The Insidious Creeping of the Gay Movement

[mattyc4]

Hey, Hey Sailor …Im still trying to get where in the Constitution marriage is a right and where the Freedom of Expression part is…lets not bombard the poor guy with too many questions we may never get the answers we seek.

Freedom of speech includes freedom of expression. I didn’t think I needed to expressly state that.

Freedom of speech is the concept of being able to speak freely without censorship liberal democracies. The right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through numerous human rights instruments, notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although implementation remains lacking in many countries. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes preferred, since the right is not confined to verbal speech but is understood to protect any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom(wikipedia)

I can find about another thousand sources for you. Still a problem?

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

Freedom of speech includes freedom of expression. I didn’t think I needed to expressly state that.

Freedom of speech is the concept of being able to speak freely without censorship liberal democracies. The right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through numerous human rights instruments, notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although implementation remains lacking in many countries. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes preferred, since the right is not confined to verbal speech but is understood to protect any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. **and Hand holding is covered here? dont get me wrong as far as i am concerned i think gays should be able to hold hands if they want! **
For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom(wikipedia)

I can find about another thousand sources for you. Still a problem?

 

[He_Man]

Freedom of speech includes freedom of expression. I didn’t think I needed to expressly state that.

Freedom of speech is the concept of being able to speak freely without censorship liberal democracies. The right to freedom of speech is guaranteed under international law through numerous human rights instruments, notably under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although implementation remains lacking in many countries. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes preferred, since the right is not confined to verbal speech but is understood to protect any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. For instance, the United States First Amendment theoretically grants absolute freedom(wikipedia)

I can find about another thousand sources for you. Still a problem?

Congratulations, you just broke the Elastic Clause.

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

Congratulations, you just broke the Elastic Clause.

 

[KathleenElsie]

Ok, I did that. What exactly was it meant to show?

That you equated sexual orientation to slavery.

That is all.

 

[He_Man]

Elastic Clause - the ability for Congress to make laws not specifically spelled out in the Constitution, but deemed necessary and proper. A way to avoid strict constructionalists from saying “where is that in the Constitution???” Hence, the laws are elastic or flexible. (The founders knew they couldn’t account for every circumstance, so they added this for flexibility.)

However, by equating the hand holding to a basic guaranteed human right, I was implying that he may have stretched the founders intent a weeeee bit too far

 

[Elric]

That you equated sexual orientation to slavery.

That is all.

This is a joke right?

I cant even fathom how you even came to such a conclusion.

I made no such equation (but I think that you already know that), nor did I say that they are the same (like your last accusation claimed). I said that there are comparisons between the two in the way that they are/were treated (I did also mention that these comparisons are stronger post 1865 when in the US at least, slavery was apparently abolished).

Essentially it boils down to poor treatment on these groups by individuals, groups/organisations and governments. They are compariable, but are by no means the same.

 

[wifeandmomoftwo]

Elastic Clause - the ability for Congress to make laws not specifically spelled out in the Constitution, but deemed necessary and proper. A way to avoid strict constructionalists from saying “where is that in the Constitution???” Hence, the laws are elastic or flexible. (The founders knew they couldn’t account for every circumstance, so they added this for flexibility.)

However, by equating the hand holding to a basic guaranteed human right, I was implying that he may have stretched the founders intent a weeeee bit too far

Ok…got it now:thumbsup:

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

I never said that, nor implied it. I simply said there were codes of conduct prior to the Bible.

Your wording indicated such.

Now—where do our rights come from?

 

[GregoryPalamas]

Wisconsin is not the US. Furthermore, and I think it’s most important: What is the Catholic Church doing to it’s part in being a Good Samaritan with Gay people?

We call upon all who are living a life of sin to repent. We create hospitals for those who don’t and gets AIDS because of it. We provide models for holy living. We provide ways of escaping this destructive lifestyle.

I’ve never been seriously tempted to go down the path of same sex activities. We do understand that for some this is a serious temptation. We understand that to succumb to the temptation is to commit an abomination against God. We walk together with anyone who seriously seeks to overcome his sin. We encourage people who are seriously seeking holiness to find his/her vocation and persue it with all of their might. We discourage the Lutheran teaching that people should sin lustily.

CDL

 

[SILVERNAME]

The homophile movement is insidious because it doesn’t play fair, it doesn’t respect the right to free speech of Christians and anyone else who opposes homophilia and the homophile agenda.

The homophile movement does not respect the freedom of conscience of anyone who opposes homophilia , especially those of Christians and employers and business owners, that is why that are trying to impose anti-Christian laws that violate the basic freedoms of anyone who opposes homophilia including Christians, employers and business owners.

Homophilia is not a right, it is a sin , an abomination before the eyes of God. It is inherently immoral, like abortion and pedophilia.

If someone wants to hire or retain a homophile, so be it, nobody is forcing him not to.

And if someone wants to fire or refuse to hire a homophile, so be it , he should be left alone by the govt. or anyone else, for that is his right as a business owner or as an employer.

That is freedom.

But these homofascists, do not care about freedom or the God-given rights of others, that is why they want to violate and infringe upon the rights of employers and business owners to fire or refuse to hire anyone who is guilty of sexual immorality.( like homophilia)

Marriage is not a right, it is a God- ordained social institution with limits and requirements.

Christians and anyone else who opposes homophilia do not force pro-homophile people to oppose homophilia.

But homofacists and pro-homophile fanatics are trying to use the judicial system to coerce Christians and other people who oppose homophilia into tolerating and accepting homophilia.

That just shows that homophile movement does not care about freedom, or equality or fairness.

All they care about is getting the license to commit all the sexually immoral acts they want, including pedophilia.

Pedophilia has always been a major part of the homophile subculture.

