Hey Maine, Maryland, Minnesota and Washington!

If you are confused about how to vote to uphold real marriage and not let it be replaced with the fraud called “gay marriage”, here’s what you do:

If you want to get a sense of what the advocates of gay “marriage” are seeking:

If you think that it’s a bad idea to be indoctrinating children about homosex foreplay while trampling their parents, you might consider not allowing the gay long march through American culture to continue unchallenged and say “no” to gay “marriage”.

  • Hanna

    With all due respect, I really don’t think it’s fair to associate the entire, extremely diverse, gay marriage movement with a couple of presenters who did something really dumb and went too far. The vast majority of gay marriage supporters I know are advocating for nothing more than plain old civil marriage. If you want to talk about sex education in schools, then talk about sex education in schools.; that’s a separate issue, not a part of the “gay agenda”. I’m not even voicing an opinion on the marriage issue right now. I just don’t think blanket statements like that are at all conducive to dialogue.

    • Ted Seeber

      It isn’t isolated:
      http://www.massresistance.org/media/video/brainwashing.html

      It’s going on all over the country. And if you think gay marriage has anything to do with “civil marriage”, then why are states that *already have civil union laws* attacked?

      • Hanna

        First of all, because they genuinely feel that their marriages are at their core no different from everybody else’s, and they’re offended that they can’t be recognized at such. But also, a marriage gives the couple certain legal rights that a civil union does not.
        And once again, marriage and education, while connected, are still separate issues and should be treated as such.

        • Mark Shea

          “Marriage” is not defined according whatever somebody feels it to be. The sense of being offended does not establish the definition of marriage.

          • Hanna

            Regardless, I was answering the question of why people want marriages when they can have civil unions. It’s not about trying to have the right to go into middle schools and teach kids about foreplay. It’s just about getting married.

            • Ted Seeber

              It’s about making homosexuality the norm, to destroy America:
              https://vimeo.com/52009124

            • Mark Shea

              Right. But gay unions are not, by the nature of the case, marriage. You cannot take any random relationship you like, declare it “marriage” and then demand everybody accept your definition on pain of your feeling offended. My relationship with my son is not a marriage. Nor is my relationship with my dog, house, or car. Yet there are people who have tried to make all these relationships be called “marriage”. When you make “marriage” mean whatever you like, you make it mean nothing. And making marriage mean nothing is a disastrously bad idea since the family must be privileged and protected or the civilization that depends on it is doomed.

              • Sunjay

                I hope you’re not having sex with and raising kids with your son, your dog, your house, or your car, and I hope you aren’t promising to love and cherish the second three in front of witnesses in a planned ceremony of union.
                We’re not asking for the state to recognize things that aren’t marriage, we’re asking it to recognize our marriages legally. It is not about being offended, it’s about not having our relationships and our lives erased because some people wish they didn’t exist.

        • Dan

          In Washington State, “Domestic Partnerships” already provide the exact SAME rights that Marriage has (since 2009). Referendum 74 here is an ideological referendum about redefining the meaning of “Marriage”. It adds NO additional rights.

          • Ghosty

            Indeed. Here in Washington State we are voting on the definition of a word, as if it was an appropriate use of the government process.

            Peace and God bless!

            • Sunjay

              Actually, because marriage licenses are granted by the state, then it is entirely the government’s responsibility to define marriage. Admittedly, normally the distinction would be decided by the courts rather than referendum, but since the issue has become so politicized (as made obvious by this post) it makes sense to resolve the issue in this way.

        • Ted Seeber

          “First of all, because they genuinely feel that their marriages are at their core no different from everybody else’s,”

          That feeling is an objective hallucination. I deal in FACTS, not “feelings”.

          “and they’re offended that they can’t be recognized at such. ”

          Nobody ever promised anybody “freedom from being offended”. I’m offended by their attempt to recruit my 9-year-old son.

          ” But also, a marriage gives the couple certain legal rights that a civil union does not.”

          Like? Oregon’s civil union law was specifically designed to mimic *all* the rights of marriage- so much so that it is even open to heterosexuals.

          “And once again, marriage and education, while connected, are still separate issues and should be treated as such.”

          If gay marriage passes, there is no reason to consider marriage a separate issue from anything at all, because the word “marriage” itself will be meaningless.

          • Hanna

            Just one quick point–can you please clarify what you mean by “recruit”? Because nobody is trying to turn anybody gay. Gay people more than anybody recognize that you can’t “turn” gay; it’s not something you choose. You can say that they’re trying to recruit him into believing what they do, and that’s true enough, but there is a difference.
            Sorry to go off on a tangent, but it’s an important distinction to make.

            • Hanna

              Also, I should point out that I do agree with the Church on marriage, but I also understand why somebody might not be. To imply that everybody who supports gay marriage also supports “indoctrinating children about homosex foreplay ” perpetuates stereotypes about gay people being promiscuous, obsessed with sex, and fans of every imaginable sexual perversion.

  • Marty Helgesen

    I suggest prayers to St. Charles Lwanga and Companions, the Uganda Martyrs. One of the reasons the pagan king persecuted them is that the pages refused to engage in acts of perversion with him and St. Charles and other adults supported them in their refusal.

  • Jack

    Although academics is not the be-all, end-all result proving everything….
    I am keen for an opinion on this:
    http://lasvegas.cbslocal.com/2012/11/05/study-teens-with-lesbian-mothers-do-better-in-school-happier-in-life/

    • Marion (Mael Muire)

      In schools such things ought not be mentioned to impressionable young people. Children should be taught at home that if they hear bestiality, fornication, incest, or homosexuality mentioned by a teacher or by other students in the classroom setting, that they should leave the room and call home and report the matter to their parents. And the parents should complain to the school boards.

      If the school boards and the school districts won’t listen, then home schooling should be the next step.

      • Sunjay

        You can’t hide the world from your kids even if you try. Pretending things don’t exist doesn’t mean your kids won’t be exposed to them, it just means they won’t know how to deal with them when they are. Having a responsible adult explain things is much safer than trying to keep the world hidden.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X