So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Grou...

So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Groups Actually Fear?

There are 18008 comments on the lezgetreal.com story from Aug 17, 2012, titled So, What Is It That The Anti-Gay Groups Actually Fear?. In it, lezgetreal.com reports that:

What makes hate, well, hate? Given that today is something of a quiet news day, it may be nice to give ourselves a breather and think about some things.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at lezgetreal.com.

Fitz

Mount Clemens, MI

#222 Aug 21, 2012
RubyTheDyke wrote:
<quoted text>
Hon let me give you a quick biography: left home at the age of thirteen when my drug addict father pimped to me a man to fulfill his rape fantasy, lived on the street and when I was "of age" made a living "passing" and esccorting bored and wealthy matrons to exclusive clubs. Met my lover, fell deeply in love, only to have it shattered when she was gang-raped by Nazi skinheads, couldn't deal and eventually comitted suicide with a gun I had bought her to make her feel safe. Went back to escorting; a few months after my lovers death happened upon two skinheads brutally beating a handicapped man, lost it and if I had simply left it to halting the assault I would have not run afoul of the law, but wanted to send a message and affected a little creative frontier justice. As it were sentenced to 25 years, which outraged many people who felt I should have gotten life but my mental state mitgated the sentence; I think if were up to the juge he would have sentenced me to 15 hours picking up trash in the city park. Served twelve in actual prison, parole, spent until 2010 caretaking my mother until her death, moved across the country at the invitation of long-time friend and one-time grief counncilor, met a current domestic partner on trip to caretake my sister, now here I am, unfamiliar with an ivory tower but well- informed and taght by the realities of life.
Darling, I'm well-aware of it as a philosophy, as I am well aware of it being your particular boogey-man and door used to slam shut your mental doors on obective thought.
Your bio has nothing to do with changing the definition of marriage...and simply demonstrates that you have no clear understanding of the lineage of the left when it comes to the insitution of marriage..

No serious educated person runs around claiming that the left is not the....LEFT...

Thats what your trying to maintain... that the left is not who it has always claimed to be...it has a collective history when it comes to monogomy and marriage..

To pretend that this latest ploy is divorced from its overall understanding is to demonstrate that you are anti-intellectual.
Mr Al

Basking Ridge, NJ

#223 Aug 21, 2012
They have no legitimate basis for not liking it. They need to work on improving their own relationships (not restricting others). Some good advice for those people: http://www.bettertopic.com/2012/08/20/does-yo...

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#224 Aug 21, 2012
Humans are suspicious of deviation from social norms.

Consensual adult incest for example is considered taboo. Should we have laws banning it & send out the sex police to arrest them. Not likely here in the US.

Should they be allowed to legally marry? If not, why?

If, as the parent of a 17 year old girl, you live next door to a middle aged chronic masterbater who leers at women & throws out stacks of stained porn next to his garbage can, you might have a problem with this.

Is he doing something illegal? Is his behavior natural? Is it immoral?

If the neighborhood gets together & discusses him negatively are they bigoted?

This is why the fear (if that's what you want to call it) exists.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#225 Aug 21, 2012
Libertatem wrote:
Humans are suspicious of deviation from social norms.
Social norms shift and change all the time. Our own society CAUSES them to be hard to define.

Maybe you mean social MORES, which CAN represent a potential for harm if they aren't followed. But these cover behaviors like murder, theft, rape, and lying. Behaviors which bring direct harm to the person they're directed at. Social mores say NOTHING about preventing free citizens from pursuing happiness in the way that suits them best.
Libertatem wrote:
Consensual adult incest for example is considered taboo. Should we have laws banning it & send out the sex police to arrest them. Not likely here in the US.
Close-family incest IS ALREADY illegal in most parts of the country. Some parts of the country, however, will allow marriage between cousins, even first cousins.
Libertatem wrote:
Should they be allowed to legally marry? If not, why?
No. One of the primary functions of marriage is to take two people who are essentially strangers, and make them into family, for their mutual legal protection. People who are already family have no need for this. It would be an unequal duplication of rights.
Libertatem wrote:
If, as the parent of a 17 year old girl, you live next door to a middle aged chronic masterbater who leers at women & throws out stacks of stained porn next to his garbage can, you might have a problem with this.
Is he doing something illegal? Is his behavior natural? Is it immoral?
If his behavior is spilling out into the neighborhood where it is directly affecting others, like pornography put in visible areas, or if his "leering" becomes harassment of any kind, THEN you have a problem.
Libertatem wrote:
If the neighborhood gets together & discusses him negatively are they bigoted?
Not if they have legitimate concerns that his private life will affect them. But that is not the case with same-sex marriage. My marriage poses no more threat to you than yours does to me.
Libertatem wrote:
This is why the fear (if that's what you want to call it) exists.
The fear comes from ONE place, in my opinion. One ancient book that unfortunately doomed an entire demographic of people to social scorn, just for being a little different. Most people are afraid of being asked to treat someone nice, that they've always been taught to hate.
HAHAHA

