Republican senator announces support for gay marriage

[Cor_Cordis]

Wrong. I’ve been to many rape trials. Read a book by Randy Thornhill & Craig T. Palmer surrounding rape. Professor Thornhill is an evolutionary biologist while C.T. Palmer is an anthropologist. The fact is that rape is a crime motivated by sex. Any1 who says that rapists don’t do it for sexual motives is dishonest, delusional or both. Here are some facts surrounding rape.

1. Rapes are found in the animal world. They’re found amongst insects such as crickets, waterstriders, scorpion flies, etc. They’re found amongst birds such as mallard ducks & red jungle fowl. They’re also found amongst primates such as Orangutans. Males rape females for reproductive reasons in the animal world. A male who has problem getting females (such as males who lose mate fights) rape females so as to reproduce.
2. Rapists mainly target young women.While rapists can attack women of all ages, most rapists go after women who are girls to 35 years old. 75% of women who are raped are under 30 years old, 10 to 12% of women raped are 30 to 35 years old, 7 to 9% 36 to 39 year old, with 5 to 8% of women rape victims being 40 or older with most in this group in their 40s, the last years of prettiest. Menopausal women, those 50 & older make up 1 to 2% of rape victims. After 40, the woman’s chances of getting raped starts going down significantly. If a man robs a 45 year old woman, he’ll take her money. But if the same man robs a 25 year old woman, then he is more likely to commit rape in addition to robbery. This is true in wars. Soldiers who win a war steal, loot & rape young women. Men rape young women because the woman has something which the man wants & that is sex-which he takes by force or by threatening force.
3. Most rapists don’t do added violence. This is esp. true of acquaintance rapes-date & marital. If a man rapes a woman, he’ll use the force or threat of this to get sex. It’s like a bank robber. Most bank robbers will only use the needed force or threat to get the $ & then leave. Another reason most rapists don’t use added violence is because of biology related to reproductive success. In the animal world, if a male kills a female in addition to sex, then his reproductive success has failed. Yes, some rapists do kill their victims just as some robbers kill their victims, but these are in the minority & the most likely reason is to kill any witnesses.
4. Poor men are more likely to commit rape. Yes, rich men sometimes commit rape if they lack sex restraint. However the reason poor men are more likely to commit rape (with most of their victims poor women) is because poor men are more likely to have problems getting women. Women are drawn to men based on the man’s phoenotype (good genes) & resources that a man has. Poor men are more likely to have problems getting women who are interested in them & they may not even be willing to pay a prostitute. So they resort to rape for their sexual motives. In the animal world, males have to impress females such as win mate fights, provide nuptial gifts such as food to impress the females. If the females aren’t impressed, then some males rape so as to reproduce.

Rapists motives are sexual & to say that rape is about power but not sex is rubbish. 84% of rapists say that sex is a main motive. Power which is force or threat of force is a means to get sex. Rapists mainly go after fertile women because this is who they want to have sex with & are attracted to.

Welcome to the Slippery Slope, folks.

Remember it?

The one all of you tolerant liberal progressive same-sex advocates claimed never existed?

Yeah. That one.

Thank you.

 

[Seeker1961]

In a consumer based economy, such as our own, the largest number of consumers having real spending power keeps the economy growing. Raising the minimum wage gives working class people more spending power, and there are more of them than there are rich people. Giving immigrants legal status also raises their spending power, and puts them on the tax rolls-giving both businesses and the government more money. A progressive tax code places a higher burden on those who have benefited the most from what the country has to offer, while keeping money in the pockets of that larger portion of the population who will spend it on goods and services.

There-no religion included. You may not like it, or agree that it will do what it says it will do-but it’s not based on the Bible in any way.

 

[Julianna]

Welcome to the Slippery Slope, folks.

Remember it?

The one all of you tolerant liberal progressive same-sex advocates claimed never existed?

Yeah. That one.

Thank you.

Another assumption about people who disagree with you. Crystal ball, tea leaves? How do you know this?

 

[Cor_Cordis]

Another assumption about people who disagree with you. Crystal ball, tea leaves? How do you know this?

Did you not just read the last twenty posts?

Did you not just read the context of the post you just responded to?

Why is it when all you same-sex advocates are presented with sound fact-based reasoning you instantly morph into the intellectual means and acumen of a 7 year old child?

Why?

 

[Julianna]

Did you not just read the last twenty posts?

Did you not just read the context of the post you just responded to?

Why is it when all you same-sex advocates are presented with sound fact-based reasoning you instantly morph into the intellectual means and acumen of a 7 year old child?

Why?

agree to disagree…Cord…let it go. I do not agree with your heavy handed, scare tactic approach to the Senators handling regarding his is son. It is not your son. Each parent deals with their family in the way they see fit. It doesnt appear that his son is seeking to get married. However, “marriage” as Bill O’Reilly pointed out refers to a construct with regarding to religious doctrine. The Church says, no. I accept that. Homosexuals will not be “married” in the Church. I get it. However, if they wish to go the county courthouse and have a civil, legal ceremony, they should have the right to do so. They have the right to work, to play, to live, pay taxes, laugh, cry, experience joy, just like the rest of us.

