Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

California gay marriage decision comes under fire from both sides

August 28, 2009 by  

California gay marriage decision comes under fire from both sides The San Francisco organization that led the unsuccessful campaign last year to defeat the state’s ban on same-sex marriage recently said it will put the measure to vote again in the 2012 election, angering both supporters and opponents of gay marriage.

Gay rights groups and those who believe marriage should not be subject to regulation by the government have criticized the decision by Equality California saying it failed to listen to the overwhelming sentiment in the gay community which wants to move immediately to challenge the so-called Proposition 8, according to David Comfort, founder of the Equality Network in Los Angeles, cited by the San Francisco Chronicle.

In fact, some groups, such as Yes Equality have said they will push to get the matter on the ballot in 2010, when Californians are due to elect a new governor, the source further says.

However, Ron Prentice, executive director of ProtectMarriage.com has vowed to fight any attempts to repeal the ban, and stressed that his organization is ready to continue to educate the public about the vital role of heterosexual marriage in society.

"[Gay rights groups] will lose [in 2012] just as surely as they would in 2010 or any other year," says Prentice, adding, "The people have spoken twice on this issue, both times reaffirming traditional marriage."
ADNFCR-1961-ID-19338588-ADNFCR

Personal Liberty News Desk

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “California gay marriage decision comes under fire from both sides”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • DaveH

    I don’t know what the beef is if they want to get married by a justice of the peace. Personally, I can’t understand why they would want to subject themselves to that present and future hassle (notwithstanding benefits). However, if they want the government to force churches to marry them, that is a whole other problem. Even though I am atheist, I would fight that vigorously as government has no business messing with religious rules.

    • rodin

      Nobody is EVER going to legislate what the churches have to do. What they are asking for is the right to have recognition of their union as a marriage under state laws… NOT under church guidelines. There will hopefully always be separation of church and state in this country…. otherwise we may as well bow down to the Ayatollahs.

      • Rev. Dr. Anthony

        That is fine on the surface my friends, but what Churches have concerns about [for good hidtorical reasons] are the civil and criminal federally sanctioned suits that are coming under the guise of so called, “hate criomes”, when we might only state publically in a meeting of Christians what we believe the Bible to be teaching, even when we are stating things contrary to society norms in a manner of civility and without hatred. These “inches” often become the “ax” that will cut off the heads of innocent Christians in the future, when laws are re-interpreted according to norms that may not now exist?

        • Dee

          In my personal experience, Christians are free to say whatever they wish. Pat Robertson got away with inciting hatred against gays and lesbians for many years on TV without being held liable for inciting the beatings. killings, and countless other degredations of gay/lesbian people. What more do Christians want? You already have it all.

        • eyeswideopen

          Rev, the Conservatives of your party, like to expound on the seperation of church and state, well, a state sanctioned marriage outside of the church has no bearing on the church. The church can enforce any rules it wants regarding marriage in the church, but to quote the Republicans “stay out of our lives stay out of state business”. Oh, that’s right the Repub’s only want to dictate guns, marriage, healthcare and religion to the rest of us. And they will try to use the government to do exactly that.

          • http://mbock3@cox.net mark

            God happens to be a job description, Jesus is for real. If we are capable of artifical insemination now then why was it not capable then.Just ask ezekiel? They put us here and are watching us.The truth will really set us free. Life can be good if we let it,however for some they have a need for life as we know it must fail. Mary and joseph had a child, not by normal conditions. He tought He tried but did not succeed in the end. He GOT THROGHT TO ME. Thier are good and bad people in this world and what rules now is mainly bad.Cash for clunkers has ruined my auto repair buisness along with auto recaiclers and auto body repair Obama Sucks period! But pelosi,Reid, and the rest of Obamas crony appointees suck equally as well!!!!!

          • Smilee

            mark says:
            September 5, 2009 at 7:56 pm

            Mark

            Have not seen you in a while, nice wife have finally let you off your time out and out of the corner, anyhow, welcome back. Bad start though your post makes no sense, guess you are a little rusty yet

  • John C. Davidson

    If this is the biggest problem in California, then someone has their head in the sand. Something’s wrong in you statehouse.

    • Chris

      John, No it’s not the biggest problem, but it is worth discussing. How many times must we vote on something that has been voted on and defeated by a large margin. This sounds like Al Franken or Al Gore demanding a recount until they can fanagle the results in their favor. This subject should be old news but someone (The press and?) always revives the issue to sell a story.
      The biggest news, other than the fires, is the fact that the way the state has been run the past twenty yeatrs has encouraged big (and small) business’ to exit Ca. for a friendlier atmosphere. I.E. lower taxes. With the closing of the latest GM/Toyota plant estimated to lose a total of 19,000 total related jobs, the Ca. socialists have not smelled the coffee. And with Gerrymandering and handpicking their districts why should they? They will be re-elected. And while Dave may be an atheist because he hasn’t made an honest attempt to learn about God, he is right that the Government, as usual, is sticking in their head where they have no business. If this continual abuse of authority continues what actions do the people have to reclaim the system of laws the founding fathers instilled?

