In Other Futile Events: Young "Pro-Marriage" Conservatives Plan March on DC..

So, if you've read my posts, you know I lean to the right, and I lean Christian. But this stuff just gets old. I get it. I get that the Bible says that dudes are supposed to marry chicks, and that's the only way it's supposed to be.

But here's the deal - the Bible also says that we're supposed to marry our brother's wife if he dies, we're supposed to respect the Sabbath, we're supposed to never tell a lie, we're supposed to always pray for our leaders.

I'd like, just once, for these "movement" folks to actually practice the faith they so gloriously stand upon as a soap box before they rant about the societal collapse that will ensue upon homosexual marriage.

“The primary challenge that our side faces right now is the intense social pressure,” said Joseph Backholm, 34, the executive director of the Family Policy Institute of Washington. “To the extent that the other side is able to frame this as a vote for gay people to be happy, it will be challenging for us.”

To put it another way, opponents of same-sex marriage say they must argue in favor of traditional marriage, not against gay people or gay rights. “It’s really a broader defense of marriage and a stronger marriage culture,” said Will Haun, 26, a lawyer and member of the Federalist Society.

New York Times - Opponents Descend on DC

Uh, dude, the "primary" challenge you face is convincing people that this is the best use of your time, resources, and energy.

We live in a world desperate with war and strife. We live in a nation with racial tensions in urban areas getting close to the 1960's. We live in cities where mega churches send millions overseas to pet charities while they let their neighbors live squalor.

Love God, and Love Your Neighbor. Until you got those two down, don't expect a groundswell of support.

In all honesty - has it never occurred to you why the same churches that enable and encourage you to march on DC for protests of gay marriage NEVER encourage you to even question why we go to war? Don't you find it the slightest bid odd that the "house of God", the God that is all loving and merciful, never bats an eye at DoD spending and our ever evolving ability to kill each other?

Yeah, gays getting married will wreck us all, if the 1,673 other things more dangerous don't first....

Priorities man... priorities.

To be realistic, there is the gay community of normal citizens living their lives like everyone else. Then there is the gay activist community and I personally dislike them with a rather strong passion myself....because they push and push and just won't STOP ...not matter what, who or where they feel they're view is missing, they'll push it with a plunger right down people's throats.

This isn't pushing by the conservatives. It's push BACK. A good % of the nation is getting a little sick of the "me me me ...I'm SPECIAL" garbage with a good number of different causes, represented by outright offensive and in-your-face activists.

Just my two cents ..and I do see a world of difference between the two sides of the community, even if most others may not.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
To be realistic, there is the gay community of normal citizens living their lives like everyone else. Then there is the gay activist community and I personally dislike them with a rather strong passion myself....because they push and push and just won't STOP ...not matter what, who or where they feel they're view is missing, they'll push it with a plunger right down people's throats.

This isn't pushing by the conservatives. It's push BACK. A good % of the nation is getting a little sick of the "me me me ...I'm SPECIAL" garbage with a good number of different causes, represented by outright offensive and in-your-face activists.

Just my two cents ..and I do see a world of difference between the two sides of the community, even if most others may not.

Its more like me me me why can I not have the same rights as you? And if you did not have the same basic rights as other people because of being gay would not be in your face about it? I highly doubt that. However, the tide has turned and the bigots are slowly crawling into their holes. Nobody wants to be the last person with a whites only water fountain.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Yes!

How dare the LGBT groups protest the right of Conservatives to marry?

How dare the LGBT News networks portray Conservatives as not worthy of equal rights?

How dare the LGBT Talk Show hosts rant about the death of America because Conservatives want to Marry?

just

It sounds like a religious issue to me and I don`t believe we should make laws that everyone has to follow based on religious beliefs.

reply to post by MrSpad

However, the tide has turned and the bigots are slowly crawling into their holes. Nobody wants to be the last person with a whites only water fountain.

The fact just about anyone who doesn't simply tolerate but enthusiastically embrace it is classified by such offensive and outright hateful terms are why the feelings are growing hard where they weren't before ..and getting harder where they never needed to be.

A fight for rights is on the edge if not already well over into getting downright spiteful and when those getting hateful represent well under 10% of this nation's population, it's not a position to be doing that from, IMO. We can all have equality but that really needs to come with some respect for each others differing points of view and levels of acceptance.

I don't believe tolerance can be optional in a civilized society. Open acceptance though? That's a whole different animal and one which cannot be forced. That's a matter of each individuals own feelings, which are each person's to hold without having to get grief over it. The attempts to force acceptance beyond tolerance from all are more self-defeating in the long run than I think some realize now.

Its called the collapse of the civil society. It is equal to the collapse of an economy and the nation. They all fall togeather.

Once the fall is complete, the civil society is reborn and the cycle starts all over. Its happend a dozen time in human history and it will happen again in the near future.

You look back in history and its quite amazing how both the civil society and economic both collapse at once. Im not quite sure which one Is more reactive to the other. I would say collapse of the family unit, manners, and faith directly result in lower productivity, higher dependency, a decrease in educated citizenry, and an increase in corruption, due to the lose moral compass, creates the conditions of an economic collapse.

After looking at the entire gay marraige issue the following can be stated:

The main problems with the entire debate as it stands can be boiled down to a religious argument and ultimately one of basic equality for all citizens in the USA.

Both sides are correct in their interpertation of what a marriage is and the laws and rights it gives in such a contract and union. It does and should be extended to all in the country, however within reason to a degree. We can not deny one group the right to have one privledge while allowing it for another, as that is the essence of discrimination, at the same time you can not force another group to change its religious beliefs to accomidate the other, as then it becomes persecution.

What I would like to see, based off of the legal tradition of the USA, based off of all of the laws in the country, and past court cases, that one of the houses of God produce a series of arguments that give pause, and thought, that is based off of wisdom and common sense and does not invoke the religious in its nature.

That ultimately has been the problem with all of the arguments against gay marriage from the get go, that those who are religious tend to bring religion into the argument. And that ultimately invalidates their argument from the stand point of any judge, as they have to remain impartial and ultimately fair to both sides. Thus any and all arguments have to be constructed on a bases of laws and precidents, and both sides should respect that and read the decisions, not just be sore losers when the judges rules against them.

Personally, I think that the judges should rule this way, as the country is divided up into federal districts, the states that are covered in the California district should allow for gay marriage, and only that district for the total of 10 years. Then after 10 years review the actual data and make a final ruling as to what the outcome has been, if it turned out that such has a positive outcome for the society and states, then allow it country wide, and if not, then rule against it. That way those who are against it and are for it, have a chance to take a step back and gather the data, but it has to be unbiased data, not influenced by any reason, except to see how same sex marriage has changed society and how gay people take to being with just one person, and the rates of divorce in same sex marriages.

reply to post by gncnew


hey
nice OP and the title really made me smile. as a brit and a non christian, it always puzzles me that some church goers over here seem to think that they invented marriage and can define it to others.

reply to post by sdcigarpig


I like what you say, however, can you imagine the firestorm if you give people a 'right' then take it away for whatever reason? I mean it would have to be such a monumental clusterf#^k.

Me personally, I say require the states to allow gay marriage, however exempt religious institutions from any kind of litigation resulting in them 'following their faith.' Everyone wins. Gays get the recognition they deserve, and religionists are free to continue to discriminate in their church.

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
To be realistic, there is the gay community of normal citizens living their lives like everyone else. Then there is the gay activist community and I personally dislike them with a rather strong passion myself....because they push and push and just won't STOP ...not matter what, who or where they feel they're view is missing, they'll push it with a plunger right down people's throats.

This isn't pushing by the conservatives. It's push BACK.

I'm in agreement with you here except for that last line I quoted... These guys aren't pushing back, they're just making a splash. The "CHURCH" in the United States has made their bread and butter on homosexuality for the better part of the last 30 years. Before that it was drugs and free sex, before that it was the scarlet letter...

Notice a trend, sex sells, and it sells pew seats just like it does cars and cologne. Again, priorities. You want the world to listen to you, earn their respect by walking the walk.

Originally posted by Tardacus
It sounds like a religious issue to me and I don`t believe we should make laws that everyone has to follow based on religious beliefs.

Slippery slope there - half our laws are already based upon religious beliefs... Now, their not just ONE religion's beliefs... but still.

Originally posted by camaro68ss
Its called the collapse of the civil society. It is equal to the collapse of an economy and the nation. They all fall togeather.

Once the fall is complete, the civil society is reborn and the cycle starts all over. Its happend a dozen time in human history and it will happen again in the near future.

You look back in history and its quite amazing how both the civil society and economic both collapse at once. Im not quite sure which one Is more reactive to the other. I would say collapse of the family unit, manners, and faith directly result in lower productivity, higher dependency, a decrease in educated citizenry, and an increase in corruption, due to the lose moral compass, creates the conditions of an economic collapse.

edit on 21-3-2013 by camaro68ss because: (no reason given)

Perhaps. I tend to think the current economic collapse has more to do with the ability of nations and hence corps to spend ficticious money.

You know, it's the first time in history that the world uses a currency that everyone knows isn't actually backed by anything other than their faith in it.

