The Homosexual Agenda

[InSearchofGrace]

I apologize. I’m new here and not used to the ediquette.
I’m really not that old. Graduated high school before 1980. But in the day the gays used to get beat up. I did it once too. A bunch of us beat up a homosexual right before graduation. I’m not proud of it. But it wasn’t unusual at the time. No one got arrested or anything. Don’t know what happened to the dude. That just was the way life was.

You hurt a human being, a child of God. I hope you will be part of the solution from now on in correcting any ongoing injustice towards homosexuals. What you admitted may have been what life was. No longer. That is why we now have hate crimes to punish that kind of cruel, uncivilized behavior.

Your post brings home the point of the importance of the anti-bullying program in schools, part of the subject that the poster before you and I are discussing.

. . . . . .

 

[InSearchofGrace]

And your references to “fisting” all trace back to the one program in Massachusetts that was shut down after the schools found out what the program (the program was sub-contracted out) had detailed in their presentation. This is old news now, it has been covered, this kind of thing is NOT being done in any school in my state (Maine) and not at my school. You seem to be fixated on an old case and are setting fires around one man in a different role in the White House. He has not been fired because he is doing an adequate job, despite your fears and Jeremiad. Again, I have been a teacher for 28 years now, and I have never encountered this sort of thing you are worried about. The anti-bullying programs and anti-harassment programs are just that: efforts to reduce the culture of harassment about differences, particularly those differences that young persons feel excused in targeting and belittling.

What is wrong with that?

Well, I’m glad that the program in question in Massachusetts was shut down before it spread across other states. Thanks to the diligence of parents there. But I don’t think Mr. Jennings could be credited for it being resolved. It was his organization, GLSEN, which had the program counseling teens on “fisting.” I am not fixated on an old case, as you say. I am bothered that the President would have appointed such an individual with his record and an agenda that appears to be not just about making schools safe for young gay students. Oh, yes, he was a co-alumnus at Harvard. And I dare say that the appointment went very well with the gay block that helped him get elected. Sorry for being cynical, but it is hard not to be one with the decisions that our President has made in his first two years in office.

I really don’t know if Mr. Jennings is doing an adequate job. He is definitely keeping under the radar now, that there are complaints from the gay quarter that he is not doing enough, hence the rash of bullying tragedies that hit the news. I am sure it is not easy for him.

The belief is that he would have been fired or forced to resign (like that other Obama appointee, Mr. Van Jones) following the controversy over his counsel to a young male student on his sexual relations with an older man, had it not been for a little but significant discovered fact. He would not have survived the controversy if it were not for the discovery that the young male student already had his 16th birthday at that time, and was not technically underage. See here. Still, there are lingering questions as to the ethics of how he handled the situation. If Mr. Obama is voted out in 2012, this may be just what you said, just old news.

I agree with what you wrote: we need to reduce the culture of harassment about differences, particularly those differences that young persons feel excused in targeting and belittling.

Beyond Mr. Jennings, I am interested in your reaction to the other parts of my post.

The prophet Jeremiah foretold the fall of the Kingdom Judah because its rulers broke the covenant with God. I guess this thread is a lamentation, but it is also a hope and prayer for people to change, for things to change, back towards God. Noting your self-identified religion, however, I have the feeling we won’t be seeing eye to eye on this as well.

Peace to you.

. . . . . .

 

[larkin31]

Gays should not be harassed or bullied in schools. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the anti-bullying program by Mr. Jennings. I hope you did not skip the parts of my posts expressly against persecution of gays. I know the pain of seeing a loved one, my own brother who is gay. He was on the receiving end of much unkindness in the school yard as a youth.

It is the baggage that Mr. Jennings brings with him and his controversial record that present as problems:
• his unethical counsel of a young man, a student, with an older man, when he was a teacher,
• his praise of the NAMBLA founder,
• his authorship of the foreword to a book called Queering Elementary Education, and
• his support of a radical agenda that includes bringing sexual liberationist teachings into public schools as the former Director of GLSEN (the Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Educational Network)

As “Safe Schools Czar” he introduced (homo)sexually explicit books in the library for young children to see and/or read. See here. Thank goodness, there are organizations like this one that is diligently checking what’s going on in middle schools and what books are in the library. Parents do not want that kind of exposure to their young children.

The only person I know of who does not mind his young son to be exposed to homosexually explicit books is that poster in this thread who just got suspended. He indicated so in his Post #73. He is vociferously pro-gay marriage as some are in this forum. You, pardon me for saying, were in agreement with several of his postings. As a teacher, do you also agree with this poster’s specific view that books in the library should include those that describe and have homosexually explicit pictures for young boys to see or read?

Supporters to Mr. Jennings claim that his program only combats bullying. But what had been uncovered are enough to the concerned that he appears to be using the cover of “bullying prevention” to enforce his radical positions on sex education.

Respectfully,

ISG

. . . . . .

I don’t care about Mr. Jennings. He can keep his job as long as his performance satisfies the President. I don’t care about donors to gay political causes, the same as I don’t care about donors to religious political causes: it is the way our system works.

I teach gay authors and say that they are gay. I don’t teach them because they are gay, nor do I hide the fact that they are or were (if no longer living). Gay characters permeate adult literature (I teach English) because gays have always permeated society, and high quality authors tend to write the truth and examine society. My wife teaches third grade and has one book that shows a two-mom household in her classroom out of the 300 or so books on those shelves. I don’t mind that either. My school has some gay couple parents, as most schools do now. Dispelling the boogey-man mythology about gays is a good thing.

 

[FidesSpesCarita]

And your references to “fisting” all trace back to the one program in Massachusetts that was shut down after the schools found out what the program (the program was sub-contracted out) had detailed in their presentation. This is old news now, it has been covered, this kind of thing is NOT being done in any school in my state (Maine) and not at my school. You seem to be fixated on an old case and are setting fires around one man in a different role in the White House. He has not been fired because he is doing an adequate job, despite your fears and Jeremiad. Again, I have been a teacher for 28 years now, and I have never encountered this sort of thing you are worried about. The anti-bullying programs and anti-harassment programs are just that: efforts to reduce the culture of harassment about differences, particularly those differences that young persons feel excused in targeting and belittling.

What is wrong with that?

I only want to deal with the “anti-gay bullying” issue, since I find the first one… reprehensible.

My personal issue with anti-bullying laws that target specific groups (anti-gay bullying, anti whatever bullying) is that we already have laws dealing with bullying. There is absolutely no requirement to single out others. It actually has the effect of making them both easier targets by making their social group more distinct, and making them feel privileged and encouraging arrogance and “in-your-face” pushing of whatever…

It is kind of like hate crimes… We already have laws against beating someone up, murder, etc. yet if it is perpetrated against someone of a minority group it is suddenly a “hate crime”… Whats the point? If there are already laws against these things, then why have two?

For instance, if I (27yo male) grab a womans butt in a bar and she slaps me, she was defending herself. If a gay man grabs my butt in a bar and I deck him, its a hate crime. The double standard really really bothers me in these situations.

FSC

 

[larkin31]

I only want to deal with the “anti-gay bullying” issue, since I find the first one… reprehensible.

My personal issue with anti-bullying laws that target specific groups (anti-gay bullying, anti whatever bullying) is that we already have laws dealing with bullying. There is absolutely no requirement to single out others. It actually has the effect of making them both easier targets by making their social group more distinct, and making them feel privileged and encouraging arrogance and “in-your-face” pushing of whatever…

It is kind of like hate crimes… We already have laws against beating someone up, murder, etc. yet if it is perpetrated against someone of a minority group it is suddenly a “hate crime”… Whats the point? If there are already laws against these things, then why have two?

For instance, if I (27yo male) grab a womans butt in a bar and she slaps me, she was defending herself. If a gay man grabs my butt in a bar and I deck him, its a hate crime. The double standard really really bothers me in these situations.

FSC

I already addressed this (and I am specifically addressing school programs, not Hate Crime legislation): sometimes specific types of bullying and harassment receive special attention in order to break down the deeply rooted cultural biases that have tended to justify the abusive behavior. Simply ask a Jew about it to find out what I mean by this if it does not make sense. School policies are not about making “double laws” nor about increasing the penalty if a gay student (versus a straight student) is harassed. The punishments are equal. If you want to say that schools should NOT mention commonly targeted types of students who are targeted by bullying, then you just don’t understand what young people need in order to learn from example and to have their cultural prejudices (when present) held properly in check.

Your example of a hate crime (hitting a gay who assaults you) is incorrect. I recommend you read up on hate crime legislation to see what it really is. But as I say, that has nothing to do with school anti-bullying policies.

