Why A War Against Gay Marriage And Gay Rights Won't Improve Society

NATO AIR

Senior Member
Jun 25, 2004
4,275
285
48
USS Abraham Lincoln
So I was sitting in church on base last week, and the chaplain comes up to give the sermon of the day. Lots of ships were pulling out for exercises last week, so I figured it would be something along the usual lines of "be strong when you're afraid, when you're lonely, have faith". Instead he delieved a blistering attack on homosexuals and gay marriage, "rotting" the very foundation of american society. Five days later, I have a response to him and those like him who are now celebrating their newfound power in America.

There are some who believe gays to be rotting the American society. There are some who believe allowing gays civil unions and other benefits would severely damage the fabric of marriage and other sacred institutions. There are some who have been attacking "immorality" for nearly 30 years and now have their dream hot button issue in banning gay marriage and the rights of gays.

All of these folks are tragically mistaken. What is endangering our society is a "me" first mentality that allows people to rationalize adultery, abuse, abandonment and abdication of parental and family responsiblity. We also have serious flaws that have developed in our society that are rotting it from the inside with most prosperous Americans unaware.

We have far too many parents working far too many hours to provide for their children with ever increasing healthcare, education, fuel/transportation and housing prices, in addition to regular inflation. Many of our children have loving, caring parents who give a very big DAMN about their future, they just never see them because they're working multiple jobs just to pay the bills.

We have a popular culture that promotes irresponsibility, violence, ignorance and laziness. How can you have a decent society with indecent entertainment and culture?

We have a set of drug laws that incarcerates hundreds of thousands of men (especially black men in this and the last generation) for trival drug offences, such as use or sale of a minute amount. How many fathers, how many sons have been locked away, at a high cost to their families, to the taxpayers and to their larger societies?

Homosexuals and their radical fringes make a convenient, easy target, but the misguided war against them will do nothing to help America.

Lastly, those on the religious right (and center) who rail and rant about homosexuals do far less raging and ranting about the injustices of the world, the everyday, avoidable tragedies that befall people. With the exception of Franklin Graham, I don't see Ralph Reed or any of his ilk spreading outrage about the genocide in Darfur or slavery in southern Sudan or Brazil. I don't hear outrage about the 43 million uninsured Americans, the millions of children who live right on or underneath the poverty line. I haven't heard anything about the single women who are trying to raise children with fathers locked up in jail for something stupid like doing drugs. Maybe I miss out on listening to the outrage over businesses, corporations and wealthy merchants/property owners who screw over their consumers, customers and tenants, often with fatal or very painful consequences. Perhaps I was out of the pew when the preachers and moralizers were condemning domestic violence and the horrific toll it takes on women (some men too) and children.

To improve our society, we must challenge ourselves. We must hold ourselves to a higher bar. We must be aware of our problems and fix them. We must reach out to others in need and give them a hand up, not a hand out. We must inspire those younger and less knowing than us to do good works, to have faith and spread it by spreading love and justice.

Instead, we crusade against homosexuals and the desires of a few of them to get married. We spend millions to advertise, argue and appeal to citizen voters. We waste precious time to help others and instead condemn people we have a moral aversion to. We forget the teachings of the great men (and women) of the world, from Jesus Christ to George Washington to Martin Luther King, who preached love, justice and prosperity of the heart and soul, not to mention one's nation. Instead, we wage a culture war, and when we've vanquished the homosexuals, we will see a society no stronger and perhaps even weaker than it was before our foolish Rubicon moment (the gay marriage outcry).
 
NATO AIR said:
What is endangering our society is a "me" first mentality that allows people to rationalize adultery, abuse, abandonment and abdication of parental and family responsiblity.

It is the abandonment of any notion of individual responsibility...This is the rot afflicting our nation. It is the failure to accept the responsibility for the consequences of one's actions that is eroding the foundation of this nation.

