Commentary: Stonewall Columbus Pride Parade reminiscent of a Fourth of July parade

Jun 23, 2013 Full story: The Lantern 605

A Pride Parade walker looks to throw bracelets at crowds that lined the street. Pride Parade, part of Stonewall Columbus Pride Festival 2013, took place June 22 on High Street.

Read more
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#548 Jul 9, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Just as a same-sex partnership does not meet the definition of marriage, an "open marriage" does not either.
Your demand to refer to them as such does not, in fact, make them such.
"Marriage… is the civil status of one man and one woman united in law for life, for the discharge to each other and the community of the duties legally incumbent on those whose association is founded on the distinction of sex."
- Black's Law Dictionary
No. They're marriages. They just don't mean YOUR definition of marriage. That's the difference, and why should they have to be beholden to YOUR definitions?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#549 Jul 9, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
But only if it's heterosexual sex education, right? If the kid's gay, you send him off into a camp. Also, I missed that. I apologize.
Same-sex behaviors were listed among the other 547 sexual paraphilias, as defined by the APA, up until 1973...when they were removed as a result of activist pressure, as follows:

During the early 1970s, gay activists had made a number of disruptive demonstrations at professional meetings, placing considerable pressure on psychiatrists to revise their designation of homosexuality as a disorder treatable by psychiatry. In 1973, the board of the APA voted to change the classification of homosexuality in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The members of the APA who specialized in treating homosexuals protested the board's decision, but immediately before a general referendum on the issue, a letter went out in the name of the board, urging APA members not to reverse the board's decision. It was not known until after the vote that this letter was in fact written and paid for by the National Gay Task Force, and the final tally in the referendum upheld the board's decision to reclassify homosexuality. The 1973 decision was based not on any advance in scientific or medical knowledge. It occurred instead as a result of successful gay lobbying -- and a considerable body of psychological data on homosexuality was dismissed as no longer relevant.

There is a certain irony in the fact that gay activists and their supporters now often claim the authority of the APA for the view that homosexuality is not a psychological problem. Michael Vasey, for instance, in his new work, Strangers and Friends, insists that the reclassification was "not the result of some 'liberal' conspiracy," but instead "represents the recognition that there is nothing intrinsic to a homosexual orientation that makes it psychologically disordered." On both points he is mistaken. The APA decision was in fact far from unanimous, and it was arrived at largely on sociopolitical grounds.

This pattern of pressuring institutions and researchers to produce results favorable to homosexuals and then claiming the results as objective evidence occurs again and again in pro-gay literature, and is perhaps one of the most curious features of scholarship in our times....."

http://tinyurl.com/ygcakn4

In essence, this movement within the American Psychiatric Association has accomplished what every other society, with rare exceptions, would have trembled to tamper with, a revision of a basic code and concept of life and biology: that men and women normally mate with the opposite sex and not with each other.

http://tinyurl.com/yfu9c7c

At no time before or since has the APA or any other psychological or psychiatric professional group ever addressed a mental health question in this manner.

Think on that.

And know that the practitioners of the remaining 547 paraphilias now have grounds [i.e., "equal protection"] upon which to demand a "marriage" of their own definition.

A society cannot exist wherein each individual claims to be his own god, determining and living by his own truth standard. That scenario is what we term "chaos."

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#550 Jul 9, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
How is it a misuse? Because it isn't used to make kids? Newsflash: Many people don't have sex to just have kids anymore. Sex is about way more than having kids. Also, different people live in different ways. Sorry life isn't a Norman Rockwell painting. Your Way =/= The Moral, Perfect Way. And they're what now?
The rectm is not a sex organ. That it is misused for such purposes is the reason AIDS and other STDs spread among practitioners so easily -- not to mention anl leakage, g@y bowel syndrome, and the plethora of others diseases and bodily harm caused by same-sex malfunctions.

[misspellings due to autu-mod censor]

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#551 Jul 9, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
No. They're marriages. They just don't mean YOUR definition of marriage. That's the difference, and why should they have to be beholden to YOUR definitions?
As I have repeatedly stated, and as you should well know, it is not MY definition.
Marriage predates our existence by millenia, and has been recognized by states, churches and society since.

YOU seek to redefine a definition that has remained as certain as the sun rising in the East.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#552 Jul 10, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't answer my question. Do you know any gays?
As a matter of fact, I was invited to a "same-sex marriage" ["commitment" ceremony], which I politely declined as I can in no way support such an act.

Roughly two years in...one of the gals split.
To marry a man.
An anatomically correct man.

ROFLMAO.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#553 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Declaration of Independence, second sentence:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
The "Creator" who "created" all men equal under the "Laws of Nature" did not then, or now, approve of same-sex behaviors.
Do you know what "pursuit of happiness" even means?
When this document was written, sodomy was punishable by execution throughout the states.
And since then it was found unconstitutional.
In fact, in 1778, Thomas Jefferson himself attempted to lessen the punishment by proposing the penalty of castration; the Virginia legislature rejected his proposal.
Further, sodomy laws remained on various state books across these United States of American until 2003, a mere decade ago.
It is only the moral relativism of the radical Progressive movement of the 21st century that has tossed this nation's moral foundations into the sewer.
No, it was the realization that what consenting adults chose to do between themselves was none of your fkn business! Read the ruling!

"The Court held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment."

Nothing there about requiring anyone's approval.
Relativism is intellectual nonsense -- those who embrace it claim there are no absolutes even as they claim, via the state, the absolute right to impose their views on others.

[QUOTE]Marriage existed for millenia before this nation's inception.
And it will exist for millenia more... just with an addition to the old definition.... you know... building on...
Our government, founded upon the "Laws of Nature"
as established by "Nature's God,"
Uh... homosexuality is a part of that nature.
recognized marriage as reflective of Nature's laws and foundational to civilized society.
The definition of marriage has not been coercively forced upon anyone.
It simply has existed through the ages as a building block of society.
And that definition is about to change for this entire country.
It is Progressives who seek to destroy the foundations of our society and nation by arbitrarily redefining them. It is not enough for them that same-sex practitioners can freely live their lives in this nation, and freely declare that their same-sex relationships are acceptable.
By the way, you miht be interested in the Libertarian's documented position on the issue.

"1.3 Personal Relationships

Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."

and

"3.5 Rights and Discrimination

Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights. We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that "right." We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual's human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs. This statement shall not be construed to condone child abuse or neglect."

Really you should read the whole thing. It parallels me pretty closely.

http://www.lp.org/platform
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#554 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
Same-sex behaviors were listed among the other 547 sexual paraphilias, as defined by the APA, up until 1973...when they were removed as a result of activist pressure, as follows:
During the early 1970s, gay activists had made a number of disruptive demonstrations at professional meetings, placing considerable pressure on psychiatrists to revise their designation of homosexuality as a disorder treatable by psychiatry. In 1973, the board of the APA voted to change the classification of homosexuality in its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The members of the APA who specialized in treating homosexuals protested the board's decision, but immediately before a general referendum on the issue, a letter went out in the name of the board, urging APA members not to reverse the board's decision. It was not known until after the vote that this letter was in fact written and paid for by the National Gay Task Force, and the final tally in the referendum upheld the board's decision to reclassify homosexuality. The 1973 decision was based not on any advance in scientific or medical knowledge. It occurred instead as a result of successful gay lobbying -- and a considerable body of psychological data on homosexuality was dismissed as no longer relevant.
There is a certain irony in the fact that gay activists and their supporters now often claim the authority of the APA for the view that homosexuality is not a psychological problem. Michael Vasey, for instance, in his new work, Strangers and Friends, insists that the reclassification was "not the result of some 'liberal' conspiracy," but instead "represents the recognition that there is nothing intrinsic to a homosexual orientation that makes it psychologically disordered." On both points he is mistaken. The APA decision was in fact far from unanimous, and it was arrived at largely on sociopolitical grounds.
This pattern of pressuring institutions and researchers to produce results favorable to homosexuals and then claiming the results as objective evidence occurs again and again in pro-gay literature, and is perhaps one of the most curious features of scholarship in our times....."
http://tinyurl.com/ygcakn4
In essence, this movement within the American Psychiatric Association has accomplished what every other society, with rare exceptions, would have trembled to tamper with, a revision of a basic code and concept of life and biology: that men and women normally mate with the opposite sex and not with each other.
http://tinyurl.com/yfu9c7c
At no time before or since has the APA or any other psychological or psychiatric professional group ever addressed a mental health question in this manner.
Think on that.
And know that the practitioners of the remaining 547 paraphilias now have grounds [i.e., "equal protection"] upon which to demand a "marriage" of their own definition.
A society cannot exist wherein each individual claims to be his own god, determining and living by his own truth standard. That scenario is what we term "chaos."
So I guess the gay also managed to strong-arm the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the World Health Organization into saying that homosexuality isn't a disease? Wow. If they can do that, wonder why they still cant get married in most states.

:/
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#555 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
The rectm is not a sex organ. That it is misused for such purposes is the reason AIDS and other STDs spread among practitioners so easily -- not to mention anl leakage, g@y bowel syndrome, and the plethora of others diseases and bodily harm caused by same-sex malfunctions.
[misspellings due to autu-mod censor]
Just because it doesn't lead to the creation of children doesn't make it "misuse". The mouth and hands don't lead to procreation, yet are frequently used in heterosexual and homosexual sex. Also, STDs are a risk for any kind of unprotected sex.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#556 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
As I have repeatedly stated, and as you should well know, it is not MY definition.
Marriage predates our existence by millenia, and has been recognized by states, churches and society since.
YOU seek to redefine a definition that has remained as certain as the sun rising in the East.
Same sex marriages are ancient, and have been seen in a variety of cultures. Even if they weren't, so what? Marriage has been redefined a lot since the beginning of civilization. As societies change, so do their practices and institutions. Furthermore, just because something is old, doesn't mean it shouldn't be changed. The position of women in society almost always was they were simply property of men. That has changed.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#557 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
A society cannot exist wherein each individual claims to be his own god, determining and living by his own truth standard. That scenario is what we term "chaos."
People can live that way just fine, as long as they create a mechanism to deal with instances where one's "truth standard" conflicts with that of another. Oh wait, we DID create such a mechanism... it's called GOVERNMENT! It just needs a little tweaking.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#558 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
As a matter of fact, I was invited to a "same-sex marriage" ["commitment" ceremony], which I politely declined as I can in no way support such an act.
Roughly two years in...one of the gals split.
To marry a man.
An anatomically correct man.
ROFLMAO.
I wonder if these women actually have a clue you think such evil thoughts about them. "Anatomically correct man?" Seriously?

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#559 Jul 10, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do you know what "pursuit of happiness" even means?
<quoted text>
And since then it was found unconstitutional.
<quoted text>
No, it was the realization that what consenting adults chose to do between themselves was none of your fkn business! Read the ruling!
"The Court held that intimate consensual sexual conduct was part of the liberty protected by substantive due process under the Fourteenth Amendment."
Nothing there about requiring anyone's approval.
<quoted text>
And it will exist for millenia more... just with an addition to the old definition.... you know... building on...
<quoted text>
Uh... homosexuality is a part of that nature.
<quoted text>
And that definition is about to change for this entire country.
<quoted text>
By the way, you miht be interested in the Libertarian's documented position on the issue.
"1.3 Personal Relationships
Sexual orientation, preference, gender, or gender identity should have no impact on the government's treatment of individuals, such as in current marriage, child custody, adoption, immigration or military service laws. Government does not have the authority to define, license or restrict personal relationships. Consenting adults should be free to choose their own sexual practices and personal relationships."
and
"3.5 Rights and Discrimination
Libertarians embrace the concept that all people are born with certain inherent rights. We reject the idea that a natural right can ever impose an obligation upon others to fulfill that "right." We condemn bigotry as irrational and repugnant. Government should neither deny nor abridge any individual's human right based upon sex, wealth, ethnicity, creed, age, national origin, personal habits, political preference or sexual orientation. Parents, or other guardians, have the right to raise their children according to their own standards and beliefs. This statement shall not be construed to condone child abuse or neglect."
Really you should read the whole thing. It parallels me pretty closely.
http://www.lp.org/platform
The "pursuit of happiness" was framed within the "Laws of Nature" as established by "Nature's God."
The framers obviously were not referring to unnatural same-sex behaviors, which were punishable by death at that time.

That marriage will continue to exist for millennia more is the great lie behind the movement to deconstruct marriage.

As the Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy has pointed out, "...once the judiciary or legislature adopts 'the union of any two persons' as the legal definition of civil marriage, that conception becomes the sole definitional basis for the only law-sanctioned marriage that any couple can enter, whether same-sex or man-woman. Therefore, legally sanctioned genderless marriage, rather than peacefully coexisting with the contemporary man-woman marriage institution, actually displaces and replaces it."

Not all Libertarians agree. Thinking Libertarians recognize this redefinition for the tyrannical state power-grab that it is. As I documented earlier, the force of law is now being used to limit the freedom of association of religious people. In each case referenced, the freedom favored was homosexual, and the freedom disfavored was religious. Homosexuals are now employing the coercive power of the state to force others to accept and approve their lifestyles.