 

[Exalt]

I only want to deal with the “anti-gay bullying” issue, since I find the first one… reprehensible.

My personal issue with anti-bullying laws that target specific groups (anti-gay bullying, anti whatever bullying) is that we already have laws dealing with bullying. There is absolutely no requirement to single out others. It actually has the effect of making them both easier targets by making their social group more distinct, and making them feel privileged and encouraging arrogance and “in-your-face” pushing of whatever…

It is kind of like hate crimes… We already have laws against beating someone up, murder, etc. yet if it is perpetrated against someone of a minority group it is suddenly a “hate crime”… Whats the point? If there are already laws against these things, then why have two?

For instance, if I (27yo male) grab a womans butt in a bar and she slaps me, she was defending herself. If a gay man grabs my butt in a bar and I deck him, its a hate crime. The double standard really really bothers me in these situations.

FSC

I can answer that.*

Hate crimes aren’t just random acts of violence towards specific individuals. They are violent acts aimed at the entire minority. They’re intended to intimidate the entire group.*

And it works. Acts of violence aimed towards a member of a minority because they are a minority has a striking chilling effect on the entire minority. They’re afraid of exposing themselves for fear of violence, and the entire group tends to drive themselves underground as a result.

That’s why hate crimes deserve an exceptional level of deterrent.

 

[athair_siochain]

Some believe homosexuality to be a genetic factor. Regardless. it is progress as laws prevent homosexuals from having equal rights.

Gays got what they want by entering the corridors of power. In Australia a Gay member of Parliament holds the balance of power, so Gay marriage is on the agenda…

Sodomy is still wrong, what next bestiality,

 

[InSearchofGrace]

I don’t care about Mr. Jennings. He can keep his job as long as his performance satisfies the President. I don’t care about donors to gay political causes, the same as I don’t care about donors to religious political causes: it is the way our system works.

I teach gay authors and say that they are gay. I don’t teach them because they are gay, nor do I hide the fact that they are or were (if no longer living). Gay characters permeate adult literature (I teach English) because gays have always permeated society, and high quality authors tend to write the truth and examine society. My wife teaches third grade and has one book that shows a two-mom household in her classroom out of the 300 or so books on those shelves. I don’t mind that either. My school has some gay couple parents, as most schools do now. Dispelling the boogey-man mythology about gays is a good thing.

I respect your position. Like I said, I am for the anti-bullying program in school and I am completely against injustice to gays, young and old alike. But I do not subscribe to gay political causes that seek legalization of gay marriages in the country and “conditioning” society to accept homosexual relations as normal, going so far as enculturating the idea in the young.

No question, gays have been and are productive in the arts and literature. Excellence in said areas is universally admired. It might be an interesting footnote as one reads a book, to know that its author is gay, or as one appreciates a work of art, that the artist is gay. While education should be a tool to promote tolerance to homosexual views, it should not promote homosexuality, in my opinion. Is it imperative to revamp in the classroom established moral values that parents would want their children to keep?

With all respect to your wife, if my sons were still in grade school, I would not want them to be taught directly or subliminally that having same sex parents is normal. I would move them to Catholic school if I could afford it or home-school them if I knew this kind of education was going on. I object to this kind of promotion in young minds, while they may still be forming sexual identification. As they mature and come across the fact of same sex relations later, it would be different, as they would then be better equipped psychologically to consider and study the subject if they are so interested.

I understand the argument that being homosexual is not a choice and that one does not become gay from simply reading about homosexuality or seeing homosexually explicit pictures. My concern is that because children learn by example and exposure, I would not want the seed to be planted in their young minds that homosexual relations are normal, or start experimenting with homosexual activities early.

I will keep what you have related in your post in the back of my mind. If/when the time comes that my sons become fathers, I can voice my concern before they decide to put their own kids in such a system.

Chances are you and your wife as teachers do not have the liberty to go against directives by the school, which it gets from the Department of Education for implementation. And directives probably vary across school districts. This brings me to the point that people in key positions, like those in the Department of Education, should not have an agenda that promotes a revamp of a mainstream value on homosexual behavior.

People including professionals might readily accept the statement “It is how the system works.” If it involves education that shapes young minds to suit the homosexual agenda, I don’t.

Common good balances majority interests and minority rights. The educational system should not undermine this balance.