      • DaveH

        Chris,
        I was raised in Catholic schools through 9th grade. I was coerced by Dad to take religion classes after school once a week while I was in public school. Ironically, those classes are what turned me.
        My favorite friend from age 33 through 50s was a Mormon who proselytized me regularly. I have absolutely nothing against religion. I think the bible is a good history book with valuable lessons from the past. I like that most religious people are trying to live within a code of treating their fellow man with respect. I just don’t believe there is a God. I’m so comfortable with my beliefs that I am one of a small minority that doesn’t hide from the doorbell when Jehovah’s Witnesses come knocking. I actually enjoy talking to them and think they are good people. They proselytize me about religion and I proselytize them about my religion – Freedom.

        • Mike Cyphers

          Freedom is absolutely the reason to live – the zealots who believe their way is the only way to heaven will have a lot to answer for when they try to convince Jesus that what he said was wrong about accepting people the way they are

      • rodin

        We will always seek to undo wrongs… It took a long time to abolish slavery and give women rights as “persons”… It will likely take many attempts at undoing the current system of laws that promote hatred and legal discrimination towards gays.

        • eyeswideopen

          Us women are still fighting for equal rights, they just passed law about salaries… Loved your insight.

          • DaveH

            And the lawyers smiled down from above.

          • eyeswideopen

            Dave, like it or not, I’ve worked just as hard as you, if not harder, as women have to be twice as good to get ahead. Im’ sorry your wife screwed you but being bitter towards the rest of us is really unfair. I had two husbands who did worse than yours. Yes, it is a big deal to finally after all these years be assured that when I’m working side by side with a man, that I too have the right to the same pay scale. I can’t believe that you wouldn’t want your daughter to have the same opportunity to advance herself through hard work and equal pay. No where in the “book” did I see that women were supposed to be second class citizens.

          • Smilee

            Eyes

            No one should be a second class citizen except maybe those who believe some should be

          • eyeswideopen

            Dave, your Libertarian platform, states that all people are equal. Who would fight for my rights under libertarian politics?

        • Scott

          What about legal discrimination against the religious community at the hands of the gay community? This is the emerging pattern, and it is gaining momentum.

          • Dee

            Scott, what on earth are you talking about? The religious are in the catbird seat They are not being discriminated against! They are the super priveleged. They are allowed to vote on whether a vilified, yet taxpaying, group in society shall have the same rights as they do. That is the right to love whom they love and to be joined in a legal union that will give them the same rights that are automatically granted to ANY heterosexuals: incarcerated criminals, murderers, pedophiles, child molesters included. You want to disenfranchise people who simply love someone of the same sex because you think doing so will get you to heaven? News flash: When you die you will just be dead. No reward for your bigotry. No punishment for it either-just dead.

          • eyeswideopen

            Dee, well said.

          • Nanette

            Right on, Scott!!!

        • DaveH

          I’ve tried for most of my life to be color-blind. I treat anyone with the same respect they treat me and probably more. But when government gets involved invariably a special class gets favoritism. I am at the bottom of the rung when it comes to special protection (Anglo Male).
          25 years ago, my ex-wife ran off with the next-door neighbor and then proceeded to use a very biased court to take severe advantage of me. Then, as if that wasn’t enough, proceeded to use my daughter (son lived with me) as a weapon for the next 10 years.
          How can I remain unbiased when people are seeking more-than-equality through the government? I would love a truly color-blind society, but we aren’t going to achieve that through Force. Government is force not reason.

          • Smilee

            Davie

            This confession of yours explains a lot about your motivation for all your hateful posts on this site, if you had this attitude when you where married It is easy for me to understand why your wife ran off with the neighbor as it probably was a step up for her. I’m a Anglo male as well but not having the experiences you think you are having because of it. Of course I believe in equality and I’m not sure you even understand what it is. Try a shrink it could help you to move on and give up your hatreds

          • Smilee

            Oh by the way daveie you once said I was black and the way you said it was derogatory and I do believe you are also somewhat racist but probably in denial about that too

        • LibertyTree

          How do these laws promote hatered and legal dicrimination? If a person wants to get married they can. But if two men can get married why can’t you marry your dog? The only reason this is an issue is because the immoral want to be recognised as normal. It is being used to numb people against immoral behavior.
          What’s next are we going to start a champaign for rapist and child molestors? After all don’t these people think they are normal also?

          • Dee

            I would like you and Scott to define “moral behavior.” ex: Which one is imoral?
            1. Loving someone – same or opposite sex, or even your dog.
            2. Hating someone because of whom they love.

          • Smilee

            Very good answer Dee

        • Scott

          LibertyTree: the campaign you alluded to is already happening! S.1390, attached to the 2010 National Defense Authorization Act, makes sexual orientation a “protected” class regarding hate crimes. The bill does not define what sexual orientation means, so it could very easily be interpreted in the courts to include pedophilia.

          • rodin

            You can stop with your fear mongering…. NOBODY is proposing legalizing pedophilia except for some deranged Christians that are trying to raise the fear level. Same sex and non-same sex marriage is between EQUALS… Pedophilia is about a non-equal relationship where the rights of the child are subordinated to the criminal.. Our society, except for the Christians, believes in not hurting others.

        • James

          Rodin, I defy anyone here to cite and quote a state or federal law that discriminates against gays. Since Lawrence v. Texas (2003), there are none.

