Posts
So what's new about a robbery in New York you say? The sheer scale of this robbery.
Every registered voter in the state of New York was robbed of their right to vote on the definition of marriage in their state. Not only that, the robbers were so smooth that there are some that approve of this attack on democracy.
"... "The people of New York were robbed of the right to vote directly on this issue, and the legislature forced this on the state," he tells OneNewsNow. "And really, the blame lies with the Republican Party -- for those four Republicans deciding to abandon the principles of the Republican Party and betray their voters. That's what happened, and they're going to be held accountable."
"The poll shows that 57 percent of New York voters believe marriage should be defined only as one man and one woman," says Gallagher, "and that in addition, the vast majority -- I think it was close to 60 percent -- said that they think the people of New York should have the right to decide this issue, not the legislature." ..."
Story here.
Well, in a representative government, the representatives are sometimes the ones that decide. Maggie's polls say one thing, other polls I've seen say the exact opposite. Which poll is right? Who knows, I'm not a statastician. But I will say that it appears the representatives voted in a matter that they felt was just. Senator Mark Grisanti, a Catholic & Republican voted yes. The state of NY is lucky to have a legislator with such integrity. He realized that the teaching of his church should have no bearing on what rights the citizens should have. If only there were more bloggers who were of the same opinion.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEfN26t5yk8&feature=player_embedded
We'll see how the voters respond to this.
ReplyDeleteProbbly the same way they responded to interracial marriage, and integration....but you're completly right on this one. Citizens SHOULD certainly have the final say on what rights other citizens should have. I'm ready to go back to Jim Crow laws and "Whites Only" waiting rooms, how about you?
ReplyDeleteRace and sexual behaviour aren't the same thing. Homosexuality isn't innate.
ReplyDeleteLouis, your obsession with my blog stems from something in your spirit that I believe is a deep hatred of God himself. Your belief that God is a murderer of children makes that plain to me.
That being said, I think you may be too far gone to be reached. Also, your comments have had some snarky little insults AFTER I told you that such comments would no longer be posted.
Louis; what would you do if a family with a 13-year-old boy moved in next to you, and a week later, the 13-year-old boy asked you to borrow a book about the homosexual lifestyle from the local library and secretly loan it to him, because his parents forbade him from borrowing the book from the library?
(Your comments will be limited to this string until you give me a clear answer to my question.)
Again, Homosexuality IS innate & you have absolutely no EVIDENCE to the contrary. Where is your (credible) evidence? Discrimination IS discrimination, whether it be based upon skin color, RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, age, physical handicap, sexual orientation or anything else. My point is that it is NEVER a good idea to have the citizens decide what rights others may have. My example is a legitimate one because were the citizens given the chance to decide if interracial marriage should be legal, if non-white children could attend traditionally white public schools, if restaurants and stores should be forbidden to refuse service to blacks or even if public facilities should be integrated they WOULD HAVE VOTED NO. So again, are you willing to go back to "whites only" waiting rooms, because this is effectively what you are advocating for? As far as your book question goes, THERE IS NO HOMOSEXUAL LIFESTYLE, so obviously this isn't something that I could actually do even if I wanted to. But, to rephrase the question in verbiage but not substance, would I check out a book about homosexuality and loan it to him? I wouldn't. But I certainly would encourage him to go to the library himself & look at some books there if he did not have his own library card. Surely you don’t have a problem with someone encouraging a child to educate themselves?
ReplyDeleteI do appreciate you asking a question that I can legitimately respond to, rather than the truly unanswerable questions you have asked many of the other commentators here.
I have absolutely no hatred of God; I simply just don't believe in its existence. What I do hate is that the Bible is used as the definitive source for all things moral, when many of the things written are clearly immoral. I am, however, saddened that not only some people’s beliefs can be so strong that they willfully ignore that immorality, but that they wish to impose the writings of this book on the rest of the citizenry. Belief in God is fine, believe in the teaching of Jesus is fine, but verbatim belief in the Bible is just plain scary and evidence of a mind that is not only incapable of critical thought, but one that also has the potential to become very dangerous.
Homosexuality isn’t innate. The existence of ex-gays is my evidence, and the fact that I’m attending the wedding of a man and a woman, both of them once gay, on 11 July 2011.
ReplyDeleteYou misuse the word “discrimination” when you apply it to someone’s behaviour. Comparing interracial marriage to same-sex “marriage” is wrong because skin color is innate. Also the Jim Crow laws that forbade interracial marriage didn’t apply to say, a Black man marrying an Asian woman. The laws banning interracial marriage only forbade Whites from marrying outside of their race.
http://blog.speakupmovement.org/university/uncategorized/stanford-law-school-debates-whether-the-constitutions-protection-for-interracial-marriages-compels-legalizing-same-sex-marriage/
God does exist, and He has laid down moral absolutes through his Word. Even if you get the entire world to accept same-sex “marriage,” God won’t, and that’s what counts. You’ll find out when you meet Him after you die. Jesus Christ may even show you this very string as evidence that you were told about him, and that you were told that the glbt lifestyle was a deal-breaker with Him. Heterosexuals who wilfully embrace sexual sin are the FIRST group of people that God condemns in a very powerful verse in the New Testament.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/index.php?search=1%20Cor.%206:9-11&version=NASB&interface=print
“Critical thought” points TO the existence of God.
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
You are a complete idiot and ex-gays are not proof that homosexuality is ot innate, but regardless, so I choose to be gay. And? The fact of the matter is you, nor any other religously minded person has any right to dictate to me who I should/should not be able to marry. In the US we have RELIGOUS FREEDOM, which includes the freedom not to believe. Oh, and CRITICAL THOUGHT no more points to God than to the Lochness Monster, unicorns or Posidon. Keep up the "you'll have to answer with God" BS, it DOES NOT APPLY TO ME. You are like a Stepford Wife. Have an original thought for once.... Geeze....
ReplyDeleteOne more insult from you and your comments won’t be posted here anymore.
ReplyDeleteYour gayness comes from your choiceS. Like heroin addiction, it is not a singular choice. I don’t hate heroin addicts; I simply do not support their lifestyle and separate from them.
You want to believe that you’ll escape the judgment that comes from God after you die?
You go right ahead. (I strongly recommend a HUGE glass of water before you die.)
http://pfox-exgays.blogspot.com/2011/06/science.html
So YOU want to call ME a f*g? Your just mad because I figured out WHY you're gay. I've warned you about your insults. So long Louis.
ReplyDelete