Acceptance of Homosexual Marriage

[CMB3884]

For me the question would have to be “Why” are the poll results being presented if there is no objective to presenting them ?

Polls can be manipulated . With all the heightened accusations using buzzwords such as “homophobe” , “hate”, “discrimination” ,"** bigot**", “equality”, "diversity" , and seeing how people who don’t agree with same sex marriage in a practical way, are being, fined, sued and losing their livelihood, you really have to wonder if a person might be somewhat intimidated by a stranger phoning them and asking if they approve of same sex marriage. Really, what do you expect them to answer - now that the ones asking have their phone number too … …?

• • Note that the poster quoted above has added, beside the link to the NY Times article, his/her own personal comment , but when we read the article, it states …

and

Let’s dispense with the polls for the moment. They’re unreliable. If someone really is interested in “looking into” some other polls, in this particular case it would seem to make every bit of sense to look more closely into the ones they have posted themselves first - It goes a long way in establishing credibility .

I was presenting poll results only because Nate13 stated: What the homosexual movement hates is that a vast majority of Americans view what they do to be wrong. Even though its now about 50/50 on legalizing gay marriage of some sort, a majority of Americans personally believe that homosexual acts are wrong. How good can a person committing these acts feel knowing 75% of their own people believe they are morally wrong? All I was attempting to show was that I have not seen the same information he has…I simply wanted more information.

Also, I question your assertion that “Polls can be manipulated . With all the heightened accusations using buzzwords such as “homophobe” , “hate”, “discrimination” ," bigot", “equality”, “diversity” , and seeing how people who don’t agree with same sex marriage in a practical way, are being, fined, sued and losing their livelihood, you really have to wonder if a person might be somewhat intimidated by a stranger phoning them and asking if they approve of same sex marriage.” These are anonymous polls…why would anyone be intimidated into lying? And if you will use that logic, then we can logically assume that people who agree with same sex marriage might feel equally as “intimidated by a person phoning them and asking if they disapprove of same sex marriage.”

I know, I know, this is not popular thinking but I simply believe that if we Catholics are angered by people who do not consider our views isn’t it possible that people with different view points feel the same?? My brother is gay, AND a wonderful person and I take issue with those who assume that EVERY homosexual spews some sort of “homosexual agenda.” It’s simply not the case - I think most of the time, people simply want facts.

Feel free to flip out now

 

[NeedImprovement]

I was presenting poll results only because Nate13 stated: What the homosexual movement hates is that a vast majority of Americans view what they do to be wrong. Even though its now about 50/50 on legalizing gay marriage of some sort, a majority of Americans personally believe that homosexual acts are wrong. How good can a person committing these acts feel knowing 75% of their own people believe they are morally wrong? All I was attempting to show was that I have not seen the same information he has…I simply wanted more information.

Also, I question your assertion that “Polls can be manipulated . With all the heightened accusations using buzzwords such as “homophobe” , “hate”, “discrimination” ," bigot", “equality”, “diversity” , and seeing how people who don’t agree with same sex marriage in a practical way, are being, fined, sued and losing their livelihood, you really have to wonder if a person might be somewhat intimidated by a stranger phoning them and asking if they approve of same sex marriage.” These are anonymous polls…why would anyone be intimidated into lying? And if you will use that logic, then we can logically assume that people who agree with same sex marriage might feel equally as “intimidated by a person phoning them and asking if they disapprove of same sex marriage.”

I know, I know, this is not popular thinking but I simply believe that if we Catholics are angered by people who do not consider our views isn’t it possible that people with different view points feel the same?? My brother is gay, AND a wonderful person and I take issue with those who assume that EVERY homosexual spews some sort of “homosexual agenda.” It’s simply not the case - I think most of the time, people simply want facts.

Feel free to flip out now

 

[NeedImprovement]

I was presenting poll results only because Nate13 stated: What the homosexual movement hates is that a vast majority of Americans view what they do to be wrong. Even though its now about 50/50 on legalizing gay marriage of some sort, a majority of Americans personally believe that homosexual acts are wrong. How good can a person committing these acts feel knowing 75% of their own people believe they are morally wrong? All I was attempting to show was that I have not seen the same information he has…I simply wanted more information. …

Well to give you a blunt analogy, you shot yourself in the foot on that one . All I did was point out to everyone where the hole was:

• • Note that the poster quoted above has added, beside the link to the NY Times article, his/her own personal comment

CMB3884:

majority support of same-sex marriage

.

