Is Same Sex Movement Getting Out Of Hand?

Where the Left and the so-called ‘gay rights’ movement is concerned, it appears that the only kind of elections they accept are the ones that go ‘their way.’ There have been ballot initiatives in 30 states so far that felt compelled to legislate the definition of marriage as a union between members of the opposite sex, and those measures passed in all of them. Given the opportunity to vote on it, it passes every time. Most recently in California and Florida.

Yesterday, we got a chance to see just how tolerant proponents of ‘gay marriage’ can be by staging protests, some not so peaceful, all around the country.

At Mount Hope Church in Michigan, a radical homosexual group disrupted an evangelical church service last Sunday. The activists rushed the pulpit, throwing condoms and buckets of glitter, using noisemakers and megaphones to scream at churchgoers and frighten children. Women ran to the pulpit and began to kiss; others shouted, “Jesus was gay!” Protests erupted outside Mormon temples in Utah and Seattle to protest the church’s support for the California marriage amendment.

Their strategy to link their cause to ‘civil rights’ simply does not fly with Americans, and certainly not with Black Americans. There is no right that straight Americans have that gay Americans do not have when it comes to marriage.

A gay man is just as free to marry a woman as I am. Similarly, a gay woman is free to marry a man. No problem. No one is preventing gays from getting married. Gays need to get a grip on the fact that they are not the mainstream of general society and learn to live with that fact, rather than trying to turn society upside down to suit their purpose, using judges that should be disbarred and politicians that should be arrested for blatantly violating the law.

I don’t believe ‘marriage’ has anything to do with rights. If it’s rights they’re after, then legislate some rights, call it a civil union, or even ‘gay married,’ but not simply ‘married.’ The latter being reserved for respect and preservation of traditional family values. Marriage is something that happens between members of the opposite sex. A judge can’t change the definition of marriage. Society via legislatures can, and I hope I’m not around if/when that ever happens.

Getting ‘rights’ for the gay lifestyle isn’t, on its face, a bad idea. Trying to equate it to normal heterosexual marriage however, is.

If gays were as proud of their situation as they seem to be, then one would think they would also be proud of that which defines them. Why not invent another hyphenated class to further delineate us? Along with ?-Americans (insert your word of choice), we’ll now have Gay-Americans. And Gay-Americans can be “gay married.” That seems to me to be a fair solution for gays that are tolerant of societal norms.

That would work, if only “tolerance” wasn’t missing from the lexicon of the gay “movement.”

related links: Gays And Marriage | Same-Sex Movement Demands Tolerance But Won’t Show Any

Spread the love

0 thoughts on “Is Same Sex Movement Getting Out Of Hand?”

  1. Yeah, I wish they hadn’t have printed that. I just issued the press release, and they picked up the “Escambia County chairman of the Northwest Florida Young Democrats” from my email signature… the YDs nor the county party had no involvement. I guess I will have to be more careful next time I send the dopes at the PNJ something.

    It’s true, I am the local YD chair, although I’m terrible at it. I very quickly get disillusioned by hyper-partisanism, i.e. being obligated to support lousy candidates just because of their party. I tend to vote Democratic but don’t hesitate to vote R if I think the candidate is better, and it’s for that reason that I wouldn’t make it far in party circles.

    Anyway, the rally was very peaceful. Turnout was good and the public response was surprisingly positive. Granted, we were downtown — I’m sure if we had done this on Nine Mile Road the result would have been different — but there were a ton of honks, thumbs ups, waves, etc. and only one negative response that I witnessed in the hour plus I was there (a guy rolled down his window and yelled some pseudo-religious hate speech).

    The way I see it?

    The fact that same-sex marriage was already illegal in three places in Florida statues is irrelevant. Codifying it in the state constitution certainly makes it harder to overturn. It is a very badly written piece of law, though, and will affect more than just gay folks.

    The way I see it is that it is a civil rights issue. I respect a person’s religious beliefs but they are simply irrelevant to this issue. This is a matter of government-issued rights. To deny these people this right is simply wrong. There is no other reasonable conclusion. It’s as heinous as segregation, or denying women the right to vote, and one day we’ll look back at this the same way we do those things.

    I am not worried about it, though. This will happen. It’s not a question of if but a question of when. Might be 5 years, might be 10, maybe even 20, but it will happen. I’m just trying to hurry it along.

  2. Yeah, I saw the article in the paper, link above. I saw ‘Derek Cosson, Escambia County chairman of the Northwest Florida Young Democrats’ mentioned in the article and was wondering what makes that issue something that Democrats support, since Amendment 2’s passage was bi-partisan?

    If you personally support it or not, that’s your business. But the article made it look as though it is a Democrat issue. ??

    At any rate, I did learn that you are the Chm. of the NWF Young Democrats. I didn’t know that before.

    I didn’t go to the rally. I wouldn’t have gone anyway unless it was to take pictures of civil unrest. Besides, I had to work. So how did it go? Was it peaceful?

    I understand that opponents of the measure said that the amendment (for Florida) was not necessary, that Florida law somewhere already affirms the point. But I also understand that, in order to keep activist judges from tampering with it, that amending the State’s constitution was the only way to insure it not only becomes law, but stays law, unless and until the people vote to change it.

    Is that how you see it?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *