Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on ...

Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches

There are 9647 comments on the The Skanner story from Mar 1, 2012, titled Maryland Gay Marriage Could Hinge on Black Churches. In it, The Skanner reports that:

With Maryland poised to legalize gay marriage, some conservative opponents and religious leaders are counting on members of their congregations, especially in black churches, to upend the legislation at the polls this fall.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Skanner.

Soo True

Ingleside, TX

#7419 Oct 7, 2012
Reproduction is required for life. For humans, like other mammals, sexual reproduction is used. Two different sexes, male and female, each contribute half their DNA to form offspring. The DNA that creates a male, or a female, creates their bodies in forms capable of passing on their DNA. The purpose of the sexual organs is for reproduction. Therefore, reproduction occurs, and there is life. Now I know some people don't understand this, and want to know where the proof is. Well, life is the proof. If the reproduction did not happen, life would cease. Look around, all life requires reproduction, there is no life without it.

Now there are people that mention sexual orientation. They say sexual orientation is genetic, and that human bodies were designed for different types of sexual orientations. Okay, people can be sexually oriented to the same sex, other animals, their self, children, or different types of machinery. Those people have just stepped away from sexual reproduction, and went to just sex. The human body was designed to have sex to reproduce (if in doubt, read first paragraph again), but as they point out, you can have sex in ways that reproduction is not a possibility.

As so many researchers like to point out, other animals show signs of homosexuality. A dog tries to have sex with a persons leg, and tries to have sex with a piece of furniture, and tries to have sex with another dog of the same sex. This is sexual orientation in the fact the dog orients to the object for sex. It is not genetic in that the dog has a DNA programmed to have sex with a piece of specific furniture. The dog, like humans, has a genetic drive for sexual reproduction. How the DNA creates the drive is by creating pleasure. The drive to achieve the pleasure can be very strong, enough to have sex just for the pleasure of having sex (see paragraph two again).

So can the drive for sexual reproduction, sex with the opposite sex, be controlled? Yes, at least in humans in recent history. You may be attracted to someone of the opposite sex, but if they are not a willing partner, like most people, you accept the rejection and move on. Society helps control this.

The chemical and electrical activity inside the human body does not always function properly. Some people become diabetics, some develop deficient immune systems, some need corrective lens to see, some are required to take one of the thousands of medications available. Some people become aggressive, irrational, or irritable because or chemical imbalances. Chemical or electrical imbalances can be major. They can cause people to hallucinate or lose the ability to reason. It is not beneficial to not function
properly. People are not designed to not have vision, not have an immune system, or to not reproduce. There is not DNA designed to prevent those, but there is failure of DNA to accomplish the design perfectly.

So we know there is DNA for reproduction, and not DNA to not reproduce. We know there is a female sex and we know the DNA responsible for it. We know there is a male sex and we know the DNA for it. We also know there is not a third type of sex. That does not mean a chemical imbalance can not play havoc on the reproductive system and drive. However, it is not know if that causes same sex attraction, a partial cause for same sex attraction, or not a cause for same sex attraction.

We do know that nurture, the environment a child is raised it and how, can change or over ride what is naturally programmed by DNA. We know DNA has a purpose to creating a desire to survive, it is required for life. We also know people can be taught to ignore that desire, and give up that desire. The are groups, past and present, that teach that and succeed. So we know people can be taught to go against what they are naturally programmed for.

DNF

“Judge less, Love more”

Since: Apr 07

Born in Newark Ohio

#7420 Oct 7, 2012
Soo True wrote:
Reproduction is required for life.....
Now there are people that mention sexual orientation. They say sexual orientation is genetic, and that human bodies were designed for different types of sexual orientations. Okay, people can be sexually oriented to the same sex, other animals, their self, children, or different types of machinery. Those people have just stepped away from sexual reproduction, and went to just sex. The human body was designed to have sex to reproduce (if in doubt, read first paragraph again), but as they point out, you can have sex in ways that reproduction is not a possibility....
with another dog of the same sex (?)....enough to have sex just for the pleasure of having sex (see paragraph two again).
So can the drive for sexual reproduction, sex with the opposite sex, be controlled?.....
So we know there is DNA for reproduction, and not DNA to not reproduce.....
We know DNA has a purpose to creating a desire to survive, it is required for life. We also know people can be taught to ignore that desire, and give up that desire. The are groups, past and present, that teach that and succeed. So we know people can be taught to go against what they are naturally programmed for.
Wow. What an amazingly long winded way of proving you actually DON'T agree with what you claim.(The "there is no gay gene" idea).

here's a hint:
"...we know people can be taught to go against what they are naturally programmed for."

