Gay jackasses destroy institutions

Cite your own examples of news slant, right and left. Contribute your own take on the news.

Gay jackasses destroy institutions

Unread postby UniterNotADivider » Wed Mar 27, 2013 4:45 pm

Is this the only thing those jackasses want? By referring to an accepted male-female, religious ceremony of the love between them as 'traditional' the party implies that the fundamental structure of all societies should be diluted to fit the whims of a tiny percentage of individuals who have made a certain choice. Traditional? Should we refer to H2O as 'the traditional definition of water'? Many African Americans are appalled by even the comparison that their struggles to gain rights are similar in any way to that of a much smaller group of people who have chosen a homosexual lifestyle - it is true though many of them also agree, but simply because they're in the party... Yet, this seems to be the only thing the modern, tolerant, diverse Democrat party cares about now, above, and at the expense, of all else. Forget governing the country!

The gay lobbyists, including Human Rights Campaign, have thumbed their noses at a majority of Americans, including a majority of Californians - where Bernie lives, a very diverse, tolerant state in it's own right and my home state. A choice-driven group can NOT be given special rights that are equivalent to others which are not choice driven - in order to have children, and thus a family, you must be gender opposite. It is required, by the laws of nature and not man. Do not consider this a religious argument, it's a biological fact. Therefore, one does not have a choice when it comes to the creation of a family. The argument that marriage is a choice throws away all reasoning about why it exists in the first place. If marriage is redefined, then family must be redefined. Homosexuals can neither marry nor have a family, by definition.

IF the court did decide their way, any two guys could hook up and one of them could receive health care benefits designed for spouses and the children only, become scout leaders, and so on. There is no logical argument to equate an institution that both produces and nurtures children to a choice that could not provide both. Two women could not have children together, except through invitro-fertilization where a male donor is required, nor could two fathers nurture with breast milk and give a child the attention a mother gives, though so may try. It would be a slap in the face, and will create the biggest culture war this country has ever seen should the court attempt to make the 'equivalence' argument. Polling just doesn't cut it in court, now can the party get on with governing, winning territory from Islamist Radical Terrorists [the president has tried to redefine 'that' too!], and fiscal responsibility? I don't believe that they can.
UniterNotADivider
Media observer
 
Posts: 10
Joined: Mon Mar 18, 2013 12:21 pm

Gay jackasses destroy institutions

Sponsor

Sponsor
 

Return to More Bias and Arrogance

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron