If there is a gay agenda - then everyone is actually bisexual and lying to themselves

I don't think the government is trying to make everyone gay.

I think the "gay agenda," can be identified as a couple of basic points.

a] There is a particular demographic within the homosexual population (I won't say that this is all of them, because I don't think it is) who are actively evangelical. These are people who essentially believe that everyone is potentially in the closet, and they also believe that heterosexuality is illegitimate, in much the same way that Christians view homosexuality as illegitimate.

These people are the basis of the "convert a straight night," events which at times have been depicted as occurring within predominantly gay public venues. I believe that there are certain individuals within the population who are not truly gay or straight, but that depending on environment can go either way; and if said people encounter homosexual evangelism, that can influence their active orientation.

b] There is and has been a concerted activism effort, to change the legal system, and render it as sympathetic and preferential to homosexual people as possible. This has included the introduction of the "hate crime," concept, among other things.

c] There is an ongoing effort within the media, to normalise homosexuality within the minds of the public. The first wave of this effort occurred in the early to mid 1990s, and specifically focused on the least threatening depictions possible; homosexual pairings between elderly individuals, within the context of lifelong monogamy. Said depictions and context were designed to make homosexuality as easy as possible to accept; and truthfully, I myself do not have any objection to homosexuality within such a context, as I do not consider gay monogamy to be socially or epidemiologically harmful.

You will notice that depictions of homosexuals in the media, usually do not involve promiscuity. It is understood that for the purposes of gaining acceptance of homosexuality, monogamy has to be emphasised as much as possible. Unfortunately, I do not consider this to be a realistic depiction of homosexuality, for the most part; my own limited observation of gay behaviour, has strongly implied to me that among male homosexuals at least, monogamy is more the exception than the rule.

I believe that monogamy is the only non-harmful form of homosexual expression, both for homosexuals themselves, and for the larger society. This is the reason why I am an adamant advocate of gay marriage. Homosexual people must be able to form stable, permanent relationships, and they should be encouraged to do so, even more strongly than heterosexual people.

Originally posted by WhoKnows100

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by neobludragon

 

Religion is the key factor. They want to keep the sanctity of the marriage from bible man and wife. I've heard it used too many times "the bible doesn't say man and man or woman and woman, it says man and woman." that is the main cause of this. So as long as there are people who are religious nuts out there and follow the bible to every last word there will be always a "gay agenda"

Your simplistic and defamatory comment that only "religious nuts who believe in the Bible" believe there to be a "gay agenda" is false. It is the oft quoted sentiment from those in the gay camp calling for a sexual practice to be grounds for marriage. Many people who don't believe in the Bible do support marriage between men and women only. Are they also "nuts"? 

A hidden agenda is one that is put into place with deceit in order to influence an outcome. In this case, from a Biblical perspective, the outcome of the agenda is to relabel a judgement from God to a normal and healthy sexual practice. The Biblical judgment is simple:  they are given over to their passions.  That means that their hearts are allowed to be hardened by their sins (Romans 1:24).  As a result, they can no longer see the error of what they are doing, and then they go and promote it and condemn others who don't participate in their sin.  So, without an awareness of their sinfulness, there will be no repentance and trusting in Jesus.  Without Jesus, they will have no forgiveness.  Without forgiveness, there is no salvation. 

That's the outcome for a gay person caught up in the lifestyle. They see nothing wrong with it, and will never seek salvation like others do for other behaviours. Those that accept the relabelling as a "normal and healthy behaviour" will never view the practice as one under judgement and will never seek to bring the gospel of salvation to them. Likewise, they will not see it as a sign of imminent punishment on the world.

A hidden agenda uses deceit and lies to influence its outcome. How in this case? Heterosexual men, viewing porn, always see lesbians portrayed as voluptuous feminine women when the reality is the complete opposite - the vast majority of lesbians are manly and butch. As a heterosexual male, you would not find sexual pleasure in watching two butch lesbians in your porn and that's why they are not there. So how is TRUTH being used to influence your opinion? It's NOT. Likewise, we are socially engineered to think of the homosexual male as that "happy go-lucky, funny, charming, sweet heart of a guy" in every single film and tv show that we watch. We never are shown the torn anuses, the 500+ sexual partners, the chain gang of men humping each other nor the gay hung up on a cross blaspheming the Lord Jesus at one of their parades. Why not? Because TRUTH can't sell their outcome.

So of course there is a "hidden agenda" in the drive to get everyone to view homosexuality as a "normal and health sexual practice". By convincing you to support someone in this lifestyle you are clapping for their eternal spiritual destruction and a judgement from God instead of trying to snatch that burning twig from the fire. But to a Christian, who themselves suffered under the same or similar sexual immorality, that twig is valuable and worthy of saving! They must convince you that we "hate" homosexuals, when it's the exact opposite - love because our own Saviour died for us so that we too could be there for other sinners. They must convince you that we "hate" homosexuals because we are "bigots" when we teach our children about the homosexual lifestyle being a judgement from God, because the entire goal of Satan is to silence the words of God so that you have no clue what's around the corner. And it's nearly there as we see thousands of heterosexual teenage girls putting on lesbian shows for their boyfriends just to turn them on. Those girls weren't born 'gay' - their sexual thrill is a high. Children of homosexual couples are more likely to become homosexuals because they see it and are told that it is normal - yet they aren't born 'gay'. Boys raped as a child are more likely to turn 'homosexual' - yet they weren't born 'gay'. Heterosexuals addicted to pornography have their sexual identity confused - yet they weren't born 'gay'.  All of these things are truths, shown by studies, yet they are not presented to you. Why not? Truths can't sell the homosexual lifestyle to heterosexual people - only lies and untruths can. God clearly states that those who perish are those who never learned to love the truth - that even in the face of multiple truths they still preferred the wickedness and lies that made them more 'comfortable'.

As I said Religious nuts, and you just proved my point.

reply to post by petrus4


I really do not like the media. It is always biased. Most of the gay guys on the television are depicted as being very feminine. These are the same people influencing what is 'masculine' and what is 'feminine' and trying to make all straight men and women fight those made-up socially constructed roles.

I'm not sure what "normalizing" homosexuality could me. Homosexuality is something that is normal, even if people had BELIEFS that taught otherwise; however, if you are against gay people, that is your right, but it is normal regardless of your belief.

Originally posted by arpgme
I'm not sure what "normalizing" homosexuality could me. Homosexuality is something that is normal, even if people had BELIEFS that taught otherwise; however, if you are against gay people, that is your right, but it is normal regardless of your belief.

What I meant by normalising, is changing people's perceptions, so that those who possibly didn't think it was normal in the past, begin to do so.

As for whether or not I am "against," gay people, that is something which requires some clarification.

I am certainly not in opposition to platonic, emotional, or spiritual love existing between two people of the same gender; but then again, the existence of that, and homosexuality as such, are very often two completely different issues.

I do not have a particularly positive opinion of anal intercourse, as a specific act, simply because of the number of potential health issues that I am aware can be associated with it. That doesn't mean that I advocate laws against anal intercourse, or that I will try and dictate that other people cannot participate in it, if such is their own preference; but it certainly is not my own preference at all.

I also do very much support gay marriage, because I believe that homosexual monogamy has enormous potential to literally save lives, both homosexual and heterosexual.

So it is not homosexuality itself that I have problems with. It is more the...secondary politics...would probably be the best term I can come up with...that are indirectly associated with homosexuality. One element of that, is the specific tendency towards an obsession with victimhood, that I have tended to observe among homosexual posters on this forum.

Generally speaking, I am not going to have large amounts of sympathy towards anyone who I perceive as having an excessive victim or martyr complex, or who I perceive is trying to subvert or modify the legal system, in order to obtain preferential treatment for themselves. It has generally been my observation that homosexual activists wish to do this.

If homosexual activists wish to gain my respect, then there needs to be a large reduction in the degree of whining, attention seeking, and addiction to victimhood. Them being gay, in and of itself, is not something I care about. In terms of my purely visceral reaction to it, I'm not likely to want to be in their immediate physical proximity, no; but if they are not right next to me, then as far as I am concerned, they can be as gay as they want.

They do, on the other hand, need to stop caring about the opinions of Christians, in all situations where Christians do not have the ability to directly employ lethal force against them. I understand that it is unpleasant to have a Christian tell you that you are a demoniac and that you are going to burn in Hell. I have had extensive experience with that myself, so I am well aware of how it feels.

I did, however, eventually have to reach a point in my own development, where I realised that Christians who are willing to condemn people in that manner, are themselves generally not intimately or directly connected with divine love, or at least are not on a regular basis; because expressing the desire or expectation for someone to experience eternal torture, is not a loving thing to do, irrespective of what they may claim.