There are 4 sets of gay men in my neighborhood. My daughter sold Girl Scout cookies to them when she was a child. I was not in fear that any of them would harm her, or my son. I have attended many HOA meetings, city meetings, crime watch meetings, town celebrations and such, and they were there. I have lived here 17 yrs. They are still together with their partner. My other neighbors, hetero, not so. Divorced, adultery, kids with drug problems, alcohol and the families will never be the same. One neighbor came back from deployment to find his wife had packed the kids and moved across state to live with another man.

The people of Sen Portman’s state have the option of not re-electing him, based on his recent views. That is the voters right. Not to many people are happy with Congress and our government right now, and that includes me. And it has nothing to do with moral issues.

 

[skierofsnow]

Rape IS about SEX. See politicalforum.com/law-justice/237047-rape-sex-motivated-crime.html

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Never said look the other way when it comes to abortion. Did any of you people tearing me up read my “tag line”? Really? You want to stop Planned Parenthood, close down abortion mills…build a Maternity Home safe house for women with unexpected, unplanned pregnancies RIGHT NEXT DOOR. I have stated this on CAF many times. I am very familiar with adoption. As it was the “life” option for my daughter when she became pregnant several years ago. Yes, her friends and the sperm donor told her to get an abortion. But she “knew” better. My husband and I said to her, "This child DESERVES “LIFE”, now give this child “quality” of life, by placing this child into the arms of a family of YOUR choice.

Let’s end this ever so quizzical inquisition regarding my views on abortion. My daughter chose OPEN adoption, she picked the parents. And some of you will be happy to know that she chose the ONLY Catholic parents in the list of bios given to her by the adoption agency. Imagine that. The Holy Spirit works wonders.

Positive change, my friends comes from “within”, not outside in. This child is now a happy, healthy 7 yr old. with loving parents and a huge extended family of cousins, aunts, uncles…etc. My daughter visits this child once a year. I have seen him twice. I placed that little guy in the arms of his mother in the hospital.

God Bless you, your husband, your daughter, the child, and the family.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Because the issue came home. It’s about his son now, not a bunch of people wearing rainbow boas and spandex at the gay pride parade.

Not the first time I’ve seen this kind of switch when people actually get to know gay people away from the stereotypes.

An interesting observation, but it would still be selfish on Sen. Portman’s part if he expects me to pay for his son’s sex life just because he came out of the closet and it created some kind of emotional stir. That’s what so-called “gay marriage” often comes down to.

 

[Seeker1961]

An interesting observation, but it would still be selfish on Sen. Portman’s part if he expects me to pay for his son’s sex life just because he came out of the closet and it created some kind of emotional stir. That’s what so-called “gay marriage” often comes down to.

Well, if the Senator asks you to chip in for his son’s wedding then I guess you’ll have a problem.

 

[SuperLuigi]

So just to be clear, it’s okay to enforce Catholic social doctrine when it comes to administering to the poor, immigration, taxation, fair wages, etc… as a part of public, legal policy, but we are supposed to look the other way when it comes to abortion, same sex marriage, the HHS mandate because “hey, religion is a personal choice, and we can’t force that on others”?

Is that really being “in the world, but not of the world”?

If we take the “I believe…but I won’t impose it” position, our religiosity is not morally meaningful. If an act is moral or immoral only for us, then it is not moral or immoral. Either something is immoral for everyone (in the same circumstance) or it is not immoral.

Only when Catholicism agrees with issues like taxation, social doctrine, immigration, etc, can it be imposed, and not considered “theocracy”. When his Catholicism does not agree with their position, it is reduced to being a matter of personal faith, no more binding on non-Catholics than receiving the Eucharist.

:clapping:

But you see, they just want to “help” their friends and family members “feel good”…and be acceptable to the cool and elite social circles from high school to DC cocktail parties.

Since it’s Palm Sunday, just think of what Jesus did.

Nevermind the lawsuits against Christian businesses in New Mexico, the UK or Vermont, it’s all par for the course for good feelings not in oneself, but in others they “care” about.


Those who support so-called “gay marriage” don’t have a leg to stand on and I haven’t seen one argument from them yet that cannot be countered.

Really…who do they think they’re kidding???

 

[SuperLuigi]

Well, if the Senator asks you to chip in for his son’s wedding then I guess you’ll have a problem.

I’ll have a problem if so-called “gay marriage” is made legal in the state I live in or at the federal level.

Do you really think that social and fiscal liberalism can be separated, as Jason Lewis would ask?

 

[Sporkbeard]

They’re kidding themselves… or satan is. Either way… its not good IMO.

Really…who do they think they’re kidding???

 

[Seeker1961]

I’ll have a problem if so-called “gay marriage” is made legal in the state I live in or at the federal level.

Do you really think that social and fiscal liberalism can be separated, as Jason Lewis would say?

I would agree that you will.

 

[Julianna]

Well, if the Senator asks you to chip in for his son’s wedding then I guess you’ll have a problem.

 

[SuperLuigi]

I would agree that you will.

Hmmm…I think there was a breakdown in communication on my part. To be clear, Jason Lewis notes that fiscal and social liberalism cannot be separate, because once government gets involved, it will just spend more money on the issue.

 

[SuperLuigi]

Yes because the psychiatric experts will challenge you to define the context of “consent”.

Most of the loving things adults subject children to are not with the child’s consent - no?

They have learn “love” - no?

After all, they’re old enough to learn about sexual identity based on their desires with the same-sex/transgender agenda now being instilled by public schools -no? Is that with their consent?

Why not learn it from a loving adult in an intimate setting? What could be more “natural” and “healthy” than that?

See where this insanity is going?

I’ve always wondered what would happen if they can prove animals can consent, even just a little.

Polygamy is already tolerated in the UK and AU if the ceremony/ceremonies was/were performed abroad.

Were’s all the “two consenting adults” crowd from the Clinton era and the gay rights movement??? Anyone?

Bueller…Bueller…

 

[Monkey1976]

I see where YOU think it’s going…but clearly you have a reason to take it there. The rest of the world puts that argument just slightly above the one about consenting animals and walks away.

Sorry, what were you saying? I was just reading this article about UK homosexual activists pushing to lower the age of consent.

Oh, and this one, where a gay-rights group in Kentucky called acting on the religious belief that homosexual acts are disordered, “a clear and present danger”.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Sorry, what were you saying? I was just reading this article about UK homosexual activists pushing to lower the age of consent.

Oh, and this one, where a gay-rights group in Kentucky called acting on the religious belief that homosexual acts are disordered, “a clear and present danger”.

I would reconsider linking to websites like that. It seems to promote the issue.

 

[epan]

An interesting observation, but it would still be selfish on Sen. Portman’s part if he expects me to pay for his son’s sex life just because he came out of the closet and it created some kind of emotional stir. That’s what so-called “gay marriage” often comes down to.

uhm… so you know senator portman and his son? how did they ask you to pay for sex? i don’t get it.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Sorry, what were you saying? I was just reading this article about UK homosexual activists pushing to lower the age of consent.
…

Not to mention the movement right in our midst working towards lowering the age of consent and legalized homosexual pedophilia, right behind legalized gay “marriage”:

NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) is one of those perverse groups who are watching same-sex marriage legislation with great interest. Established in 1978, this organization has already been legitimized by the ACLU in protecting their constitutional rights. Meanwhile, they continue to seek acceptance in allowing adult men to engage in “lawful consensual sex” with boys reportedly as young as 8 years old. Basically, they seek legalized pedophilia. What is legislated as a right for one group will only spread to become a right for all groups. David Thorstad, the founder of NAMBLA, has stated publicly,

“Freedom is indivisible. The liberation of children, women, boy-lovers, and homosexuals in general, can occur only as complementary facets of the same dream.”

Impossible, you say? People would never allow that to happen?

That’s what people thought before the 1970′s when the first efforts to legitimize same-sex unions began. Today, the United States has nine state governments (Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, New York, Maine, Maryland, Washington and the District of Columbia) that have legalized same-sex “marriage” and offer same-sex “marriages”. Their efforts were accomplished through legislation, court ruling, and in three of these states, it has been upheld by popular vote in a statewide referendum. In 1940, who would have anticipated those results?

If you think NAMBLA is some inconsequential fringe group, think again. The notoriety of NAMBLA has already mainstreamed into entertainment. A storyline in the award-winning television show, “South Park,” had Cartman, the baby character, being introduced to NAMBLA by his doctor. (Season 4, Episode 5) This “intended for mature audiences” animated show, produced by Braniff Productions and aired on Comedy Central, obviously caters to a morally deficient audience.

Yet another layer of the onion is peeled away.

“The maleficence of same sex marriage is incomprehensible. At the center of this vortex are the watchful eyes of groups who ardently believe that their unions are just as legitimate and justifiable.”

~P.D. Yoko - Onion

To add to the above, many if not all homosexuals are truly offended, with reason, when the subject of pedophilia is raised along with discussion on homosexuality. One objection as Seeker repeats is that the two are different and distant from each other; pedophilia as acted on is rape because a minor can not give consent, whereas homosexuality as acted on is between consenting adults. We know that legal age of consent is not uniform, it varies from state to state, and it has been known to change through time. With pressure groups such as that in the UK and NAMBLA in the US, really, the legal age of consent is continually being challenged. Why, NAMBLA’s stated mission is to remove the age of consent laws…

It can not be denied that there is in fact an overlap between homosexuality and pedophilia, evidenced by the existence of NAMBLA. Its members assert that children are capable of consent, and that not all are victims. Children can be groomed, and the wily predators make sure they know the birthdate of the object of sexual desire. They insist of course it is LOVE. Sick is what it is.

Another objection or comeback is that there are more heterosexual pedophiles than homosexual pedophiles, which is true statistically, 2:1, according to this NCBI exploratory study. Interestingly, the same study also suggests that the proportion of pedophiles among persons with a homosexual erotic development is greater than that in persons who develop heterosexually.

,