Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash...

Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes

There are 17562 comments on the NBC Chicago story from Jan 7, 2013, titled Church Leaders Vow Political Backlash if Gay Marriage Passes. In it, NBC Chicago reports that:

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.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at NBC Chicago.

Fearless Contrarian

Saint Paul, MN

#5642 Jul 13, 2013
The question society needs to ask is, is mankind ready to redefine an ancient human institution that is biologically natural and universal?

It's important to consider that in states where same-sex marriage is legal, public schools are required to teach impressionable children that homosexuality is a normal and an equally valid alternative to heterosexuality. This new and untested social experiment, which goes against humans’ procreative instincts and natural order, will have profound negative social, economic, health, and evolutionary consequences.

The LGBT movement would like you to believe that same-sex marriage is only an issue concerning two people who love each other, but that is far from the truth.

Why same-sex marriage is harmful from a secular perspective

It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society

By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes the official and active promoter of anti-evolutionary sexual behavior. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.

In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new, alternative lifestyle and children will be socialized and encouraged to act against their primal procreative instincts.

In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect heterosexuals and all people of good will to betray their biological inhibitions by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and evolution.

Since homosexual behavior threatens the genetic progression and continuity of humanity, society should be very cautious to normalize and institutionalize it as a healthy alternative lifestyle.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#5643 Jul 13, 2013
Fearless Contrarian wrote:
Since homosexual behavior threatens the genetic progression and continuity of humanity, society should be very cautious to normalize and institutionalize it as a healthy alternative lifestyle.
Society is more threatened by idiotic logic like yours than gay marriage.

Two questions,
How many children will same sex couples have is same sex marriage is not legal?
Conversely, how many children will same sex couples have is same sex marriage is legal?

Do you see where your idiotic argument falls short?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5644 Jul 13, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
One could make that argument, if one were capable of articulating a compelling state interest served by denying same sex couples the right to marry. Thus far, you have lacked the competence to do so.
One does, and can make that argument is allowing both parties to a same sex relationship,as individual men, or women, to marry, as any other member of their respective sex, this creating the relationship of which the state has a compelling interest in.
it does illustrate that the state does not have an interest in children being raised by two birth parents.
Quite the contrary Liddie, adoption exists for situations where the bio mom and dad are unwilling, or unable to care for their children. The state recognizes this, and although not the ideal situation, it none the less demonstrates the state's interest in encouraging, promoting, and protecting the male female relationship in a legally recognized marriage so as to minimize the occurrence of such situations.
you are just proving the fallacy of your arguments, left and right.
No, just uncovering the fallacy of your arguments are from the left....left field....way....way...out there.
The definition must conform to the constitutional guarantee of equal protection.
Ahhhhhh.....Liddie but it does, all men are treated as men, as are all women treated as women, each is allowed to marry the other, thus meeting the definition of marriage as a legally recognized union of husband and wife. Each sex, essential for the marital union, is equally protected within the relationship, thus meeting the constitutional threshold of equal protection.
Unless, of course, you have finally grown am argument against equal protection for same sex couples to marry.
Your side has consistently lost in court, and will continue to lose unless you come up with a rational argument.
And yet the SCOTUS didn't impose SSM nationwide, or clearly rule there is a right to SSM. Hmmmmmm......I wonder why.....

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5645 Jul 13, 2013
barry wrote:
<quoted text>then you don't know what you are talking about. as a manager i've hired lesbians a "committed" couple who were perhaps the best employees i had. in my work at the university i've had the privilege to work with some homosexuals who were in the top 1% in their field. unfortunately non of them are currently having any success as they no longer can compete on a national level in their specific field of talent. what a sad shame it is.
perhaps you do have more authority. but you are only one. and perhaps you should reconsider your approach. perhaps you need to be talking to your people about what it takes to be successful and what it takes to convince people to think differently.
no one will ever be convinced or changed be strong arm threats of legal law suits. that wedding thing will come back to bite your efforts and will not win any approval points from those of us who try to accept who you think you are and work with you to a common goal in the real world.
\
You work at a university? That explains why you are such a dummy.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#5646 Jul 13, 2013
Fearless Contrarian wrote:
The Hidden Danger of Same-Sex Marriage:
The sky is falling....the sky is falling.... blame the gays.....ROTFLMAO

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5647 Jul 13, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
I see, and your father is, not in your life, by choice, or not by choice?
Choice. Same with my 7 year old brother. Except his father is closer and he sees him less.