You've Got To Be Carefully Taught - Matthew Morrison & Paulo Szot (South Pacific)
Mona Lott

Brooklyn, NY

#7421 Oct 7, 2012
Soo True wrote:
We also know people can be taught to ignore that desire, and give up that desire. The are groups, past and present, that teach that and succeed.
No they don't. You don't "know" anything.
The success rate for so-called "reparative therapy" are about zero.

From the available data, four studies reported a "success" rate during conversion therapy of 0.4%, 0.0%, 0.5 and 0.04%. That is, conversion therapy has a failure rate in excess of 99.5% during each study. Considering the anecdotal data which indicates a large percentage of extremely depressed and suicidal clients emerging from conversion therapy, it would appear that this form of therapy is worthless. It my well result in the death by suicide of more gays and lesbians than it "converts" to a heterosexual orientation. Unfortunately, we cannot be certain of this. The quality of the studies is extremely poor.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_exod1.h...

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7422 Oct 7, 2012
Soo True wrote:
Your whole argument is based on reproduction and the populating of this planet. Well, here is my argument against procreating for the sake of procreating.....

We are already on the verge of being over-populated and besides that........look at what happen when your parents had you.......stupid must have been inherited!!!

“Trolls are Clueless”

Since: Dec 07

Aptos, California

#7423 Oct 7, 2012
Soo True wrote:
Reproduction is required for life. For humans, like other mammals, sexual reproduction is used. Two different sexes, male and female, each contribute half their DNA to form offspring. The DNA that creates a male, or a female, creates their bodies in forms capable of passing on their DNA. The purpose of the sexual organs is for reproduction. Therefore, reproduction occurs, and there is life. Now I know some people don't understand this, and want to know where the proof is. Well, life is the proof. If the reproduction did not happen, life would cease. Look around, all life requires reproduction, there is no life without it.
Now there are people that mention sexual orientation. They say sexual orientation is genetic, and that human bodies were designed for different types of sexual orientations. Okay, people can be sexually oriented to the same sex, other animals, their self, children, or different types of machinery. Those people have just stepped away from sexual reproduction, and went to just sex. The human body was designed to have sex to reproduce (if in doubt, read first paragraph again), but as they point out, you can have sex in ways that reproduction is not a possibility.
As so many researchers like to point out, other animals show signs of homosexuality. A dog tries to have sex with a persons leg, and tries to have sex with a piece of furniture, and tries to have sex with another dog of the same sex. This is sexual orientation in the fact the dog orients to the object for sex. It is not genetic in that the dog has a DNA programmed to have sex with a piece of specific furniture. The dog, like humans, has a genetic drive for sexual reproduction. How the DNA creates the drive is by creating pleasure. The drive to achieve the pleasure can be very strong, enough to have sex just for the pleasure of having sex (see paragraph two again).
So can the drive for sexual reproduction, sex with the opposite sex, be controlled? Yes, at least in humans in recent history. You may be attracted to someone of the opposite sex, but if they are not a willing partner, like most people, you accept the rejection and move on. Society helps control this.
The chemical and electrical activity inside the human body does not always function properly. Some people become diabetics, some develop deficient immune systems, some need corrective lens to see, some are required to take one of the thousands of medications available. Some people become aggressive, irrational, or irritable because or chemical imbalances. Chemical or electrical imbalances can be major. They can cause people to hallucinate or lose the ability to reason. It is not beneficial to not function
properly. People are not designed to not have vision, not have an immune system, or to not reproduce. There is not DNA designed to prevent those, but there is failure of DNA to accomplish the design perfectly.
So we know there is DNA for reproduction, and not DNA to not reproduce. We know there is a female sex and we know the DNA responsible for it. We know there is a male sex and we know the DNA for it. We also know there is not a third type of sex. That does not mean a chemical imbalance can not play havoc on the reproductive system and drive. However, it is not know if that causes same sex attraction, a partial cause for same sex attraction, or not a cause for same sex attraction.
We do know that nurture, the environment a child is raised it and how, can change or over ride what is naturally programmed by DNA. We know DNA has a purpose to creating a desire to survive, it is required for life. We also know people can be taught to ignore that desire, and give up that desire. The are groups, past and present, that teach that and succeed. So we know people can be taught to go against what they are naturally programmed for.
Does this have anything to do with marriage equality?

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#7424 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
But gay marriage will affect all of us. It further opens the door for you to teach other people's kids your ideas about sexuality.
http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/InTheClassro...
Rose's Law:
Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"

Gay marriage doesn't open the door to anything other than gay marriage. What is and isn't taught in the classroom WRT sexuality doesn't depend on the legal status of gay marriage.

