Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

Jan 7, 2013 Full story: NBC Chicago 17,568

Leaders of several Chicago-area African American churches on Monday urged state lawmakers to vote against pending legislation that would allow same-sex marriage in Illinois.

Full Story

“equality for ALL means ALL”

Since: Jan 07

Fort Lauderdale FL

#1745 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so you don't think that if sandusky would have had a perversion for young girls that he wouldn't have found a way to gain access to them? really a poor argument on your part.
however my original question is based on the fact that we know young boys who were sold in prostitution by their mother who now as teenagers are in trouble for having sexual activity with children under the age of ten. i was looking for a study to see if this was a common thing and if in fact if young boys were molested by men is there a greater chance that they too would be homosexual and/or would there be a greater chance that they also would molest children. you are trying to defend your position when really, all i asked for was for some one who said that someone else was wrong to provide a link proving it. as of yet it hasn't happened.
as a foster parent i happen to feel from experience that there might actually be a link. i just was curious.
Do we have to teach you how to use google?

I don't do that for free.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#1746 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>peter 4:25?
however i accept the list even with the question of that verse and 1Thes 4:11 is out of context.
my point was the Bible also says a lot about the homosexual lifestyle and it is clearly more than 10 verses and the sexual aspect of it is clearly condemned.
I doubt you can come up with ten verses that condemn homosexuality. There's basically Leviticus and the writings of Saul. That's it.

Of course, there is the story of Noah's sons raping him, but the anti-gay almost never bring that up.

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#1747 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>so you don't think that if sandusky would have had a perversion for young girls that he wouldn't have found a way to gain access to them? really a poor argument on your part.
No, I'm saying that pedophiles are opportunistic. If I were a jewel thief with access to gold, should I ignore what is handy because I also like diamonds? If my arguments are poor, what does it say about yours?
however my original question is based on the fact that we know young boys who were sold in prostitution by their mother who now as teenagers are in trouble for having sexual activity with children under the age of ten.
Once again, there is no link between being a teenage prostitute and being homosexual.
i was looking for a study to see if this was a common thing and if in fact if young boys were molested by men is there a greater chance that they too would be homosexual and/or would there be a greater chance that they also would molest children.
Why are you so insistent on conflating molesting children and being homosexual? You will indeed find that children who have been molested are more likely to molest other children. There is really no controversy over that in the literature. But you keep trying to say that it makes them homosexual in their orientation toward other adults. Since you wish to make that claim, why don't you provide the evidence instead of simply making up excuses for not accepting the evidence we've already provided you?
you are trying to defend your position when really, all i asked for was for some one who said that someone else was wrong to provide a link proving it. as of yet it hasn't happened.
as a foster parent i happen to feel from experience that there might actually be a link. i just was curious.
Actually, my link did show that. You simply insisted on misconstruing what it said. If you don't like that source, I suggest you seek your own sources instead of carrying on this silly exercise in denial.
Professor Bubblegum Shoe