          • Smilee

            Since when has a law stopped discrimination, their is a law against murder too but we still have lots of them, the fact is we do have less because of these laws but not none, fact is gays are frequently discriminated against,

  • Scott

    Marriage is not a political institution. Rather it is rooted in biology and moral obligations. Seana Sugrue writes in The Meaning of Marriage, “The reality of [biological] differences between men and women, leading to the potential for offspring, is essential to the pre-political foundation of marriage.” Therefore the government has no right to change it. Traditional marriage advocates like myself argue that the state has a responsibility to defend true marriage. To institute same-sex ‘marriage’ would require the state to engage in a form of despotism, bringing the extra-governmental institution of marriage under government control, and “nurturing” (forcing change upon) society to support its definition of marriage. Then, anyone who would dare oppose the state’s definition of marriage would find him/herself battling against the state. Since most marriage traditionalists draw upon religious roots for their stance, there is a fundamental mutual exclusivity between instituting same-sex ‘marriage’ and preserving religious freedom. That is, same-sex ‘marriage’ and religious freedom cannot co-exist.

    • DaveH

      I agree Scott that there would be trouble with the government, but that is the ‘disease’. We need to treat the disease, rather than the symtoms. We need to eliminate government’s involvement with social issues.
      Am I the only one who has noticed that the more Government has gotten involved, the less civil our society has become? Many of us cannot get along just with our spouses or acquaintances. How can people think for a minute that we can achieve a one-size-fits-all solution for social problems?
      We need to work to lessen the size of government if we truly want to make the most of relationships with our fellow man.

    • Dee

      Marriage IS a government institution. Marriage is performed by justices of the peace in government buildings. Relion and church need not have anything to do with it. If heterosexuals want to get married in church with a religious ceremony they may. The fact that others are married in the county court house does not detract from that. The two marriages are legal marriages. They are just different, one from the other. Gay/lesbian marriages, if legalized would be just another facet of marriage with no threat to church marriages. Why are you guys so bent out of shape over this?

      • eyeswideopen

        They must be worried that the gays will be a big voting block for Pres. Obama… everything gets back to him, one way or another, just watch. loved ur response

    • Smilee

      Marriage is a civil matter under all states laws and is under no church laws and as there is separation of church and state and as those that do not believe in same sex marriage then also have to believe it is OK to discriminate against them and that is to make legal to treat them different and show me where in the US constitution it allows that. The church law has no say in this issue.

  • David

    The reason for the very existence of marriage is to legitimize children. It has been important to protect women and raise children.

    The unique DNA creation is covered by the family bond of marriage. To destroy that unique institution is to blow out a cornerstone in the foundation of society.

    But having said that, the reality today is that there are people with children, that have discovered that they prefer a relationship with one of their own gender. While they do not both share DNA with the child, they still may need the rights required by our legalistic society to raise the children.

    There is no cause or need to change the meaning of existing marriages to do this. A covenant union, or a civil union covenant could be created, that gives the same legal meaning that marriage has.

    • Smilee

      Where in the constitution is the meaning of marriage defined, fact is it is not but it does not allow for discrimination, by the way marriage under state laws is a civil union covenant albeit it is called marriage and no church law of any kind defines marriage in the civil arena

  • Robin from Indiana

    California must be where all the loonies live. They had their chance to vote yes for it and the majority spoke by saying NO. What part of NO is so hard to understand? I can’t believe that it will be put back on the ballot again. If it would have been passed, do you think that it would have been put on the ballot again so that it could be ‘unpassed’? Marriage is ordained by God. God’s word says that homosexuals are an abomination to Him. End of story! Give it up.

    • Scott

      God said that homosexual behavior is an abomination, just as much an abomination as any of our sins that we are willing to overlook. He went to the cross for their sins, as well as mine and yours.

      • Dee

        Scott, I am sorry, but you are so CONFUSED. Too much church, I suspect.

      • Smilee

        Where in the US constitution does it say it is an abomination and that is the defining document in US law not the bible or any church law, your argument is not relevant to this discussion
        Reply

      • eyeswideopen

        Yes, and the bible also states, you should stone your children when they disobey. Are you going to do that??

  • Lynn V Salton

    I agree with the Daves. Gay couples should be able to receive the same applicable legal recognition and benefits as any other married couple. If they adopt, they should be entitled to all of the tax breaks that any other “traditional marriage” would receive. This should be guaranteed and/or protected by the State as any other heteosexual civil union. However, this should NOT mean that any churches or justices of the peace, should be forced to perform marriage ceremonies that are contrary to their beleifs. The State has no business defining religion in any manner.

    By the way, many commenters have written that marriage is s not a political institution, but it is based in procreation and raising children in accordance with the beliefs of the church that married the parents. A cynical view might be this… marriage is a ceremony designed to ensure the survival of the particular type of religion that married the parents. You always need to expand your consumer base… so go forth and mulitply. You can commit “orignal sin” as often as you like, but the offspring you produce must come to OUR church (mosque/madrassa) and donate to the collection plate every week.

