The Homosexual Agenda, page 7


Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 03:25 AM by CazMedia
grady says,

This is an assumption which is based on your belief that people who disagree with someone must hate them. To say that marriage is an institution primarily for procreation and the socialization of children and for the legitimization of and contol of sexuality is not an expression of hatred for homosexuals, it only a statement that marriage is not for same-sex couples. Society has chosen to benefit those who commit to marriage, but marriage was not established to qualify couples for social largess.
I have said this time and time again in threads concerning gay issues, yet still i am assaulted and labled homobhobe or biggoted hater and such...WHY? Not everyone that is not pro gay agenda, hates them or even usus the bible to come to that conclusion, yet were lumped in with the truely biggoted.

Why do many of you people think that any person has to NOT hate someone? There is no legislation that bans people from hating and/or organising themselves with others of the same persuasion. In fact, the first amendment PROTECTS those people from the obviously hate filled bigoted, devicive people that would like to silence them and kill their ideology. (meaning any of you that say its wrong to hate)

You hate, you just happen to hate a group that enjoys more condemnation than support. You are discriminating between them and those you think deserve your attention/support. This is no different from them exercising their rights to do the same to you.

You claim to expouse equality?, then stand up and say the haters are entitled to their positions as long as they are not commiting criminal acts to support it. wish them well in their pursuit of happieness, or do you prefer to impose your ideology upon them by force?
Hate and love are on the same coin, just on opposite sides. How do you legislate peoples emotions?

dreamlandfl says,
The right to get married IS a right

please explain how the gov/courts can enforce this civil right...how is this defined?...who will garuntee you a spouse? Doesnt this demean everyone else that is single or divorced? Wont they be "lesser" people because they are not enjoying this right? Marriage is a choice between 2 people. A right is the same for all people, not a choice. plenty of single/divorced people enjoy the same opportunities and successes as marrieds, why havent they been considered needing a right for them?

Red Oct says,

Basically what we are seeing with the gay marriages and all that.. is no different than the fight black people had to gain equal rights, or women fighting for equal rights.. always you've seen that many traditionalist conservatives attaked groups that looked to have equal rights like everyone else.
Excuse me?!? please stop demeaning the suffering of blacks to that of gays, they are not even in the same ball park!!!
when were gays property? when couldnt gays own property? when were gays segregated in transportation and resturaunts and bathrooms etc? When were gays denied the right to vote?
Please stop demeaning blacks by trying to pump up the suffering of gays to equal the struggle against slavery. Yes there are some instances of gay bashing, but as far as this being institutionalized into the laws and such this has never happened to gays. Stop LYING to support a feel good gay agenda.

RedOct continues LYING to support this gay agenda, (or the fell good pc agenda of bleeding hearts, take you pick which agenda)

Personally I am for gay marriages.. because it's not affecting my life, and it won't affect anyone elses life.
here is my answer from another thread

"even though it does not hurt or even affect them in any way" I think that citing one effect will be enough to say this idea is a false premise.
I propose that i, as a straight man, will be affected when tax revenues drop, because more combinations of people (now m4f, add m4m and f4f combos) will be able to claim a marriage tax deduction. What about insurance cost rising to cover the new influx of the combos into the claims for death bennifits kick in once gay marriages are allowed...now more people will be eligible for payouts...that cost will be passed to the consumer. There are 2 reasons no one ever talks about.

In fact, i almost NEVER see more than a list of wants, and NO discussions on how implementations of thes ideas into the legal/tax structure be accomplished. What would the effects on taxes be, on insurance, which laws need to be altered because of this new union? where is the legal loopholes that could be abused.....NONE of these ideas are ever discussed, only....give us...give us...give us you biggoted bastards....

Forgive my reluctance to implement such a plan with deep reaching effects until we've actually looked at how this can/would work and other consequences of adopting gay marriage.

Why is it wrong to ask these societal questions that obviously can effect anyone, weather they percieve it or not.