, but when we read the article, it states …
" NY Times:

“There is a margin of error associated with the calculation of the trendline, so it is too soon to say with confidence that support for gay marriage has become the plurality position (let alone the majority one).”

and
NY Times:

" it’s always possible that the momentum toward increasing support for gay marriage could flatten out or even reverse itself."

Also, I question your assertion that “Polls can be manipulated …”

Really ? As demonstrated in the example immediately above, you just manipulated poll results yourself (though perhaps inadvertently through haste to try and make a point). This isn’t helping your credibility very much. Neither has it provided anything beneficial to what our Holy Catholic Church proposes for our acceptance.

My brother is gay, AND a wonderful person and I take issue with those who assume that EVERY homosexual spews some sort of “homosexual agenda.” …

I’m not quite sure whom you presume to address with that statement - If it’s me , you would be shooting yourself in the other foot. Personally, it would make no difference to me whether your entire family, 3 cousins, one uncle (and maybe one of his cats) were gay . I know a close friend/medical professional (male) who experiences a SSA, yet he’s one of the finest philanthropists I know.

I know a male nurse (long term & palliative care) who is gay. The patients never stopped saying great things about the way he cared for them and since his retirement, he is sorely missed . I know another male (long term & palliative care) attendant who has enough compassion to fill an entire ward and in his spare time he worked tirelessly as a volunteer for a foundation which assists AIDS patients (oh did I mention he was gay ?). My own mother used to care for an AIDS patient . After his death, she stayed close to his partner to help him through the adjustment period.

You have GLBT people just trying to get along in life, and you have the gay militants and tyrants. My issue is predominantly with the militants , their attack on marriage, children, and the family and the havoc they’re wreaking with the help of some political and legal underhandedness . BTW are you aware that some openly gay people resent the entire Gay Marriage Equality issue ?

I apologize but I really won’t have time to continue penny ante bickering and “I know someone who is gay” one upmanship . There is something a lot more sinister being installed by the homosexual activists which needs some attention. So I can’t promise to reply to any posts here in the future. I don’t admit to being a very avid fan of moral relativism. There is an absolute Truth and his name is Jesus Christ.

I do promise to pray for you and your brother . However , I note that up to this point, you haven’t offered half as much for the Catholic perspective as you have for the gay perspective.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, in respose to this part here :

Feel free to flip out now

, Seriously, that last post was all over the place, almost a little erratic . Don’t tell me you took your own advice…:doh2:

 

[cmforte]

haha what are you agreeing about then? To hand them a piece of paper and a tax break? I’m sorry but you and I both know they are not out there fighting for that. They want to make speaking out against homosexuality hate speech. That is the end goal. Right now they have no ground to stand on to try and achieve that goal. If you allow for the redefining of what marriage is, you will give them the ground they need to stand on to make that happen. Preventing discrimination against homosexual people and redefining what marriage is are not one in the same. What the homosexual movement hates is that a vast majority of Americans view what they do to be wrong. Even though its now about 50/50 on legalizing gay marriage of some sort, a majority of Americans personally believe that homosexual acts are wrong. How good can a person committing these acts feel knowing 75% of their own people believe they are morally wrong?

I don’t agree. You can always put wording in any gay marriage law to protect anti-gay marriage proponents’ freedom of speech. As we all know, it is the letter of the law, the exact wording that counts. So you can always include words protecting the right to speak out against homosexuality and gay marriage. (though the First Amendment *should *be suffecient enough for this.)

-Chris

 

[NeedImprovement]

Accepting the application of a same-sex marriage was part of Mrs. Belforti’s job. When you go to a job, to work, especially for the government which affects many people who are different than you and share different views, you need to and should leave your personal and religious beliefs at the door. If you don’t like that, dion’t work that job.

-Chris

This commentary is not very clear at all .You appear to be mixing up two things here. Which are you saying ? … That Mrs. Belforti should, *participate in the same sex marriage application process * , or not ?