Peace.

. . . . . .

 

[larkin31]

I respect your position. Like I said, I am for the anti-bullying program in school and I am completely against injustice to gays, young and old alike. But I do not subscribe to gay political causes that seek legalization of gay marriages in the country and “conditioning” society to accept homosexual relations as normal, going so far as enculturating the idea in the young.

No question, gays have been and are productive in the arts and literature. Excellence in said areas is universally admired. It might be an interesting footnote as one reads a book, to know that its author is gay, or as one appreciates a work of art, that the artist is gay. While education should be a tool to promote tolerance to homosexual views, it should not promote homosexuality, in my opinion. Is it imperative to revamp in the classroom established moral values that parents would want their children to keep?

With all respect to your wife, if my sons were still in grade school, I would not want them to be taught directly or subliminally that having same sex parents is normal. I would move them to Catholic school if I could afford it or home-school them if I knew this kind of education was going on. I object to this kind of promotion in young minds, while they may still be forming sexual identification. As they mature and come across the fact of same sex relations later, it would be different, as they would then be better equipped psychologically to consider and study the subject if they are so interested.

I understand the argument that being homosexual is not a choice and that one does not become gay from simply reading about homosexuality or seeing homosexually explicit pictures. My concern is that because children learn by example and exposure, I would not want the seed to be planted in their young minds that homosexual relations are normal, or start experimenting with homosexual activities early.

I will keep what you have related in your post in the back of my mind. If/when the time comes that my sons become fathers, I can voice my concern before they decide to put their own kids in such a system.

Chances are you and your wife as teachers do not have the liberty to go against directives by the school, which it gets from the Department of Education for implementation. And directives probably vary across school districts. This brings me to the point that people in key positions, like those in the Department of Education, should not have an agenda that promotes a revamp of a mainstream value on homosexual behavior.

People including professionals might readily accept the statement “It is how the system works.” If it involves education that shapes young minds to suit the homosexual agenda, I don’t.

Common good balances majority interests and minority rights. The educational system should not undermine this balance.

Peace.

. . . . . .

We teach at a private school, there are no directives from the state.

There are gay parents at Catholic schools, too. There are gay parents in your town. There are gays fixing your house, paving your roads, healing your sick. There are gays fighting and dying to keep this country safe. How many ways will you retreat to keep your children from seeing that gays do everything everyone else does for your community and for your family and for your country–including parenting some children?

 

[buffalo]

There are gays fixing your house, paving your roads, healing your sick. There are gays fighting and dying to keep this country safe.

So do thieves, pedophiles, ephobiliasts*, e*mbezzlers, rapists, kidnappers, murderers and criminals of all sorts, etc…

We teach our kids that behaviors are the issue.

 

[larkin31]

So do thieves, pedophiles, ephobiliasts*, e*mbezzlers, rapists, kidnappers, murderers and criminals of all sorts, etc…

We teach our kids that behaviors are the issue.

I don’t talk to my kids about the private consensual sexual behavior of other people in my community. I find that to be a disturbing need on the part of a parent to do so.

So, again, I make my point: how far must one retreat to isolate one’s children from consensual adult gays? How much do you tell children that private consensual sex between adults is wrong? How descriptive do you get? Which individuals in your schools, or churches, or restaurants, or supermarkets, or clothing stores do you point at to say: " I don’t want you to socialize or interact with them"? Who would actually take their kids out of a school because ONE book among 300 others in a classroom depicts a caring parent couple of two women? Is acknowledging that a gay couple can love their child a deal-breaker for school choice? How about for a neighborhood? How about for a friend of a child? Do you tell your children that they cannot be friends with a child of a lesbian couple for fear that they might question the legitimacy of religious scorn toward them?

 

[buffalo]

I don’t talk to my kids about the private consensual sexual behavior of other people in my community. I find that to be a disturbing need on the part of a parent to do so.

So, again, I make my point: how far must one retreat to isolate one’s children from consensual adult gays? How much do you tell children that private consensual sex between adults is wrong? How descriptive do you get? Which individuals in your schools, or churches, or restaurants, or supermarkets, or clothing stores do you point at to say: " I don’t want you to socialize or interact with them"? Who would actually take their kids out of a school because ONE book among 300 others in a classroom depicts a caring parent couple of two women? Is acknowledging that a gay couple can love their child a deal-breaker for school choice? How about for a neighborhood? How about for a friend of a child? Do you tell your children that they cannot be friends with a child of a lesbian couple for fear that they might question the legitimacy of religious scorn toward them?