Why would it be wrong for a democratic society to expect these answers before enacting legislation of this kind?
Care to spew this LIE again and explain away the rammifications i pose?

redoct again,

Open mindedness and respect is the key to a more well-rounded society.
Tell this one to the Boy scouts, that are PROTECTED from being pushed into accepting an ideology that is not consistant with their ideals, yet they get crapped on now for being bigots.
They have the right to be left alone to their beliefs and not be labled by the pro gay supporters that pretty much tried to slander and destroy a historic and overall good institution. When i start to see the gay agenda people behaive in the same manner as you advocate the rest of us have to do with them...then equality will be in effect. Until then, look to your own projected bias to find bigotry.

I have no problems with any special interest minority group (kkk or gays) to have and promote their agendas. Just dont resort to devicive namecalling, labeling, and subervise tactics to circumvent the democratic process to get what you want at the expense of others rights.

[edit on 18-10-2004 by CazMedia]

[edit on 18-10-2004 by CazMedia]


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 09:12 AM by W_HAMILTON
Originally posted by edsinger
No I think you summed it up fine. The Priests did those things to him and that might be what triggered it....I dont know.


No, they didn't molest him. I believe he was Mormon actually, and he was young at the time (probably around 16), and he confessed to one of the priests, and they began to treat him with shock therapy to try and get him to change his ways. I believe he contemplated suicide for awhile, and it took him quite some time to come to grips with who he was, and get over all the priests had done to try and force him to be something he wasn't. So temporarily saying you've been cured of the "gay demons" doesn't mean much, since alot of it is induced because of stuff like this (though maybe not quite as violent). People can hide their sexuality, so anyone can profress to having 'exorcised' the gay demons. But that's just a nice way to side they are disguising who they are imo. Even though I'm sure some people are just confused, or maybe were molested, and have issues in that sense but that doesn't necessarily mean they are gay, so I'm sure those type of people can change. But people that are simply gay do not change, because that's either (1) how they were born or (2) something that happened during their child (how they were raised, something to trigger it, who knows) which they have no control over. So stories like that just mean they were successful and convincing you, and maybe their family that considered them an outcast, or the priests that told them they were going to hell -- they simply convinced them that they had changed because it was in their best interest.

And Herman, you tell me. I've never done drugs. I've never had wild sex with random people. I can probably count on one hand the number of times I've gotten drunk in my life. Come up with some other stereotypes about the "gay lifestyle," and I can probably say I've never done those things either. Hell, truth be told, I've never even be with a guy -- certainly not sexually, not even a boyfriend. But I'm still gay. Is that "living the lifestyle" to you? Actually that's a rhetorical question, because I already stated just like myself, you don't know a damn thing about what God wants, so don't try to answer it as if you do. I think I made my point clear.

As for the marriage being religious thing, that's no problem to me, like I said, let all marriages be called a civil union, and if they go thru the religious ceremony, let it be christened a "marriage" then. That seems to work for me. I couldn't care less about the religious aspect of marriage, I care about the rights, about what the relationship signifies, about the practicality of being in a legally recognized relationship with someone you are committed to.


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 09:49 AM by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Originally posted by SpittinCobra
Grady, I am asking, Do YOU think gays have an agenda? If so, what is it? Why do you think this?


Yes, I think gays have an agenda. I decline discuss my personal views on the matter at this time, as I was hoping that this duscussion could inform my views.

I did something similar by initiating a thread on the Nineteenth Amendment, with similar confusion at the outset. Must one incite conflict to foster discussion?

The material posted is for the sake of discussion. Those who wish to post other views, agendas and manifestoes should feel free to do so.


Well, my opinion is that you are taking the views of a couple of extremist gays and using it as some sort of evidence that the entire gay movement is out to legalize child molestation and kill off poor white Christian heterosexual protestants.

The links and info you posted do not surprise me. i grew up near San Fransisco. headquarters for such "upstanding" folks like Queer nation, who used to vent their violent anti conservative/anti democratic/anti heterosexual and family views. yet most of the San Fran gay community rolled their eyes at them and considered them hyperactive thugs in need of a reality check.