 

[CMB3884]

Well to give you a blunt analogy, you shot yourself in the foot on that one . All I did was point out to everyone where the hole was:

Really ? As demonstrated in the example immediately above, you just manipulated poll results yourself (though perhaps inadvertently through haste to try and make a point). This isn’t helping your credibility very much. Neither has it provided anything beneficial to what our Holy Catholic Church proposes for our acceptance.

I’m not quite sure whom you presume to address with that statement - If it’s me , you would be shooting yourself in the other foot. Personally, it would make no difference to me whether your entire family, 3 cousins, one uncle (and maybe one of his cats) were gay . I know a close friend/medical professional (male) who experiences a SSA, yet he’s one of the finest philanthropists I know.

I know a male nurse (long term & palliative care) who is gay. The patients never stopped saying great things about the way he cared for them and since his retirement, he is sorely missed . I know another male (long term & palliative care) attendant who has enough compassion to fill an entire ward and in his spare time he worked tirelessly as a volunteer for a foundation which assists AIDS patients (oh did I mention he was gay ?). My own mother used to care for an AIDS patient . After his death, she stayed close to his partner to help him through the adjustment period.

You have GLBT people just trying to get along in life, and you have the gay militants and tyrants. My issue is predominantly with the militants , their attack on marriage, children, and the family and the havoc they’re wreaking with the help of some political and legal underhandedness . BTW are you aware that some openly gay people resent the entire Gay Marriage Equality issue ?

I apologize but I really won’t have time to continue penny ante bickering and “I know someone who is gay” one upmanship . There is something a lot more sinister being installed by the homosexual activists which needs some attention. So I can’t promise to reply to any posts here in the future. I don’t admit to being a very avid fan of moral relativism. There is an absolute Truth and his name is Jesus Christ.

I do promise to pray for you and your brother . However , I note that up to this point, you haven’t offered half as much for the Catholic perspective as you have for the gay perspective.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, in respose to this part here :
, Seriously, that last post was all over the place, almost a little erratic . Don’t tell me you took your own advice…:doh2:

My apologies if you thought I was attempting to manipulate poll results…I thought I was simply presenting links to the most recent poll results I’ve read; adding the comment “majority support for same sex marriage” was my attempt at summarizing the results. I was not attempting to inject my own opinion.

The reason I brought up my brother was not to show “I know someone who is gay,” that would be a very silly tactic as everyone knows someone who is gay. I brought him up to state exactly what I stated: that not every homosexual spews a homosexual agenda. And to be honest, I haven’t offered as much information on the Catholic perspective of gay marriage because I think we all know what the Church teaches us regarding this matter…I didn’t think I needed state it for the 500th time.

Also, in my opinion your response lacked charity… there is no need to respond to someone, even if you don’t agree with them, in such a manner. You could have made the exact same points using a different tone. And I say this sincerely because I know I don’t mean to come off in an abarasive or unkind way, but sometimes it can happen - please consider that people may feel attacked by the way you respond to what they say. I sincerely appreciate the prayers for my brother (you can never have too many prayers said for you) and I’ll pray for you as well.

 

[Nate13]

I was presenting poll results only because Nate13 stated: What the homosexual movement hates is that a vast majority of Americans view what they do to be wrong. Even though its now about 50/50 on legalizing gay marriage of some sort, a majority of Americans personally believe that homosexual acts are wrong. How good can a person committing these acts feel knowing 75% of their own people believe they are morally wrong? All I was attempting to show was that I have not seen the same information he has…I simply wanted more information.

Also, I question your assertion that “Polls can be manipulated . With all the heightened accusations using buzzwords such as “homophobe” , “hate”, “discrimination” ," bigot", “equality”, “diversity” , and seeing how people who don’t agree with same sex marriage in a practical way, are being, fined, sued and losing their livelihood, you really have to wonder if a person might be somewhat intimidated by a stranger phoning them and asking if they approve of same sex marriage.” These are anonymous polls…why would anyone be intimidated into lying? And if you will use that logic, then we can logically assume that people who agree with same sex marriage might feel equally as “intimidated by a person phoning them and asking if they disapprove of same sex marriage.”

I know, I know, this is not popular thinking but I simply believe that if we Catholics are angered by people who do not consider our views isn’t it possible that people with different view points feel the same?? My brother is gay, AND a wonderful person and I take issue with those who assume that EVERY homosexual spews some sort of “homosexual agenda.” It’s simply not the case - I think most of the time, people simply want facts.

