is BETTER than both of those criterias, in which countless thousands of psychologists and psychiatrist worldwide have contributed to and developed through decades of research. Additionally, please tell me which college you obtained your PhD in psychology from.

It's one thing to have an opinion, but you need facts to back an opinion or you're just stating something with absolutely no concrete evidence whatsoever, in which case your posts belong in the conspiracy theory zone to be laughed at by the likes of Terral and Eots.

 

[DavidS]

Maybe you're talking about my brother, a former soldier and a firefighter who was almost killed in 9/11. What's the matter -- you don't approve of his lifestyle?
QUOTE]

My condolences about your brother.

I guess he will never make you an Uncle

How sad

Actually, I am an uncle. He adopted a baby 3 months ago. A friend of his got pregnant and planned to have an abortion and he convinced her not to and that he and his partner would adopt the child. And so it was done.

Please, Sunni, tell me how you view adoption. Go ahead. Cross that red line.

 

[DavidS]

For the same reason that children are not allowed to enter into any legal contracts on their own. An extention of civil law. Or are you saying it's ok for an 8 year old to sign a contract for a car?

They are all morally based, the laws protecting children, the laws protecting your posessions. To say that one thing is morally based and therefore should not be a law is ridiculous. You apprently missed the point, which is not surprising.

What's sad is that your only argument against having sex with children is because they cannot give legal consent.

The homosexual / pedophile organization known as NAMBLA wants to lower the age of consent to 8 years old.

NAMBLA is a pedophile organization. It does not represent the same values as a majority of homosexuals.

 

[DavidS]

I still don't understand how you can be a small gov conservative and fight against gay marriage

THIS is the center of the hypocritical core of the social conservative movement. It is IMPOSSIBLE to say "Get the government out of our lives" and to have the government imposing moral laws and bans.

Yeah, they should allow adults to have sex with children too. And if I think it's okay to take someone else's things then I should be able too. I mean, what right does the government have to impose any moral laws or bans on anything?

Actually, that's not a moral law. It's a safety issue. Children can't make decisions for themselves and most people who like to have sex with little children also like to kill little children or harm them. So, yeah, it's a safety issue. The age of consent is based off of an appropriate age that someone is, medically proven to be able to make good decisions for themselves.

 

[Sunni Man]

Maybe you're talking about my brother, a former soldier and a firefighter who was almost killed in 9/11. What's the matter -- you don't approve of his lifestyle?
QUOTE]

My condolences about your brother.

I guess he will never make you an Uncle

How sad

Actually, I am an uncle. He adopted a baby 3 months ago. A friend of his got pregnant and planned to have an abortion and he convinced her not to and that he and his partner would adopt the child. And so it was done.

Please, Sunni, tell me how you view adoption. Go ahead. Cross that red line.

Allowing homos to adopt children is the worse form of child abuse

To be raised by diseased mentally ill perverts will only lead to a life of ridicule and hardship for the kid.

Plus, chances are, the child will be molested by one or both of the partners before the age of 18