The New Witch Hunt-From Salem 1692 to the Hysteria Over Gay Rights and Marriage Today

[marvin martian]

Ask anyone what they think happened in Salem Mass. In 1692 and they are likely to say something to the effect that some unsophisticated settlers, given to religious fervor and superstition during a harsh winter and desolate conditions, became obsessed with evil and targeted those who they saw as a threat. Ask those same people if such a thing could happen today, and they are likely to say “of course not!”

However, I submit to you that it is in fact happening again, only this time gays-not witches are the target. Consider:

In Salem witches were viewed as being possessed by evil that must be exorcised. The religious right of today see gays has being sick and in need of a cure.

The members of the Bay Colony saw witches as a threat to their Christian beliefs and even a threat to the continued existence of Christianity. Today, the religious right speaks passionately about their religious freedom being violated by gay rights and the criminalization of Christianity.

The settlers were driven by ignorance and fear of the unknown, and the need for a scapegoat to blame their problems on witches-which included a small pox outbreak and the perception of religious persecution. Today, we can see these same forces at work among the virulently religious right who have blamed gays for everything from natural disasters, and disease to the risen of liberal secularism.

Yes, the colonists were beset by real and present dangers- Native American’s , pirates, economic difficulties and political tensions with England which added to the stress which in turn contributed to the hysteria and the need to blame someone. We see the same dynamic playing out today with the fear of Islam and ISIS, uncertainty about the economy and the fact that there are people in power who do not reflect their values.

The settlers were so threatened by those who they deemed witches that they imprisoned and murdered them. Today, most on the right do not advocate imprisonment, burning at the stake, or drowning. However, there are those who do lament the decriminalization of homosexuality and some who have in fact advocated the imprisonment and execution of gays.

As in 1692, there is an identifiable triggering condition now. Then, it was a difficult winter living in isolation. Now, it is the rapid rise of the acceptance of gay people, and the speed at which they have gained legal rights culminating in marriage equality

If anyone wishes to question the voracity of this analogy, I invite you to first review a brief history of the Salem witch trials:



Now, let’s have a closer look at what is happening today. Enter Mike Huckabee:


Clearly, he is demonizing and scapegoating gays. Here is more from a supporter of another presidential contender who apparently has no problem with her extreme and bizarre views

Now let’s talk about the World Congress of Families which met recently in Salt Lake City….




More Salem style vilification and scapegoating. And the myths born of ignorance and fear, and the lies that speak to the deep seated animosity towards gays continues. Numbers 3, 4, 6, and 9 are especially egregious and represent the type of rhetoric that can lead to physical violence:




And then there is the endless drum beat of fear mongering about how gay rights is antithetical to Christianity and that it will destroy the freedom of religion, and religion itself:



The American Family Association is one of the most divisive and virulent organizations that is exploiting Christianity in there anti-gay crusade:



This is an extremely disconcerting development and represents a new low for those working against equality. As a last resort, the anti-equality forces have claimed victimhood and are, in fact blaming the victims. It is born of fear, prejudice and an increasing sense of desperation, and is attempting to hijack Christianity to stem the tide of progress in the area of human rights and evolving standards of decency. They purport to speak for the entire Christian faith, but in reality, represent a small, paranoid and reactionary fringe.

It is also disturbing to realize the depth of the divisiveness that has developed between these progressive rights organizations and a certain segment of the Christian community, a divisiveness that really does not need to be. The claims that the advance of gay rights and secularism an affront to Christians and impinges on religious freedom is without merit. While there are those that actually believe that is the case, others are knowingly promoting a false idea of religious liberty for their own purposes.

And let’s not forget the American evangelical, including some politicians who have traveled to Africa and Russia to promote those countries antigay agendas, which have included proposals to jail and even execute gays. Even right here in the U. S., in California to be exact, a ballot initiative to allow for the summary execution of gays was proposed.

It all comes down to this…..there are some of us who are not better, not smarter, and no more rational than the inhabitants of the Bay Colony, and if they were to achieve the control of government , Salem could indeed happen again.