Feel free to flip out now

you missed the point. While 50% of Americans may be of the opinion to let homosexuals marry if its no skin off their back, I guarantee close to 75% would consider gay relations to be an offense against God personally. This would be similar to the abortion poll numbers where many more people are for women having a “choice” but 75% of people would say they would never have an abortion themselves and believe it to be wrong personally.

 

[CMB3884]

you missed the point. While 50% of Americans may be of the opinion to let homosexuals marry if its no skin off their back, I guarantee close to 75% would consider gay relations to be an offense against God personally. This would be similar to the abortion poll numbers where many more people are for women having a “choice” but 75% of people would say they would never have an abortion themselves and believe it to be wrong personally.

Ahhh, okay, I did miss your point. I understand what you’re saying now. Thanks for the clarification

 

[Nate13]

I don’t agree. You can always put wording in any gay marriage law to protect anti-gay marriage proponents’ freedom of speech. As we all know, it is the letter of the law, the exact wording that counts. So you can always include words protecting the right to speak out against homosexuality and gay marriage. (though the First Amendment *should *be suffecient enough for this.)

-Chris

If you equate gay rights to African American rights your freedom to speak out against homosexuality will be forfeit. Once something is deemed “hate speech” it is no longer protected under the first Amendment. Gay rights groups seek to interlink their actions with who they are, thus you can’t criticize their actions without criticizing who they are which would be hate speech. They seek to equate it with criticizing an African American for having black skin. Allowing for gay marriage will interlink a homosexual oriented person’s actions with who they are and thus lay way for any criticism of their actions being labeled hate speech.

“Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication that disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or other characteristic.”

 

[cmforte]

If you equate gay rights to African American rights your freedom to speak out against homosexuality will be forfeit. Once something is deemed “hate speech” it is no longer protected under the first Amendment. Gay rights groups seek to interlink their actions with who they are, thus you can’t criticize their actions without criticizing who they are which would be hate speech. They seek to equate it with criticizing an African American for having black skin. Allowing for gay marriage will interlink a homosexual oriented person’s actions with who they are and thus lay way for any criticism of their actions being labeled hate speech.

“Hate speech is, outside the law, any communication that disparages a person or a group on the basis of some characteristic such as race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or other characteristic.”

Where is “Hate speech” illegal? As long as you are not inciting violence, I thought the First Amendment protected*** all ***speech, even that we don’t like, agree with, or even disgusts us. Why in recent years the KKK (who I don’t like or agree with, of course) was even allowed to get permits to hold public rallies where they spew all their routine vile hate rhetoric. Where in the USA is something that is called “Hate speech” no longer protected by the First Amendment? Doesn’t that blatantly contradict it? I’m not racist, but if some jerk wanted to call an African-American the N word that should be his/her right under the First Amendment, just as I have been called a honkey, cracker, and so on…when I am the target of so-called “hate speech” I don’t try to violate my offender’s freedom under the Constitution. (I usually just ignore them.) It seems to me that that is the real issue, then, we should be fighting for: our rights under the Constitution, not whether or not gay marriage should be legal…why, there are even pro-illegal immigrant activist groups trying to get anything that speaks out against illegal immigration (like some posts and posters in this forum) deemed “hate speech” in order to silence them. So that should be our main concern. Not just the First Amendment as it protects our freedom to speak out against homosexuality, but the First Amendment as it protects our freedom to speak out in general.

-Chris

 

[Nate13]

Where is “Hate speech” illegal? As long as you are not inciting violence, I thought the First Amendment protected*** all ***speech, even that we don’t like, agree with, or even disgusts us. Why in recent years the KKK (who I don’t like or agree with, of course) was even allowed to get permits to hold public rallies where they spew all their routine vile hate rhetoric. Where in the USA is something that is called “Hate speech” no longer protected by the First Amendment? Doesn’t that blatantly contradict it? I’m not racist, but if some jerk wanted to call an African-American the N word that should be his/her right under the First Amendment, just as I have been called a honkey, cracker, and so on…when I am the target of so-called “hate speech” I don’t try to violate my offender’s freedom under the Constitution. (I usually just ignore them.) It seems to me that that is the real issue, then, we should be fighting for: our rights under the Constitution, not whether or not gay marriage should be legal…why, there are even pro-illegal immigrant activist groups trying to get anything that speaks out against illegal immigration (like some posts and posters in this forum) deemed “hate speech” in order to silence them. So that should be our main concern. Not just the First Amendment as it protects our freedom to speak out against homosexuality, but the First Amendment as it protects our freedom to speak out in general.