This is the only moral issue facing us as a society, all else is simply window dressing for those with an agenda which benefits nobody but themselves
 
Bullypulpit said:
It is the abandonment of any notion of individual responsibility...This is the rot afflicting our nation. It is the failure to accept the responsibility for the consequences of one's actions that is eroding the foundation of this nation.

This is the only moral issue facing us as a society, all else is simply window dressing for those with an agenda which benefits nobody but themselves

i think bully, once we get beyond politics, that is truly something nearly everyone on here would agree on
 
Note to Gays:

I don't know which church the topic starter goes to but I certainly agree with that sermon. Homosexuals DO rot out our society, and I've said it before and I'll say it again: GOD said that homosexuality is an abomination. Period. Is God a homophobe?! Yes He is. If you take a look around you, you'll find that only some psychopathic HUMANS are gay. There are no gay insects or birds or horses or rabbits are there? No, because male-female relationships are what GOD planned. Even freakin' MAGNETS attract opposite poles, while like poles repel each other. Same-sex stuff goes against nature itself. Homosexuality is UNNATURAL and spreads disease. Does my GOD stuff offend you?! The Truth is the truth whether you believe it or not. All gays can call me HOMOPHOBE and BIGOT until they drop dead and go to hell, but I don't mind one bit.

--- BIGOT AND PROUD OF IT.
 
EVERY Protestant/Christian preacher must preach on said things...too many people are finding the practice of homoseuxality 'just fine!'.

:-/

Neccessary, but yeah...(shrug).


fwiw - Homosexuals are the epitome of a Me First mentality - "I wanna do what I wanna do no MATTER how it destorys lives! I wanna adopt a child no MATTER how jacked-up-in-the-head it will make the child!"
 
-=d=- said:
EVERY Protestant/Christian preacher must preach on said things...too many people are finding the practice of homoseuxality 'just fine!'.

I understand this point of view. Protestant/Christian teachings find problems with homosexuality. They should be encouraged to speak up.

fwiw - Homosexuals are the epitome of a Me First mentality

I don't know. "Preserving the family blood line" isn't just as selfish? Possibly. Can you prove that heterosexuals are incapable of having frivolous sex? No?

"I wanna do what I wanna do no MATTER how it destorys lives! I wanna adopt a child no MATTER how jacked-up-in-the-head it will make the child!"

I might be a little crazy myself, if (1)the marriage of my parents was considered to be illegal by the state. I might be driven a little crazier by (2)the drunken aunt admonishing my gay father for 'doing it in the butt with the messenger of satan'. And on top of having to deal with the fact that (3)I am adopted since my parents are gay, and (4) I may have come from an abusive and or broken home.

How do you come to the conclusion that the homosexuality of the parents and nothing else makes the child of a gay couple more likely to have mental problems than that of a straight couple?
 
TheEnemyWithin said:
Note to Gays:

I don't know which church the topic starter goes to but I certainly agree with that sermon. Homosexuals DO rot out our society, and I've said it before and I'll say it again: GOD said that homosexuality is an abomination. Period. Is God a homophobe?! Yes He is.

If God's a homophobe I'm an atheist and He can burn in hell. :wank: I've never said it before but I have to admit it has a nice ring to it.

If you take a look around you, you'll find that only some psychopathic HUMANS are gay.

Yes, the majority of psychopaths are homophobes :whip3:

There are no gay insects or birds or horses or rabbits are there? No, because male-female relationships are what GOD planned.

Actually, primates engage in it. Were Adam and Eve monkeys?

Even freakin' MAGNETS attract opposite poles, while like poles repel each other.
:blah2:

Same-sex stuff goes against nature itself. Homosexuality is UNNATURAL and spreads disease.

Sexuality outside of marriage is UNHOLY and spreads disease.

Does my GOD stuff offend you?!

well, I wasn't offended until...

--- BIGOT AND PROUD OF IT.

"Sieg Heil!" :gay:
 
nbdysfu said:
I don't know. "Preserving the family blood line" isn't just as selfish? Possibly. Can you prove that heterosexuals are incapable of having frivolous sex? No?

