I have been reading over the past several weeks about gays and gay issues. I was part of an online thread that even questioned whether or not there is a "gay agenda".
Some of the notable mentions in the news recently have been: President Obama appointing historically the largest number of gays, like Kevin Jennings, in his administration, President Obama's pledge to legislatively seek the repeal of Don't Ask, Don't Tell (DADT) and the outing of gays in Uganda's Rolling Stone magazine.
But wait! A little noted event occurred in Iowa a key state in any national election. According to A.G. Sulzberger in his New York Times article, "Ouster of Iowa Judges Sends Signal to Bench":
"An unprecedented vote to remove three Iowa Supreme Court justices who were part of the unanimous decision that legalized same-sex marriage in the state was celebrated by conservatives as a popular rebuke of judicial overreach, even as it alarmed proponents of an independent judiciary"
A.G. goes on to report, "Leaders of the recall campaign said the results should be a warning to judges elsewhere." I agree.
Social matters belong in the hands of the people, not activist judges.
The issue of special rights for gay and lesbian behaviors are a matter of broad social judgement, not imposition by judicial fiat. So who are those behind the gay agenda? Progressive Democrats and Republicans who have came to believe that being gay is not a choice, even though the science says otherwise. It is pushed by a vocal few in both parties who wrongly believe this behavior deserves some special recognition equal to that of blacks who have suffered past discrimination.
Progressive Democrats and Republicans have tried their damnedest to deny any public outrage over the openly gay agenda. How do they do this? "As part of the vast social project of moral leveling." Charles Krauthammer wrote, "it is not enough for the deviant to be normalized. The normal must be found to be deviant." [Emphasis added]
So anyone speaking out against the gay agenda is considered to be a homophobic, racist, bigot. Even President Obama's senior advisor Valerie Jarrett was attacked when she said homosexuality is a "lifestyle choice"
Standard progressive tactics - shut up the opposition by categorizing them as being morally deviant.
How does the media play in all of this? They have scrubbed their style manuals of any references to the gay or lesbian lifestyles for fear of being branded "deviant". Some even support the gay agenda because they have embraced "normalizing deviant behavior" in the name of social justice.
There are countless examples of how dangerous male sex with males (MSM) is and the harm it does. In Sarasota County, Florida 70% of the HIV/AIDS cases are due to MSM. This is born out by the Florida Manup Report and the United Nations. According to the Florida Manup 2010 Report:
"In Florida, 1 in 209 white men, compared to 1 in 44 black men and 1 in 117 Hispanic men are living with HIV/AIDS (reported cases). Males account for the majority of HIV/AIDS cases in Florida. Men should begin engaging in frank discussions about the seriousness of HIV/AIDS and include women and adolescents in the discussions." [Emphasis added]
The problem is men are afraid to speak out against the dangerous behaviors of gay men for fear of being labeled deviants.
According to American Vision, "All types of behaviors make people happy. Just because a person pursues that happy behavior does not make that behavior morally acceptable. . ."
Morality is an individual decision, not a decision made by the state. From the passage of Proposition 8 in California and of Amendment 2 in Florida and the ouster of the judges in Iowa the people have spoken. The state morally redefining marriage is not acceptable to the people.
A.G reports, "critics of the campaign, including those who see the courts as a protector of minority rights. . ." This is perhaps the most frightening statement of all. It is not the role of the judiciary to make moral decisions. It is the people in our Republican form of government who decide moral issues. When the state becomes a vehicle for the imposition of morality we will have tyranny.
Time to manup and talk about the negative consequences of the gay lifestyle. What do you think?