Like its been mentioned. theres white seperatist groups who want a totally white nation with all other races kicked out. Is this an agenda for the whole white society? No.........

Gays, like any other group, are not immune to lunatics and seriously disturbed individuals. just cuz a few gays want to play with kids does not mean all gays wanna make it legal. plenty of gays who violently oppose any kind of child abuse and exploitation.

And given the fact that the majority of child molesters are heterosexual, I dont believe gays are simply sick people who like to play with children in a bad way. Some do. many dont.

I personally dont care for gay people myself. I have had friends who were gay, have lived near them. My reason for not likeing them has more to do with generally their pace of life, goals, perceptions of reality, and abilitiy to stay on planet earth. But i sure as hell dont find them a threat or scary, and I sure as hell dont believe in demonizing them as much as the Right Wing whackos do.

Now, extreme Christians Right wingers, THERE is a scary group with a disturbing agenda. i worry more about them than I do a couple of nutjob gays with little pull and less presence in the media.

the Right Wing Whackos have done more to screw this country up than a couple of gay pedophiles. To tell you the truth, between the Right Wing Whackos and the Left Wing Traitors, both have done more damage than a Russian combo commie/fascist/homosexual army could ever do.


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 10:58 AM by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Originally posted by MacMerdin
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf

My reason for not likeing them has more to do with generally their pace of life, goals, perceptions of reality, and abilitiy to stay on planet earth.



Could you explain this a little more? Just curious.....thanks. I'm trying my hardest to stay away from this GOD awfull thread but was curious what you ment by this statement.

Edit: And is this not a generalization/stereotype you are perpetuating for yourself?

[edit on 18-10-2004 by MacMerdin]


No problem.

For starters, i am not religous, and dont believe homosexuality is some crime against some invisible god. i dont believe homosexuals are some mutated abnormal sick humans with evil tendancies.

What i eant by my above statement:

Most gays I knew lived totally irresponsible lives, even those of "high" social standing. They engaged in risky, irresponsible acts like cruising, annonomous sex partners, multiple sex activities, risky drug use, and amoral attitudes towards alot of things.

Its not their preferences in sex partners. If they dig other men and women, thats their thing. But i have found, that msot gays find the idea of personal responsibility towards the feelings of others you are involved with, and the idea of having a monogamous relationship with a person and forming a deep bond of love, loyalty, and respect and trust, seems like an anethema.

Not that all gays are shameless husseys. its just there is such a tiny minority, in my experience, actually wish to embrace a positive sort of lfiestyle. i feel that the tendancy towards impersonal promescuity and amoral attidue towards many things, the the unwillingness to set limits and standards and personal codes of ethics and such, unhealthy. Not only for gays, but for heterosexuals too. but unfortunately, tis alot more prominent amongst gays.

not to say gays are simply immoral rutting animals with no self control. Its simply the main gay culture that allows such things. i often wonder why things like monogamous, lasting reltionships between two homosexuals are not more heavily promoted and encouraged. i mean, it would cut down on disease rates, and would really improve the quality of life for many gays, as it has been found, that gays suffer with alot of difficult emotional issues that only get worse when they engage in endless streams of meaningless, impersonal, sexual relations. i think if gays would get over the attitude of monogamy being a boring "breeder" activity, they would find they too could reap great emotional, social, and spiritual rewards of having their own special 'someone", that is exclusively their own.

I have known a couple of gay people who had lifetime partners, and it really helped them cope and grow as people, and they became more positive mebers of society, but unfortunately, the vast majority i have known simply set no boundaries and limits on what they will do and except, and this kind of behavior, gay, straight, or vegesexual (my own term for asexual) is totally destructive not only to the individual, but to the whole of the community.

Again, im not saying all gays, but the vast majority seem to want a lifestyle with no limits or boundaries on whats exceptable, whether its sex, drugs, ect, and this really harms them and people around them, and has serious lasting consequences for all.