It's not about frivolous sex - it's about engaging in behaviour which is destrucitve to lives (higher disease, death, domestic violence rates, etc), but 'feels good' for them. it's about People putting their 'feelings' ahead of every other single aspect of their lives, and ahead of what's best for 'community'.
 
If you take a look around you, you'll find that only some psychopathic HUMANS are gay. There are no gay insects or birds or horses or rabbits are there? No, because male-female relationships are what GOD planned.

What if you don't believe in God? What if you just believe in let and let live - in your own house? I know several gay people, and several bisexual people. Two of them, I would consider to be best friends, and they're hardly psychopathic. In fact, I know more psychopathic straight males than anything. Perhaps we should stop tagging/labeling them with a broad brush, and just focus on what is believed to be right/wrong according to each individual person, and then figure out *WHY*, and stop citing the bible as your arguing point, because I'll bet there's not a damn one of you that lives by every single thing the bible says.

JMO.
 
Shattered said:
What if you don't believe in God? What if you just believe in let and let live - in your own house? I know several gay people, and several bisexual people. Two of them, I would consider to be best friends, and they're hardly psychopathic. In fact, I know more psychopathic straight males than anything. Perhaps we should stop tagging/labeling them with a broad brush, and just focus on what is believed to be right/wrong according to each individual person, and then figure out *WHY*, and stop citing the bible as your arguing point, because I'll bet there's not a damn one of you that lives by every single thing the bible says.

JMO.


There has been posted plenty of non-biblical reasons why Homosexuality is both naturally wrong, and destructive. :)
 
-=d=- said:
There has been posted plenty of non-biblical reasons why Homosexuality is both naturally wrong, and destructive. :)

...and I'm not buying any of what I did see a few posts up.. Higher domestic violence rate? Mmm.. No. That's still pretty much a man/woman issue. Higher disease rate? Mmmm.. No... I'm pretty sure there are far more diseased heterosexuals wandering around than homosexuals. Unprotected/casual sex is still just unprotected/casual sex, no matter the individuals involved..

Precisely how do you control who you happen to fall in love with? After 35 years, I haven't been able to.. One of the homosexuals I know has been exclusively involved with the same person for the last 15 years.. Hardly seems careless and dangerous, or even a threat to society to me...
 
Shattered said:
...and I'm not buying any of what I did see a few posts up.. Higher domestic violence rate? Mmm.. No. That's still pretty much a man/woman issue. Higher disease rate? Mmmm.. No... I'm pretty sure there are far more diseased heterosexuals wandering around than homosexuals. Unprotected/casual sex is still just unprotected/casual sex, no matter the individuals involved..

Precisely how do you control who you happen to fall in love with? After 35 years, I haven't been able to.. One of the homosexuals I know has been exclusively involved with the same person for the last 15 years.. Hardly seems careless and dangerous, or even a threat to society to me...


I'm meaning "On this forum, over the past 6 months, there has been PLENTY Of non-biblical data showing how destructive and unhealthy (for people, AND society) homosexuality is". :)

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/search.php?

:D

But just a side note: It's not about falling in love - it's about misplaced feelings about physical desire. Love has nothing to do with it. Your friend in the 15 year relationship will die 10-20 years before the 'expected' life length they'd have without engaging in homosexual activities. :(
 
Your friend in the 15 year relationship will die 10-20 years before the 'expected' life length they'd have without engaging in homosexual activities.

Whatever gave you that idea? A typical 20-year old male is more likely to die 10-20 years early, just due to reckless behavior, and sheer stupidity. This persons relationship is no different than yours, or mine, other than the fact that its frowned upon by society as a whole. He gets up, he goes to work, he comes home to his "mate", they grocery shop, do laundry, watch TV, as well as everything else we consider a "normal" part of life. He wouldn't throw his relationship in your (collective) face, any more than you'd throw yours (again collective) in his face... And I know more (male and female) like him..

As a side note: Why do guys think it's more than ok for two women to go at it, but two guys is absolutely forbidden?