^^^Says the guy who wants all unvaccinated people killed.

 

[bodecea]

If you don't see the difference between burning perceived evil at the stake and a fight against being forced to redefine marriage then you're out of your mind.

Witches weren't trying to force their values on people. Heck, they didn't even really exist there.

There is a huge difference between criminal punishment for behavior and retaining civil traditions and values. The two aren't even comparable

Let's keep in mind that a CURRENT Supreme Court Justice is trying to eliminate a woman's choice based on "precedence" from two 18th century English witch-hunters.

 

[talksalot]

There is also another reason why some people pick on gays.

In 2022. gays are the only group that a lot of people can criticize without suffering personal or professional consequences.

Those people actually want to criticize another group, but they do not dare do so.

So gays are the perfect default object.

The only group you can pick on without fallout is white men and Southerners, both men and women.

 

[themirrorthief]

First, you might want to brush up on the history of marriage:




Secondly, you might want to try to explain why same sex marriage is narcissistic and more than heterosexual marriage is....Or do you think that anyone who wishes to marry for romance and sexual attraction is narcissistic? If that is true, I feel very sorry for you.

Lastly, what the hell does any of this have to do with the point of the OP? Answer: Nothing. Off topic bovine excrement.

gays deserve to get married and suffer like everyone else

 

[surada]

Here we go with the sexually retarded attempting to make the marriage issue about religious garbage.

Marriage isn't about honouring homosexual unions and it is most certainly not about honouring religion either, it is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence.

Here they are attempting to compare their lies and deception with witch hunts as they use every lie and deception to support their every lie and deception that they used to make this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage in the first place.

What really makes me laugh in their pathetic faces is that now that they have managed to make this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage, it's like they expected to sweep marriage under the rug and that they made a mockery of it would be forgotten and the problem they created for themselves would just go away. I got news for you, the party is just getting started.

The mentality of the homosexual activist is absolutely ridiculous.

Here they are attempting to make the issue about claiming that homosexuals don't choose to be born that way.

Whether or not homosexuals choose to be homosexual doesn't detract from the fact that thousands of years since marriage was created proves that marriage is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence and that sexual unity is quite obviously heterosexual unions, and that thanks to heterosexual unions each and every single human being even exists makes heterosexual unions quite obviously well above any other sexual union worth honouring with something called marriage. It is a distinction most worthy of acknowledgement which is why this pathetic modern day mockery homosexual activists have made of marriage will soon be short lived as marriage will soon be restored to the respectful state it was created for and in honour of.

Whether or not homosexuals choose to be born homosexual doesn't detract from the fact that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective and there is quite obviously not anything to honour in that in equal distinction to heterosexual unions, and no matter how much homosexuals and homosexuals refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are, that still does not change this fact.

Homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions no matter how much homosexuals and homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are. Whether or not homosexuals choose to be born homosexual or not doesn't detract from this fact and nor does it carry so much as a shred of validity to do with the foundation of this primary issue no matter how much homosexuals and homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are!

Yet the fact that since marriage was created and for thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage prove that your so called belief is already falsified thus proven yet another homosexual activist lie.

Arranged marriages prove that marriage isn't about who you love, as well arranged marriages were always in honour of heterosexual unions. I made bold a paragraph within the following for you.

Marriage:
Fact: If it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. Thanks to heterosexual unions we even exist which is the factual evidence that proves homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions and that thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves that marriage was never about honouring that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. Thousands of years Homosexual activists are calling marriage an equality issue when homosexual unions do not even equal heterosexual unions to begin with quite obviously.

I know many of you are aware of this as I myself was made aware by the media as it happened over the years and each and every time homosexual activists failed, they attempted a new lies and deceptions all the while evading the fact that thousands of years prove that marriage is about honouring heterosexual unions. (hence the insane homosexual activist obsessive compulsive lying deceiving mentality) Not one of them ever will contest this fact with so much as a shred of validity as not one of them ever did. All they do is attempt to make their delusions the issue such as:
They attempted to make the issue about some people in society feeling uncomfortable about different human racial variations getting married. Yet even different variations of the human race getting married was also always in honour of the unity of male and female!!!

