Why is there an orchestrated effort to normalize and legitimaize homosexuality?

If you are upset that married couples get too much benefits, it is up the government of people not to associate those benefits with marriage. But it has nothing to do with gays.
Marriage benefits are part of regulation and licensing of relationship between man and woman, and as you know heterosexual relationship should be regulated and licensed because of possibility of life creation.
Since homosexual couples can't create life, couple cannot be fully responsible for the new life, so there is no need to regulate or license that type of relationship.
It is similar to situation where mother and daughter live together, if daughter decides to acquire a child no special license is needed for relationship between mother and daughter because only one member of couple is fully responsible.
Only relationship where two people are responsible require government involvement.

 

I do not know the law where purposes of marriage are listed, but the only legitimate and practical purpose to license and regulate relationship between man and woman is their ability to create new life. All other activities do not require government and my tax money.
Think about it. Man and woman can create life but they can't take it away.
SOOOO heterosexual relationship require regulation
Can two man create life - NO.
Can two women create life - NO.
No need to regulate and license them.
Dignity and benefits is totally different story that should be addressed in different laws.

By the way when you talking about infertile or postmenopausal women you still have to regulate it. No matter how you twist it relationship between man and woman REQUIRE regulation while relationship between two people of the same sex DO NOT.

 

There are more 'variables' than you are willing to admit. Simple as that.

Your equation doesn't apply.

Save your homophobic commentary for some playground full of those who agree with you. If you aren't reasonable enough to see/understand that homosexual couples should NOT be discriminated against... others WILL challenge the things you say.

 

What can be more reasonable then fact that relationship between man and woman is fundamentally different from relationship between two people of the same sex.
The only activity between man and woman that require government involvement is possibility of life creation.
Remember man and woman can create life but they can't take it back.
Both parties ARE BOTH responsible.
They trade their responsibility for marriage benefits, that is as simple as that.

 

How exactly do those fundamentals differ? It is time for you to get away from the vague generalities. I mean, "fundamentally different" sounds profound... but that isn't enough to deny homosexual couples the right to marry legally.

Many heterosexual couples do not procreate, cannot procreate and do not intend to procreate. Do you see what I mean there? (You should.)

That is irrelevant within the context of granting marriage rights to homosexual people. Many homosexual people have children too. So what?

And so it is with gay couples that have children. Can't you understand that? Why don't you?

(See the above.) And it's not simple; that's for certain. Don't believe me? Ask any divorce lawyer.

 

Well in his defense, there is no evidence of this 'homophobia' you accuse him of. An opposing point of view is not necessarily a sign of malicious intent.

 

His commentary (to me) communicates homophobia. Others may disagree, but that is my view.

 

Honestly, Johnny, I think you are highly motivated to demonize your opponent because his position offends you. That hardly makes him the bad guy here. Everyone seems to be taking offense at their opponents position. That's way too common in these threads. Settle down. Relax. Be civilized. Make your point. It's not an insult contest or a shouting match. It's a debate, a presentation of opposing views.

 

Another bunch of BS!
I was victim of childhood sexual abuse (I was 11) and I have never had homosexual feelings, although I am absolutely in favor of homosexuals receiving the exact same rights as we have as heterosexual people.

It is not a gay man or a lesbian who sexually assaulted me. . .it was an old priest, a family man with 4 children, and a WW1 veteran!

Obviously "some" gay people may have experienced sexual abuse during childhood. . .NOTHING puts gay people apart from the general population, and pedophiles exist in all walks (and all sexual orientation) in the general population.

By the way. . .some "sex changes " are in fact "sex reassignment" because mistakes were made assigning a sex to a child at birth. . .and because some newborns are NOT clearly differentiated between male and female! I personally believe that it should be a crime to engage in open homophobia, since it is totally against human rights.

So. .you want to make one thing a crime, for very invalid reasons, and I am telling you, everyone might want to "choose" what they consider a "crime!"

 

Gays are homolesters such as Jerry Sandusky & the priests who homolest boys-they are homosexuals. 33% of gays report homosexual rape in youth. Many gays and lesbians who commit suicide do so because they often were childhood sex abuse victims and many have other copathologies such as antisocial conduct, drugs, etc. Sex abuse especially homosexual rape in youth is major cause of homosexuality/transexuality-deny it is dishonest, delusional or both. It remains to be seen how many of Jerry Sandusky's victims think they're gay because of this. Homosexual/lesbian sexual behaviors are bad for health often as result of childhood sex abuse though there possibly other causes such as birth defect though they've not conclusively proven gayism's inborn.


Making it a crime to do sex change mutilations is what must be done. Sex changes happen because science knows how to do it but sex changes are useless mutilations. Transexuals are worse than the homos & most transexuals were childhood sex abuse victims. Many transexuals are child molesters as http://blogs.miaminewtimes.com/riptide/2012/07/transgender_hotel_maid_gropes.php?ref=trending Transexuality is a sad science waste-if a man thinks he is a dog it would be bad for a Dr. to surgically alter his voice so that he can bark like a dog, train him to be a dog and put a fake tail. Sex change maimings which is mutilating some1 to make them fake members of opposite sex is comparable to trying to make a man a dog because he thinks he is a dog instead of a man.

 

Homosexual are no more likely to be pedophiles than heterosexual people.

I actually do not care to debate anything with you. Your comments are far too prejudice and unfounded to mean anything to a reasonable debate.

Enjoy talking to yourself.

 

This has been discussed many times, but here it goes. It depends on what your definition of a homosexual is. If 1 accepts the colloquial, then yes, a 'man' who has sex with young boys is a homosexual a homolester. So it’s a fact that homos molest more, if 1 accepts the colloquial word & not the politically safe rubbish

 

Look up the definition. It will help you to better understand things.