    Other commenters have mentioned that marriage

    • Lynn V Salton

      (Sorry ’bout the typos and sentence fragment at the end of my previous post)

    • Scott

      FYI, this ‘cynical view’ is antithetical to Christianity. There probably are some who teach this, but their view is not Biblical. The Bible clearly teaches that sex with your spouse is intended to be a blessing. Children are an extension of that blessing, as well as a blessing on their own. Meanwhile, sex with anyone other than the one to whom you are married is sin.

      • rodin

        Scott, Christianity is NOT the final arbiter of our civil laws. There is too much hatred and disrespect of others for it to be allowed to be so. Our civil laws must reflect the diversity of different people and religions and of those without religion. Hence we need more of a golden rule type system where everyone is allowed to live peacefully and respectfully with everyone else. This is a basic tenet of all religions and most philosophies. ie for Christians it is “Do unto others…” BTW for all the hill people on this website, the line does not finish with “before they do unto you”

        • eyeswideopen

          rodin,LOL

    • DaveH

      Lynn,
      Here again I would say you are treating the symptoms, not the disease. For instance, why should a married couple get a tax break (or not)? Each individual should be on the hook for the same taxes, whether Male or Female (true equality). I am especially adamant about the exemptions for children. If anything, more kids mean more government aid, so I think the parents would be fortunate that they didn’t have to pay extra for the kids. And please, I am not against anyone having kids, I just believe that those who choose to have children should be the ones who pay for them.

      • eyeswideopen

        Yea, Dave, I have often wondered why people with no children should be forced to pay school taxes. Doesn’t seem fair.

      • Dee

        I agree.

    • eyeswideopen

      Well said.

    • eyeswideopen

      Lynn, liked your thoughts.

    • Smilee

      No church is forced to perform a marriage ceremony and the Constitution protects that right so why are you worried about that. Where is the state interfering with church law or doctrine??? Commentators have no force of law so why quote them as they are somehow have authority. Marriage is all states is a civil matter under the US constitution and our laws none are under any church law

  • Jack Kinch(1uncle)

    If gays would stay in the closet. we wouldn’t have to think of the disgusting things they do.
    Another thing that bothered me was the idiot don trump picking a gay to judge a female beauty contest. Is it any wonder he would screw up?

    • Dee

      Hey! who said you had to think of disgusting things? Clean up you head, Jack!

    • Smilee

      Why do you think about them??

  • BABUSHSKA

    The two things California has done right in the last several years is to vote to uphold the definition of marriage as being between a man and a woman. To allow gay marriage will ultimately lead to the destabilization of our society by removing the very foundation our society is built on, the family… mom, dad, and children. The argument that there are many forms of families doesn’t hold up if you look to what God’s loving design for marriage is. We need to preserve and strenthen traditional marriage, not weaken it. We can do that by not allowing the gay agenda to call for re-votes on gay marriage over and over again when they don’t like the response of the populace; by not allowing elementary school classes be taught on the gay lifestyle; by not allowing “gay pride” parades in our city streets; by letting the entertainment industry know we will not support movies and television shows dealing with gay subjects, that we will not buy advertisers products who financially support the gay agenda and so forth.

    • DaveH

      Bab,
      I very much respect your wishes not to have your kids indoctrinated. The Libertarian solution to that would be vouchers, so you could send your kids to schools that didn’t do that. That would also solve that contentious (made-up) issue of separation of church and state, as people would then be able to send their children to a private religious school.

      • eyeswideopen

        Dave, what are you saying? Voucher’s, from the government? What happened to self sufficiency? Voucher’s are grant money to pay the school for your child’s admission, I thought you didn’t want government involved in our lives? Why should my tax money allow a few children to get a better education than my next door neighbors kids?

  • Barney Fife

    We messed up when we let women start voting, driving and wearing shoes. Now we are trying to make them marry women and men marry men. Them Qu**rs make me sick.

    • Neanderthal Man

      Barney, the mistake was not in giving women the vote. The mistake was made much futher back in history. We never should have taught females how to speak!

    • Smilee

      Barney Fife

      How fitting a name you picked

  • BABUSHSKA

    DaveH: I too, was raised Catholic and like you, attended catechism classes once a week. I found them meaningless. The Catholic church left me with a guilt-laden “faith” dominated by fear, repurcussions, and judgement, not a loving relationship with God. It wasn’t until I was 43 years old that I left the Catholic church and finally came to know what I had been missing. And that is a relationship with Christ and the assurance of salvation. And that’s what true freedom really is.

    Your statement that you don’t believe there is a God saddens me. Ask yourself, What if you’re wrong? What if there IS a God? And all He wants is fellowship with you!

    • DaveH

      Bab,
      I appreciate the sentiment, but I just don’t believe there is one. But you can rest assured that I will never vote with the Liberals to interfere with your beliefs.