Same-sex marriage was the key to obtaining this power over all citizens.

The quest has only ever been about using the power of government to coerce religious believers into accepting what many consider to be immoral behavior as legitimate.

We see the Progressives attacking believers in the realm of abortion and contraception as well -- through that coercive state beast known as Obamacare.

Same play. Different target.
You've got it all wrong this time, Libertarian.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#560 Jul 10, 2013
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
People can live that way just fine, as long as they create a mechanism to deal with instances where one's "truth standard" conflicts with that of another. Oh wait, we DID create such a mechanism... it's called GOVERNMENT! It just needs a little tweaking.
It clear that by "tweaking" you mean "coercing."

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#561 Jul 10, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
I wonder if these women actually have a clue you think such evil thoughts about them. "Anatomically correct man?" Seriously?
I have no evil thoughts about them; I simply could not support their immoral choice.

And they proved what all thinking people know:
Aberrant sexual behaviors are practiced by choice.

Anyone may declare that they are a homosexual, and then demand special rights and/or legal remedies as a result. No one can authenticate their claim...and therein lies the farce.
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#562 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
It clear that by "tweaking" you mean "coercing."
Can't you go back to your alpha male circle jerk, and leave gay people alone?

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#563 Jul 10, 2013
Oliver Canterberry wrote:
These parades are an embarrassing sign of a by gone era, most the original Stonewall marches died of Aids many years ago. Putting prevision and debauchery on display is something that even the majority of gays disapprove of, but like all liberal groups, the radicals set the tone in displays that are crude, rude and vulgar.
Your posts remind me of trying find the clean end of a turd!

And to my Dear Friends:

The backlash has begun!

Please post this on all social media venues. This MUST be addressed:

I just created the following poll on TOPIX:

Is TOPIX allowing editors to censor/kill Gay and Lesbian stories on the Jacksonville FL and other local Forums?
Broseph

New Castle, DE

#564 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no evil thoughts about them; I simply could not support their immoral choice.
And they proved what all thinking people know:
Aberrant sexual behaviors are practiced by choice.
Anyone may declare that they are a homosexual, and then demand special rights and/or legal remedies as a result. No one can authenticate their claim...and therein lies the farce.
No? Then you wouldn't mind them knowing what you posted here, how laughed about their marriage falling apart, and how you implied that one of them looked like a man? That would be fine, right? Also, how about the girl is bisexual? You know? The B in LGBT? Sigh.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#565 Jul 10, 2013
-tip- wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no evil thoughts about them; I simply could not support their immoral choice.
And they proved what all thinking people know:
Aberrant sexual behaviors are practiced by choice.
Anyone may declare that they are a homosexual, and then demand special rights and/or legal remedies as a result. No one can authenticate their claim...and therein lies the farce.
Demanding that current laws apply to ALL citizens isn't "special rights". Currently heterosexuals enjoy "special rights" the majority of States.

I like how you folks whine about "re-defining marriage" but have no problem re-defining the meaning and original intent of the authors of the Constitution who used the words "ALL CITIZENS"

I have to congratulate you side for re-defining the word "ALL" in the U.S. Constitution.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#566 Jul 10, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
So I guess the gay also managed to strong-arm the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychoanalytic Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, and the World Health Organization into saying that homosexuality isn't a disease? Wow. If they can do that, wonder why they still cant get married in most states.
:/
Because everyday citizens -- unlike professional associations -- are not beholden to political interests/funding.

“animis opibusque parati”

Since: Oct 12

Location hidden

#567 Jul 10, 2013
Broseph wrote:
<quoted text>
Can't you go back to your alpha male circle jerk, and leave gay people alone?
Are you tired...or is that your real self shining through?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Poll The best Columbus mall was __________. 7 min Jonathon and Jeffery 0
VOTE FOR THE "Warmongers" OR ELSE! 2 hr Murphy was here 1
News Driver faces homicide charge (Jul '09) 5 hr shld1440 226
Where has BizzyBee, Pale Rider, Catman, been 5 hr They cannot kill ... 6
Poll Which topix troll are you willing to ignore com... (Apr '13) 5 hr shld1440 99
Places to see local hip hop artists 5 hr Zoe Regen 16
News Getting a lift: Elevators on the rise in centra... 6 hr Zoe Regen 3
Columbus Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Columbus People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]