So you simply have to realise that Christians who do condemn you, do so because they are mentally ill. It may not be a permanent form of mental illness as such, but one that arises from the belief system which they hold, at that particular point in time. If you understand that a Christian who condemns you is mentally ill, it becomes easier to ignore it, because you realise that their behaviour is not truly anything to do with you at all. It is something which they are responsible for.

reply to post by petrus4


The reason why gay people care about the opinions of Christians is because, somehow, freedom of religion does not exist. If you have a religious belief that gay marriage is important and needed, it doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are because Christianity rules and they can stop you from practicing your spiritual belief which is belief in gay marriage.

This is somewhat true. Take a look at the younger women. Girls are developing breasts at an earlier age than normal. Because of the birth control medications, and other estrogen being thrown in our water and food supply. Estrogen makes men more feminine and become weak. But I don't think this would prove that they are doing this as a agenda.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by petrus4

 

The reason why gay people care about the opinions of Christians is because, somehow, freedom of religion does not exist. If you have a religious belief that gay marriage is important and needed, it doesn't matter what your religious beliefs are because Christianity rules and they can stop you from practicing your spiritual belief which is belief in gay marriage.

One of the most basic inherent legal abilities of human beings, is their ability to form contracts. A contract is quite literally all that marriage is; it's just that in most cases, the government serves as a third party, (which isn't something that any sane person should want, anyway) and the celebrant really only serves as a witness.

When you look at it like that, you'll start to realise that there is in fact no way that Christians can legally prevent gay marriage. All they can prevent is the usual marital contract, in which the government agrees to be a third party. If you want the government to be a party to said contract, because you want certain welfare benefits or whatever, then I agree that you're probably stuck.

However, it's important to understand that having government as a party to the marital contract, really is not a good idea. The reason why, is because if you have children, and they decide to take them via Child Protective Services, and you object, they'll tell you they have the legal right to do that; and they do, because their ability to do such, was one of the conditions of the marital contract. In other words, as part of said contract, your children become their property. Part of the definition of any contract is that something of value changes hands; and in this case, it's your children.

You really need to think very carefully about why you need or want marriage at all.

reply to post by petrus4


Isn't the same thing true for straight marriages? Are you against that, too? I agree that marriage is stupid and we shouldn't have to make the government recognize us in order to be "official". The relationship is official when the couple makes it so not when the government signs and agreement to choose to recognize them...

However, marriage is a part of some people's religious beliefs and if you are gay and you believe that you have to be married to have sex or whatever, then you should be able to do so and not have other people's spiritual beliefs interfere.

Originally posted by Shrukin89
This is somewhat true. Take a look at the younger women. Girls are developing breasts at an earlier age than normal. Because of the birth control medications, and other estrogen being thrown in our water and food supply. Estrogen makes men more feminine and become weak. But I don't think this would prove that they are doing this as a agenda.

Increased estrogen doesn't make men feminine; but it can make them lazy, irritable, and most lead to cardiovascular problems. It definitely doesn't make them "gay", this is left to a combination of hormones and genetics.

I have no idea why people associate "femininity" to being gay when they are two completely different things. A guy can be gay and be extremely masculine...

Also, masculinity and femininity does not exist. It is just a social construct. As you go into different countries, you will see that what is "feminine" to one may actually be "masculine" to another...

For example, the French wore high heels and they believe that this was masculine because it made them taller than all the other men showing superiority.

Originally posted by Domo1
reply to post by arpgme

 

I know straight guys wish that they can do this to some lesbians.

You've never seen my white fluffy self in a wig. The makeup makes me a lipstick lesbian, but the tie makes me butch. I'm all kinds of desirable.

Are you single? xx

The whole gay agenda is being pushed so much by the media that, when polled, over 40% of the people thought that gays make up at least 25% of the population.

It's actually less than 3%. But you can understand why some would think that by the way the media pushes this lifestyle as normal. If you meet 100 random people today there is no way 25 of them are gay, it's more like 2 or 3 max (unless you are in San Francisco).

reply to post by WhoKnows100


You really have no idea what you're talking about mate.... that long winded rave amounts to stereotypical religious stories they use to frighten the life out of some poor kid who is in the process of defining their sexuality..... and its people with attitudes like yours that have these kids feeling unworthy of love or life, then they have to battle suicidal tendencies as well. Your view of the gay community is what is perverted not the people within the gay community.