      • Richard Pawley

        Dear Dave,
        I can truly see how a person who does not have faith could look at the world and say “How can there be a God?” I was blessed in that I had faith since I can remember (I write of praying at the age of three or four and having my prayers answered in my autobiography) but I still didn’t even know that one could have a personal relationship with GOD until I was well into my adult years. I went through the “my church is the only one that counts” phase as do most who were born to religious or church going parents. What I discovered is that faith in Jesus and a relationship with Him transcends denominations. It my case it isn’t sentiment. Since I experienced what the 120 did in the Upper Room in the Book of Acts, Chapter two, just past the gospels, I no longer believe. Now,I know! There is a big difference. Of course I had to learn and I did read the Bible once after that, cover to cover and may do so again. More importantly now I could understand much that before I could not. Don’t look at damaged human beings, even me, who only know some of the truth, and conclude that because you have never experienced God he must not be. He is not just the force that binds the universe together as in Star Wars “The Force” (He is that too, but so much more). I’ll tell you something no one may have ever before told you. “There is not one person on this planet that God loves more than He loves you”. There are, however, many who know Him, and who are guided by Him, and so they benefit, in ways to numerous to tell. In my latest book on what is really going to happen as a result of the very long Greater Depression, we have entered into I point out that those who can count on God for guidance and direction are going to be much better off than those who try to go it alone in the turbulent and troubled times ahead that have barely just begun. When you become interested in how you can know God read the four gospels and the section just after it, the one called ACTS. You can do that in less than two hours. The key to understanding the Bible is not to digest it only with your intellect. It can’t be done. It has to be spiritually discerned. And when the time comes and you want to know God, but you will find that God is already there and that He already loves you. You can’t impress Him or do anything He doesn’t know and you certainly can’t earn His love (that’s what the cults teach). I certainly don’t know all about God, the Bible, or even the economy, but I know what I know. By the way I would keep out of LACALIF between Sept 19 of this year and Sept 8 of next year as there is a “high probability” according to what researchers have discovered in the factual Bible Code that says there will be a MAJOR EARTHQUAKE there during that time. I also write about that too. Californians are going to have a lot more to worry about than fires and Gay Marriage very soon. May God someday bless you as He wants to do.

        • eyeswideopen
          • eyeswideopen
          • eyeswideopen
          • Richard Pawley

            Not sure why you repeated the address three times – it was correct the first time – but I had read the Australian atheist’s so-called rebuttal of the earlier discoveries a few years ago. Those who choose to oppose God or resist His Love and go their own way are free to do so and can always find a reason. The researchers at the Isaac Newton Bible Code Research Society continue to do their work and it actually crossed my mind that similar research by the NSA might have been the real reason Bush went into Iraq in the first place. I don’t know why the Australian opposes God but he is free to do so. One of America’s largest cults came out with a book opposing the Bible Code a few years back. The so-called Code however is based on probability. Much can be found that is most likely chance and of low probability but the fact that accurate mention was found of the earthquakes in Kobe, Japan, that killed 6,400 in 1995 as I recall, and the SFCALIF GREAT EARTHQUAKE of 1906 and 1989, as well as the LACALIF GREAT EARTHQUAKE of 1994 it is probable that the one of 2010 will occur too. Not only that but in my books, both of which can be found at places like Barnesandnoble.com and amazon.com I mention other reasons why I believe the LA earthquake of the Hebrew year of 5770 (our Sept. 2009 – Sept. 2010) will happen, both the collective unconscious and dramatic visions of others more than 40 years ago. Our scientists say there is a 99% probability that it will happen “within” 30 years but even the idea that these earthquakes could be found in a 3,200 year old manuscript would seem to indicate that that manuscript was something much greater than just history, wisdom, or myth. One of our greatest scientists and code-breakers at the NSA once said that whoever wrote what we call the Bible was not bound by time as we know it. Time itself might not be as we have always assumed it to be. God, however, does not require that anyone believe in The Bible Code and even some Christians and Jews don’t like the idea that such things can be found in the Bible. My advice, keep your eyes wide open, but “seek and ye shall find”. Of course if you seek the negative and reasons not to believe something you can probably find that too.

    • Lindy

      “What if there IS a God? And all He wants is fellowship with you!”

      Your GOD is all powerful, all knowing, all seeing… he’s omnipotent… why would he even want fellowship with me, a mere mortal? If GOD wants my fellowship, he will create peace on earth, find a cure for cancer and make sure no child is ever harmed. That’s what a GOD would do.

      Sadly, GOD seems to be nothing more than a group of like-minded people who get together and create a GOD in their own image so they can worships themselves. Religion is command and control of the worst kind. Can a priest, pastor or pope be voted out of office?

      • Richard Pawley

        Lindy, God does want fellowship with us but He can’t really have that completely until we allow Him to raise us up to His level, first spiritually, and eventually, in total. God does not want robots or clones who worship or fellowship with Him because they have no choice. As I said in a recent book, he treasures free will more than we do ourselves (or so it seems to me). There are reasons why mankind goes through what it goes through, much to much to write about this late at night. Cancer I am convinced is 85% or more avoidable but we have that free will that interfers with avoiding the causes of cancer. By the way, I believe that God created the cosmos and all that is in it (us and other intelligent life in the far reaches of space – nowhere near here) to have fellowship. He is not hiding but we have to be on the same frequency so to speak. By the way I agree with you that for some “GOD seems to be nothing more than a group of like-minded people who get together and create a GOD in their own image so they can worships themselves”. In one of my books I point out that the most common mental illness on this planet is that we can be God. NO, we can’t! That job is taken. We can be like Him, and that was the reason that Jesus was born into this dimension in the first place, to teach us how. Much to learn, but as Jesus told a woman in England about 75 years ago (she was a born again Christian who had begun to learn and complained to him while praying that there was so much to know). Well, His reply to her was, “What are you complaining about, you have forever to learn it!” Like I told Dave above, don’t give up on God by what you see in people who claim to know him. Some may and you will see something differnt about those who really do. Must go. Falling asleep. May He bless you when you need Him in the terrible times ahead. Just remember He loves you and you can’t earn love. You can accept it or reject it. God is not Baptist or Catholic or Dutch Reformed or Jewish. God is!

