Top Stories

Open letter to readers: Today and tomorrow

By Lynda Waddington | 11.17.11

Wednesday was a difficult day for The American Independent News Network, which is the larger entity that operates The Iowa Independent. Our chief executive and founder announced two of our sister sites would close and their content would be moved to The American Independent.

ACS lockout continues; plan emerges to repeal sugar protections

crystal_sugar_80
By Virginia Chamlee | 11.15.11

A recently introduced bill could have far-reaching impact on the U.S. sugar industry, including American Crystal Sugar, a farmer-owned cooperative that locked out 1,300 Midwest workers on Aug. 1.

Cain campaign: Farmers know more about regulations than EPA

hermancain_80x80
By Andrew Duffelmeyer | 11.15.11

The chairman for Herman Cain’s Iowa effort says the campaign “relied more on the word of farmers than Washington regulators” in deciding to run an ad containing claims the Environmental Protection Agency says are false.

Mathis wins, Democrats maintain Senate control

Liz Mathis
By Lynda Waddington | 11.08.11

The Iowa Senate will remain under the control of a slim 26-25 Democratic majority when it reconvenes in January 2012.

Press Release

PR: Nation should work to address veterans’ challenges

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

BRUCE BRALEY RELEASE — As US involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan ends, it’s more important than ever that our nation works to address the challenges faced by the men and women who fought there.

PR: Honoring veterans, help in hiring

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

CHUCK GRASSLEY RELEASE — A difficult job market is challenging the soldiers, sailors and airmen who have protected America’s interests by serving in the Armed Forces.

PR: In honor of America’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

TOM LATHAM RELEASE — No one has done more to secure the freedom enjoyed by every single American than our veterans and those currently serving in the armed services.

PR: Honoring and supporting our nation’s veterans

By Press Release Reprints | 11.11.11

DAVE LOEBSACK RELEASE — Veterans Day is an opportunity to reflect on the service of generations of veterans and to honor the sacrifices they and their families have made so that we may live in peace and freedom here at home.

inside_iowa_capitol_500

Former GOP lawmaker: Marriage equality consistent with conservative principles

Angelo begins quest to change Republican climate on same-sex marriage
By Lynda Waddington | 06.01.11 | 7:00 am

Over the past few years a nearly unspoken prohibition on diversity has emerged among Iowa Republicans in relation to the subject of civil marriage. Former Sen. Jeff Angelo is convinced not only that the prohibition must end, but that a failure to do so jeopardizes core conservative principles of limited government.

Jeff Angelo

Jeff Angelo

“You have to start somewhere. Where I’m starting is to say that I believe it is actually within the principles espoused by conservatives to support same-sex marriage,” Angelo said in an exclusive interview with The Iowa Independent hours before launching a new advocacy group, “Iowa Republicans for Freedom.”

“If we are in favor of freedom and are in favor of limited government, then we have to acknowledge that these values — the values of being in favor of marriage equality — are consistent with our conservative principles.”

He acknowledges there are strong emotions at play for many of those individuals who favor exclusive heterosexual marriages, but cautions such emotions can serve as blinders.

“Sometimes we get so passionate about an issue that we actually stomp all over principles that we would normally defend,” he said.

Angelo, a Republican who chose to leave the Iowa Legislature in 2009, was once a lead sponsor of legislation that sought to ban same-sex marriage in Iowa. He’s since changed his position and, despite push-back from some fellow Republicans, refuses to relinquish what describes as “the title of conservative.”

“One of the things that we are going to come up against is that people, conservative Republicans who are in favor of marriage equality, get intimidated at local meetings,” Angelo said. “They get told they aren’t really a Republican if they support it. So they just stop showing up for meetings and they stop speaking out in favor of equality because they don’t want their commitment to Republican principles to be questioned. … I’m not comfortable with that. The intimidation that’s been happening is a big problem.”

The Iowa Republicans for Freedom organization, which will be officially launched Wednesday during a press conference at the Iowa Capitol, seeks to identify and network GOP members throughout the state who believe conservative values of smaller government should keep government out of the private lives of all Iowans, including gays and lesbians.

“In my party we always talk about how we don’t want an activist court. So why would we want an activist Constitution?” he asked. “Those against same-sex marriage want to put something into the Iowa Constitution that is effectively legislation, which is not why the Constitution was constructed. The Constitution is intended to protect individual rights and limit government.”

Laboring Under Delusions

When political discussions are focused on ideology, Angelo said, it is sometimes easy to lose sight of “the real people, real Iowans, real friends, real neighbors, real relatives” who are being hurt by the ongoing debate about marriage in Iowa.

“I previously bought into the notion that I could tell my gay friends how much I loved them, that I just disapproved of their lifestyle and they would be OK with that,” Angelo admitted. “But they told me that I made them feel lesser in my eyes or that I made them feel like a second-class citizen. I labored under delusion for some time that [what my friends said] wasn’t true, that they really believed I loved them and that I was their friend.”

Although Angelo now understands the statements from his friends were true reflections of their feelings and emotions toward his actions to deny them the ability to marry, he isn’t ready to call foul on current elected officials who have fueled much of the ongoing discussions by introducing and passing legislation aimed at establishing a ban on same-sex marriage and civil unions within the Constitution. Instead, the lion share of his criticism is reserved for himself and other like-minded Republicans.

“If only one side of an issue is speaking out, then a person is going to believe they are doing the right thing in allowing the majority to have their way,” he said. “I feel like there are some legislators that had some real struggles with voting for the Constitutional Amendment earlier this session, but ultimately felt they were doing the right thing by their constituents. The only way to turn that around is if people begin to speak to the opposite side of this issue.