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5648 Jul 13, 2013
Fearless Contrarian wrote:
The question society needs to ask is, is mankind ready to redefine an ancient human institution that is biologically natural and universal?
It's important to consider that in states where same-sex marriage is legal, public schools are required to teach impressionable children that homosexuality is a normal and an equally valid alternative to heterosexuality. This new and untested social experiment, which goes against humans’ procreative instincts and natural order, will have profound negative social, economic, health, and evolutionary consequences.
The LGBT movement would like you to believe that same-sex marriage is only an issue concerning two people who love each other, but that is far from the truth.
Why same-sex marriage is harmful from a secular perspective
It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society
By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes the official and active promoter of anti-evolutionary sexual behavior. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.
In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new, alternative lifestyle and children will be socialized and encouraged to act against their primal procreative instincts.
In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect heterosexuals and all people of good will to betray their biological inhibitions by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and evolution.
Since homosexual behavior threatens the genetic progression and continuity of humanity, society should be very cautious to normalize and institutionalize it as a healthy alternative lifestyle.
Well, asexuality could stop the continuation of the human race. So I take offence. Asexuality, the meaning used for humans, is actually against nature. Animals have no qualms with any sodomy, so is it actually bad? Asexuality is the real threat. We are.

Since: Mar 11

St. Croix valley

#5649 Jul 13, 2013
Fearless Contrarian wrote:
The question society needs to ask is, is mankind ready to redefine an ancient human institution that is biologically natural and universal?
It's important to consider that in states where same-sex marriage is legal, public schools are required to teach impressionable children that homosexuality is a normal and an equally valid alternative to heterosexuality. This new and untested social experiment, which goes against humans’ procreative instincts and natural order, will have profound negative social, economic, health, and evolutionary consequences.
The LGBT movement would like you to believe that same-sex marriage is only an issue concerning two people who love each other, but that is far from the truth.
Why same-sex marriage is harmful from a secular perspective
It Imposes Its Acceptance on All Society
By legalizing same-sex “marriage,” the State becomes the official and active promoter of anti-evolutionary sexual behavior. The State calls on public officials to officiate at the new civil ceremony, orders public schools to teach its acceptability to children, and punishes any state employee who expresses disapproval.
In the private sphere, objecting parents will see their children exposed more than ever to this new, alternative lifestyle and children will be socialized and encouraged to act against their primal procreative instincts.
In every situation where marriage affects society, the State will expect heterosexuals and all people of good will to betray their biological inhibitions by condoning, through silence or act, an attack on the natural order and evolution.
Since homosexual behavior threatens the genetic progression and continuity of humanity, society should be very cautious to normalize and institutionalize it as a healthy alternative lifestyle.
teaching people that homosexuality is a normal, natural part of the human species is just the truth. why do you hate the truth so much?

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5650 Jul 14, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>teaching people that homosexuality is a normal, natural part of the human species is just the truth. why do you hate the truth so much?
Yaaaaaaaaay Woody's back to play with us. Che si deech(dice) amico?

After the teaching that same sex sexual behavior/attraction is a "normal, natual part of the human species", although I question the wisdom of such considering most American have trouble naming their senators, will everyone get a rainbow bumper sticker?

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5651 Jul 14, 2013
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>teaching people that homosexuality is a normal, natural part of the human species is just the truth. why do you hate the truth so much?
Because, people in general don't like change

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5652 Jul 14, 2013
DeathToDiscrimination wrote:
<quoted text>
Because, people in general don't like change
True....but some things in life just don't change.

