The Homosexual Agenda

The Committee on Lesbian and Gay Concern American Psychological Association has published a guide to avoid heterosexual bias in clinical literature:

www.apastyle.org...

Massacheusetts, the only state where same-sex marriage is legal, now finds itself in a heated debate over whether or not birth certificates should be changed to accommodate the "children of same-sex couples. Maybe I haven't been keeping up with science well enough of late, but are same-sex couples reproducing with one another or are some women "borrowing sperm from men? Maybe someone can clarify this.

Massacheusetts' Birth Certificate Debate

www.foxnews.com...

Google Search

[edit on 2005/7/27 by GradyPhilpott]

[edit on 2005/7/27 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Massacheusetts, the only state where same-sex marriage is legal, now finds itself in a heated debate over whether or not birth certificates should be changed to accommodate the "children of same-sex couples. Maybe I haven't been keeping up with science well enough of late, but are same-sex couples reproducing with one another or are some women "borrowing sperm from men? Maybe someone can clarify this.

Massacheusetts' Birth Certificate Debate

www.foxnews.com...

Google Search

1)If you endorse traditional marriage as its always been, do you approve of the concept of women as chattel? Do you approve of the concept of the man being the sole owner of all assets and wealth in the marriage, and being under no obligation to share any of it with the woman if they seperate? These concepts have been integral parts of both jewish and christian marriage throughout the western world until about a century ago after all, and were founded on the 'biological' logic that the man is naturally the master and the provider.

2) If the technology to fertilize a woman's ova with genetic material from another woman is developed to the point where it's safe and widely available, would you support lesbian marriage on the grounds that they can now reproduce and have children? And don't dismiss this one as impossible, because its already doable and the only thing standing between it and the market is professional ethics and the concerns of the community.

3) If (and we're getting a little further into science fiction territory here) a fetus could be conceived made entirely from genetic material from two male donors, would you support male homosexual marriage on the grounds that they can now reproduce and have children? Feel free not to take this one too seriously though, since it's a fair way from being practical and probably won't be done even with animals for at least a decade.

4) Marriage today in the western world is almost invariably about love. Couples who don't love each other don't get married. Married couples who don't love each other have a tendancy to get divorced. Couples who are planning on getting married tend to consider love the primary motivator, ahead of having children together (something they wouldn't want to do if they weren't in love) or financial security (which is an added bonus, but hardly anyone's real reason for getting married). Please to be explaining why the love same-sex couples feel for one another is somehow less important or less noble and magically doesn't warrant the societal recognition and the celebration that marriage brings.

This should be a discussion of the social movements associated with Homosexuality.

You do realize of course, that you could just as easily list dozens of "Christian" manifestos claiming agendas of genocide, raping infidels, castration, bigotry, etc. etc. right? Sounds like you're picking a few bad apples out of the barrell and holding them up as an example of the whole barrell.

I don't get what the heck a guy would see in another guy...(heck, I still have a hard time understanding what women see in us), but I've got better things to do with my time than worry about what people do behind closed doors.

The only reason there are "social movements" by homosexuals, is that they have been hassled for the way they live their lives for so long, there wouldn't really be any other choice to become accepted in society. What was a personal and private issue, has to become a social issue, just because of what the society has been doing throughout history to keep gays out of their normal lives.

Like gazrok said, I don't really get homosexuality either, but I'm not about to start wasting my time trying to stop them from just loving each other, if that's what they want to do...who cares? It's just a problem our society has, with forcing conformity, not allowing individuals to make their own decisions. And don't try to say that gay people can simply "choose" to not be gay, because I have no idea why they would make a choice that would cause them to basically be humiliated the rest of their lives...it's just the way they want to live, and they should be able to live that way.

Who really has the "agenda"? It's not the ones who are simply trying to live their lives and be accepted in this unaccepting society we have...and I'm not referring to homosexuality with that statement, but simply dissenting from sociological norms in general. Everyone who doesn't fit in has the "agenda", right?