Alpharetta, GA

#1748 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
so you don't think that if sandusky would have had a perversion for young girls that he wouldn't have found a way to gain access to them? really a poor argument on your part.
...shortened for 4000 word limitations...
as a foster parent i happen to feel from experience that there might actually be a link. i just was curious.
Hard-wired gay orientation and hard-wired hetero orientation doesn't change; and bi-sexual orientation doesn't change either.....
.
.....but.....
.
.....a bi-sexual kid grows up to swing either way (hence the word bi-sexual) as shown on this sliding scale:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons...
.
A parent who gets his/her BDSM jollies abusing their children often raise children who grow up to be BDSM abusive too; so that element can be ingrained into a child
.
Here's what to watch for:
.
Profile of the Sociopath
++++++++++
Glibness and Superficial Charm
.
Manipulative and Conning
They never recognize the rights of others and see their self-serving behaviors as permissible. They appear to be charming, yet are covertly hostile and domineering, seeing their victim as merely an instrument to be used. They may dominate and humiliate their victims.
.
Grandiose Sense of Self
Feels entitled to certain things as "their right."
.
Pathological Lying
Has no problem lying coolly and easily and it is almost impossible for them to be truthful on a consistent basis. Can create, and get caught up in, a complex belief about their own powers and abilities. Extremely convincing and even able to pass lie detector tests.
.
Lack of Remorse, Shame or Guilt
A deep seated rage, which is split off and repressed, is at their core. Does not see others around them as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Instead of friends, they have victims and accomplices who end up as victims. The end always justifies the means and they let nothing stand in their way.
.
Shallow Emotions
When they show what seems to be warmth, joy, love and compassion it is more feigned than experienced and serves an ulterior motive. Outraged by insignificant matters, yet remaining unmoved and cold by what would upset a normal person. Since they are not genuine, neither are their promises.
.
Incapacity for Love
.
Need for Stimulation
Living on the edge. Verbal outbursts and physical punishments are normal. Promiscuity and gambling are common.
.
Callousness/Lack of Empathy
Unable to empathize with the pain of their victims, having only contempt for others' feelings of distress and readily taking advantage of them.
.
Poor Behavioral Controls/Impulsive Nature
Rage and abuse, alternating with small expressions of love and approval produce an addictive cycle for abuser and abused, as well as creating hopelessness in the victim. Believe they are all-powerful, all-knowing, entitled to every wish, no sense of personal boundaries, no concern for their impact on others.
.
Early Behavior Problems/Juvenile Delinquency
Usually has a history of behavioral and academic difficulties, yet "gets by" by conning others. Problems in making and keeping friends; aberrant behaviors such as cruelty to people or animals, stealing, etc.
.
Irresponsibility/Unreliability
Not concerned about wrecking others' lives and dreams. Oblivious or indifferent to the devastation they cause. Does not accept blame themselves, but blames others, even for acts they obviously committed.
.
Promiscuous Sexual Behavior/Infidelity
Promiscuity, child sexual abuse, rape and sexual acting out of all sorts.
.
Lack of Realistic Life Plan/Parasitic Lifestyle
Tends to move around a lot or makes all encompassing promises for the future, poor work ethic but exploits others effectively.
.
Criminal or Entrepreneurial Versatility
Changes their image as needed to avoid prosecution. Changes life story readily.
++++++++++
http://www.mcafee.cc/Bin/sb.html
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1749 Jan 21, 2013
Tony C wrote:
<quoted text>
Do we have to teach you how to use google?
I don't do that for free.
obviously i use google as i will substantiate my claims from the internet. however if i have googled it and have not found any studies pro or con on the topic that others are being so authoritative about then i will ask for help. apparently you're not very helpful or you don't have anything to substantiate the claim.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1750 Jan 21, 2013
nhjeff wrote:
<quoted text>
I doubt you can come up with ten verses that condemn homosexuality. There's basically Leviticus and the writings of Saul. That's it.
Of course, there is the story of Noah's sons raping him, but the anti-gay almost never bring that up.
you take great liberty with the story of noah. of course that is the only way you can claim some satisfaction for your position.
it wasn't "son's" but one son Ham. the Bible simply says that he, Ham, "saw the nakedness of his father" and then told his brothers who covered "the nakedness of their father" with a garment. you assume much to come up with some kind of homosexual activity involving the "sons" and noah.
and then you ignore the fact that what ever happened there was a curse put on the son of Ham. i guess that supports your theory that what ever happened was ok?

Genesis 18:20 Genesis 19
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
1Kings 14:22,24 15:11-12
2Kings 23:3,7
Romans 1:26-27
1Corinthians 6:9-10
1Timothy 1:10
Jude 7
Deuteronomy 23:17
Isaiah 3:9
Ezekiel 16:46-58
2Peter 2:6

and that doesn't even include the verses that clearly define marriage as a relationship between man and woman.
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#1751 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>obviously i use google as i will substantiate my claims from the internet. however if i have googled it and have not found any studies pro or con on the topic that others are being so authoritative about then i will ask for help. apparently you're not very helpful or you don't have anything to substantiate the claim.
Being molested doesn't make anyone gay. Only uneducated people believe that nonsense. People who are victims of abuse are more likely to become abusers.

http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/intelli...
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#1752 Jan 21, 2013
barry wrote:
and that doesn't even include the verses that clearly define marriage as a relationship between man and woman.
Sorry to inform you that the State defines marriage here in the USA. How you think your buybull "defines" it is irrelevant.
barry

Rainsville, AL

#1753 Jan 22, 2013
Jane Dodo wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry to inform you that the State defines marriage here in the USA. How you think your buybull "defines" it is irrelevant.
except for the fact that you are content with the state endorsing your interpretation/version of religion.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#1754 Jan 22, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>...
and that doesn't even include the verses that clearly define marriage as a relationship between man and woman.
You didn't include the verses where marriage was between one man and many women. Or when a woman had to marry her dead husband's kin. Or the ones where incestuous unions were supposed to populate the Earth.

Why is that?

And yet, you actually included Leviticus against gay folks, when NO CHRISTAIN TODAY actually follows those laws for ancient Hebrew priests.

It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

You pick and choose the verses that support your opinions, without giving a thought to what Jesus actually says and means.
Quest

Woodford, VA

#1755 Jan 22, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>except for the fact that you are content with the state endorsing your interpretation/version of religion.
Actually, must of us, even good Christians, would rather the government NOT endorse any one interpretation of any one religion.
After all, how would they decide the "correct" interpretation?