-Chris

Ah your right to a point. I did some research and you are right as far as the U.S goes. Unless the hate speech is targeted to incite violence or to defame someones character it is protected. Unfortunately those protections do not apply to those in the U.K and other European countries.

 

[cmforte]

Ah your right to a point. I did some research and you are right as far as the U.S goes. Unless the hate speech is targeted to incite violence or to defame someones character it is protected. Unfortunately those protections do not apply to those in the U.K and other European countries.

This is just one good example of why some Americans don’t want to imulate the Europeans, why there is such a cultural divide between us, and why we are suspicious of the UN and of international laws and organizations, because they could impose such laws on to us, laws we know blatantly contradicts the whole concept of freedom and human rights, even if Europe and the UN doesn’t. Not to mention violating our own Constitution, that to most red-blooded Americans, takes precedent over any and all international treaties and laws.

-Chris

 

[Nate13]

This is just one good example of why some Americans don’t want to imulate the Europeans, why there is such a cultural divide between us, and why we are suspicious of the UN and of international laws and organizations, because they could impose such laws on to us, laws we know blatantly contradicts the whole concept of freedom and human rights, even if Europe and the UN doesn’t. Not to mention violating our own Constitution, that to most red-blooded Americans, takes precedent over any and all international treaties and laws.

-Chris

Actually if you look right up north of us in Canada, the law can be brought to bear on anyone who uses hate speech to incite hatred… kind of an oxymoron there haha. Supposedly there is a religious doctrine exception though…

 

[cmforte]

Actually if you look right up north of us in Canada, the law can be brought to bear on anyone who uses hate speech to incite hatred… kind of an oxymoron there haha. Supposedly there is a religious doctrine exception though…

Yep, know all about Canada, unfortunately. The same thing I wrote also pertains to them. And I’ve heard many former Canadian radio talk show hosts, mainly conservatives of course, say that one reason they decided to work in the US is because of those laws restricting freedom of speech and expression in Canada.

-Chris

 

[NeedImprovement]

Accepting the application of a same-sex marriage was part of Mrs. Belforti’s job. When you go to a job, to work, especially for the government which affects many people who are different than you and share different views, you need to and should leave your personal and religious beliefs at the door. If you don’t like that, dion’t work that job.

-Chris

This commentary is not very clear at all .You appear to be mixing up two things here. Which are you saying ? … That Mrs. Belforti should, *participate in the same sex marriage application process * , or not ?

… Going once … :hey_bud:

 

[NeedImprovement]

CMB3884:

Also, in my opinion your response lacked charity

If I recall correctly .I’ve only gotten that particular criticism twice before here at CAF . Both times, whichever critic(s) it was using those user names, they went on to get themselves banned without any help from me… instigators/trolls … coincidentally one was pertaining to this same subject too. As one of our moderators explained when he was recently obliged to close a thread regarding same sex marriage *:" this thread has become a magnet for trolls" *,which is too often the case .

A lot of people who aren’t wise to all the guile of the homosexual militants, don’t understand what they’re trying to accomplish here. But it can be safely said that along with all the other brash trampling of rights and fundamental freedoms underway , we receive far too frequently abusive proof that they detest religious freedom because they come all the way here – to our home at CAF, to attack us. They try to sow and cultivate feelings of resentment. Now could you please be careful this time to understand that I’m speaking of the militants here - not the GLBT people who are simply trying to get along in life; nor am I referring to the GLBT people who think all the same sex marriage commotion is a really dumb idea … Yes there are some GLBT’s who think that.

Unfortunately it is the militants who wield the power – some of whom even think they have this God-given right to decide for all the other GLBT people.