If you have kids then you well know just how soon they learn stuff. As always you tell them when they are mature enough to understand. They also know in their hearts the natural law. That is why in the long run legislating acceptance of the homosexual act will not stick. Try as you may you can’t escape this reality.

 

[larkin31]

If you have kids then you well know just how soon they learn stuff. As always you tell them when they are mature enough to understand. They also know in their hearts the natural law. That is why in the long run legislating acceptance of the homosexual act will not stick. Try as you may you can’t escape this reality.

This whole conversation started with a remark about books with gay parents in them and wanting to keep kids away from a classroom that has that kind of book in it.

I don’t know what you are trying to refer to.

 

[tammy57]

I think that most people arguing for gay rights on this site are in fact straight. The Christians in this country are a big part of the reason why things like that gay kid from rutgers jumping off a bridge after he was outed by his roommate streaming a video. I believe he was a Catholic actually as the article I mentioned earlier said something about a priest with his family.

It is this condemnation of homosexuality by the religious right that is ruining lives. You can say that you are trying to help people save their souls so they don’t go to hell, but that is just your biased opinion on God and who he sends to hell. Who are you to state God’s will? You should never be so sure about your beliefs in God or the supernatural that it effects the compassion you show others…and by that I mean interfering with their happiness, when what they are doing doesn’t interfere with someone else’s.

It is people like you that has caused so much pain and suffering for homosexuals in this country. And THAT is why people are arguing against it. People kill themselves because of it, and its horrible. If society became more accepting of these things, the world would be a better place.

Beautiful! :clapping:

tammy57

 

[tammy57]

We teach at a private school, there are no directives from the state.

There are gay parents at Catholic schools, too. There are gay parents in your town. There are gays fixing your house, paving your roads, healing your sick. There are gays fighting and dying to keep this country safe. How many ways will you retreat to keep your children from seeing that gays do everything everyone else does for your community and for your family and for your country–including parenting some children?

Thank you, larkin31.

tammy57

 

[larkin31]

Thank you, larkin31.

tammy57

you’re welcome

It is easy to say these things!

 

[InSearchofGrace]

…
There are gay parents at Catholic schools, too. …

I understand the matter is being examined so Catholic schools can have an established policy. This is yet another incursion by gay activists, another forcible bending of the rules even if it runs contrary to a long held moral belief of a religious educational institution.

Why would same-sex couples put their children in a Catholic school, knowing the CC teaching on homosexuality? Do they think that the teaching will change? Or, do they assume that with their children’s presence at Catholic school events and their acceptance into the community, it will undermine that teaching? In any case, they are using the children as pawns.

…
There are gay parents in your town. There are gays fixing your house, paving your roads, healing your sick. There are gays fighting and dying to keep this country safe. How many ways will you retreat to keep your children from seeing that gays do everything everyone else does for your community and for your family and for your country–including parenting some children?
…
Which individuals in your schools, or churches, or restaurants, or supermarkets, or clothing stores do you point at to say: " I don’t want you to socialize or interact with them"

You make it sound like gays are a majority, more than the estimated ratio of 1 in 10, although in my family, it came out to be 1 out of 6 male siblings. The world is not full of gays when one steps out of the front door, except maybe for someone who lives in the Castro District of San Francisco, or in West Hollywood in L.A.

We do not look for gays at the supermarket, in restaurants, in offices, to point them out. We don’t flee from them or make them pin a gay star on their lapels. That would be most uncharitable, which would be against God’s commandment on love of neighbor. The debate is not about disagreement with productive citizens in our society. You are an advocate for same sex parenting. I and many others are not. So please quit the drama.
. . . . . .

 

[InSearchofGrace]

I don’t talk to my kids about the private consensual sexual behavior of other people in my community. I find that to be a disturbing need on the part of a parent to do so.

So, again, I make my point: how far must one retreat to isolate one’s children from consensual adult gays? How much do you tell children that private consensual sex between adults is wrong? How descriptive do you get? Which individuals in your schools, or churches, or restaurants, or supermarkets, or clothing stores do you point at to say: " I don’t want you to socialize or interact with them"? Who would actually take their kids out of a school because ONE book among 300 others in a classroom depicts a caring parent couple of two women? Is acknowledging that a gay couple can love their child a deal-breaker for school choice? How about for a neighborhood? How about for a friend of a child? Do you tell your children that they cannot be friends with a child of a lesbian couple for fear that they might question the legitimacy of religious scorn toward them?