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5653 Jul 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
True....but some things in life just don't change.
In time.... all will change. I'm more and less sane. Yes, I said 'and'.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5654 Jul 14, 2013
DeathToDiscrimination wrote:
<quoted text>
In time.... all will change. I'm more and less sane. Yes, I said 'and'.
Sex, coitus, still makes babies. Short of mass produced test tube babies, that's not gonna change.

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5655 Jul 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Sex, coitus, still makes babies. Short of mass produced test tube babies, that's not gonna change.
Not anytime soon. But it will

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5656 Jul 14, 2013
DeathToDiscrimination wrote:
<quoted text>
Not anytime soon. But it will
That is the realm of science fiction. If it does come to pass, it could render marriage extinct.

“Vita e' Bella.”

Since: May 12

Location hidden

#5657 Jul 14, 2013
DeathToDiscrimination wrote:
<quoted text>
Choice. Same with my 7 year old brother. Except his father is closer and he sees him less.
Half siblings? Two different biological fathers?

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5658 Jul 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
Half siblings? Two different biological fathers?
Why yes!

“Fun or death!”

Since: Jul 13

Location hidden

#5659 Jul 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
<quoted text>
That is the realm of science fiction. If it does come to pass, it could render marriage extinct.
Ever heard of evolution, genius? And it would not make marriage extinct. Is marriage not about emotions?

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#5660 Jul 14, 2013
Pietro Armando wrote:
One does, and can make that argument is allowing both parties to a same sex relationship,as individual men, or women, to marry, as any other member of their respective sex, this creating the relationship of which the state has a compelling interest in.
Watching you think is often like watching a dog that has been fed peanut butter.
What point were you trying to make.
Keep in mind, the thought of a compelling state interest originates with the judicial level of review of strict scrutiny, it is applicable when the state wishes to deny a right, not to grant one.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Quite the contrary Liddie, adoption exists for situations where the bio mom and dad are unwilling, or unable to care for their children. The state recognizes this, and although not the ideal situation, it none the less demonstrates the state's interest in encouraging, promoting, and protecting the male female relationship in a legally recognized marriage so as to minimize the occurrence of such situations.
None the less, it illustrates that the state does not have an interest in children being raise by their biological parents, just as divorce proves that there is no state interest in children being raise by two parents.
Pietro Armando wrote:
No, just uncovering the fallacy of your arguments are from the left....left field....way....way...out there.
Actually, yours are the ones that are out there, and you seem to lack the ability to rationally defend them.
Pietro Armando wrote:
Ahhhhhh.....Liddie but it does, all men are treated as men, as are all women treated as women, each is allowed to marry the other, thus meeting the definition of marriage as a legally recognized union of husband and wife. Each sex, essential for the marital union, is equally protected within the relationship, thus meeting the constitutional threshold of equal protection.
You've yet to offer that elusive compelling state interest served by restriction marriage to being between a man and a woman.

Personally, I think you lack the mental capacity to do so.
Pietro Armando wrote:
And yet the SCOTUS didn't impose SSM nationwide, or clearly rule there is a right to SSM. Hmmmmmm......I wonder why.....
Of course, not. That was not the question before the court. However Kennedy's decision for the majority clearly illustrates a path forward that will bring equal protection for all, as does Antonin Scalia's dissent. The map has been handed down. Only a fool would not be able to see as much.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Home, sweet home.

#5661 Jul 14, 2013
Never make a politician grant you a favour;
They will always want to control you forever,

Stephen Marley, Ziggy Marley and Anthony Henderson
Revolution
http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/b/bob_marley...

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 3 min Chimney1 173,825
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 3 min thetruth 12,790
News GOP establishment plans Trump takedown 9 min Prep-for-Dep 137
News Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 12 min OzRitz 54,548
News Trump would deport children of illegal immigrants 34 min Quirky 481
News Turkey duped the US, and ISIS reaps rewards 1 hr Filipsamovich 32
News In America, atheists are still in the closet (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 47,824
News The President has failed us (Jun '12) 1 hr Quirky 341,259
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 1 hr Limbertwig 193,975
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 hr THE DEVIL 1,277,191
News White House says Mount McKinley to be renamed D... 3 hr Your Ex 90
More from around the web