The Homosexual Agenda

  • Thread starter Thread starter InSearchofGrace
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
John21652 said:
You’ll have to excuse Larkin 31, for he beleives in nothing of substance outside his own hedonistic desires. He and some of his ‘supporters’ here would tell you up was down if they thought it would in some way bolster their argument and to hell with logic in the process! By trying to tell us there is no such thing as Natural Law, he is trying to tell us he does not beleive in at least half of the philosophical enquiry undertaken by humanity over the last, say, two thousand years and he consines to the dustbin of history many of humanity’s greatest thinkers. Oh, such hubris!!

The whole trouble with people like Larkin 31 and his contempories is that Natural Law condemns the homosexuality they espouse as being in some way normal, or natural…
Click to expand...
“Natural Law” does not condemn anything. Only people condemn.

And I love you too, John!
 
FidesSpesCarita said:
I really dont understand how people dont get that Natural Law is based upon the theological principle that we live in a created universe and therefore an atheist would not understand its purpose, truth, or recognize its existence.

Well, it was a happy mistake. Had I thought of it while responding it would have been done anyway. If the primary purpose is ignored, all other purposes become essentially null. If you were to have open heart surgery, but not to repair anything just because you felt like it, that would be stupid. If you were to buy a car, but not have a license and have no intention of getting a license, that would be stupid. If you were a jar of peanuts, but have an allergy to peanuts that prevents you from ever eating them, that would be stupid.

The primary purpose is the thing from which all other purposes for a thing flow. Open heart surgery is to correct a problem, it can also be done to prevent problems, but primarily it is a surgery of correction. A car is primarily a transportation device, if purchased to be a lawn ornament that is stupid. Peanuts are primarily a food source, if someone cannot eat them than buying them is stupid. Marriage is primarily for procreation and care/upbringing of children, if it is entered into without the intention of being open to a family, then that is stupid. Especially in todays society of promiscuity, free sex, and contraception.
Click to expand...
We don’ make laws in our country to prevent “stupidity.” I agree with all of your examples, but they are besides the point. If we were to design law to prevent me from buying peanuts and then just throwing them out, then you might have a parallel here. But we don’t. What one does with one’s right or privilege, short of causing harm to another without his/her consent or beyond which we call “negligent,” then the individual should be free to engage in that behavior. You can’t penalize me for being stupid with my peanuts. Not in this country.
 
larkin31 said:
Their bodies aren’t.

Their gametes are. And this is due to the fact that most life on earth has evolved from a process of genetic reproduction that results in diploid structures.
Click to expand...
What a totally rediculous answer!

Your sentence is factually wrong.

Most life on Earth has not “…*evolved *from a process of genetic reproduction that results in diploid structures.” Most life on Earth results from a process of genetic reproduction that results in diploid structures. All that sentence means is that a female and a male gamete merge to contain two chromosomes.

Male gametes are sperm and female gametes are aggs. When the two combine, a new life is formed. The two are combined after a male penis ejaculates sperm into the female vagina and that’s what the two differing organs are designed for. Not to mention the whole range of hormonal and chemical reactions which drive the process. They differ from male to female, yet they complement one another. So you see, their bodies are in fact designed to be complimentary. Unlike the homosexual use of the anus, which some men pretend to gain pleasure from when a penis is shoved in it. That’s a totally disfunctional use of body parts. The result is often incontinence, sometimes aids, sometimes herpes and a host of other problems. And don’t anyone try and tell me that because a few woman go for anal intercourse that it is somehow legitimised. It’s immoral, disfunctional, harmful to individuals and a moral decay in society. Those who seek to normalise such behaviour should realise that to attempt to normalise the abnormal is rediculously illogical.

By the way, Larkin 32, so very nioce of you to say “I love you too John”. However I know you wrote it gratuitously, for you cannot love what you do not know. You do not know me, therefore you cannot love me. However, rest easy with the knowledge that I don’t hate you, or even dislike you, but only many of your ideas. As for you as a person, I worry for you, because you seem to be adrift in this world with no moral compass. I find that immensely sad.
 
edwest2 said:
I’ve chosen a feminist law site to give my fellow Catholics here a different perspective on gay so-called marriage in Canada:

feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=4117

Apparently, to them, only the individual really matters, not couples.

God bless,
Ed
Click to expand...
That is why so many children are being denied the right to their biological parents and life itself.

So, is a me society best for the common good?
 
John21652 said:
What a totally rediculous answer!
Click to expand...
perfect! haha
Your sentence is factually wrong.
Click to expand...
Most life on Earth has not “…*evolved *from a process of genetic reproduction that results in diploid structures.” Most life on Earth results from a process of genetic reproduction that results in diploid structures. All that sentence means is that a female and a male gamete merge to contain two chromosomes.
Click to expand...
Are you denying evolution?
 
