Very recent epiphany, The gay rights movement has a very sinister agenda.

originally posted by: deadeyedick

originally posted by: Annee
I'm just gonna say: sinister is in the Eye of the Beholder.

Equal Rights - Equal Dignity was fought and won legally in court.

You have told me on multiple occasions that it is a war against Christianity and that any compromise that led to equal benefits for same sex couples would not be accepted and only gay marriage would be accepted.

I grew up Christian. I was Christian (of a sort) most of my life.

Where have I said what you claim? Where have I said anything even close to what you claim?

Christianity is losing the strong-hold they've had on America's secular government, as they should.

There is no "gay" marriage, there is only marriage (Legal Marriage).

a reply to: thinline

Gay folk are not all pedophiles in fact the percentage is the same for heterosexuals.
Ignorant...wow.

originally posted by: Urantia1111
a reply to: GoShredAK

Anybody else stop reading at "Satan"?

Pretty much.

Belief is a choice.

a reply to: Annee

Agreed. What's happening right now is that humanity is maturing. Much like as a child ages and discovers Santa Claus isn't actually real. There's no organized "war" on Christianity I know of -- as it's not needed. Christianity will fade away on its own, just as a child's belief in elves, tooth fairies, Santa, Easter Bunny ect. All of those myths and beliefs were helpful during periods of our own personal growth, and Christianity was helpful for humanity for a period of its own growth. It is only a matter of time before it, like our childhood beliefs, are cast off as we mature as a species. It is inevitable.

Nature worship gave way to polytheism, polytheism gave way to monotheism, monotheism will eventually give way to something else. It is simply the way of things, and no "war" is needed to help further this along.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: thinline

Gay folk are not all pedophiles in fact the percentage is the same for heterosexuals.
Ignorant...wow.

Pedophile is its own orientation.

The attraction is children. The victim is mostly by availability, not gender. Men have easier access to boys.

Whatever sex act a pedophile engages in, they are still a pedophile. Not hetero, not homo. Pedophile.

originally posted by: GoShredAK


This is being done in various ways, the tactic I'm referring to is the recent legalization of gay marriage in all states, along with the acceptance of the lifestyle virtually being forced upon those who show a hint of opposition.

On the surface this is just a blatant attack on valuable morals

And I'm sure the intolerant of the past said the exact same thing when they were forced to accept interracial marriage, even though it went against their beliefs or "morals".

a reply to: Annee

Oh I was just recalling how you said that a compromise of civil union would not be accepted in lieu of gay marriage and that you are part of a war on Christianity because of the past persecution of gays it is necessary to seek retaliation in the thread I made about civil unions and how marriage altogether should not be a function of the government. It is all in there. My assertion is that there is a war against Christianity. Do you disagree? Have you changed your mind now that a goal was reached cause if so that would be a good thing.

a reply to: MystikMushroom
Your post here is plenty proof of a war against Christians. Perhaps now some may want to back peddle on their push against the fact we believe that marriage should between man and woman.

Even if you do not want to see the battles being fought only shows you choose to ignore many msm feeds.

On the other hand I do hope now we can find some common ground and militants on each side can seek understanding.

Dp

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Annee

Oh I was just recalling how you said that a compromise of civil union would not be accepted in lieu of gay marriage and that you are part of a war on Christianity because of the past persecution of gays it is necessary to seek retaliation in the thread I made about civil unions and how marriage altogether should not be a function of the government. It is all in there. My assertion is that there is a war against Christianity. Do you disagree? Have you changed your mind now that a goal was reached cause if so that would be a good thing.

Compromise? For what?

Where have I said there is a war against Christianity?

I have used the physically disabled, prior to the Disability Act, as a parallel to Equal Treatment-Equal Rights.

Legal Marriage is a government contract. It is what we currently have.

Removing government from marriage is a completely different topic.

My advice to you, OP: Don't take the replies this thread to be an accurate representation of ATS. You'll notice certain members are compellled to relentlessly beat threads like this into silence, which deters others from joining. Many an ATS'er has been frustrated by the realization that civilized discussion in these threads is nigh impossible.

To my point above, even the smallest detail can be a point of derailment when the SJW crowd steers the discussion. Many in this thread seem to have a narrow definition of the word 'agenda.' An agenda does not have to be written in some manifesto or agreed to in a meeting. An agenda can form naturally and be adopted by groups of (perhaps unwitting) people.

On second thought, it might save time if you just use more pedestrian words like 'plan' or 'movement' in place of 'agenda.'

a reply to: MystikMushroom
You don't think that's the way every generation sees things?

'We have advanced far beyond our primitive ancestors! Surely we can do no wrong.'

a reply to: deadeyedick

There is no "war". I don't know how you're getting that?

In a war, people fight. No one has to fight for people to stop being Christian. People don't choose to be atheists, they realize it. Religious people don't understand how one can have an absolute absence of belief. To them belief in some kind of spiritual system is a necessary part of being human. These folks can't conceive of believing for or against religion, they simply cannot entertain the paradigm. So, to these people they believe they chose to be Christian, and truly and honestly think with everything they know -- that people choose to be atheist.

There is no war against Christians. The only thing that exists are people making themselves into victims and martyrs. A war isn't a war when people are putting down their religious texts and just walking away.