Stamford, CT

#226 Aug 21, 2012
Brian wrote:
<quoted text>
More lies. Must be your fantasy. Stay away from the school yard.
Apologies if I offended your kind, but you know it's true. I didn't say all of you are that way.
Kermudgeon

Buffalo, NY

#228 Aug 21, 2012
Obviously they're afraid of their own latent homosexual urges.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#229 Aug 21, 2012
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>Social norms shift and change all the time. Our own society CAUSES them to be hard to define.

Maybe you mean social MORES, which CAN represent a potential for harm if they aren't followed. But these cover behaviors like murder, theft, rape, and lying. Behaviors which bring direct harm to the person they're directed at. Social mores say NOTHING about preventing free citizens from pursuing happiness in the way that suits them best.

Libertatem wrote, "Consensual adult incest for example is considered taboo. Should we have laws banning it & send out the sex police to arrest them. Not likely here in the US."

Close-family incest IS ALREADY illegal in most parts of the country. Some parts of the country, however, will allow marriage between cousins, even first cousins.

Libertatem wrote, "Should they be allowed to legally marry? If not, why?"

No. One of the primary functions of marriage is to take two people who are essentially strangers, and make them into family, for their mutual legal protection. People who are already family have no need for this. It would be an unequal duplication of rights.

Libertatem wrote, "If, as the parent of a 17 year old girl, you live next door to a middle aged chronic masterbater who leers at women & throws out stacks of stained porn next to his garbage can, you might have a problem with this.
Is he doing something illegal? Is his behavior natural? Is it immoral?"

If his behavior is spilling out into the neighborhood where it is directly affecting others, like pornography put in visible areas, or if his "leering" becomes harassment of any kind, THEN you have a problem.

Libertatem wrote, "If the neighborhood gets together & discusses him negatively are they bigoted?"

Not if they have legitimate concerns that his private life will affect them. But that is not the case with same-sex marriage. My marriage poses no more threat to you than yours does to me.

Libertatem wrote, "This is why the fear (if that's what you want to call it) exists. "

The fear comes from ONE place, in my opinion. One ancient book that unfortunately doomed an entire demographic of people to social scorn, just for being a little different. Most people are afraid of being asked to treat someone nice, that they've always been taught to hate.
I meant social norms. Informal social norms do change all the time at different rates. This is part of being human. LGBT

You bring up my statement about incest. I don't believe that 2 siblings receive the same benefits just by being related that a marriage contract provides. For example when I'm doing my taxes, i don't check a box that says jointly with my bro for a different monetary outcome.

& if you're signing a contract with someone who is essentially a stranger then please reconsider. I know from experience that it's a bad idea.

As far as you telling them they can't marry, isn't your bigotry interfering with their pursuit of happiness? Please explain more clearly. I see this accusation a lot from individuals in the gay community. Why is it different when the law wont let them marry?

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#230 Aug 21, 2012
Fitz wrote:
<quoted text>
Your bio has nothing to do with changing the definition of marriage...and simply demonstrates that you have no clear understanding of the lineage of the left when it comes to the insitution of marriage..
No serious educated person runs around claiming that the left is not the....LEFT...
Thats what your trying to maintain... that the left is not who it has always claimed to be...it has a collective history when it comes to monogomy and marriage..
To pretend that this latest ploy is divorced from its overall understanding is to demonstrate that you are anti-intellectual.
You asked where I received my education and I am asserting that it is grounded in the subtance of real life, real experience, real observation and a real knowlege of human nature and the human condition, which I find a vastly superior education than the slathering over of reality with a patina of theories that have never found vindication outside a texbook and the disconnected intellects that embrace them because they're safer than living-I'll take street-smarts over think tankers any day.