Since: Apr 11

Santa Monica, CA

#7425 Oct 7, 2012
Soo True wrote:
Reproduction is required for life. For humans, like other mammals, sexual reproduction is used. Two different sexes, male and female, each contribute half their DNA to form offspring. The DNA that creates a male, or a female, creates their bodies in forms capable of passing on their DNA. The purpose of the sexual organs is for reproduction.
I'm straight, and I've never used mine for that.
Soo True wrote:
Therefore, reproduction occurs, and there is life. Now I know some people don't understand this, and want to know where the proof is.
Nobody is arguing against that, stupid, it's just not an issue.
Soo True wrote:
Okay, people can be sexually oriented to the same sex, other animals, their self, children, or different types of machinery. Those people have just stepped away from sexual reproduction, and went to just sex.
Again, I'm straight, I just have sex. Every time I did, I took birth control. Now I'm past menopause. Should I quit having sex!?
When are straight guys going to start turning down BJs from women because they can't reproduce that way?

There is nothing wrong with having sex for pleasure and only pleasure, so what is your point?

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7426 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Do public schools need to teach kindergartners that "heterosexuals exist? I mean come on.......schools need to be safe havens for ALL sorts of kids and their families........and it is you that is not being honest with what your thoughts are.........sorry, but frankly, I've not seen any of those things being taught at my grandchild's school and if they were......no big deal because they aren't what you think they are.
Yes...schools need to be safe havens for everyone. That does not mean teaching homosexuality acceptance to kindergartners.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7427 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
How so? Did your marriage have any affect on me? Has my marriage had any affect on you or your marriage?
Why would I teach ANYONE'S kid about sexuality? I've already seen your link and disagree with you about what you think it does!!!
Should school be allowed to teach my grandchild about heterosexuality? No, but it does each and every day just because the teachers speak about their spouses, children and grandchildren........why is that necessary? or even appropriate? If I want my grandchild to know of these things, they will be taught when the child is ready.......but in reality......they already hear about it every day in school, on the streets, by young adolescent teenagers with raging hormones and on the TV.......so, please tell me why you think one is okay, but not the other!!!
Never mind...you are unreasonable and rambling.

The curriculum I linked to specifically and intentionally teaches children to accept homosexuality as normal, healthy, and moral. Many parents (spare me your disagreement) would like to deal with these very personal matters in their own home and in there own way.

Such teaching about "hetereosexuality" does not exist. Get reasonable.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7428 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes...schools need to be safe havens for everyone. That does not mean teaching homosexuality acceptance to kindergartners.
What do you consider to be "homosexuality acceptance"?

Kindergartners do have Same-Sex Parents, right? They have friends who know their parents, right? Exactly what is the real issue you have? Because I don't believe ANYONE is teaching them to accept homosexuals per say.......as it is to accept and respect those who are different.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7429 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
From the link you provided:
Support Services for LGBTQ Youth assists school staff and administrators in understanding and implementing policies and procedures that create safer school communities for all of our students. District specific data supports implementing these policies through our many programs and curricula.
A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code.
The California Education Code (51938) mandates that parents/ caregivers be notified 15 days before classroom instruction about sexuality, human growth and development, including sexually transmitted disease/HIV infection. Further, parents/caregivers must be given the opportunity to review instructional materials and exclude their child from curriculum sections related to family life and sexuality. Parent Notification materials can be found in the District Student and Parent/Guardian Handbook, distributed each academic year.
Parent notification does NOT need to be sent in the following instances, which reflect the teachable moment:
When students ask for definitions: What does gay mean?
When intervening in name calling incidents
When students discuss families
Reading a book with LGBTQ character(s)/plots/subplots.
When celebrating Diversity Days, Gay Pride, or Health Fairs
Speaking about LGBTQ persons in the curriculum other than Health.
Teachers may include topics about LGBTQ persons in classroom discussions.
This includes, but is not limited to: LGBTQ historical figures, family members, and the community.
No Parental Notification is needed for these classroom discussions
http://www.healthiersf.org/LGBTQ/GetTheFacts/...
Did ya read the whole site? or just what you didn't agree with or like?
Yes!! This is my favorite part! I have reposted it several times! This is the clearest example on the whole site about the agenda of these people. Allow me to repost their finest moment:

"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."

Think about how ridiculous this is. Discussing gays and gay families "does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life"? Really? On what planet?