Comments
Gays, normalizing deviants, and legislating morality
Kudos to you Richard, for you insightful analysis of these issues. I agree with you 100%. This branding, labeling, etc., is a tool the deviants, progressives, addicts, alcoholics, immorals, amorals, and others needing social approval have used so skillfully to put people with values, standards, and morals "in our places." It has worked because the majority of Americans who have been brought up to value Judeo-Christian moral standards, strong work ethic, and patriotism don't know why we believe and act the way we do. Consequently, we have no defense against the labels and branding because, Heaven forbid we should offend anyone with our opinions, beliefs, and values. Even though the majority of Americans hold to the Biblical model for our behavior, the deviants of our society and the regressive/Progressive/anarchist wannabes have driven us into submission by using our own standards for politeness, empathy and desire for peace against us. We say to ourselves that this is the way Christ was: unoffensive and non-confrontational, understanding. That wrongheaded thinking has caused us to look weak and vulnerable and true to the labels. Yes, Jesus was understanding, empathic, loving, and patient with sinners. (I am grateful for that!) But we ignore the other side of our loving Savior borne out in His dealings with the Sadduccees, Pharisees, the money changers in the temple, hypocrites, and unlawful. He was strong, confrontational, and unmistakably clear: "Your thinking, behavior, and treatment of the weak, needy, and downtrodden is unacceptable and will not be tolerated." He quoted Old Testament Law to them and, as the Son of God, could preach the mind of God to them. They got the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth when He opened His mouth. Offending them was not His concern; their dying without hearing the Truth was. He even warned that choosing His way would divide families, relationships, etc., causing division, ostracism, even death for His followers. We who hold values other than those of the deviant, unlawful, anarchist wannabes must stop being fearful, namby-pamby, milquetoast Americans, Christians, and people with values. We must learn who we are and how we got here and prepare to defend this way of life to the death, if need be. We are the majority, we must arm ourselves with the truth and be ready to fight those who would destroy our way of life. Keep up the good work, Richard. I enjoy your comments.
Thanks for the refreshing article!
It's very nice to hear someone willing to open their mouths and be willing to speak common sense on this issue of homosexuality. Opponents (who are in the minority) will brand you a bigot or a homophobe if you even slightly express opposition to homosexuality or even gay marriage. That is wrong. The homosexual lifestyle is very unhealthy and immoral and there's nothing wrong with calling a spade a spade and saying as much!
It's your new military
I'm a Christian, and I'm getting kicked out.
Gay Agenda
This is what I think:
1. The gay agenda is equality!
2. You have no scientific proof that being gay is a choice. It's only common sense that being either gay or straight is not a choice. The only choice is being in the closet!
3. Anyone speaking out against the gay agenda of equality is at best ignorant and at the worst a bigot.
4.Aids is a horrible disease and societal and religious pressure to stay in the closet is detrimental to dealing with the spread of Aids.
5. I agree with your last statement "When the state becomes a vehicle for the imposition of morality we will have tyranny." That's why GLBT taxpaying folks should have the same rights as anyone else.
6. Its time to manup and see what harm discriminatory laws and attitudes towards GLBT folks cause. And, it's time to see that GLBT folks are everywhere and can be your sons, daughters, uncles, aunts, mothers, fathers, bosses, employees, neighbors. And, that it's not healthy for them to be in the closet.
No gay agenda
No one gets a sexual orientation by having sex. Else they would not know who they wanted to have it with. Being gay has nothing to do with behavior as gays can choose to be celibate, monogamous or promiscuous, just like straights can. I've challenged many to define the "gay lifestyle". Those who throw this phrase around obviously don't know any real gay people. Quick, all of you reading, write down the names of 5 gays who aren't celebs. See, you don't really know any. So assuming they all live some similar lifestyle is silly. I'm straight, married 42 years to the same man. Is my so called lifestyle anything like the straight Mother Teresa, Brittany Spears or Elizabeth Taylor (serial monogamy)? Course not. Knowing you are straight tells me nothing important about you. Are you blue collar, a professional, do you live on a farm, do you go to church? Are you moral, honest, do you volunteer? These are things that define a lifestyle, not who you have a capacity to love. When gay kids can date openly and learn about relationship building when their straight peers do, when they have lifelong committed role models in other gay couples in their lives and on TV, when they can aspire to a legal relationship called marriage, then and only then can we start looking forward to see if there are statistical differences caused by being gay.
Agenda
Quick, everyone reading this. Name five gay people who aren't celebrities. Can't? How can you label them in any way as having a so called "lifestyle"?
Is it really true that you
Is it really true that you (Rich Swier) think that anti-gay bullying is acceptable? I read somewhere that you said something to that effect...
Post new comment