Defending a Higher Law: Why We Must Resist Same-sex “Marriage”

  • Thread starter Thread starter buffalo
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
gearhead said:
Yes; what about it? Do you think it’s some sort of manifesto that every gay person swears to uphold? It’s not. And I think the fact that you had to reach back to 1972 to find your straw man is evidence of this.

I think that the strategic goals of PFLAG are much closer to the mainstream position of the gay rights movement today:
Click to expand...
Do you have a source that admits that the 1972 platform has been abandoned?
 
buffalo said:
LOL - who sets those filters?

Anyway - loosen up your parental controls and look through this stuff.

If you see hate let me know and I will withdraw the link.
Click to expand...
Well, I’m actually using a computer at work so whatever system they use is responsible for the filters.

There are also organizations, even some that call themselves Christian, that support heterosexual polygamy, swinging, casual sex, and polyamorous relationships but I would certainly not assume this is how the majority of heterosexuals feel concerning these issues. So, just because an organization or a leader of an organization makes statements about a “gay agenda” does not mean that all or most GLBT persons subscribe to those beliefes. I can at least speak for myself and my many gay friends when I say that we do not support such an agenda, especially where it concerns forcing a particular morality in the classroom or changing the basic definition of a committed, loving relationship.
 
40.png
buffalo:
LOL - who sets those filters?
Click to expand...
After reading that site it makes me sick to think people actually think this way in this day and age. It is a hate site, you just can’t see it becuase you agree with it. This site cherry picks everything that supports its ideas and leaves everything else out. It hardly gives an “honest” article on anything.
 
RyanML said:
Well, I’m actually using a computer at work so whatever system they use is responsible for the filters.

There are also organizations, even some that call themselves Christian, that support heterosexual polygamy, swinging, casual sex, and polyamorous relationships but I would certainly not assume this is how the majority of heterosexuals feel concerning these issues. So, just because an organization or a leader of an organization makes statements about a “gay agenda” does not mean that all or most GLBT persons subscribe to those beliefes. I can at least speak for myself and my many gay friends when I say that we do not support such an agenda, especially where it concerns forcing a particular morality in the classroom or changing the basic definition of a committed, loving relationship.
Click to expand...
If you say so…😦

Please share as to what specific points in the 1972 platform you do not support.
 
buffalo said:
Do you have a source that admits that the 1972 platform has been abandoned?
Click to expand...
Again:
gearhead said:
Do you think it’s some sort of manifesto that every gay person swears to uphold? It’s not.
Click to expand...
There’s no need to “abandon” something if you never picked it up in the first place. What you have is a statement from an individual, 37 years ago. Some people may have agreed with him; many did not.

The position statements of virtually every gay rights organization are right out there for you to Google and read for yourself. To the extent that they don’t agree with your straw man manifesto, I suppose you could say that they have “abandoned” it, as evidenced by them advocating something completely different.
 
gearhead said:
Again:

There’s no need to “abandon” something if you never picked it up in the first place. What you have is a statement from an individual, 37 years ago. Some people may have agreed with him; many did not.

The position statements of virtually every gay rights organization are right out there for you to Google and read for yourself. To the extent that they don’t agree with your straw man manifesto, I suppose you could say that they have “abandoned” it, as evidenced by them advocating something completely different.
Click to expand...
I would be satisfied to see a public renouncement of it by the major gay groups. Do you have one?
 
World Congress Speaker Calls for “Monogamy Men” to Take Back the Culture

(WASHINGTON, DC – C-FAM) Patrick Fagan, family scholar at the Family Research Council, told the World Congress of Families last week in Amsterdam that there are two competing cultures of sexual morality and that both have a profound effect on culture and public policy. Fagan called one culture “monogamous” and the other “polymorphous” and he warned that one is “snatching” children from the other.
Code: 
 Fagan told the audience that “the culture of the traditional family is now in intense competition with a very different culture. The defining difference between the two is the sexual ideal embraced [by each].” He described an “elegance in the simplicity of the ideals behind the two cultures: monogamy and polymorphous serial polygamy, or ‘polyamory' for short. “
more…
 
buffalo said:
I would be satisfied to see a public renouncement of it by the major gay groups. Do you have one?
Click to expand...
I can’t find a response to that particular statement specifically, but I could probably find statements that address specific points within it. It seems that it’s mainly “gay agenda” conspiracy theorists who have latched onto it.

So we’re not wasting my time, which points would you like renouncements for?
 
buffalo said:
(WASHINGTON, DC – C-FAM) Patrick Fagan, family scholar at the Family Research Council, told the World Congress of Families last week in Amsterdam that there are two competing cultures of sexual morality and that both have a profound effect on culture and public policy. Fagan called one culture “monogamous” and the other “polymorphous” and he warned that one is “snatching” children from the other.
Click to expand...
Ah - the FRC. Please don’t get me started on them. Needless to say, they’re not a source of reliable information. “Pack of liars” is probably a more accurate description.
 
gearhead said:
I can’t find a response to that particular statement specifically, but I could probably find statements that address specific points within it. It seems that it’s mainly “gay agenda” conspiracy theorists who have latched onto it.

So we’re not wasting my time, which points would you like renouncements for?
Click to expand...
Anything that protects sexual orientation.

Pretty much every one.
 
buffalo said:
Anything that protects sexual orientation.

Pretty much every one.
Click to expand...
Well, you’ll be out of luck there, since virtually every gay rights organization would support Federal demands 1, 2, 3, 5, and 9, and State demands 2, 4, 5 and 6.

If you want renouncements of the statements on polygamy or repeal of the age of consent, I could probably do that… but I sure won’t find renouncements of the demands that actually make sense.
buffalo said:
Thought so…🤷
Click to expand...
My opinion has foundation; if you want me to tell you why I consider them to be unreliable, I can.
 
gearhead said:
Yes; what about it? Do you think it’s some sort of manifesto that every gay person swears to uphold? It’s not. And I think the fact that you had to reach back to 1972 to find your straw man is evidence of this.

I think that the strategic goals of PFLAG are much closer to the mainstream position of the gay rights movement today:
Click to expand...
The first time I ever saw that 1972 agenda was HERE. I’ve never seen it before, heard of it before, or heard any gay activist speak of it. I’ve worked with PFLAG and the Human Rights Campaign and you won’t see anything like that from either one of those groups.

It’s like taking Fred Phelp’s “agenda” and ascribing it to every Christian on the planet.
 
mkingdomlvr said:
The first time I ever saw that 1972 agenda was HERE. I’ve never seen it before, heard of it before, or heard any gay activist speak of it. I’ve worked with PFLAG and the Human Rights Campaign and you won’t see anything like that from either one of those groups.

It’s like taking Fred Phelp’s “agenda” and ascribing it to every Christian on the planet.
Click to expand...
Here is another one you might have not seen:

The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals

Look them all over but look at 23-29.
 
40.png
buffalo:
Here is another one you might have not seen:

The Communist Takeover Of America - 45 Declared Goals
Click to expand...
Aaaaaaaaand there we have it, being gay and fighting for rights is now akin to communism.

Unfreakingbelievable
 
j1akey said:
Aaaaaaaaand there we have it, being gay and fighting for rights is now akin to communism.

Unfreakingbelievable
Click to expand...
When I was a kid I remember this clearly. This is the Communist plan to take over America without firing a shot or landing on our soil. I grew up with this. Check out some history.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top