I dont support gay marriage, i support civil unions with all the full benefits of a heterosexual marriage. i simply do not like the concept of calling it a marriage. marriage is for a man and wife. Wife is the old anglo saxon word for an adult female. A marriage is a union of the opposite sex.

But I believe a union of full legal recognition should be available to gays. Such a thing will help, in my opinion, encourage gay people to settle down and seek out a soulmate. i think gays should really get together and create a special ceremony. the union of a same sex couple is different in many aspects to a union of opposite sexes, and thus, should have a special ceremony refelcting the unique principals and issues of such a union. Why gays would want to mimic heterosexual rites is beyond me. Youre gay. Youre not bride and groom. You are two lovers of like body and mental make up. I special ceremony and title should reflect it.

these are just my opinions. likie i said, it annoys me the general amorality i have experienced amongst gays i have known. ive known heterosexuals of the same mentality, but encounter them far less.

i simply think the mentality that pervades the gay community is an unhealthy and destructive one, thats all.

It has nothing to do believing some nonsense that being gay is a sin and someones god hates gays.


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 12:14 PM by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Originally posted by MacMerdin
Thank you Skadi for replying to my question. I thought that is what you were getting at but wanted to clear it up for people who didn't get it.

My theory on the reason why gay people (men in particular) are so permiscuous (sp?) with sex, drugs, etc. is that we grow up with everyone telling us we are wrong, abhorant, evil, are going to hell etc. So we grow up with some sort of self loathing. If you look at it, the heterosexual counterpart who engages in this type of lifestyle usually does not have any self respect for some reason or other.

So, to actually curtail these annoying habits of my fellow gay men.....treat them with respect and they will respect themselves and thier bodies. Just my theory but I think alot of people would agree with me (gay or straight).

Also, I like your reasoning about having a seperate "marriage" for gay people. You are right, we are different and should have a different ceremony than straight people......because we aren't husband and wife....we are husband and husband or wife and wife. Also, a lot of straight people can't comprehend that we are husband and husband and NOT husband and wife. I have heard sooooo many times people asking..."well who would be the wife?". People, it doesn't work like that. I like men for a reason...they are a man. I do not want a wife...I want a husband. I'm not fem either....I am as masculin as the next guy.....but I still want a husband and not a wife. Understand?


Thank you. You said it in one phrase what it took me a long and laborous post to say:

lack of self respect.

And you are right. heterosexuals abuse themselves for the same reason.

I do not treat gays differently for the most part. But I found that with many, i had a hard time trying to explain how hurting themselves hurts other people. its not like i dont understand the familial tradgedy of comming out with such a "dirty little secret"?

No, im not gay. i came out of my own closet once, the broom closet. i was once a practicing Wiccan. My family was mostly hardcore fundimentalist Christians who believed Jimmy Swaggert, Orel Roberts, Pat Robertson, and jerry Falwell are all truly annointed men blessed by god with true visions, prophecies, and messages straight from the big spook himself. So, im sure you can imagine when finally, after being repeatedly pestered about why i no longer attended church or rolled my eyes when family would rant about how the holy spirit touched them. When i told them why, you would have thought i told them i was a Satanic baby eating serial killer who had sexual relations with livestock and corpses.

it was tempting, after the horrible rejection and sudden branding as diseased and "possesed by the lies and evil of satan", to go get loaded, party, escape. But i refused. Why? Cuz i knew if i let myself engage in self destructive activities, I would only give them even more reason to believe and prove themselves right, that i was dealing with satan and being destroyed. But instead, i moved on. i engrossed myself in more estoric studies. Went to school, spent weekends volunteering at the animal shelter, ect. And that just pissed em off more.