As to understanding marriage/relationships, again that is only something that can be truly understood through the light of our humanity and not social theory- sorry Babydoll, but you won't learn about love in a social science class, earning a PHD after your name isn't going to teach you the communication skill or develop the character it takes to have an enduring lifetime comittment to another person, without which marriage is just another piece of paper and without which marriage is not a living entity simply another academic construct. You have a lot to learn about being human, Fritz, and the fact that the only way you approach marriage is in terms as a useful political tool of social manipulation demonstrates that it is you, not myself, that lacks the understanding of our modern basis of marriage.

It's not your intellectualism that I'm in contention with, it's your utter lack of wisdom.
Justmy2cents

Modesto, CA

#231 Aug 21, 2012
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
Your religion may or may not be fostering hate - many do, in the guise of doing "God's" will. If you advocate harming other people and their families, and work to deny them equal protection under civil law, then that is hateful, by definition.
But you don't have to worry about your church being forced to support gay folks and their families.
That's the beauty of separation of church and state. You cannot force people who don't share your religious beliefs to live by them under the law, and your church can't be forced to accept anyone they don't like as a member.
It's really very simple.
Oh but not true if you read the Paper, I recall some guy by the name of "John Hagee" being sued in Canada for preaching the bible He read out load the verse where God said it is abomination for a man to lay with a man!... No longer can this guy preach in Canada with out being tossed in jail! he lost!
so how we do we Prevent this from happening and still let everyone have it the way they want ? Nope not being a *ss just wondering what some here would think should be done to protect both Church and gay rights?? so one can change the other? Just wondering?

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#232 Aug 21, 2012
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>Social norms shift and change all the time. Our own society CAUSES them to be hard to define.

Maybe you mean social MORES, which CAN represent a potential for harm if they aren't followed. But these cover behaviors like murder, theft, rape, and lying. Behaviors which bring direct harm to the person they're directed at. Social mores say NOTHING about preventing free citizens from pursuing happiness in the way that suits them best.

Libertatem wrote, "Consensual adult incest for example is considered taboo. Should we have laws banning it & send out the sex police to arrest them. Not likely here in the US."

Close-family incest IS ALREADY illegal in most parts of the country. Some parts of the country, however, will allow marriage between cousins, even first cousins.

Libertatem wrote, "Should they be allowed to legally marry? If not, why?"

No. One of the primary functions of marriage is to take two people who are essentially strangers, and make them into family, for their mutual legal protection. People who are already family have no need for this. It would be an unequal duplication of rights.

Libertatem wrote, "If, as the parent of a 17 year old girl, you live next door to a middle aged chronic masterbater who leers at women & throws out stacks of stained porn next to his garbage can, you might have a problem with this.
Is he doing something illegal? Is his behavior natural? Is it immoral?"

If his behavior is spilling out into the neighborhood where it is directly affecting others, like pornography put in visible areas, or if his "leering" becomes harassment of any kind, THEN you have a problem.

Libertatem wrote, "If the neighborhood gets together & discusses him negatively are they bigoted?"

Not if they have legitimate concerns that his private life will affect them. But that is not the case with same-sex marriage. My marriage poses no more threat to you than yours does to me.

Libertatem wrote, "This is why the fear (if that's what you want to call it) exists. "

The fear comes from ONE place, in my opinion. One ancient book that unfortunately doomed an entire demographic of people to social scorn, just for being a little different. Most people are afraid of being asked to treat someone nice, that they've always been taught to hate.
You say "Most people are afraid of being asked to treat someone nice, that they've always been taught to hate."

Agree. Not a big fan of mobs & bullies myself.