  • Bill Holloway

    I believe our foundsing fathers said “With liberty and justice for ALL” not With liberty and justice for all HETEROSEXUALS.

    • DaveH

      Yeah, and they also didn’t include slaves. They didn’t necessarily believe slavery was right, but political expediency drove them to ignore it. Damn politics. The very reason for government to exist (that is to protect people and their property from other people) had failed.
      I believe that society would be kinder and gentler if we had much less government.

    • LibertyTree

      I believe our founding fathers would have shot the freaks. Don’t try and use that Justice and Liberty for all ploy because they already have justice and liberty. We don’t guarantee that every citizen has a right to everything. What about drivers license, gun permits,and on and on. Gays do not have a need to be legally married. They already have the right to leave their worldly things to anybody they want. They already are able to visit each other in the hospital. They can buy health insurance. Why should we have to pay for health coverage for high risk people and raise our rates?

    • Dee

      Great observation! Kudos, Bill.

    • Smilee

      I guess all does not mean all to you and davey

  • LibertyTree

    They don’t really want to get married it’s just what they do to get people to think they are normal.
    New Hampshire just started marrying these freaks and there zero applications in several of the largest counties.

    • Dee

      Why do you call yourself “Liberty Tree” when you clearly do not believe in liberty for anyone but you? OOoops! Maybe I just answered my own question.

      • eyeswideopen

        lol, lol

      • Smilee

        Dee you are so wise

  • Ramona Valle

    Love the sinner and hate the sin. Homosexuality goes against natural and church teaching. It is disordered. When male homosexuality is acted upon the outcomes are predominantely negative. Homosexuals have a much shorter life span. The average life span of a male homosexual is 47 years. There is a much higher incidence of sexually transmitted diseases. There is a much higher rate of abuse in coupled homosexuals. Same-sex attraction exist due to environmental factors. Same sex attraction does not have to be acted upon. There is help. Go to courage.com or .org. I pray for you every day on my rosary.

    • Lindy

      Ramona… when you woke up this morning did you decide to act heterosexually or are you just naturally a heterosexual? Gays don’t decide to act gay they just are gay. You say gays have a shorter life span… a higher incidence of STDs and are victims of abuse. If that’s true (and I’m pretty sure your facts are correct)why would anyone willingly choose this lifestyle? Which of course makes me wonder why anyone would think that gays choose to be gay… or think that its environmental. It is what it is… its a naturally occuring trait… let them be… and let be treated equally and fairly.

      An earlier post said that “government is force not reason” and if that is true the same must be said about religion. So if your opposition to homosexuality is based on your beliefs… that’s your right. It would also be your right to keep homosexuals out of your church. To do anything more is just an example of religion as force without reason.

      • eyeswideopen

        Lindy, we missed you. Welcome back.

      • BABUSHSKA

        It’s the practice of homosexuality that I’m opposed to. Love the sinner, hate the sin. More than it being what I say against it, it’s what God says. He’s our authority. So go to God about it.

        • Dee

          Not possible. “Hate the sin, hate the sinner” is more like it. So, God must be a heterosexual male? Hmmm. I think some heterosexual male made that up.

          • Smilee

            I believe you can hate the sin and love the sinner and show him/her love and respect, however, on this site most seem to hate both albeit some are in denial about that because of how they suggest they should be treated which makes it clear they also hate the sinner. If they are born this way I have doubts they are sinners then and I’m in sure we do not have the human ability to judge them even though some here think they do and do not realize they do not. In short they play God and I find that more offensive

  • shannon

    the bottom line is the gay community wants to legalize sodomy. that is it plain and simple.

    • Dee

      Aw, Smannon. Come on! Sodomy? I’ll bet you or some heterosexual Christian you know has done sodomy. Do you know what sodomy is?

      • Smilee

        And I’m betting it was not a real pain in the butt for them either. Sodomy was found constitutional by the US Supreme Court in a fairly recent Texas case

        • eyeswideopen

          Smilee, Omg, I can’t stop laughing. heh heh.good one.

  • James

    In historical background, the Founding Fathers of these United States were all Christians, two were Catholic and the rest were Protestant. They all viewed the Holy Bible as the inspired word of God, and every sin therein was treated as a crime, although not to the same degree.
    For example, Leviticus 20:13 made homosexual acts a capital offense, and all States made this sin a crime, but not a sin unto death. This held sway until 2003 (220 years) when in Lawrence v. Texas (2003), the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a Texas law which criminalized homosexual acts. The Court said: “this Court’s obligation is to define the liberty of all, not to mandate its own moral code.”
    (If one stares at that long enough, he could go beserk. If “liberty” is now defined as contrary to the Holy Writ, and every state’s law which upheld it, how is that non-mandating “its own moral code.”)
    John wrote (1 John 5:16): “If any man see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death: I do not say that he shall pray for it.”
    Clearly, capital offenses were not to be forgiven, in this life.

    • Dee

      Really? “All Christians”? I heard they were all athiests. But, I suppose if they were all christians that would explain why there were no founding mothers.

      • Smilee

        All Christians or a christian nation are all a conservative far right myth, it was interesting to me a few years back when Billy Graham in a interview with David Frost said this country was not founded as a Christian Nation and has never been a Christian nation and the US constitution is our supreme law not the bible and they do often differ.

    • eyeswideopen

      I will repeat this one more time. This country was not founded under Jesus Christ. His name is not recited nor written anywhere in any of our founding documents. Under God, In God we trust, but not Jesus Christ. This is a myth promoted by the Republican Conservatives. Just google In Jesus Christ we trust and you will see.

      • Lindy

        The words “Under God” were added to the Pledge of Allegiance in the mid 1950s and NOT by the founding fathers in 1776. The phrase “in God We Trust” was first added to US coinage around the time of the Civil War. The phrase “in God We Trust” was added to US paper money in the late 50s… the 1950s. So, trusting GOD or being under GOD (which some might construe as kind of gay) had nothing to do with the founding fathers.

        • eyeswideopen

          Lindy, thanks, I was too lazy to look up info.. appreciate it.

  • Frederick H

    Reading many of the posts here I’m all the more strengthened in my conviction that religion is one of mankind’s most horrendous inventions. So many wars fought (and some still being fought) over the most idiotic nonsense ever contended by human beings. Such as the Jesus’ resurrection or the virgin Mary’s immaculate conception, etc, etc, etc. I have been raised in a traditional Methodist environment and believe me, I regret the fact of my birth within this family to this very day, being in my thirties presently. Sunday services were a veritable ordeal, I can tell you that. If I see how many evangelicals do heavily break the law these days, cheat on their spouses, beat up their children, are as full of greed as Mr Madoff himself, I am so glad to have left this whole religious shite way behind me and have been living a very happy life as an agnostic with my beautiful male lover for over a decade now. We’re not married and we don’t want to be either. We’ve been granted a legal partnership recently so no relative will steal any of our belongings, should either of us pass away one day. Organized religion is a cancer, but I’m sure the laws of evolution will take care of this phenomenon, albeit not quickly enough, I’m afraid.

    • Dee

      Thanks, Frederick.

      • James

        Dee, ‘Founding Fathers’ is an expression that’s been with us since our beginnings, or course women played a role. And it’s an historical fact that early America was known as a Christian Nation, but that doesn’t mean their religion was necessarily biblical.

        • Dee

          James, can you name the women who played a role? I really think that “founding fathers” meant what it said. MEN. Juat as the term “mankind” means just that. MEN. As we know, women had no vote until the 1920s. I would also like to know which of those fathers embraced Christianity. For starters, George Washington was atheist.

          • Lindy

            What about Betsy Ross? Didn’t she sew something for the “founding fathers”?

            (FYI… just foolin’ around!)

        • Smilee

          Known as a Christian nation???? It is a far right conservative myth and was not founded as a Christian Nation or has it ever been. The US constitution is our supreme law not the bible and they do differ on many items

    • James

      Frederick H, I agree with most of what you said here. The so-called ‘Christianity’ being practiced today, in no way resembles the biblical story. What convinced me of its divine origin was Daniel 2:36-40, which described the four world empires that would rule here. The first was the Babylonian Empire; the second was the Persian Empire; the third, the Grecian; and the fourth the Roman. Daniel wrote this while in captivity in Babylon, circa 600 BC. These empires did come into existence in that order, which eventually persuaded me that only God could have known that.

  • Frederick H

    Alas James, the trouble with such texts as by Daniel (allegedly) is, that there is no reliable evidence whatsoever that they were written by the “author” as indicated and indeed “circa 600 BC”. Might very well be that this particular “book” was produced long, long after the empires as described were history already, as they say. Another hypothesis might be that the original text (i.e. the entire book of Daniel) has been heavily tampered with, to match the so-called prediction to the facts as we know them at present. So, I’ll not be the least convinced at all, until and only until well-read and responsible scholars offer ample evidence (still to be scrutinized thoroughly, mind you) of the author’s factual trustworthiness. This, of course, is of relevance to every scrap of Scripture (be they from the Bible, the Koran, the Pali Canon or whatever), I should think.

  • Smilee

    Where in the US constitution does it say it is an abomination and that is the defining document in US law not the bible or any church law, your argument is not relevant to this discussion

  • Frederick H

    Right on Smilee. We’re sidetracking this whole discussion by introducing all kind of biblical stuff into our argumentation. The bible or any other religious document is totally irrelevant to the debate, as they require faith and do not the least add to an objective appraisal of the issue in hand. I do endorse the wiccan stance here though: do as thou willst, if it harms none. And what indeed (objectively and evidently) constitutes “harm” in the case of homosexual behavior as such?

  • Dr. Ballard

    Let Gays marry. Other countries have done it and some how have not had Biblical plagues befallen them. That can prove one of two things – for those who believe, you presume to speak for God and he doesn’t really care. And for the non believers – this is a Human affair, and merely a civil matter.