Flglades said:
I think there is a agenda to bully Christians not to stand up for the gospel. Christians are now being label as haters and bigots by the gay community

I got banned two weeks ago and again this week under different sign on by Huffington Post for defending the Churchs teaching of Homosexuality is a sin. I posted quit openly from the bible and church teaching.

THe result was being banned. So much for our liberal media open and honst discussion. They currently have a article from Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson on how christians must not consider homosexuality a sin.

Need i say more about the gay lesbian agenda
Click to expand...
So the media a profiteer off free speech and continually claims the people have “a right to know” (when it suits them, denies you free speech. :hmmm: Yup, they are infiltrated by the homosexual agenda.
 
The general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called After the Ball, by gay rights activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in 1990, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:

"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior.

Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are ‘not Christian’ and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned…"

After the Ball outlines key points of the homosexual agenda:
  • “Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible.”
  • “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers.”
  • “Give homosexual protectors a just cause.”
  • “Make gays look good.”
  • “Make the victimizers look bad.”
  • “Get funds from corporate America.”
Thirty years after publication of this homosexual propaganda campaign, we see the sorry outcome in our everyday life and in twisted opinions of professionals who find their way into all forums such as this one.

According to Conservapedia, the homosexual ideology, consists of a set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate acceptance and approval of homosexuality, and the strategies used to implement such. Among the goals and means of this movement are indoctrinating students in public school and distorting Biblical teaching and science. The other goals are restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining special treatment for homosexuals, and interfering with freedom of association.

Btw, here is a recent posting by a concerned mother of two boys and who works as an illustrator of children’s books, of a video clip on the Safe Schools Czar appointed by Obama speaking at the Queer Politics Conference in Harvard in 1998, talking about his goal of a gay curriculum..

A noteworthy remark from ‘Compete of Lose’ to the blogpost:

The liberal education people have managed to severely degrade the public schools in America. Until the schools can brag about their students achievement in math, reading, and science, they will be emphasizing the wrong subjects and not giving our next generation the tools they need to compete. If they cant compete then they will be condemned to a lower standard of living.

My sentiment, exactly.

. . . . . .
 
InSearchofGrace said:
Thirty years after publication of this homosexual propaganda campaign, we see the sorry outcome in our everyday life and in twisted opinions of professionals who find their way into all forums such as this one.
Click to expand...
Oops, error. Make that twenty years.

. . . . .
 
InSearchofGrace said:
The general agenda is seen to be overall implementing a marketing strategy explained in a book called After the Ball, by gay rights activists Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen in 1990, in which a six-point plan was set forth as to how they could transform the beliefs of ordinary Americans with regard to homosexual behavior in a decade-long time frame:

"The agenda of homosexual activists is basically to change America from what they perceive as looking down on homosexual behavior, to the affirmation of and societal acceptance of homosexual behavior.

Thus propagandistic advertising can depict all opponents of the gay movement as homophobic bigots who are ‘not Christian’ and the propaganda can further show them [homosexuals]] as being criticized, hated and shunned…"

After the Ball outlines key points of the homosexual agenda:
  • “Talk about gays and gayness as loudly and as often as possible.”
  • “Portray gays as victims, not as aggressive challengers.”
  • “Give homosexual protectors a just cause.”
  • “Make gays look good.”
  • “Make the victimizers look bad.”
  • “Get funds from corporate America.”
Thirty years after publication of this homosexual propaganda campaign, we see the sorry outcome in our everyday life and in twisted opinions of professionals who find their way into all forums such as this one.

According to Conservapedia, the homosexual ideology, consists of a set of beliefs and objectives designed to promote and even mandate acceptance and approval of homosexuality, and the strategies used to implement such. Among the goals and means of this movement are indoctrinating students in public school and distorting Biblical teaching and science. The other goals are restricting the free speech of opposition, obtaining special treatment for homosexuals, and interfering with freedom of association.

Btw, here is a recent posting by a concerned mother of two boys and who works as an illustrator of children’s books, of a video clip on the Safe Schools Czar appointed by Obama speaking at the Queer Politics Conference in Harvard in 1998, talking about his goal of a gay curriculum..

A noteworthy remark from ‘Compete of Lose’ to the blogpost:

The liberal education people have managed to severely degrade the public schools in America. Until the schools can brag about their students achievement in math, reading, and science, they will be emphasizing the wrong subjects and not giving our next generation the tools they need to compete. If they cant compete then they will be condemned to a lower standard of living.

My sentiment, exactly.