Contrary to the implication, we do not have the “need” to talk to our kids about the private consensual behavior of other people in the community, but if the situation calls for it, we would talk to our kids, couched in age-appropriate terms.

Your post is full of reverse bias, larkin. I’ll tell you something, I already know I cannot isolate my sons from homosexual views, from coming across consensual gay adults. The situation has been visited in the most direct way in my family, because my brother was in a domestic partnership for 10 years. So, you don’t have to wonder if the rest of us, especially families who have gay members, are not affected at all, with the in-your-face attitude of homosexuals.

My brother and his partner were into arts and antiquity, and had framed male academic nudes hanging around the walls in their home. Some might view the nudes as pornographic, but I happen to view the ones they had as tasteful. However, there were other issues that we were not in agreement, like Prop 8, adoption of children, etc. We simply agreed to disagree. I’m not saying it was easy.

Anyway, to make a long story short, the relationship eventually failed – miserably. His partner wanted a third party (of course, another male) in the picture. My brother is still picking up the pieces of his life. But when they were together, there were occasions when they would visit. My sons, who were in middle school and junior high, were sometimes present. Of course, my husband and I talked to our sons about our views, our values, what do you think? There were family social gatherings, weddings, baptisms, etc., and they were not excluded, although we did not come to the celebration of the day they formally entered into domestic partnership in San Francisco. Our mother was heartbroken but kept her equanimity. My brother and his partner were not banished by us, but they knew that we did not approve of their open cohabitation.

If you think that most people do not understand or do not have empathy towards homosexuals, you are wrong. My brother has to carry his cross, the cross of homosexuality to the end of his days. He is always in my prayers.

Although I have a gay brother, I am not an advocate of same-sex causes, particularly on parenting and promotion of homosexual behavior as you are.

Tell me, why are you so vested in same-sex causes?

. . . . . .

 

[larkin31]

I understand the matter is being examined so Catholic schools can have an established policy. This is yet another incursion by gay activists, another forcible bending of the rules even if it runs contrary to a long held moral belief of a religious educational institution.

Why would same-sex couples put their children in a Catholic school, knowing the CC teaching on homosexuality? Do they think that the teaching will change? Or, do they assume that with their children’s presence at Catholic school events and their acceptance into the community, it will undermine that teaching? In any case, they are using the children as pawns.

Maybe they think that the Catholic schools are the better choice in their community. To assume that the children are pawns is to express some prejudice in the matter.

You make it sound like gays are a majority, more than the estimated ratio of 1 in 10, although in my family, it came out to be 1 out of 6 male siblings. The world is not full of gays when one steps out of the front door, except maybe for someone who lives in the Castro District of San Francisco, or in West Hollywood in L.A.

I was making no such suggestion at all. But take either of your two numbers, and extrapolate for an entire community. THAT is my point. And, your point reminds me: their are gays even in our households as brothers and sisters and children. It’s pretty hard to run from them.

We do not look for gays at the supermarket, in restaurants, in offices, to point them out. We don’t flee from them or make them pin a gay star on their lapels. That would be most uncharitable, which would be against God’s commandment on love of neighbor. The debate is not about disagreement with productive citizens in our society. You are an advocate for same sex parenting. I and many others are not. So please quit the drama.

The poster I was replying to said that he/she would remove his/her children from a classroom if it contained even one book in 300 that depicted gay parents favorably. All I did was respond to that claim by asking how many other places would one try to keep children away from gays. Another poster said that he would teach his children to devalue gay behavior in a community. I simply asked for details to see just how someone would do that and at what age. I am a parent of two children; this is not drama nor hypothetics with me.

I actually think that the drama and posturing is the other way: pyrotechnics about the evil of gay parents in books and dire slippery-slope arguments about what gay marriage will do to children and hetero marriage. Unless you want to distance yourself from that rhetoric.

 

[larkin31]

Tell me, why are you so vested in same-sex causes?

. . . . . .

I consider SOME gay causes to be the broadening of justice. And I always support the broadening of justice. I consider justice on earth more important than sexual morality or the pursuit of salvation.