    Face facts, with the exception of the hard core and their offspring, most people in the Gen x, y, and beyond don’t care about this. If there won’t be Gay Marriage lets say this year, there will be relatively soon.

    • http://www.gaytostraight.org/Home.asp Dave

      Funny, you say nobody cares and yet even far leftist states like California have voted against allowing this perversion TWICE. Seems like there are still many, many right minded people who care tremendously about preventing this perversion from becomming law. Praise God!

  • Frederick H

    Absolutely, Dr Ballard. It’s just a matter of highly necessary “cultural evolution”, I dare say. The funny thing is, btw, that the really great ancients (the Greek, the Romans, the Babylonians before them) did not care a hoot who did what with whom. The word homosexuality did not even exist. As you probably very well know, the concept (as an “isolated phenomenon”) wasn’t invented until the late 19th century when “Victorianism” heavily dominated European and American culture. So now, more than a century further on in history its high time to drop this whole nonsense about gayness as something very special and very particular, way down into the waste basket of cultural history. Basta!!!

    • http://www.gaytostraight.org/Home.asp Dave

      The Romans had peg-boys also. They sure knew how to give in to their carnal lusts. Yet even they knew marriage was for procreation and rearing of their children. It wasn’t for gays. Thanks for bringing up the history of this perversion. BTW, I hate having you tout it as diversity when in reality it is perversity.

  • Carol McSwain

    Although the government has worked hard alongside gay and lesbian lobbies to take God out of everything so that the people who don’t agree with that God is and will always be, the Word says that, “In the beginning God created…Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion…So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male AND female created he them…

    Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shall not lie with manking, as with womankind; it is an ABOMINATION.

  • Carol McSwain

    Romans 1, Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened…Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lust of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves…For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections for even their women did change the natural use into that thich is against nature…And likewise also the men leaving the natural use of the soman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet..and even as they DID NOT LIKE TO RETAIN GOD IN THEIR KNOWLEDGE, GOD GAVE THEM OVER TO A REPROBATE MIND, to do those things which are not convenient.

    Pat Robertson didn’t say those words, God did! Pat Robertson is not trying to spread hatred or gay bashing. Pat Robertson is trying to call them out of that lifestyle so that no homosexual will perish. He is trying to call you to turn from that lifestyle. There is pleasure in sin for a season but that pleasure soon ends and the wages of sin is death. There will be no good end to living like that. The heartache you feel now will be nothing compared to an eternity in Hell. God loves the homosexual and it grieves Him. Turn from your sins before it is too late. The time is short. The signs are all around. This world is a mess and Jesus said, “when you see these things, look up for your redemption is drawing near.” You do not have to hang your head in shame when you meet God, repent and turn from your sins before it is too late.

  • Frederick H

    Good Graciousness, Carol. Can’t you think for yourself?? All this nonsense about god wanting this and god wanting that and imminent punishment is nothing more than pure POWER POLITICS and population politics, as far as all that crap about the sinfulness of acting on one’s gay nature is concerned. The same is true for abortion and euthanasia. The church just wants to keep a tight grip on our behavior and our freedoms and therefore has to come up with all this biblical shite time and time again. But luckily not all of us are such dumb fools as to let ourselves be intimidated by this medieval blah blah of god as a mighty granddaddy up there in the sky, watching our every step day, by day, by day. Jeez, god als Big Brother. Gimme a break. Grow up, at last.

    • http://www.gaytostraight.org/Home.asp Dave

      Give US a break. Just because YOU don’t understand the truth of God’s Word doesn’t mean we should give up when we DO understand it’s message. Just because you want something doesn’t mean it is good for you to get it. That is just an extremely immature idea. Why don’t YOU grow up, and keep your bedroom antics to yourselves? We are sick of hearing about them. What you try to make us believe is diversity is in reality perversity. We don’t want to know about it, and we sure aren’t ever going to accept that perversion as an acceptable lifestyle.

      • Smilee

        Are you trying to make us believe you understand the truth of God’s word??? you have said so much and said it so many times on this site that convince any reasonable person the is just so much more of you BS and twisted thinking. Your constant links to all these radical sites does nothing to refute what I said either

  • http://www.gaytostraight.org/Home.asp Dave
  • Frederick H

    Well Dave, as a matter of fact we gays have been confronted more than long enough with such conservative biblical nonsense as included in your posts. We DON’T WANT your so-called cures. What’s even more, we don’t need them. We’re perfectly OK the way we are. Stop harassing me and my gay brothers and lesbian sisters with your religious crap. The god you say you’re worshipping doesn’t even exist. Get over all that foolish and primitive idiocy. We’ve had enough it, as it is. Your god’s been dead for over a century; in fact, ever since Nietzsche exposed the insanity of (the traditional Christian) faith in the late 1800s. The only sensible reaction to the contents of the web sites you recommend is hearty laugh and two middle fingers, I’d say. I used to feel a lot of anger reading such total BS about a decade ago. Not any more, my dear. Now I sincerely hope that young people who stumble upon such brain-dead nonsense will see right through its sugary surface to the really hard-core conservative bigotry bubbling underneath. It’s all lame evangelical propaganda and I wouldn’t be surprised to find a fat financial motive running deep down in the advertisers’ heart of hearts.

  • Frederick H

    Sorry for the typos

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.