. . . . . .
Click to expand...
you sure have an issue with gays
 
catholicsforequality.org/page/report-anti-equality-activity

Gotta love this link above. Meaning, if your parish supports traditional marriage(which they call “anti-equality activity”, lol) people can go to this link and “report” the parish to this site(I take it so they can picket outside the parish with pro-gay marriage signs and propaganda or harass the priest with emails?)

Just one example the gay agenda tries to intimidate priests …
 
Seeker2010 said:
With all due respect, you are delusional.

When my grandfather was my age, homosexuals stayed in the closet yet they face severe consequences.

When my father was my age, they were more out, but the idea of gay marriage was so ridiculous that it wasn’t even up for discussion.

Today, it’s controversial, but it is being discussed, and in some cases, passed.

By the time a child born today is my age, he or she probably won’t even realize it was once controversial.

Strong opposition to gay marriage is highest in the 50+ crowd. The under 30 crowd is strongly in favor of it. As those opposed die off, they are being replaced by someone in favor of it.

It is inevitable. It WILL happen. It’s only a matter of time.
Click to expand...
As they say, more wisdom comes as you age…

thats the goal of the liberals however. Get em while they are young and impressionable. MTV, Lifetime, VH1, Sex and the City, reality shows, etc. They can create their new generation of future low-IQ liberal drones where all they have to do is shout bigot or inequality a few hundred times whenever an argument comes up…
 
PetersKeys said:
catholicsforequality.org/page/report-anti-equality-activity

Gotta love this link above. Meaning, if your parish supports traditional marriage(which they call “anti-equality activity”, lol) people can go to this link and “report” the parish to this site(I take it so they can picket outside the parish with pro-gay marriage signs and propaganda or harass the priest with emails?)

Just one example the gay agenda tries to intimidate priests …
Click to expand...
Indeed.

Gay agenda advocates will try to change the meaning of words, including what is Catholic.

Below is the declaration of conscience of these so called Catholilcs:
  • The American principle of the separation of Church and State was enshrined in the Constitution to ensure that no particular religious perspective would be imposed on our pluralistic society.
  • Catholic teaching on social justice has been central to the building of a just society, creating awareness of diversity in the human family, calling us to lives of respect, not simply tolerance, for one another.
  • We remember that Roman Catholics were once denied civil rights, treated with suspicion, ridiculed because of our sacred rituals, and questioned as to our allegiance to “foreign authorities.” Memory challenges us to remain vigilant whenever bigotry and injustice enters into public discourse.
  • Same-sex civil marriage does not in any way coerce any religious faith or tradition to change its beliefs or doctrine or alter its traditional marriage practices.
“As Roman Catholics, we differentiate between sacramental marriage and civil marriage. Therefore, we perceive that same-sex civil marriage poses no threat to our Church. While we respect the authority and integrity of the Church in matters of faith, our prayers and discernment have brought us to a new openness on this issue. We do not ask the Church to perform same-sex marriages. We do implore the Church to honor the States’ prerogative to authorize civil marriages for our gay and lesbian family and friends.”

The people behind this organization may have been Catholic before, but they ceased to be Catholics and do not speak for the Catholic faithful with these positions.
 
OK - folks, It is time to fight the agenda. Start by voting in a few weeks. Vote out ANYONE who advances this agenda, at every level of government.
 
PetersKeys said:
As they say, more wisdom comes as you age…

thats the goal of the liberals however. Get em while they are young and impressionable. MTV, Lifetime, VH1, Sex and the City, reality shows, etc. They can create their new generation of future low-IQ liberal drones where all they have to do is shout bigot or inequality a few hundred times whenever an argument comes up…
Click to expand...
Homosexuals Brainwashing Public School Children

Part I

Part II

. . . . . .
 
PetersKeys said:
As they say, more wisdom comes as you age…
Click to expand...
But my point remains, you have lost the war already. SSM will be the law in the land within 20 years, from sea to shining sea. Within 2 years, if SCOTUS upholds the ruling on Prop 8.
 
PetersKeys said:
As they say, more wisdom comes as you age…

thats the goal of the liberals however. Get em while they are young and impressionable. MTV, Lifetime, VH1, Sex and the City, reality shows, etc. They can create their new generation of future low-IQ liberal drones where all they have to do is shout bigot or inequality a few hundred times whenever an argument comes up…
Click to expand...
This is precisely true. As someone who works in the media I’ve watched the whole social engineering project unfold. The TV, not mom or dad, will guide your kids. It will portray meaningless sex as good, cohabitation with sex as good. And all those movies where people live together but are soooo happy!! Yep, boys and girls, when you grow up, just pick a guy or girl, live with them, and when they get to be not fun anymore, just let them go, and move on to the next person.It’s not like the two of you were married or anything.

And gays, they just want to have a little fun. What’s the big deal?

God Forbid,

Ed
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top