i soon discovered that my self acceptance and willingness to simply let them loathe me burned them. Why? because when they looked at me, they were forced to face the fact that everything they believed in was not absolute truths. because according to them, practitioners of witchcraft were all [ossesed and lied to by the devil, and all go mad or become evil and demonic and start engaging in evil things, and inside are really longing for "god" to save them from themselves. What they saw in my eyes was too much to bear: the saw a calmness, a peaceful acceptance, that their religion, which they tried to force on me, could never give me. When i was suffering great spiritual crisis when i was engaged in thier "faith" (which to me, was basically spiritual sadism), they would tell me it was simply the devil trying to torment me as a believer. But it pissed them off even rgeater when they realized i had found peace, true love and appreciation for life, and this came not from jesus, but from what the had believed all their lives to be the forces of darkness. No longer was I a miserable nervous, self hating wreck who believed i was an unclean sinner, but a person who was finnaly able to end a lifetime of spiritual turmoil and living in an enforced alien philosphy. I had found hope and peace, and it did not come from jesus, which was a total blow to everything they believed as absolute and unswervable truths. Seeing me happy, healthy, and doing things like paying the rent for my sick mom, saving homeless animals, and helping friends through drug rehab was simply too much to bear, because it was simply impossible for anyone to find peace and hope outside christianity.

Gays really need to learn that they cannot depend on respect and consideration of toher people. the topic and beginning post of this thread shows that simply aint gonna happen. there are still people who strongly believe gays are evil commie subversives who have an agenda to make it legal to rape kids and farm animals and outlaw heterosexuals. gays need to understand this is a fact of life. But the only way to defeat these people is not by telling them, you need to at least live and let live, because as we saw with matthew shepahrd, there are people out there who find the idea of letting gays live to be unacceptable, and tying them to fences and mericlessly beating them to death is a service to humanity.

Gays need to learn the best way to defeat these people is to not only accept themselves as people, but also to realize, that the best way to defeat those who despise you is to entitle yourself to all the things they believe you are unworthy of and incapable of. When gay people take responsibility for their own happiness, and realize that love, committment, companionship, and living life in a healthy, sane, and empowering manner are NOT the sole entitlement to heteros only, you defeat your enemies. To see gay people as happy and enjoying the same rights and privilages heteros enjoy flies in the face of everything they are convinced of, and forces them to face up to the fact they have been wrong.

And that by itself is victory.

if only the gay community would see that self destructive behavior feeds the stereotypes that gays are flawed, defective, abnormal freaks incapable of or a normal productive happy life, they would alos know encouraging the opposite would kill their arguments, or send them into a depserate frenzy to hold on to their old preconceptions.

Tolerance cannot be forced on people, nor should it. But tolerance isnt everything.

Winning the war is


reply posted on 18-10-2004 @ 12:15 PM by Jazzerman
Originally posted by Herman
...but MARRIAGE is a RELIGIOUS union between two people...thus bringing religion into the game, and RELIGIOUSLY, homosexuality is a sin. That's why I'm for civil unions, because gay marriage is just a huge contradiction to what it's supposed to stand for. "We are gathered here in the eyes of God to tell him that we choose to live out what he sees as a sin". Besides, you seem to proclaim a lot of "The biggest _____ on ATS". Get a hold of yourself.


Actually, that is untrue itself. Marriage is a legality, and one does not have to get married by a religious figure in order to complete the agreement of marriage. People essentially enter into a binding contract with each other stating they will remain with each other, and oftentimes religion is not even an issue.

People around the world comprising of different cultures and religions get "married" just like Christians, so effectively it negates it being a "Christian" practice as well. Different religions treat marriage, well, differently. According to some polygamy is ok, or the various list of others that I referenced before in this thread. Marriage is only defined by the law in the United States...this is why my sister was able to get married even though she is a Wiccan, or why my fiance' and myself can get married even though she is also a Wiccan. Marriage is a legal issue...nothing more!

Now, do two homosexual people that are committed to each other deserve the same legal obligations and freedoms as Heterosexual couples in the eyes of the law? Yes...because marriage is defined more as a legal contract than a religious notion.
Pages: <<  4    5    6    7    8    9    10  >>    ^^TOP^^