Walking away from religion isn't a war against it. It's simply walking away. I don't know of any kind of "war" that works when people just up and leave.

a reply to: OpenMindedRealist

Sure, and I'm not claiming that we're not going to say the same thing about us now 100 years in the future, it's the way of things.

As our understanding of our universe grows, our beliefs and awareness changes. It's just how it works. It's how it will always work. What is known and accepted as fact today will be seen as silly in 500 years.

It's the way of things. *shrug*

a reply to: GoShredAK

Humans are not special. That fallacy has caused more grief towards the planet Earth and its produce than any other living creature. As for the concept of Satan as well as God it is just the product of fanciful imaginings.

As a species we are pretty unwise and blunder from one crisis to another be it social, religious, military, scientific or economic.

The only end time prophecy that will truly come to pass without human manipulation or interpretation is when the local Sun that keeps this tiny Earth ticking over reaches the end of its current state and destroys this plant as the Sun expands and brightens to dangerous levels.

a reply to: GoShredAK

No offense, but you need a history lesson. Your mind is enslaved. You are firmly plugged in to the system (Matrix).

Native Americans had the Two Spirit people - Two Spirit theory

Throughout human history there has been an issue with gender, sex, and gender identity. THROUGHOUT HISTORY. This is not a new construct.

The only thing that changed is the creation of a system (religion) to control the thoughts and actions of human beings. I'm not saying we shouldn't have a system of basic rules. But to be honest, our system is vastly corrupt and out of hand.

Even the original 10 commandments make no mention of homosexuality. That had to be added later BY MOSES in Leviticus. Strangely the original 10 commandments also make no mention of pedophilia, bestiality, or any other manner of sexual practices. WHY?

No offense, but I find picking and choosing archaic bible verses a futile battle. You can pick one and then I can pick one to show you how wrong you are. It's a never-ending cycle.

Besides, you don't even understand who Satan really is... how can we have a meaningful discussion?

originally posted by: piney
Jesus said if you love me you will follow my commandments and the commandments of my father. God states you shall not lay down with a man the way you do with a woman. And if you do not follow any of his commandments then you reject him. I once believed live and let live. But now I can't support such an abomination. By supporting them I too will be condemned. Do not confuse yourselves is this love or lust. God is OK with man loving his fellow man but the lust part is what he opposes. This goes for heterosexuals
As well you can love a woman but do not lust for the flesh until marriage. Lust is one of the 7 deadly sins. God knows man is weak and he does forgive but he doesn't forgive the state of sin. Jesus was not politically correct he said things that shocked everyone. He spoke the truth he said it how it was. As for homosexuality I see it like the emperors new clothes. Everyone is too afraid to speak out against it. Not me. I don't hate gays but pray for them to stop sinning. Satan can't touch you unless God gives him permission. Now that we are at the 7th millennium God has commanded Satan to work harder to take as many souls as he can. The gates of hell are wide open. Enough room for all. Too me homosexuality is

The gates of hell.

Everything in this post is wrong born of fanatical imaginings and reading religious texts written thousands of years ago in another country that applied to specific Middle-East regions.

originally posted by: jkramer
first off, everything the feds do applies to me. sanctioning, or banning, any sort of act sets further precedents for them to exert their will directly upon me at a later date.

Actually the precedent was already set for this ruling from the interracial marriage ruling (Loving v. Virginia).

second, a person would have to be delusional to think the feds actually care about the "plight" of homosexuals. it was a political stunt. nothing more. nothing less.

Political stunt? That must be why homosexual rights have advanced more during Obama's Presidency than during any other Presidency. Yea, political stunt and not because he actually cares about them. Though, this is really just a random opinion that has no ability to be backed up with any sort of evidence. So in other words, it's irrelevant and I don't care about it. Clearly the federal government is doing SOMETHING about gay rights regardless if you think it is a "political stunt" or not.

that's why i prefer things be dealt with at the local level. in my mind, that's how you truly judge if the times are changing. for instance, it is claimed that prior to the revolution Iran was a very westernized nation. yet there are sources stating that the majority rural areas were still very tradition and did not support the pro west regime. if what the national government said truly mattered, them there would never have been a revolution sense the population would have resisted it.

Many states had already legalized gay marriage at the local level though. The ruling overturned the last holdouts. Plus some people NEVER change. You have to drag them kicking and screaming into the next century. We had to do the same thing with racial rights.

third, claiming that what homosexuals are going through is akin to the civil rights movement is total nonsense. if this was taking place in the 50s, or a modern muslim state, i would agree. however, homosexuals dont face any where near the discrimination, within the US, that blacks faced during the civil rights movement. even back then i highly doubt the feds would have stepped in if they did not see any sort of gain for themselves.

I can't believe you are saying this with a straight face...
A Brief History of Homosexuality in America

Besides, things don't have to be as bad as they were in the 1950's to recognize that things aren't equal between homosexuals and heterosexuals. That is a dumb analogy. The Constitution requires equally, not that the government step in when people become complete asshats towards each other. So if things aren't equal then it's not Constitutional.

on a side not, i am still shocked that california outlawed homosexual marriage.

Bigots exist everywhere. Including in liberal states.

Anti-gay marriage people love to use the "states rights" argument when it suits them. If the federal government had gone the opposite direction and made same sex marriage illegal, these folks would be cheering. The "states right" argument only applies when something they believe in struck down by the federal courts. To these people, the federal government is great when they get their way, an evil oppressor when it opposes their beliefs.