CMB3884:

… there is no need to respond to someone, even if you don’t agree with them, in such a manner. You could have made the exact same points using a different tone. And I say this sincerely because I know I don’t mean to come off in an abarasive or unkind way, but sometimes it can happen - please consider that people may feel attacked by the way you respond to what they say.

Attacks come in all shapes and sizes. Of these, there exist specific attacks which I consider to be the lowest in their nature and which have no or hardly any exterior abrasive appearance whatsoever - particularly to those they are attacking . I find the subtle prevaricatory attacks of the militants promoting the homosexual agenda to be some of the most insidious and deceptive material I’ve ever studied .** Sophistry is still lying ; it’s simply a more advanced level of lying. **

Just so you know that I do live up to my user name on occasion, there have been several instances where a moderator found it necessary to edit my post. And to our moderators I’m truly grateful -:tiphat:. In hindsight, I wouldn’t have wanted to post the pre-adjusted versions of those pieces. But on this one I’m okay so far.

I additionally believe it is rude to open by parading four links from sites citing polls which erroneously claim the majority of Americans favour same sex (it will never be marriage) ‘marriage’ . You said you didn’t feel it was necessary to repeat what the Church teaches “for the 500th time” … , but you did in effect, in one post, alongside the links you posted , repeat ”majority support of same-sex marriage” three times . One wonders whether one may have just as easily asked the OP if there were any links to substantiate his post without posting those aforementioned links and commentaries.

Excuse me a minute …

 

[NeedImprovement]

Accepting the application of a same-sex marriage was part of Mrs. Belforti’s job. When you go to a job, to work, especially for the government which affects many people who are different than you and share different views, you need to and should leave your personal and religious beliefs at the door. If you don’t like that, dion’t work that job.

-Chris

This commentary is not very clear at all .You appear to be mixing up two things here. Which are you saying ? … That Mrs. Belforti should, *participate in the same sex marriage application process * , or not ?

Going twice … :hey_bud:

 

[NeedImprovement]

… Okay, I’m back.

This is Catholic Answers Forums – not some *run of the mill *, no aim,say whatever you want, forum . Our faith is precious to us and we don’t get tired of hearing about it either ; as Bishop Joseph Henry Ganda once told a group of us during a homily: “Our faith is very precious to us. Remember we must never, never let anyone take our faith away.”

The participatory request of our faith is that we try and grant our personal assent to what the Holy Catholic Church proposes to be worthy of our belief .

When anyone attacks that belief, or interferes with it … really, :shrug:what should they expect ?.

Trying to discourage our members here with distortions of the truth , is equally an attack on our faith. It causes confusion. Any authors of deliberate confusion, in my opinion, don’t have a whole lot to be proud of seeing that the devil is a master of confusion. Distortions of the truth can further affect morale. Ask any commanding officer of an armed forces division and he/she will tell you how important morale is to the troops entrusted to his/her charge.

Our over 296,000 members possess many different expressions of this same unified faith – each one, in its own way, unique in the eyes of God.

• We have adults who have drawn very close to God with a beautiful childlike faith – a tender faith where even the suggestion of a homosexual act to them induces a picture of it in their minds and that image can cause them grief to the point of tears.
• We have people whose apostolate it is to pray all the day – for everyone – from all walks of life.
• We have members as young as 13 years old – still impressionable, but with a flame of faith that is so vibrant, it inspires the rest of us.
• We have some members who wouldn’t think twice to lay down their life for a fellow human being.
• And we have MOTHERS – Catholic and Christian mothers and expectant Catholic and Christian mothers

.

It is particularly on account of these dear mothers that I ask :

What do you think it does to them when they have to be subjected to the attacks of the homosexual militants on these threads ? Or what do you think it does to an expectant Catholic mother even when links are posted trying to claim that a majority of the population where her baby will grow up are in favour of same sex marriage ? What do you think it does to her inside … to the hopes she has for the little one growing in her womb ? Some of these mothers are already learning about the forced indoctrination of (their) children with the homosexual agenda within the school systems.

Does the word “insensitive” ring a bell ?

There is a further possibility that one of the reasons I was upset at your post was that I mentioned one of my own brothers among the real-life examples given back in post # 122 and before you mentioned your brother, I never saw the need to mention mine. Incidentally, “feel free to flip out” appeared to be a taunt to me (probably not intentional).