 

Nonsense only to gay/lesbian groups. Sex abuse especially homosexual rape in youth is major cause of homosexuality/transexuality-deny it is dishonest, delusional or both. You were both going to ignore me, yet you replied. Also what you say is your opinion. Dr. NE Whitehead did a study which found people who do gay/lesbian behavors more likely to be drug junkies and commit suicides. Transexuals have more problems. So it's truth gayism, lesbianism and transexuality are all comparable to drug junkyism.

 

You're talking about sexual-abuse... not homosexuality. And the association you are trying to make, surely isn't supported credibly by you here.

And I would agree that sexual-abuse (a violent crime) could lead many victims to various forms of sexual dysfunction.

 

Gays are homolesters such as Jerry Sandusky & the priests who homolest boys-they are homosexuals
How Many Victims of Penn State Homosexual Predator Jerry Sandusky Will Think They are ‘Gay’?
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality Peter LaBarbera


News Release
Americans For Truth About Homosexuality

CHICAGO—The discovery that former Penn State University defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky has been molesting boys as young as 10 years old – and that university officials including head coach Joe Paterno did not do more to apprehend this predator – has shocked America. Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans For Truth About Homosexuality (AFTAH), said the scandal exposes the continuing problem of homosexual predators in society. He offers the following observations related to the PSU scandal:

Many openly homosexual (“gay&#8221 men, like CNN anchor Don Lemon, were molested as boys or experienced abnormally early sexualization. Yet many of these same men do NOT see their boyhood victimization at the hands of homosexual male predators as causing their homosexuality. (This is due partly to the success of the modern “gay” movement that falsely ascribes “gayness” to a person’s (innate) identity, and emphasizes the ambiguous notion of “sexual orientation” as opposed to behavior that is sinful, destructive and changeable.)
Thus, how many boy victims of homosexual predator Sandusky will end up believing that being homosexual (“gay&#8221 is “who they are”? How many will struggle with sexual identity issues? And how many will be told by LGBT advocates and liberal-minded people just to “accept being gay” as “who they are” because they were “born that way”?

Because the media and academia have largely become apologists for the modern homosexualist movement, they downplay or ignore obvious causative factors in the formation of “gay” identity – including pederastic molestation. CNN’s Lemon is a case in point: he is now an “out gay” celebrity, yet few question the absurdity of him not associating the molestation of his youth with his later embrace of homosexuality as a positive identity.
There IS a long history connecting homosexuality to pederasty, and a disproportionate link between homosexuality and pedophilia: why else would so many child molestation victims be boys when only 1-3 percent of the population is homosexual? Since cases of women molesting boys remain rare, if homosexuality were not such a strong factor, nearly all of pedophile victims should be girls, which is far from the case.
Sandusky is married but obviously has a homosexuality (perversion) problem. Yet pro-“gay” liberals will deny any linkage between homosexuality and Sandusky’s rape/seduction of boys. In fact, after news of the Penn State scandal came to light, “gay” activists stressed that Sandusky is married. However, behavior is what matters – not a person’s marital status or self-described “sexual orientation.” Some inner demons or life traumas – probably in his own youth – caused him to lust for boys, wrecking untold misery in the lives of his victims. Behavior is the issue, and this was a case of a serial homosexual predator raping boys.

 

Sandusky wasn't gay. He is a pedophile.

More meaningless, homophobic crap.
You are back on Ignore!

 

He was a gay pedophile. He specifically targeted little boys, not girls.

 

So what?

Do you think little girls who suffer because of pedophiles are less "worthy" of compassion?

Do you think that, because "heterosexual sex" is the norm, it makes heterosexual pedophiles better or just "okay?"

And do you think that because homosexual pedophiles do exist, we shouldn't even mention or realize that heterosexual pedophiles are at least as common as Homosexual pedophiles?

This is hypocrisy. And as a woman who suffered from being sexually molested by HETEROSEXUAL MEN, I find it disgusting that society keeps on pointing the finger to "homosexual pedophiles," while closing our collective eyes to the cases of pedophilia that happen right underneath our eyes?

By the way, many pedophiles are not attracted to "boys, or "girls," but to CHILDREN! It is precisely the minimal differentiation between male and female children that attracts pedophiles!

 

Then why did Sandusky single out little boys? He was gay and a pedophile, when people say that pedophilies 'are neither gay or straight' it's just a semantics game.

 

You KNOW this? (Or is that merely your personal conclusion?)

 

It's more like common sense - if a man is attracted to little boys exclusively, that makes him a gay pedophile. Why does the idea of that threaten you so much?

I just think it's stupid when gay activists try to create a semantical difference between being 'gay' and being attracted to little boys - just because they're apparently afraid of the idea that some gays might be pedophilies.

 

And you KNOW that was the case as well?

Please, stop making things up. It doesn't help anything.

You claim it is only a 'semantic' distinction, when anyone decently educated realizes that pedophilia isn't primarily about 'gender'. There are MANY heterosexuals who will pick a girl or a boy as a victim (despite their actual sexual orientation).

If you are going to talk about this stuff... it makes more sense to speak truth rather than promote made-up notions.

 

You make some very large assertions. Where did you get the statistic that 33% of gays report homosexual abuse in youth? You can't just throw that out there without citing your sources and expect others to that and your argument as valid.
Like has been said many times, being homosexual does not make someone a pedophile and to make those two words equivalent is uncalled for and unnecessary.
Yes there are cases such as the Sandusky one. He is one person and so to conclude that all homosexuals are pedophiles is a fallacy. There are also heterosexual pedophiles and so If we were to follow that logic then all heterosexuals would be considered pedophiles as well which is not the case.