[edit on 27-9-2005 by Shoktek]

Originally posted by Gazrok


You do realize of course, that you could just as easily list dozens of "Christian" manifestos claiming agendas of genocide, raping infidels, castration, bigotry, etc. etc. right? Sounds like you're picking a few bad apples out of the barrell and holding them up as an example of the whole barrell.

I could have done what you propose, but the subject of the thread was The Homosexual Agenda, which was brought up in another thread. I did a Google search and posted what was available on the subject at the time. It's unfortunate that the search yielded what it did, but the point of the thread, in part, was to, through discussion, present a more balanced view. That hasn't occurred. Instead, most respondents have chosen to deride me or grill me as to my own personal beliefs, which for the most part I have tried to avoid, except for a few basic tenents founded on traditon and personal experience and observation.

[edit on 2005/9/27 by GradyPhilpott]

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

....the subject of the thread was The Homosexual Agenda, which was brought up in another thread. I did a Google search and posted what was available on the subject at the time. It's unfortunate that the search yielded what it did, but the point of the thread, in part, was to, through discussion, present a more balanced view. That hasn't occurred. Instead, most respondents have chosen to deride me or grill me as to my own personal beliefs, which for the most part I have tried to avoid, except for a few basic tenents founded on traditon and personal experience and observation.

Questions #2 and 3 were in direct response to the question you posted directly above my previous post.

I spend most of my time over at ATS - because I don't care for politics. I'm sick of it. Now, I've seen this thread on some lists, and I've been avoiding it because I knew what was going on in here. So I had a little time and patience on my hands... I read the first page, and that was enough to fill me with disgust! I couldn't bear to read 35 pages of gay bashing and uninformed mud slinging. Sorry.

I thought most people on this board had some intelligence. I was wrong. Some of the members are still stuck back in the middle ages. Uninformed. Ignorant. Hateful. Primitive. Yes, this thread may cause me to think twice about being a member of ATS. I wandered into the politics arena. Will I never learn?

I don't have the stomach to read through all 35 pages to see if any other board members are gay. I am gay. And I'm a Christian. (Anyone who doubts me can take it up with me when we walk around chatting in heaven!) For those sticking up for homosexuals. Thanx. And good luck. (To the Mods - thanx for not letting personal opinions get in the way. You've got my respect.) And for those homophobic people on here. You know not what you say. Walk a mile... That's all. Oh, and read my lips. You are IGNORANT! What happened to denying it?

@GradyPhilpott - There's no gay agenda. Full stop. Or I just didn't receive my instructions on who to kill yet. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Enough said. Enough politics for the next 5 years.

- Ok, so I scanned the whole thread before I posted my final reply... Fact remains; it's exactly what I thought it is. Seems like there was one or two gay posters. I_AM_that_I_AM - I didn't pick up if you're gay or not, but you'll be getting a vote from me.
I'll be over at ATS chasing aliens and running from MIB's. Leave me alone or I'll put the Gay Mafia on you.

Whoa Gemwolf!

Most of us were defending your right live whatever peaceful lifestyle you choose without being persecuted or called a sinner. What thread were you reading?

[edit on 29-9-2005 by 27jd]

Originally posted by Banshee

Originally posted by edsinger
...show the odds of a gay man being a pedofile are greater, much greater than a hetro one.

Oh, come on.

Look up sexual abuse statistics, ed.

Between 1 in 3 and 1 in 4 girls will experience childhood sexual abuse.
Between 1 in 5 and 1 in 6 boys will experience childhood sexual abuse.

Now, if significantly more girls are being abused, how does that account for your claim that homosexual men are more likely to abuse young boys?

Deny ignorance.

Because Guys in thier masculinity feel to embarassed to come forward thats why, been there and he's lucky he lived, and anyone who touches my children will regret it!

Originally posted by Gemwolf
I spend most of my time over at ATS - because I don't care for politics. I'm sick of it. Now, I've seen this thread on some lists, and I've been avoiding it because I knew what was going on in here. So I had a little time and patience on my hands... I read the first page, and that was enough to fill me with disgust! I couldn't bear to read 35 pages of gay bashing and uninformed mud slinging. Sorry.