“Together for 24, legal for 5”

Since: Sep 07

Littleton, NH

#1756 Jan 22, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>you take great liberty with the story of noah. of course that is the only way you can claim some satisfaction for your position.
it wasn't "son's" but one son Ham. the Bible simply says that he, Ham, "saw the nakedness of his father" and then told his brothers who covered "the nakedness of their father" with a garment. you assume much to come up with some kind of homosexual activity involving the "sons" and noah.
and then you ignore the fact that what ever happened there was a curse put on the son of Ham. i guess that supports your theory that what ever happened was ok?

No, I clearly did not present the story of Noah and his sons as a justification of homosexuality. Instead, I pointed out that this reference is ignored by you religious freaks. What. Exactly, was this sin? Putting a robe over their father's naked body? Doen't that sound like a loving gesture to you? Clearly, something else occurred which is referenced only obliquely. The hints to what that is come from the original texts and concordance with other Bible verses. Serious Bible scholars know that, whichever side of the issue they are on.
Genesis 18:20 Genesis 19
Of course, you made the common leap from rape and I hospitality to homosexuality. I know that you will insist on interpreting this passage the way you wish, so I will point out to others that your interpretation is at odds with even a casual reading of the story, with further references to the events in other parts of the Bible, and with historical interpretation by Jews and Christians alike, up until the last few centuries.
Leviticus 18:22
Leviticus 20:13
There's two that we can agree on, though even there the original texts are far from clear.
1Kings 14:22,24 15:11-12
2Kings 23:3,7
Apparently, you have a special version of the bible which substitute phallus worship for idolatry in these passages. I was unable to find even the most oblique reference to homosexuality in any published translation of the Bible.
Romans 1:26-27
1Corinthians 6:9-10
1Timothy 1:10
So we are now up to 5.
Jude 7
Deuteronomy 23:17
Isaiah 3:9
Ezekiel 16:46-58
2Peter 2:6
All of the above reference the sins of Sodom and Gemorrah, but none directly reference homosexuality. Even if we accept that homosexuality was one of the sins for which the cities were destroyed, the text is clear that there were many sins. I know it is comforting for you to always assume that none of the other sins were important, for you undoubtedly are prone to committing many of them. It is much easier for you to assume the truly nasty sin was one toward which you have no inclination. It shows that you have a very well-developed skill of selective reading.
and that doesn't even include the verses that clearly define marriage as a relationship between man and woman.
Well, that wasn't actually the question, was it? You failed. I challenged you to find 10 references to homosexuality, and you found five. You also listed five references to Sodom--and its long litany of sins, among which homosexuality is minor, if it is even a sin. And then you threw in two references to idolatry, which has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

But I will provide two more references that may support your view: the aforementioned story of Noah, and the story of Jonathan and David. It's clear early in the story that the family was displeased by their relationship.
Jane Dodo

Hoboken, NJ

#1757 Jan 22, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>except for the fact that you are content with the state endorsing your interpretation/version of religion.
Huh? My interpretation of religion? WTF?

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#1758 Jan 22, 2013
The world got by just fine without gay marriage for thousands of years, and I think it could get by for thousands of more years without it.

For me, giving the status of marriage to homosexuals will not give any dignity to homosexuality.

I have always believed that it is just a widely-practiced sexual fetish and all the people who are into it want some respectablity from all the normal people in our society.

Yet, you can't/shouldn't ask normal people to respect people with fetishes despite how widely-practiced those fetishes are.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#1759 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
The world got by just fine without gay marriage for thousands of years, and I think it could get by for thousands of more years without it.
For me, giving the status of marriage to homosexuals will not give any dignity to homosexuality.
......
You don't believe that strong families IMPROVE the world?

Ho odd.

And a person's sexual orientation doesn't need to be "given dignity", it's simply a natural trait. What we DO do, in America, is treat other Americans with dignity.

Or, at least, we should.

Can you explain how legally recognizing the marriages of gay people harms you? How their families and children are a threat to you?

And, really, why should gay taxpayers pay out of pocket to subsidize YOUR marriage, to the detriment of their own families? Can't straight married folks stand on their OWN feet.

Would YOU put up with such a thing?