You can't paint everyone with the same broad brush - it's not right, and we don't like it when it's done to us..
 
Shattered said:
...and I'm not buying any of what I did see a few posts up.. Higher domestic violence rate? Mmm.. No. That's still pretty much a man/woman issue. Higher disease rate? Mmmm.. No... I'm pretty sure there are far more diseased heterosexuals wandering around than homosexuals. Unprotected/casual sex is still just unprotected/casual sex, no matter the individuals involved..

Precisely how do you control who you happen to fall in love with? After 35 years, I haven't been able to.. One of the homosexuals I know has been exclusively involved with the same person for the last 15 years.. Hardly seems careless and dangerous, or even a threat to society to me...


The thing of it is, none of that makes homosexuality wrong in and of itself. Cigarette smoking has a higher disease rate and it can be argued that it is morally wrong from a Christian standpoint (tearing down God's temple) but why should that be the reason to make them illegal?

If people go into a homosexual relationship knowing the pitfalls they may have to face then more power to them. I can't sit here and tell them that their choices are wrong for them, and I don't expect the government to be in that business either. That is the reason for so many laws that are intrusive and simply not the business of the government. Because somebody may put themselves in danger is not a reason to make a law if the danger is clear at the beginning as it is in this case. If it were, being promiscuous would have to be illegal regardless of whether you were homosexual or heterosexual.

How many Conservatives here get sick of the "If it would save even one life wouldn't it be worth it?" argument. To that argument I say unequivocally, no. There is a cost benefit analysis that is important. I say society would gain far more for itself if it just stayed out of these people's business and worried more about their own business.

The whole "natural" argument is senseless as well. It is unnatural to fly in an airplane, yet we do it and it is not immoral. It is unnatural to use SCUBA gear for all the little gods' sakes, but it certainly is not immoral. It isn't even "normal" to use SCUBA gear as the definition talks about a constitutional norm. The vast majority of people simply never SCUBA, it is therefore not normal but that is of course no reason to make it illegal. It can even be argued that it has a higher mortality rate for those who do it than those who do not as SCUBA drownings are obviously higher for those who participate than for those who do not.

This is not the realm of government, but of Churches and other religious institutions. I personally advocate Civil Unions for everybody joined outside of a religious insitution regardless of hetero/homosexuality. Marriage should be defined by the religious institution that it is, and therefore the sole provider should be religious institutions. If that would be the case then homosexual marriages are already taking place as there are currently churches and other religious institutions that provide sanctified services joining gay unions in matrimony already. No Church can be forced to provide the services against their teaching, but there are ones that would choose to do so and some that already do choose to do so.
 
Shattered said:
As a side note: Why do guys think it's more than ok for two women to go at it, but two guys is absolutely forbidden?

Who on earth thinks thats ok? Being a guy i can honestly say i dont.
 
Avatar4321 said:
Who on earth thinks thats ok? Being a guy i can honestly say i dont.

Every single male I know thinks it's erotic as hell when two women go at it... You're the first to have said "I don't like it".
 
In the mix of gay discussions, NATO AIR's point is absolutely right on. The fact is that our culture is drowning in a "Me first" mentality. And -=d=-'s point is also right on - we go further and further along the road of advocating our selfish sexual desires above the commitments of family and monogamy, and homosexuality becomes legitamate because, hey, it's what I want to do, right? (not me personally... 'me' in the abstract sense)

But it's not just American culture. It is human nature to be selfish - look at any two-year-old for proof. But I suppose that's a topic for another forum (what a shameless plug).
 
Shattered said:
Whatever gave you that idea?
Just so you know, it doesn't make me happy to read this kind of data...it's just reality.

:(:(

A 1997 study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology reported that the life span of a 20-year-old homosexual or bisexual man in a Canadian metropolitan area is 8 to 20 years less than the average male. The study's authors wrote: "If the same pattern of mortality were to continue, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged twenty years will not reach their sixty-fifth birthday. Under even the most liberal assumptions, gay and bisexual men in this urban centre are now experiencing a life expectancy similar to that experienced by all men in Canada in the year 1871."

In 1998, another study, this one in the journal Psychological Reports, used four contemporary databases to conclude that homosexual activity may diminish life expectancy by 20 to 30 years. By comparison, the National Cancer Institute says that cigarette use lops 7 to 10 years from the average smoker's life.

Even before the devastating AIDS epidemic broke on the homosexual scene in the early 1980s, gays' life spans were severely truncated by comparison with the national average. In 1977, the largest survey of homosexuals up to that time reported only 0.2 percent of lesbians and 0.8 percent of gay males were age 65 or older. Also, as long ago as the 1930s and '40s, sex researcher and sex-liberation pioneer Alfred Kinsey reported that less than 1 percent of the homosexuals he studied were over age 65.


:(
Smokers and drug addicts don't live as long as non-smokers or non-addicts, so we consider smoking and narcotics abuse harmful. The typical lifespan of homosexuals suggests that their activities are more destructive than smoking and about as dangerous as drugs.

6,737 obituaries from 18 U.S. homosexual journals over the past 13 years were compared to a large sample of obituaries from regular newspapers.5 The obituaries from the regular newspapers were similar to U.S. averages for longevity: the median age of death of married, never-divorced men was 75 and 80% of them died old (age 65 or older). For unmarried or divorced men the median age of death was 57 and 32% of them died old. Married, never-divorced women averaged 79 at death; 85% died old. Unmarried and divorced women averaged age 71 and 60% of them died old.

The median age of death for homosexuals, however, was virtually the same nationwide - and, overall, about 2% survived to old age. If AIDS was the cause of death, the median age was 39. For the 829 gays who died of something other than AIDS, the median age of death was 42 and 9% died old. The 163 lesbians had a median age of death of 44 and 20% died old.

Even when AIDS was not involved, homosexuals frequently met an early demise. Three percent of gays died violently. They were 116 times more apt to be murdered, much more apt to commit suicide, and had high traffic-accident death-rates. Heart attacks, cancer and liver failure were exceptionally common. 18% of lesbians died of murder, suicide, or accidents - a rate 456 times higher than that of white females aged 25-44.5 Age distributions of samples of homosexuals in the scientific literature from 1858 to 1997 suggest a similarly shortened lifespan. . . .



Shattered said:
As a side note: Why do guys think it's more than ok for two women to go at it, but two guys is absolutely forbidden?


This isn't 'homosexuality' - I think it generates from guys' desire to nail two women at once. Two women kissing shows women to be freaky - a trait which a lot of guys like.
 
Two women Isn't homosexuality??? So.. lesbianism has it's own definition, although it's two people of the same sex??

Ok.. I'm always up for learning something new - gotta learn something new every day just to continue to exist..

So, educate me.

How is woman + woman different (in the terms we're speaking of) than man + man?

I'll be back to pick up my education after work. :)
 
-=d=- said:
Just so you know, it doesn't make me happy to read this kind of data...it's just reality.

:(:(






:(







This isn't 'homosexuality' - I think it generates from guys' desire to nail two women at once. Two women kissing shows women to be freaky - a trait which a lot of guys like.


As I said in my previous post, simple direct danger does not make a reason to make a law against something. Cigarette smokers have an earlier death as well on a whole, but we don't make it illegal to smoke.

It is dangerous to go rock climbing (somebody died getting strangled by his own equipment just recently), it is not illegal. People have died bungee jumping, it is not illegal. People drown while SCUBA diving, it is not illegal. Driving kills more than anything else in the US, it is not illegal. If simple danger was enough to make laws we would all live cyber lives in bubbles dreaming about reality.

Choosing an action that puts you in danger is not enough reason to make a law aganst it.

That it is "unnatural" and not "normal" are also not reasons to make laws against something. It is unnatural to fly in an airplane, but there is no law against it. It is also not normal as most people simply are not flying in airplanes a great majority of the time, it doesn't make it immoral or illegal.
 

Forum List

Back
Top