*They even deceptively tried to make marriage to be about being with who you love. They again ignored the fact that love may have been present in many marriages but marriage itself was always between heterosexual unions of which beside that primary fact to do with this issue, not every heterosexual couple got married out of love and the USA Supreme Court themselves even acknowledges this fact and I'll get to that just below!!!*

They also tried to make the issue about heterosexual couples who are not able to birth children and can still get married. That was when they were deceptively trying to make the issue of marriage into "marriage isn't about procreation." What they avoided, I find quite obvious, is the fact that heterosexual couples that can not have children still doesn't disrespect that marriage was created for and in honour of heterosexual unions!!! Marriage wouldn't even exist now if it were not for heterosexual unions. None of us would even exist now if it were not for heterosexual unions which quite obviously makes heterosexual unions, well above all other unions, worth honouring. If it were up to homosexuality to sustain the human population, we quite obviously would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective and where is the honour in that?
Because it was brought to homosexual activists attention that marriage isn't about honouring that if it were up to homosexuals to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective thus exemplifying that marriage is being disrespected by these activists attempting to make a complete mockery of it, they then attempted to claim that divorce disrespects marriage in attempt to make their delusions the issue once again. Yet the fact remains that divorce certainly doesn't disrespect the fact that marriage was created for and in honour of heterosexual unions, but homosexual activists attempt every lie and deception in attempt to make their delusions the issue.
Homosexual activists even have even become scholars in recent past then attempted to claim that every gay relationship they could find recorded throughout history was a marriage. I was in two relationships myself but was never married but if homosexual activists thought it would help their lies and deceptions they would call each of my relationships a marriage because they try and make every lie and deception that they can possibly fathom appear relevant in attempt to try and make their delusions the issue! Back in the Days of the Roman Empire for example homosexuals were beheaded for attempting to make a mockery of marriage but homosexual activists attempt to claim such short lived mockeries as actual marriages.
Homosexual activists have even attempted to make ghost marriages the issue of which ghost marriages were about honouring heterosexual unions of couples after they passed away because of such things in some cultures where the second born could not marry before the first born of a family. So if the first born never married, the family would have to wait until the next sibling died to have a ghost marriage!
The USA Supreme Courts lame excuse for supporting a bunch of filthy homosexual activist lies and deceptions:

The Court notes, marriage was once viewed as an arrangement in which women were treated as the property of their husbands and subordinate to their will. As the Court observes, this came to be viewed as grossly unjust and so the institution of marriage evolved to rid itself of the injustice.
Which is another factual example of marriage honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence and that union again are heterosexual unions before and after that court made a decision. Here is where the Supreme Court makes a complete mockery of themselves and in this instance the USA while then after expect citizens to respect a bunch of filthy lies and deceptions or face jail:
Today the Court announces that that time has come to recognize the injustice in the disparate treatment of gays and lesbians seeking the right to marry.
Homosexual activists lie by claiming that there is discrimination or an injustice but they obviously do not back that claim with even so much as a shred of validity because this is not an equality or discrimination issue because we all equally have the right to marry those born with the opposite sex genital that we ourselves are born with because that is what marriage was created for and in honour of and thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves it beyond any shadow of doubt.
Homosexual activists even attempt such rhetoric as: The fact something is usually done in some way does not prove that it is has to be done that way, or that it should be done that way
Not anything will ever change the fact throughout the existence of the human race that thanks to heterosexual unions we even exist which is worth honouring with marriage (hence is what marriage was created for and in honour of and thousands of years proves it) no matter how desperately homosexual activist scramble to try and make their every lie and deception the issue because they refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are! Because homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are they are throwing away tax dollars with their every lie and deception while causing headaches over complete garbage and I say make these imbeciles pay back every cent out of their own insane pockets! It's likely enough to bring any country enduring such rhetoric out of deficit and beyond!

again

thanks to heterosexual unions each and every single human being even exists makes heterosexual unions quite obviously well above any other sexual union worth honouring with something called marriage. It is a distinction most worthy of acknowledgement which is why this pathetic modern day mockery homosexual activists have made of marriage will soon be short lived as marriage will soon be restored to the respectful state it was created for and in honour of.

if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective and there is quite obviously not anything to honour in that in equal distinction to heterosexual unions, and no matter how much homosexuals and homosexuals refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are, that still does not change this fact.

Homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions no matter how much homosexuals and homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are. Whether or not homosexuals choose to be born homosexual or not doesn't detract from this fact and nor does it carry so much as a shred of validity to do with the foundation of this primary issue no matter how much homosexuals and homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are!

again

Thousands of years since marriage was created proves that marriage is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence and that sexual unity is quite obviously heterosexual unions, and that thanks to heterosexual unions each and every single human being even exists makes heterosexual unions quite obviously well above any other sexual union worth honouring with something called marriage. It is a distinction most worthy of acknowledgement which is why this pathetic modern day mockery homosexual activists have made of marriage will soon be short lived as marriage will soon be restored to the respectful state it was created for and in honour of.

love

Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
David Jeffrey Spetch
Ps. Be good, be strong!
Hamilton Ontario Canada

Roman Homosexuality: Social Status and Acceptance

Homosexuality in ancient Rome did exist, but it was more complex than simply "gay or straight." Let's look at the social context of Roman homosexuality.

www.thoughtco.com

 

[talksalot]

Roman Homosexuality: Social Status and Acceptance

Homosexuality in ancient Rome did exist, but it was more complex than simply "gay or straight." Let's look at the social context of Roman homosexuality.

www.thoughtco.com

Depravity ended the Roman Empire

 

[surada]

Depravity ended the Roman Empire

Actually Christianity ended the Roman empire.

 

[talksalot]

Actually Christianity ended the Roman empire.

There's more than one reason for the decline and fall of Rome, but I don't think Christianity is on the list.

 

[surada]

There's more than one reason for the decline and fall of Rome, but I don't think Christianity is on the list.

Yes, it is. Christianity contributed to the fall of Rome.

The Fall of the Roman Empire [ushistory.org]

www.ushistory.org

 

[themirrorthief]

Yes, it is. Christianity contributed to the fall of Rome.

The Fall of the Roman Empire [ushistory.org]

www.ushistory.org

nobody gives a damn what gays are doing

 

[themirrorthief]

First of all, gays CAN and DO have children, ALL THE TIME. Hetero couples sometimes use the same techniques to have children as gay people do.

Secondly, gay couples who don't have children are just like hetero couples who don't have children, of which there are probably more childless hetero couples than gay ones.

Thirdly, didn't you say that you were coming out the closet this week?

who knew anal sex could lead to pregnancy I like the new science and IM not even queer except for my sweet furry cat old tiger

 

[themirrorthief]

When domestic strife occurs, leaders look for, and usually find, a scapegoat. In Salem it was witches. Or perceived witches. In Germany it was Jews, homosexuals, Romani, intellectuals, immigrants, etc.

In the US, we seem to be using the old Nazi playbooks and scapegoating gays, Muslims, intellectuals, liberals/conservatives, and so on.

except for totally non judgmental me...I just think queer sex is nasty

 

[surada]

Roman Homosexuality: Social Status and Acceptance

Homosexuality in ancient Rome did exist, but it was more complex than simply "gay or straight." Let's look at the social context of Roman homosexuality.

www.thoughtco.com

Marriage is a contract between consenting adults. You can have any sort of marriage you choose. The state doesn't care. They just don't want to raise your offspring.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

who knew anal sex could lead to pregnancy I like the new science and IM not even queer except for my sweet furry cat old tiger

Who know that anyone could be so STUPID and ILLITERATE as to interpret what was said to mean that anal sex could result in pregnancy?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

except for totally non judgmental me...I just think queer sex is nasty

Then don't do it!! And stop watching gay porn and peeking in windows.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Marriage is a contract between consenting adults. You can have any sort of marriage you choose. The state doesn't care. They just don't want to raise your offspring.