“Never give up”

Since: Dec 12

North Olmsted, OH

#1760 Jan 22, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't believe that strong families IMPROVE the world?
Ho odd.
And a person's sexual orientation doesn't need to be "given dignity", it's simply a natural trait. What we DO do, in America, is treat other Americans with dignity.
Or, at least, we should.
Can you explain how legally recognizing the marriages of gay people harms you? How their families and children are a threat to you?
And, really, why should gay taxpayers pay out of pocket to subsidize YOUR marriage, to the detriment of their own families? Can't straight married folks stand on their OWN feet.
Would YOU put up with such a thing?
All humans are born with sexual organs. It was Nature's intent that all animals, including humans, procreate. I believe going against Nature's intent is abnormal and doing so is a choice, it is not a built-in or natural trait that you are claiming.

Every gay marriage is a message to young people that making the choice not to procreate is an okay thing to do. I believe it is not and bad choices should not be given any legitimacy.

And by paying taxes, you are doing your civic duty, something you should do despite what the money is used for.
Brad

Manchester, CT

#1761 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
The world got by just fine without gay marriage for thousands of years, and I think it could get by for thousands of more years without it.
For me, giving the status of marriage to homosexuals will not give any dignity to homosexuality.
I have always believed that it is just a widely-practiced sexual fetish and all the people who are into it want some respectablity from all the normal people in our society.
Yet, you can't/shouldn't ask normal people to respect people with fetishes despite how widely-practiced those fetishes are.
These people are gonna hammer you.
Its no longer a discussion on these threads,its the gay way,or the highway.
You'll find that lots of strange people have become emboldened with the re-election of Oblamer and feel its their time to get theirs.
Topix is no longer a place where constructive dialogue gets exchanged.
Its degraded into a shooting gallery of agenda drivin insults,period.
Even the people who resisted that behavior are reduced to it.

Since: Mar 07

The entire US of A

#1762 Jan 22, 2013
BraveCon wrote:
<quoted text>
All humans are born with sexual organs. It was Nature's intent that all animals, including humans, procreate. I believe going against Nature's intent is abnormal and doing so is a choice, it is not a built-in or natural trait that you are claiming.
.....
Nature intends it's creatures to legally marry?

You seem to forget that gay people are not infertile, and something like 30% of gay couples either have raised or are raising children. You also forget to mention that infertile straight folks, and those that do not choose to have children marry legally every day.

Is that against nature?

I guess I would have to ask you what you WOULD consider "natural"?

Would that be gay people pretending to be attracted to the opposite gender and marrying unsuspecting straight folks, as we have had to do for those thousands and thousands of years you were talking about?Do you really believe such a union is natural? And healthy?

Would you want that for yourself? For your child? Would you pray that someday your own child be sucked into a loveless marriage of convenience?

If you would not willingly accept that for your own family, why would you suggest it for the families of others?

That doesn't seem very "natural" to me.
Quest

Woodford, VA

#1763 Jan 22, 2013
Brad wrote:
<quoted text>
These people are gonna hammer you.
Its no longer a discussion on these threads,its the gay way,or the highway.
...
That's likely because this is a Gay/Lesbian forum.
Funny how that works.
But, really, why in the world should we "discuss" and give any credence to your ideas that we, and our families, should accept second class citizenship, simply to make people like yourself feel better about your lives.
It's just playing in to your weakness and insecurity.
We want you to stand on your own feet, stop demanding special rights and taking tax subsidies from gay folks and take some control over your own lives.
Brad

Manchester, CT

#1765 Jan 22, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
That's likely because this is a Gay/Lesbian forum.
Funny how that works.
But, really, why in the world should we "discuss" and give any credence to your ideas that we, and our families, should accept second class citizenship, simply to make people like yourself feel better about your lives.
It's just playing in to your weakness and insecurity.
We want you to stand on your own feet, stop demanding special rights and taking tax subsidies from gay folks and take some control over your own lives.
I accept you for what you are,isn't that enough?
Why do you need anybody elses approval?
Sounds very insecure to me,thats all.

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
Once more on fascism knocking on the Balkan doo... (Aug '09) 7 min Blahblah80 1,718
Stay issued in Indiana gay marriage ban case 10 min nhjeff 7
Community concerns over ice use among gay men i... 21 min Professor Jumper 3
US judge upholds state same-sex marriage ban, r... 22 min No Surprise 725
An Afternoon in WeHo With a Gay Russian Teen Se... 27 min Professor Jumper 7
No gridlock for gay marriage, legal marijuana 29 min Professor Jumper 1
Arkansas AG asks court to uphold gay marriage ban 34 min Professor Jumper 3
Is Polygamy the Next Gay Marriage? 54 min Frankie Rizzo 446
Gay marriage cases await early Supreme Court de... 1 hr Frankie Rizzo 350
Gay marriage (Mar '13) 1 hr Jasper Muggins 55,850
Biggest Gay Lies 5 hr Phobos 1,996
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Gay/Lesbian People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••