Anyone who comes to CAF and attacks our faith , particularly those who may fancy themselves as having some type of craft for deftly wording said attacks, should also be ready to accept the fact that they just may end up having the credibility of what they’re saying dismantled – into dust if necessary ; particularly if it would encourage the young ones and help them to see through the illusion; or help the confused ones think clearly again , and , once the depravity is unmasked for all to see , it can further serve us as a personal reminder of our Blessed Lord’s exhortation to , “Pray for those who persecute you.”

There is more in those links you provided which is contradictory to claims made . I intend to point out those contradictions in the hope it might help some of our other members understand that reading everything, that doing the homework and knowing all the facts is more than half the battle in unmasking deception (but praying is even better). If , in the process, the fact becomes evident that you didn’t do your own homework , please have the good sense not to try and blame that on me.

 

[NeedImprovement]

The person who posted those 4 links back in post # 118 also said in post # 125 :
ibid:

“…everyone knows someone who is gay”.

I believe that’s an exaggeration which paints a larger than life picture . One of those links provided leads to a poll which asserts that only 58% of Americans know someone who is gay or lesbian, adding that that figure hasn’t changed since 2003 when the question was first asked . So the poster has provided the link themselves to information which again contradicts what they are saying.

In post # 121 the poster, claimed
ibid:

“these are anonymous polls” .

My free time was limited. So I’ve only investigated one of the four links in depth on that point to date. But guess what I found ? **The company who conducted that poll actually recruits people to answer their polls . **And in the online application form, the person fills in the following information : “First Name, Last Name, Address 1, Address 2, City , State, County, Zip Code, Country, Home Phone, Work Phone, Fax, email .” - (practically everything but their father’s marks from grade 3). Once again , the poster has provided the link themselves which directly contradicts what they are saying.

At one of the linked sites, the company conducting the poll was honest enough to admit,
...not telling...do your homework:

“In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.”

There was an attempt to raise a point of contention as to the accuracy of these polls which the poster claims/”summarizes” ,“majority support of same sex marriage” (it will never be marriage). Interestingly enough , if you follow one of the 4 links , you’ll find a response by National Organization for Marriage President, Brian Brown. :
one of the four linked articles in post # 118:

Opponents of same-sex marriage took issue with the poll, which asks respondents: “Do you think it should be legal or illegal for gay and lesbian couples to get married?” Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, argued that the term “illegal” could be inferred to mean that violators could be imprisoned, which most Americans would consider harsh.

Brown, whose group is a prominent anti-gay-marriage group, noted that all 31 states that have put same-sex marriage on the ballot voted to ban it.

“The only poll that counts is a free and fair vote on the part of the people,” he said. “We’ve seen these biased polls time and time again — right before votes in which same-sex marriage is rejected. It’s absurd. The people of this country have not changed their opinion about marriage.”

… rather peculiar that someone might want to leave that part out when posting in a Catholic Forum. I should think it would be of genuine interest to people .Surely that commentary by Mr. Brown hasn’t already been repeated 499 times here to date – has it ? It even resembles the sentiment of this comment :

NeedImprovement:

Let’s dispense with the polls for the moment. They’re unreliable.

Mr. Brown is right . The only poll that counts is a free and fair vote on the part of the people.

Excuse me a minute …

 

[NeedImprovement]

Accepting the application of a same-sex marriage was part of Mrs. Belforti’s job. When you go to a job, to work, especially for the government which affects many people who are different than you and share different views, you need to and should leave your personal and religious beliefs at the door. If you don’t like that, dion’t work that job.

-Chris

This commentary is not very clear at all .You appear to be mixing up two things here. Which are you saying ? … That Mrs. Belforti should, *participate in the same sex marriage application process * , or not ?

SOLD !!

[i31.photobucket.com/albums/c382/skippy_me/th_Auction_hammer.jpg](http://media.photobucket.com/image/auction hammer/skippy_me/Auction_hammer.jpg)

The poster of this comment, which was in response to one of my posts, has had ample time to respond and continues to post here and elsewhere at CAF. I’m left to assume that the yet-to-be qualified comment will serve no further purpose, so I’m moving it to another thread for the purposes of comparative analysis. I won’t be moving the username along with the comment. It’s only the wording I wish to focus on.