Now, the family unit stuff... yeah, I agree. But I think that has less to do with sexuality and more to do with selfishness and a few lazy self-entitled generations that have been fed the secret to happiness is "dolla dolla bills y'all"

Originally posted by DarkKnight76
reply to post by sdcigarpig

 

I like what you say, however, can you imagine the firestorm if you give people a 'right' then take it away for whatever reason? I mean it would have to be such a monumental clusterf#^k.

Me personally, I say require the states to allow gay marriage, however exempt religious institutions from any kind of litigation resulting in them 'following their faith.' Everyone wins. Gays get the recognition they deserve, and religionists are free to continue to discriminate in their church.

edit on 21-3-2013 by DarkKnight76 because: (no reason given)

Ding Ding Ding! We have a winner! Tell him what he's won Jack!

"Mr. Wayne, you've won yourself an all inclusive trip to logic land where the pestering masses will ignore you because they can't get any campaign contributions from your position..."

Thankfully in a few years time we'll be talking about this as a bit of historical bigotry.
The next generation will be changing things as issues of sexuality become less important to them.
My late teen son is into girls but has a couple of gay friends in his school. There is no bullying, exclusion or feelings of superiority over sexuality in his community, they just accept people based on how they treat others.

I've spoken about this often with my son, and he can't quite believe the attitudes which still exist in the older generations. He even tells me that his friends find it ridiculous that some 'grown ups' actually still think people are 'turned gay'. The funniest (and most thought provoking) line he ever gave me was "Blonde girls are my favourite dad, you could put a wig on the best looking lad at school and I still wouldn't fancy him, but I'd defend his right to wear that wig".

Roll on the day when the next generation are in positions of power I say, this out of date bigotry will hopefully be banished to the history books.

Originally posted by grainofsand
Thankfully in a few years time we'll be talking about this as a bit of historical bigotry.
The next generation will be changing things as issues of sexuality become less important to them.
My late teen son is into girls but has a couple of gay friends in his school. There is no bullying, exclusion or feelings of superiority over sexuality in his community, they just accept people based on how they treat others.

I've spoken about this often with my son, and he can't quite believe the attitudes which still exist in the older generations. He even tells me that his friends find it ridiculous that some 'grown ups' actually still think people are 'turned gay'. The funniest (and most thought provoking) line he ever gave me was "Blonde girls are my favourite dad, you could put a wig on the best looking lad at school and I still wouldn't fancy him, but I'd defend his right to wear that wig".

Roll on the day when the next generation are in positions of power I say, this out of date bigotry will hopefully be banished to the history books.

I wonder if you're right. You know, by now you'd think immigration would have been settled, but I don't think the political machines have any real interest in this issue being "settled" because it's just too useful to distract and sway the masses.

Hillary Clinton's emails leaked about Bengazi? Naw son, gay marriage.

reply to post by gncnew

Totally agree that politicians will go for any distraction they can if it stops the masses noticing the wider problems in the world. The UK parliament recently voted to allow churches to carry out legally recognised same sex marriages. Personally I don't think Cameron (our Prime Minister) raised it as a distraction here, or as a vote winner because it will cost his conservative party traditional voters if anything. I think he did it in the name of equality and the issue can be put to rest from now on.

Regarding Hilary though, yep, it certainly seems to be a ploy to sway thoughts away from her indiscretions and raise support for the speculation that she will go for a run at president.
If you're interested at all, here's a UK news perspective on her views (gay marriage etc) from 4 days ago:
www.guardian.co.uk...

reply to post by MrSpad

we all do have the same rights, I am straight and I am not allowed to marry a dude, child, sheep or sofa even if we are "in love" What is being asked for is special rights to accommodate sexual deviation. They have the right to marry an adult human of the opposite sex just like the rest of us.

reply to post by camaro68ss


Absolutely right. Along with the morals goes the ethics. Without ethics corruption runs rampant and then comes the fall.

reply to post by grainofsand


The public schools are an indoctrination machine that works in tandem with pop culture. That is why your child thinks the way he does. Glee anyone? Also it has long been acknowledged that homosexuality is often the result of sexual abuse. It spreads like a disease not genetically like hair loss. It is a dirty little secret that you will not see on the news. When pressed every homosexual that I know (friends/family) has admitted this to me. Up until the last decade or so it was still recognized as a mental illness. It was removed from the list due to political pressure, not because the facts have changed. Now these sick people cannot even get help because they are being told they are not sick. To top it off I will now be called a bigot even though most of the bigotry is coming from the gay lobbies, not the mentally and spiritually healthy people like me. There is much info on the subject available online and many books have been written by credible doctors/psychiatrists. www.home60515.com...