Just as abortion and contraception are two sides of the same immoral coin.( and mindset and worldview)

So are homophilia and pedophilia two sides of the same immoral coin( and mindset and worldview).

Consent does not make sexual immorality moral, sexual immorality is immoral regardless if there is consent or not
the absence of consent merely makes something inherently immoral, like sexual immorality, much more immoral.

 

[GregoryPalamas]

So are homophilia and pedophilia two sides of the same immoral coin( and mindset and worldview).

Indeed.

CDL

 

[fix]

Where do rights come from? Well, the rights I speak of come from the USA constitution.

Rights originate from that paper? So, if we amend the constitution to allow slavery that would be a right? Rights are conjured up as we desire?

The Bible was certainly not the first book that set out some rights.

Yep, the natural moral law existed from the very start. Long before the bible was codified. Now where do rights come from?

 

[KathleenElsie]

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

Plase read this says it all and comes right form the Vatican.

 

[b_justb]

Nice reference; good job!

I liked this part, short and to the point:

Moral conscience requires that, in every occasion, Christians give witness to the whole moral truth, which is contradicted both by approval of homosexual acts and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons.

 

[Steadfast_love]

Well then, my moral concience requires me to say in this occasion…
Steadfast Love:

Don’t waste your time reading this article. It is as hateful as the title implies.

 

[SILVERNAME]

The insidious homophile movement has already started targeting children as young as 2 years old.

These sexual deviants want more “fresh meat” to satisfy their immoral perverted desires.

And they are using the judicial system and the legislature , with the help of corrupt politicians, to do this!!

Please check this website out!

saveourkids.net/

And please sign the petition!!

Help the parents in California protect their children from homophilia!!

 

[Elric]

The homophile movement is insidious because it doesn’t play fair, it doesn’t respect the right to free speech of Christians and anyone else who opposes homophilia and the homophile agenda.

So what you are saying is that anyone should be able to say whatever disrespectful, slanderous, offensive and hate filled comments about homosexuals and they should accept them?

The homophile movement does not respect the freedom of conscience of anyone who opposes homophilia

So they have to respect those that show none to them?

Tell me, does that go both ways?

, especially those of Christians and employers and business owners, that is why that are trying to impose anti-Christian laws that violate the basic freedoms of anyone who opposes homophilia including Christians, employers and business owners.

You mean that they are opposed to being fired simply for being homosexual?

Mate that is an unchristian act to do that in the first place.

Homophilia is not a right, it is a sin , an abomination before the eyes of God.

Prove it.

[QUOTEIt is inherently immoral, like abortion and pedophilia.
[/QUOTE]

Prove it.

If someone wants to hire or retain a homophile, so be it, nobody is forcing him not to.

And if someone wants to fire or refuse to hire a homophile, so be it , he should be left alone by the govt. or anyone else, for that is his right as a business owner or as an employer.

I guess that they would have to answer to God for such uncharitable actions.

That is freedom.

That is discrimination.

But these homofascists, do not care about freedom or the God-given rights of others, that is why they want to violate and infringe upon the rights of employers and business owners to fire or refuse to hire anyone who is guilty of sexual immorality.( like homophilia)

This sounds a lot like the pot calling the kettle black. Not only that, you are ignoring your own beliefs with this misguided crusade of yours.

Marriage is not a right, it is a God- ordained social institution with limits and requirements.

Christians and anyone else who opposes homophilia do not force pro-homophile people to oppose homophilia.

Not through lack of trying anyway.

But homofacists and pro-homophile fanatics are trying to use the judicial system to coerce Christians and other people who oppose homophilia into tolerating and accepting homophilia.

No, they are just trying to protect their jobs.

That just shows that homophile movement does not care about freedom, or equality or fairness.

Actually they are reminding you, in their own way, of your christian values.

All they care about is getting the license to commit all the sexually immoral acts they want, including pedophilia.

Pedophilia has always been a major part of the homophile subculture.

Just as abortion and contraception are two sides of the same immoral coin.( and mindset and worldview)

So are homophilia and pedophilia two sides of the same immoral coin( and mindset and worldview).

Should have known that this was comming.

Consent does not make sexual immorality moral, sexual immorality is immoral regardless if there is consent or not
the absence of consent merely makes something inherently immoral, like sexual immorality, much more immoral.

I dont think that you should really talk about morality.

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Why not? This is a Catholic forum. Those of us who are Catholic live by a certain standard of morality. (Or at least, we try).

Homosexuality is still a sin. And homosexuals are re-drawing the line every time they threaten their boycotts and shove through their special-interest legislation.

It was a homosexual threat against the APA in the 1970s which made that organization cave, and WITHOUT FURTHER STUDY, declassify homosexuality as a mental illness.

But the truth is still the truth, no matter how much you would like it to be otherwise.

 

[Elric]

Why not? This is a Catholic forum. Those of us who are Catholic live by a certain standard of morality. (Or at least, we try).

I know that is the claim, but reading comments on these forums contradicts that claim.

Homosexuality is still a sin. And homosexuals are re-drawing the line every time they threaten their boycotts and shove through their special-interest legislation.

Re-drawing the line?

I doubt that most of their “specal-interest” legislation would be necessary if people went by their beliefs and morality.

It was a homosexual threat against the APA in the 1970s which made that organization cave, and WITHOUT FURTHER STUDY, declassify homosexuality as a mental illness.

Yes, yes I know about that.

Something had to happened, because homosexuality isnt a mental illness. Its more of a neruological issue than a psycological issue, so they were right to declasify it as a mental illness.

But the truth is still the truth, no matter how much you would like it to be otherwise.

What truth?

All I see is “How dare they want to have rights”, “how dare they want job protection”, “how dare they not want to be called names and be abused”, “how dare they want to be treated as equals”.

Where is the truth?