So the law says parents need to be notified when the schools want to discuss sexuality and family life. These guys simply declare that discussing gay families is that at all...and no parental notification is necessary! Gee...no agenda here!

THESE PEOPLE WANT TO TEACH OTHER PEOPLE'S CHILDREN THERE IDEAS ABOUT SEXUALITY WITH OR WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT!

Get it? This is my main point. Allow gay marriage and these fascists will have even greater justification!

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7430 Oct 7, 2012
Rose_NoHo wrote:
<quoted text>
Rose's Nonsense:
Morons with no real argument scream, "But what about the children!?"
Gay marriage doesn't open the door to anything other than gay marriage. What is and isn't taught in the classroom WRT sexuality doesn't depend on the legal status of gay marriage.
See post above.

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7431 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
What do you consider to be "homosexuality acceptance"?
Kindergartners do have Same-Sex Parents, right? They have friends who know their parents, right? Exactly what is the real issue you have? Because I don't believe ANYONE is teaching them to accept homosexuals per say.......as it is to accept and respect those who are different.
Then why bother? If SO MANY kids have gay parents and these kids have friends who are aware of the situation then what is the point at all?

The point is to teach all these little ones that being gay is normal, healthy, and moral. That way we can use the public school system to eradicate all that nasty homophobia with have in society.

Sounds like a great plan...eh?

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7433 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Never mind...you are unreasonable and rambling.
The curriculum I linked to specifically and intentionally teaches children to accept homosexuality as normal, healthy, and moral. Many parents (spare me your disagreement) would like to deal with these very personal matters in their own home and in there own way.
Such teaching about "hetereosexuality" does not exist. Get reasonable.
Actually it does.......each and every day kids are shown that being straight is somehow the only way they should be......for a kid who happens to be Gay or Lesbian.....how do you think that makes them feel?

Parents can opt out of certain subjects, but the school doesn't need to ask permission to discuss certain things.

Being Gay or Lesbian is normal and healthy and moral........even you disagree with it.....what is unhealthy is high risk sexual practices and that applies to everyone who engages in sexual activity.

I'm always amazed at how folks like you think I'm being unreasonable or ranting, especially when I throw their link and information back at them......it shows you didn't read the whole link, but only what you thought would prove your point.

As an Educator........any discussion regarding this issue would always be age appropriate and only discussed if a question was asked or someone brought something up.......personally, there is a time and place for this issue and I'd prefer it to be at home by responsible adults who took the time to educate their child on the facts instead of the fear and intimidation factors, but that isn't what you want either......you want to teach your kids how to hate others just because their different, right?

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7434 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Because I don't believe ANYONE is teaching them to accept homosexuals per say.......as it is to accept and respect those who are different.
Okay...now I know you are unreasonable. You write you don't believe anyone is being taught to "accept" homosexuals? You say on the contrary they are being taught to "accept" and respect those who are "different"? Of course, EVERY story is about these different people who are gays and lesbians?

Look...you don't have to agree with me and I don't have to agree with you. All I am saying is that using the public school system to teach other people's kids their version of sexuality (and morality for that matter) against the wishes of parents is just wrong. Let each family work out these very personal matters at home.

If you can't allow me and my family that right than you can't expect me to respect yours.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7435 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes!! This is my favorite part! I have reposted it several times! This is the clearest example on the whole site about the agenda of these people. Allow me to repost their finest moment:
"A discussion about gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender and questioning people does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life education and does NOT require parent notification according to the California Education Code."
Think about how ridiculous this is. Discussing gays and gay families "does not constitute a discussion about human sexuality or family life"? Really? On what planet?
So the law says parents need to be notified when the schools want to discuss sexuality and family life. These guys simply declare that discussing gay families is that at all...and no parental notification is necessary! Gee...no agenda here!
THESE PEOPLE WANT TO TEACH OTHER PEOPLE'S CHILDREN THERE IDEAS ABOUT SEXUALITY WITH OR WITHOUT PARENTAL CONSENT!
Get it? This is my main point. Allow gay marriage and these fascists will have even greater justification!
Discussing Gay and Lesbian families DOESN'T have anything to do with human sexuality, any more than discussing a heterosexual family has anything to do with human sexuality!!!

And how is discussing the family life about human sexuality?

Kids are being taught that other types of families exist.......they aren't discussing anything sexual......that would be your mind going into the gutter!!!

We do live in a diversified society and there are many different types of family make-ups!!!

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7436 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Then why bother? If SO MANY kids have gay parents and these kids have friends who are aware of the situation then what is the point at all?
The point is to teach all these little ones that being gay is normal, healthy, and moral. That way we can use the public school system to eradicate all that nasty homophobia with have in society.
Sounds like a great plan...eh?
The point is that we live in a diversified society and kids need to get along with all sorts of other kids who come from different family make-ups.

Nothing wrong with ending Hatred, Bigotry, Racism or Homophobia in our communities and our society and yes, it's not a bad plan!!!

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7437 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually it does.......each and every day kids are shown that being straight is somehow the only way they should be......for a kid who happens to be Gay or Lesbian.....how do you think that makes them feel?
Parents can opt out of certain subjects, but the school doesn't need to ask permission to discuss certain things.
Being Gay or Lesbian is normal and healthy and moral........even you disagree with it.....what is unhealthy is high risk sexual practices and that applies to everyone who engages in sexual activity.
I'm always amazed at how folks like you think I'm being unreasonable or ranting, especially when I throw their link and information back at them......it shows you didn't read the whole link, but only what you thought would prove your point.
As an Educator........any discussion regarding this issue would always be age appropriate and only discussed if a question was asked or someone brought something up.......personally, there is a time and place for this issue and I'd prefer it to be at home by responsible adults who took the time to educate their child on the facts instead of the fear and intimidation factors, but that isn't what you want either......you want to teach your kids how to hate others just because their different, right?
Ah...there we have it. Why would you say I want to teach my kids to hate others? On the contrary. As a Christian I teach my children to love and even DEFEND those who are being picked on. That includes gays. See John 8:1-11. But I teach them to accept gays from MY perspective...not yours.

You don't need to protect my children from me. And you have no right.

“WAY TO GO”

Since: Mar 11

IRELAND

#7438 Oct 7, 2012
WaterBoarder wrote:
<quoted text>
Okay...now I know you are unreasonable. You write you don't believe anyone is being taught to "accept" homosexuals? You say on the contrary they are being taught to "accept" and respect those who are "different"? Of course, EVERY story is about these different people who are gays and lesbians?
Look...you don't have to agree with me and I don't have to agree with you. All I am saying is that using the public school system to teach other people's kids their version of sexuality (and morality for that matter) against the wishes of parents is just wrong. Let each family work out these very personal matters at home.
If you can't allow me and my family that right than you can't expect me to respect yours.
Different doesn't necessarily mean Gay or Lesbian.....when I was in elementary school, we had a kid who didn't participate in holiday stuff.......his family believed differently and we were taught to accept him, not make fun of him......so, yes......different for many reasons....not just because of being Gay or Lesbian!!!

You don't respect me or my family.......and I'm pretty certain that you would teach your children to somehow be disrespectful towards my grandchild based strictly on who they're grandparents are........again......IT'S NOT ABOUT SEXUALITY for the little ones as much as it's about respecting those who come from different situations!!!

“You wish you were here!!”

Since: May 09

The OC

#7439 Oct 7, 2012
RnL2008 wrote:
<quoted text>
Discussing Gay and Lesbian families DOESN'T have anything to do with human sexuality, any more than discussing a heterosexual family has anything to do with human sexuality!!!
And how is discussing the family life about human sexuality?
Kids are being taught that other types of families exist.......they aren't discussing anything sexual......that would be your mind going into the gutter!!!
We do live in a diversified society and there are many different types of family make-ups!!!
Well first of all the law say that any discussion of sexuality AND family life needs parental notification. Certainly the curriculum I linked to qualifies for that...does it not?

The truth is these folks just don't want to have to get permission from the parents before teaching this stuff. Think about the arrogance of that. The very parents of these kids, and the people who pay the taxes that provide these salaries of these educators, don't have the right to simply be notified before this teaching occurs...even thought the law explicitly states it!

Its clear. These people want to teach other people's kids their ideas about human sexuality against the wishes of the parents. It's an effort to eradicate "homophobia". Its a noble goal. I don't want to see anyone being hurt. But it's an over-stepping of governmental authority by any reasonable person's measure.

You just happen to agree with their goals. You simply fill in the rest with whatever is convenient.

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 What would Jesus say about same-sex marriage? (Jul '15) 18 min No Surprise 5,417
News Why does the Texas criminal code still ban "hom... 21 min tob 38
News 2nd Circuit allows sex bias suit based on gay s... 38 min Wondering 7
News 'Reading a book can't turn you gay,' say author... 39 min Wondering 126
News Mike Huckabee links same-sex marriage to straig... (Feb '11) 40 min Repeal Explosion 67
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 1 hr Terra Firma 46,410
News 'Free Kim Davis': This is just what gay rights ... (Sep '15) 1 hr Truth 25,300
More from around the web