Wednesday, April 7, 2010


It seems to me that most of the glbt community and their worshippers are hellbent (pun intended) on forcing the acceptance of homosexuality upon those who refuse to accept the gay lifestyle as normal. This includes teaching children, without the consent of their parents, that homosexuality is okay.
Here is yet another piece of evidence to support my case.


  1. There's a reason we're still fighting for marriage equality, and that's because civil unions aren't equal to full, federally recognized marriage. Even if you gave civil unions all the state benefits, the federal benefits are still missing because the federal government doesn't recognize civil unions.

    The way I see it, you have three options for equality:

    1) Get rid of government recognized marriage altogether, and all the benefits that went along with them.

    2) Change government recognized marriage into civil unions and leave marriage to the churches.

    3) Give every competent, willingly consenting adults the right to marry any other competent, willingly consenting adult.

    Also, let's talk about this teaching children that homosexuality is okay thing. You want teachers to stop reading books that feature, or even passively mention same sex relationships, we'll have to get rid of all the books that feature or passively mention opposite sex relationships. Otherwise we'll just be recruiting impressionable children into the heterosexual lifestyle.

  2. But Elliot,

    You already HAVE marriage equality. You have the same right to marry one woman at a time that I do. If you don't like women, then there's something wrong with YOU, not the definition of marriage. Although you have the right to be wrong, you don't have the right to turn what is wrong into what is right by the sheer force of your will. You and your fellow homosexuals aren't fighting against the misperceptions of humanity like African-Americans were, your fighting against what God says marriage should be, which is between one man and one woman. And even the one-man-one-woman definition from God has limitations concerning blood relatives.

    I never said that I wanted teachers to stop reading books that passively mention the glbt lifestyle. I'm saying that it shouldn't be done WITHOUT THE CONSENT of the child's parents, parent, or legal guardian. Heterosexuality and homosexuality aren't the same because every person walking the Earth is as a result of heterosexuality, and not one person walks the Earth as a result of same-sex sexual contact. It would be stupid to not tell children where babies come from and they will eventually find out about "gay" life.

    I won't be able to post your response, if any, unless you answer this question: Do you think that children should be taught that heterosexuality and homosexuality are equal, WITHOUT the consent of their parents, parent, of guardian?

  3. Elliot,

    I will need a clearer "yes" or "no" not a lecture on the existence of the glbt community, before I can post your response. If you cannot deny teaching the acceptance of homosexuality (NOT the existence, or their right to be left alone, but the ACCEPTANCE) to children WITHOUT the consent of their parents, I will not post your response.

  4. Okay Elliot,

    Since you can't give me a clear "no." I've got to go. I have clearly stated on this blog that nothing sexual should be taught to a child without the consent of their parents and I won't associate with someone that thinks that an end-run around a parent's right to know what their child is being taught is justifiable.


Debate and discussion are welcome here, but attitude and ad hominem attacks will get you banned.