I thought most people on this board had some intelligence. I was wrong. Some of the members are still stuck back in the middle ages. Uninformed. Ignorant. Hateful. Primitive. Yes, this thread may cause me to think twice about being a member of ATS. I wandered into the politics arena. Will I never learn?

I don't have the stomach to read through all 35 pages to see if any other board members are gay. I am gay. And I'm a Christian. (Anyone who doubts me can take it up with me when we walk around chatting in heaven!) For those sticking up for homosexuals. Thanx. And good luck. (To the Mods - thanx for not letting personal opinions get in the way. You've got my respect.) And for those homophobic people on here. You know not what you say. Walk a mile... That's all. Oh, and read my lips. You are IGNORANT! What happened to denying it?

@GradyPhilpott - There's no gay agenda. Full stop. Or I just didn't receive my instructions on who to kill yet. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Enough said. Enough politics for the next 5 years.

- Ok, so I scanned the whole thread before I posted my final reply... Fact remains; it's exactly what I thought it is. Seems like there was one or two gay posters. I_AM_that_I_AM - I didn't pick up if you're gay or not, but you'll be getting a vote from me.
I'll be over at ATS chasing aliens and running from MIB's. Leave me alone or I'll put the Gay Mafia on you.

If you cannot verbally confess " Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh" you are no Christian end of discussion, and they who are servants of sin know not the Lord.

You know, I still wish that this thread could finally address the issue I initially intended for it to address:

This should be a discussion of the social movements associated with Homosexuality.

I have endeavored to stay out of the resulting fray, but I am going to put one thing in the proper perspective. Every single individual brings to every single situation an agenda. It is human nature. It cannot be denied. It is axiomatic. It is nothing to be ashamed of.

There is an agenda to mainstream homosexuality, if nothing else. There is an agenda to extend all the rights and privileges accruing to heterosexual couples to homosexual couples, etc.

Why no one can address these real issues is beyond me. If there truly is no agenda, as some insist, then I would ask, why not?

There can be no doubt that since the late sixties there have been considerable changes in societal attitudes toward homosexuals and homosexuality. It would seem to me that there is an ongoing social movement. Why can't there be a sober discussion of such?


[edit on 2005/12/16 by GradyPhilpott]

Whoo. Whoo.. There are differences, Jesus knows there are. I mean, Lesbian judo mud wrestling is surely a sign from God himself! Those disgraceful sweaty homo men have nothing to do with the lord that way, I mean they are tight ... so tight... but surely we shouldn't stand for this poofter equality nonsense. Stand up! Will we really let those perverts change the beauty of our enjoyment of two women finding the virtues of sweet sweet innocent foxy lovin'? do we really want them to turn that into something Gay? it's up to you!

yours sincerly,

- Concerned Masturbating Christian.

You said a mouthful, kegs. I guess that would be the reason there can't be a sober discussion, which also answers the throbbing question of why so few members bother with PTS, anymore.

[edit on 2005/12/16 by GradyPhilpott]

Grady, if those you speak of can’t handle humour as the clear, clean right hook it can be and often is to normal sensibilities, then that's their loss.

Originally posted by edsinger
Thank You for posting this, I will quit posting in the other thread as that is where the agendists were spinning. Now we have a proper thread.

i've been to the site before, and needless to say, it's affiliated with the KKK and other white supremecist organizations. i'm white, i'm proud of my heritage, but i'm not proud of the parts of my heritage involving the oppression of other races. just don't take this source and use it for anything involving serious discussions. its just a bunch of bigots mouthing off with innacurate data and pseudoscience.

this is therefore an improper thread, started with horrible propaganda. edsinger, i thought you were one of those good, rational republicans, but now i'm not so sure

[edit on 18-12-2005 by madnessinmysoul]

I'm not sure what site you are referring to. edsinger's comment was regarding another thread from which this one was spun off.

i'm talking about inoohr, they're affiliated to white supremecy. edsinger thinks this is a proper thread, when in fact it's severely bigoted from the get go.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
i'm talking about inoohr

What is that? You should note that this is a very old thread and I was hoping that some of the emotion evoked when it was first posted might have died down enough to address this issue from a more cerebral perspective. Maybe you could share more about your views with us and your substantiation one way or the other.