I, however, don't think bigotry will disappear by eliminating a book.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#233 Aug 21, 2012
Libertatem wrote:
<quoted text>
You say "Most people are afraid of being asked to treat someone nice, that they've always been taught to hate."
Agree. Not a big fan of mobs & bullies myself.
I, however, don't think bigotry will disappear by eliminating a book.
Homophobia may be justified by the bible by some, but the bible certainly doesn't cause homphobia. MOST homophobes are clueless about the bible. With or without the bible's supposed condemnations, homphobia would exist. It obviously exists in societies that are note Jewish nor Christian. Using the bible to justify homophobia is an excuse, not a reason.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#234 Aug 21, 2012
Libertatem wrote:
<quoted text>
I meant social norms. Informal social norms do change all the time at different rates. This is part of being human. LGBT
You bring up my statement about incest. I don't believe that 2 siblings receive the same benefits just by being related that a marriage contract provides. For example when I'm doing my taxes, i don't check a box that says jointly with my bro for a different monetary outcome.
& if you're signing a contract with someone who is essentially a stranger then please reconsider. I know from experience that it's a bad idea.
As far as you telling them they can't marry, isn't your bigotry interfering with their pursuit of happiness? Please explain more clearly. I see this accusation a lot from individuals in the gay community. Why is it different when the law wont let them marry?
Sweetie, let me throw a couple of cents in and say that genetic variation within a species is vital for species survival-we know that. We also know that genetic homogeny magnifies genetic error and increases the likelyhood of its manifestation. This has negative implications on the individual and a negative impact on a community that has to care and compensate for them. The negative import for interbreeding is real and demonstrable. The only thing being impacted in the case of gay marriage are other people's ideas. In actual practice these people not infringed upon in any way from in anyway from pursuing life, liberty and happiness according to their own philosophies, and their only loss is the loss to dictate terms of another person's life,which was not their right to begin with. in the absence of any tangible harm outside of a few pi$$ed-off control freaks There is no equivalency between allowing siblings to marry and breed and gay marriage.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#235 Aug 21, 2012
Libertatem wrote:
I meant social norms. Informal social norms do change all the time at different rates. This is part of being human. LGBT
You bring up my statement about incest. I don't believe that 2 siblings receive the same benefits just by being related that a marriage contract provides. For example when I'm doing my taxes, i don't check a box that says jointly with my bro for a different monetary outcome.
& if you're signing a contract with someone who is essentially a stranger then please reconsider. I know from experience that it's a bad idea.
That's why I said "essentially". Obviously, no one should enter into a contract with a total stranger. But marriage is a contract which makes two people who AREN'T family, INTO family. This is a redundant practice for anyone who is ALREADY family.
Libertatem wrote:
As far as you telling them they can't marry, isn't your bigotry interfering with their pursuit of happiness? Please explain more clearly. I see this accusation a lot from individuals in the gay community. Why is it different when the law wont let them marry?
I'm not even sure who you're talking about. Where are all these incestuous people? Do they have as many Topix headline threads as gay subjects do? Do they have any websites? Where is their national advocacy board located? Where are their parades? Where can I get a t-shirt? A bumper sticker, at the very least?

I see NO movement for any kinds of "incestuous rights". No one who is legitimately WITHIN such a movement has drawn ANY analogies. Why aren't any of these people here, arguing for their OWN rights? Why are you doing it FOR them? I don't think I can accept YOU as their proxy representative, fighting for rights which they themselves aren't calling for.

On the other hand, the world is FULL of gay people by the MILLIONS, many who brave social norms that would see them hang at the end of a rope just for being different. I think their fight for their rights is SLIGHTLY more realistic than a phantom movement of incest marriages, and I'll accord it a proportionate amount of concern.

I have no "bigotry" against people who are incestuous. I've never met any. I certainly never wrote a book calling for their deaths (not saying you did, but plenty of people admire just such a book, and use it as their motivation). But getting into an incestuous relationship is very specific to someone's personal situation and family structure. There isn't anyone out there who can ONLY fall in love with a brother or sister. They're perfectly capable of falling in love with someone that they've MET, OUTSIDE the family.

Gay people don't fall in love with someone of the opposite sex, and stitching in some legal wording which restricts marriage on that basis is a denial of the only kind of relationship that we can form, the kind that works very best for us. This isn't protection of "marriage", it's protection of xenophobia. It's protecting the "tradition" of keeping gay people locked out of "social norms". This has been true whether gay people want to join the military, hold a job or apartment, or simply walk down the street.