Most lesbians tend not to be butch at all, in fact the butch ones are in the minority. The majority of lesbians are made up of women who identify as neither femme nor butch but are often self labelled as 'Just Me', the next most common are the femmes, lipstick lesbians, androgynous-bois/boys and queer identified.... these days its rare to find a butch lesbian but they are the only ones you will notice due to the way they dress and look.

My neighbour looks like a butch woman but she has 4 kids and is happily married to a guy and has been for the last 23 years. Her sister is a lesbian and she would easily make a comfortable living as a swim suit model if she wasn't a mechanic. Gender within the gay community is viewed as a social construct. The Queer community love to 'gender f@ck' ... meaning... there are no stereotypes or heterosexual role playing within the relationships.


.... and... No one is going to make someone else gay, its chemical and biological. .... and the majority of all gay people come from heterosexual relationships.... Your ideas that gay parents are more likely to have gay kids is a flawed argument based on fearmongering, dogmatic religious superstition from the dark ages.

reply to post by Carseller4


How would you know? Can you read a person's to see what attractions they have? I didn't see one scientific study saying 25% and it is common sense that isn't it. It is 10% and even that seems like a lot because people are till hiding their attractions... You should look up Kinsey's studies.

Increased estrogen doesn't make men feminine; but it can make them lazy, irritable, and most lead to cardiovascular problems. It definitely doesn't make them "gay", this is left to a combination of hormones and genetics.

I have no idea why people associate "femininity" to being gay when they are two completely different things. A guy can be gay and be extremely masculine...

Also, masculinity and femininity does not exist. It is just a social construct. As you go into different countries, you will see that what is "feminine" to one may actually be "masculine" to another...

For example, the French wore high heels and they believe that this was masculine because it made them taller than all the other men showing superiority.

I'm not associating femininity to being gay. I have a couple of friends who are very flamboyant and appears to be gay. But they are straight. I feel myself as being a bit feminine too. Just a different personality and characteristic. I agree that in some other countries that people act in totally opposite gender roles.

Originally posted by arpgme
reply to post by neobludragon

 

Exactly, which is why it makes me curious about those who are afraid of a "gay agenda". A gay agenda can't even work on a gay person. If they aren't attracted to the same sex, it doesn't matter if the government says "being gay is ok" because they are still only attracted to the opposite sex.

Which makes me wonder about people scared of being "caught" in a gay agenda...

Seems like, these are people who actually do have same sex attractions but are scared of acting on it.

edit on 8-6-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)

so people who "fear" racist agendas are actually racist then

Weird logic- anyway, the whole gay thing, whether from the real uber gay fascists or those who want them hidden from view is a distraction from more important things- only around 3% of the population is gay, there is more important issues

Heterosexuality is a biological instinct programmed into our DNA by millions of years of evolution . I wonder at what point will schools teach the student your all bisexual and must experiment with both sex before you can choose weather your Hetero or Gay . And if you DONT comply your a hater.

Originally posted by blueorder

so people who "fear" racist agendas are actually racist then

Weird logic-

I never said that people "fear" something because they are it. You are simplifying what I said. I specifically said there is not a reason for a straight person to be scared of a "gay" agenda because if you don't have same-sex attractions it doesn't matter how many people says "being gay is ok" you are still going to only be attracted to the opposite sex.

This logic does NOT apply to racists, because a person can be indoctrinated into believing that racism against a certain race is good. You can not indoctrinate a person to be gay, either the attractions are there or they aren't, no amount of saying "gay is good" will change that if there is no attraction.

We are what we learn; and television has a say in darn near everything we do. On top of that...let's all remember...that the 1st woman, came from a man; and men have been coming from women, ever since. So, i'd say everyone has male/female in them; but to say we're all bi-sexual and lying to ourselves is a little hetero-phobic!

Also, how do you know that there wasn't a straight agenda? What if there was a conspiracy to make people straight so that they can have more children since the population was low and the government needed more people?

edit on 8-6-2012 by arpgme because: (no reason given)

How can the government have a straight agenda when most of the population is in fact straight? Are you trying to imply that it wasn't natures will that the majority of people are heterosexual but some Government influence?

Its actually quite comical

reply to post by KingDoey


They made laws to make homosexuality illegal and to even put gays to death, and the had people and the media teach that homosexuality is wrong in an effort to remove homosexuality as much as they can to have heterosexuals only... and to scare bisexuals into only having heterosexual sex.