If the current course is allowed to continue, we will may to see “marriage” defined to cover a 75-year-old man, and a three-year-old boy. Perhaps that creepy old man and multiple little boys.

The LGBpbiWTF bunch threw out the “consenting adults” lie as soon as it had served their purpose.

 

[surada]

If the current course is allowed to continue, we will may to see “marriage” defined to cover a 75-year-old man, and a three-year-old boy. Perhaps that creepy old man and multiple little boys.

The LGBpbiWTF bunch threw out the “consenting adults” lie as soon as it had served their purpose.

We're talking about the law not your hysteria. Children can't consent.

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

We're talking about the law not your hysteria. Children can't consent.

We're talking about the law not your hysteria. Children can't consent.

Bob the Bigot is one crazy ass fuck head. Don't even bother

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Bob the Bigot is one crazy ass fuck head. Don't even bother

Says the depraved freak who thinks of children as young as THREE as fucked-up sexual perverts.

Just how fucked up in one's head does one have to be to speak of a three-year-old boy as being a “transsexual”?

 

[beautress]

First, you might want to brush up on the history of marriage:

Secondly, you might want to try to explain why same sex marriage is narcissistic and more than heterosexual marriage is....Or do you think that anyone who wishes to marry for romance and sexual attraction is narcissistic? If that is true, I feel very sorry for you.

Lastly, what the hell does any of this have to do with the point of the OP? Answer: Nothing. Off topic bovine excrement.

When the earth was young, people stoned men who laid with men because wars killed off too many men, and they were needed to marry women who kept mankind populous.

The Pentateuch of the Bible condemns the practice of men lying with men and back then, stoning to death was the way society dealt with such behavior three thousand years ago.

Somewhere in the Old Testament there is mentioned an army of Eunuchs who saved their country. If I went with guessing, my guess would be the society had developed an honorable way for gay men to earn life and not death by going to war, but I'm not certain why any other explanation of their home life was not discussed at all.

Families today have been dealing with schools that teach acceptance of gayness and may omit passages "our son and his husband... or "our daughter and her wife..." even though parents have lost control over the social lives of their children without knowing it could determine whether or not they have traditional grandchildren who carry their family genes in future generations, and some feel umbrage at not having their genes replicated through sound marriages with well-bred children. It's impossible when the village raises the child and has been for a long time. Everyone in my generation watched tv shows in which grandmothers were a mainstay of young unmarried women going on dates with a man until she was married off. Most of those shows were gone by the 70s around the time the song, "Age of Aquarius" (c1969) was made popular.

By the mid-fifties, every large town had an entire sector where gay men lived, separated from their families. I don't believe the soldiers of WWII would kill a gay guy who just saved their life with expert marksmanship against the enemy, and by the same token, people like General Eisenhower came home with a huge respect for all heroes regardless of gender, color, etc. And when Ike was President, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover's sexuality was not condemned, and the first black girl in American history was invited to attend an all-white school in Little Rock, Arkansas, due to her superior scholarship, black skin, and was escorted by hand-picked National Guardsmen her first day of school, and likely she was protected as needed as long as she attended school there. I remember watching that on TV one day. I'll have to look the date up, BRB. I found it! It was on September 25, 1957. My family lived in Channelview, Texas, and was in the 5th grade. Our TV was black and white, so it looked like it was a gray day, but it did not become a school discussion item.

I remember that up until graduation day, there were still curfews for black people, and I didn't like it much because I'd seen people ranting about blacks instead of fixing their own personal problems. I always liked fairness even when others didn't seem to be annoyed about the unfairness that was part of the black community's life. I'm kind of glad our nation worked it out, and that Martin Luther KIng would be happy to know his people would become equal before the turn of the century he didn't live to see due to his assassination by racial hatred.