If opposition to marriage equality were the FIRST time we've ever seen anti-gay sentiment, then these arguments might be believable. But hatred toward gays has been CONSISTENT, regardless of what right we're asking for. This is no different.

FaFoxy

“ WOOF !”

Since: Oct 10

Coolidge, AZ

#236 Aug 21, 2012
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
That's why I said "essentially". Obviously, no one should enter into a contract with a total stranger. But marriage is a contract which makes two people who AREN'T family, INTO family. This is a redundant practice for anyone who is ALREADY family.
<quoted text>
I'm not even sure who you're talking about. Where are all these incestuous people? Do they have as many Topix headline threads as gay subjects do? Do they have any websites? Where is their national advocacy board located? Where are their parades? Where can I get a t-shirt? A bumper sticker, at the very least?
I see NO movement for any kinds of "incestuous rights". No one who is legitimately WITHIN such a movement has drawn ANY analogies. Why aren't any of these people here, arguing for their OWN rights? Why are you doing it FOR them? I don't think I can accept YOU as their proxy representative, fighting for rights which they themselves aren't calling for.
On the other hand, the world is FULL of gay people by the MILLIONS, many who brave social norms that would see them hang at the end of a rope just for being different. I think their fight for their rights is SLIGHTLY more realistic than a phantom movement of incest marriages, and I'll accord it a proportionate amount of concern.
I have no "bigotry" against people who are incestuous. I've never met any. I certainly never wrote a book calling for their deaths (not saying you did, but plenty of people admire just such a book, and use it as their motivation). But getting into an incestuous relationship is very specific to someone's personal situation and family structure. There isn't anyone out there who can ONLY fall in love with a brother or sister. They're perfectly capable of falling in love with someone that they've MET, OUTSIDE the family.
Gay people don't fall in love with someone of the opposite sex, and stitching in some legal wording which restricts marriage on that basis is a denial of the only kind of relationship that we can form, the kind that works very best for us. This isn't protection of "marriage", it's protection of xenophobia. It's protecting the "tradition" of keeping gay people locked out of "social norms". This has been true whether gay people want to join the military, hold a job or apartment, or simply walk down the street.
If opposition to marriage equality were the FIRST time we've ever seen anti-gay sentiment, then these arguments might be believable. But hatred toward gays has been CONSISTENT, regardless of what right we're asking for. This is no different.
Regarding incest, and websites advocating for it, it depends on one's definition of incest. Many people disagree as to what constitutes incest.

I'm referring specifically to first cousins. About half the states define sexual relations between first cousins as incestuous, and DO forbid the marriage of first cousins. About half the states take the opposite view and do not define first cousin sexual relations as incestuous, and DO permit the marriage of first cousins.

Some years ago, I had a very heated discussion with my Roman Catholic (and former Protestant) sister about this very topic, and she was vehemently against first cousin marriage, insisting that first cousin sexual relations were incestuous, DESPITE the Roman Catholic Church permitting first cousin marriage.

(btw, Carlo Gambino, head of the Gambino Family, and his successor, Paul Castellano, who was both Gambino's cousin and brother-in-law, both married their first cousins in a Roman Catholic church).
new hammer time

Cartersville, VA

#237 Aug 21, 2012
We fear swift judgement from God. I believe this nation is under satanic attack with all this sick gay stuff. Surely we as a nation cannot survive much longer when all those gays are "socking" it to whomever. Sodom & Gomorrah all over again.
God has another "match" to strike.

Since: Mar 12

Location hidden

#238 Aug 21, 2012
RubyTheDyke wrote:
<quoted text>Sweetie, let me throw a couple of cents in and say that genetic variation within a species is vital for species survival-we know that. We also know that genetic homogeny magnifies genetic error and increases the likelyhood of its manifestation. This has negative implications on the individual and a negative impact on a community that has to care and compensate for them. The negative import for interbreeding is real and demonstrable. The only thing being impacted in the case of gay marriage are other people's ideas. In actual practice these people not infringed upon in any way from in anyway from pursuing life, liberty and happiness according to their own philosophies, and their only loss is the loss to dictate terms of another person's life,which was not their right to begin with. in the absence of any tangible harm outside of a few pi$$ed-off control freaks There is no equivalency between allowing siblings to marry and breed and gay marriage.
I disagree when you say,

"There is no equivalency between allowing siblings to marry and breed and gay marriage."

Individuals are free to pursue happiness in their own way. As I said in an earlier post, we are not going to send the sex police out to arrest consenting adults in this country. You cannot prevent adult siblings from having sex.

As far as condoning it by allowing a marriage contract, as I have said before, when you remove govt.$ from the equation the responsibility to care for a retarded child is on the parents if they choose to procreate.

That being said, gay siblings will not be able to procreate, so why do you believe the law should deny the marriage contract to them?

Btw, I really could care less about peoples sexual habits where consenting adults are concerned. I just happen to think that the govts. role in the contract should have nothing whatsoever to do with sex or love. So, ANY two adult citizens should be allowed to enter the contract and reap the benefits if we are going to keep the benefits in place.

Personally I'd rather see them go away along with the federal income tax.

“Unconvinced”

Since: Nov 09

Seattle, WA

#239 Aug 21, 2012
new hammer time wrote:
We fear swift judgement from God. I believe this nation is under satanic attack with all this sick gay stuff. Surely we as a nation cannot survive much longer when all those gays are "socking" it to whomever. Sodom & Gomorrah all over again.
God has another "match" to strike.
Aren't you supposed to be EXCITED about the end of the world? If you think gay people are bringing about the Apocalypse, why would you want to delay it?

And why would YOU need to fear judgment from a god, if you aren't the one supporting this? Can't he tell who's on his side and who isn't? Can't he AIM at the "bad" people while sparing the "good"? Does he unleash his judgment against people who don't deserve it?

Is this the same god who rained Hurricane Katrina down on New Orleans as punishment for supporting homosexuality, while leaving the gayest neighborhood in the city virtually untouched? Was he the same god that Texas Gov. Rick Perry prayed to for rain to end the droughts, and then he got rampant wildfires instead?

I can't understand worshipping someone who is so BAD at directing his anger with more precision.
new hammer time

Cartersville, VA

#240 Aug 21, 2012
EdmondWA wrote:
<quoted text>
Aren't you supposed to be EXCITED about the end of the world? If you think gay people are bringing about the Apocalypse, why would you want to delay it?
And why would YOU need to fear judgment from a god, if you aren't the one supporting this? Can't he tell who's on his side and who isn't? Can't he AIM at the "bad" people while sparing the "good"? Does he unleash his judgment against people who don't deserve it?
Is this the same god who rained Hurricane Katrina down on New Orleans as punishment for supporting homosexuality, while leaving the gayest neighborhood in the city virtually untouched? Was he the same god that Texas Gov. Rick Perry prayed to for rain to end the droughts, and then he got rampant wildfires instead?
I can't understand worshipping someone who is so BAD at directing his anger with more precision.
When you think carnally its IMPOSSIBLE to understand the WILL of God. Salvation lets you in on our Heavenly Fathers Ways. Until you are "born again" there is no way you'll ever understand Him. The choice is yours

Since: Jan 12

Huntington, WV

#241 Aug 21, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
<quoted text>
When I lived in Huntington, there were 3 gay bars there. Any still there ?
You only hear about the ones where men behave badly, the straight ones.

Since: Jan 12

Huntington, WV

#242 Aug 21, 2012
FaFoxy wrote:
636 15th Street
78 - 80
:)
Marshall? I wasn't anywhere then but I loved growing up in Huntington.

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.

Gay/Lesbian Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 3 min Frankie Rizzo 43,015
News What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 5 min Wish4549 4,736
News Thousands of people march during rally at Bosto... 12 min Sorry Hill 2,271
News Is Same-Sex Attraction a Sin? 21 min Doyle 11
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 42 min Wish3287 22,553
News Mexican leftist senators defend battering Trump... 54 min Shirvell s Shrivel 1
News Arkansas court upholds gay marriage birth certi... 56 min Shirvell s Shrivel 1
News Trump's staff picks disappoint, alarm minority ... 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 277
More from around the web