“In other words, if there isn’t any organization like Iowa Republicans for Freedom, and there aren’t any Republicans willing to stand up and say they are for marriage equality, then what is a Republican elected official to do?”

For that specific reason, Angelo says he won’t blame current Republican elected officials for “acting the way they have done.”

“I know how this process works. I can get some votes in my direction. I can get some Republicans to speak actively in favor of marriage equality if they know that people are going to be backing them when they do that,” he said. “Given the current environment, I do understand how the Governor and legislators are acting at this particular point, and I wish I would have changed my mind a little bit earlier and would have gotten this work done a little bit earlier. But I’m starting now.”

A Passionate Advocate

Angelo, who made his change of heart known during a January public hearing in the Iowa House, said that just speaking at a hearing wouldn’t have been enough for him on any issue.

“I’m well aware that this isn’t going to be easy. It wouldn’t have been easy three years ago, and now I’m starting off much later than those with an opposite view. But I also know that politics is ultimately the art of persuasion,” he said.

“I am a person who is very passionately committed to the things that I believe — not just on this issue, but on all types of issues. It’s the way that I am, and I never sit back on an issue that I believe in and not actually pursue it, not actually become part of it and promote it. So it wouldn’t be sincere of me if I came out and said that this is very important, that people of the same sex should be allowed to marry, and then not do anything else about it. That isn’t how I’m built.”

He hopes his voice can rise above “hurtful political rhetoric” and help Iowa Republicans understand that it “is a positive thing for Iowa” to support same-sex marriage.

“I truly believe that the debate over marriage equality in Iowa is not resulting in anything good. People are being hurt. People are angry. People are being divided,” said Angelo. “I don’t see anything good coming out of a continued fight to discriminate against gays and lesbians who want to be married. I think the more positive outcome is for us to support them. And I think it is especially important for Republicans to hear that from their fellow Republicans.”

Follow Lynda Waddington on Twitter


Comments

  • Anonymous

    Excellent assessment of the Constitution and its purpose of limiting governmental intrusion.  This is the Republican party I remember and love.  Happy to see it back again!

  • Anonymous

    Pretending that marriage is somehow legitimate if extremely incestuous below the level of biological dysfunctionality, (a.k.a.”gay marriage”) is a convenient delusional tactic that serves ulterior motives.  The ulterior motives, like trying to supplant the word ”perverted” by a more respectable contrivance such as “gay,” are to dress up homosexuality in the guise of something positive.  If people can be hypnotized to think perversion is ok because it’s swallowed as ’gay,’ and then perverted pseudomarriage is ok because it’s swallowed as ‘gay marriage,’  then of course the next step is to milk the taxpayers and private employers for spousal benefits.  The homosexuals have already snookered their way to special legal protections that everyone else doesn’t have– unless you can find a prosecutor who will prosecute a homosexual for discriminating against a heterosexual.  Lots of luck with that, especially when my experience in Johnson County is precisely otherwise, wherein a guy like former County Attorney Pat White would rather protect a lesbian lying blackmailer and her felonious misconduct than enforce the Code of Iowa.  We aren’t suppposed to add 2 + 2 and realize that when lesbian Anne Cleary did the same type of blackmail a few years later it was the last straw precipitating an already unstable Lu Gang into shooting dead 5 people at the University of Iowa (cf. the book “Deadly Scholarship” by Edwin Chen).  Beyond special privileges for a homosexual racket that has already taken over state institutions like the “University” and as many local governments as they can infiltrate, beyond expecting tax dollars to support entitlements for alleged spouses who contribute nothing to society, beyond expecting fringe benefits for ‘spouses’ from private industry, and beyond prejudicial laws and whatever freebies can be wheedled, only time will tell what pretexts are contrived next by homosexual racketeering along the stepping stone path of selfish incremental invention– but only if homosexual ‘marriage’ can be successfully peddled on the way.  Likely the next targets will include more pushing into the schools.  This is already being done very openly in Massachusetts (www.massresistance.org) where they advertise for school principals in homosexual magazines.  As the Family Research Council disclosed last month:  ((Start quote>>   For years, groups like FRC have been making compelling arguments against same-sex “marriage.” And this week, a homosexual activist may have made the best one of all. “Recruiting children?” writes Daniel Villarreal. “You bet we are.” After accusing voters of overreacting to the dangers of same-sex “marriage,” one homosexual confessed that parents are right to be worried. “Can we please just start admitting that we do actually want to indoctrinate kids?” he says on Queerty. (Warning: link contains obscene language.)”[Conservatives] accuse us of exploiting children and in response we say, ‘NOOO! We’re not gonna make kids learn about homosexuality, we swear! It’s not like we’re trying to recruit your children or anything.’ But let’s face it–that’s a lie. We want educators to teach future generations of children to accept queer sexuality. In fact, our very future depends on it… Why would we put anti-bullying programs or social studies classes that teach kids about the historical contributions of famous queers unless we wanted to deliberately educate children to accept queer sexuality as normal?” << end quote for now.  FRC item has extra detail, omitted for space considerations here ))
    The only thing that is unusual is that one homosexual racketeer named Daniel Villarreal feels strong enough to come out into the open with admitted facts that close observers have known about for years, even though this homosexual agenda racketeering was widely denied previously, and often is still. That's the nature of criminal conspiracies– they don't want society to know about their creeping lies, infiltrations, espionage, sabotage, and endless conniving distortions until they think their racket has built up sufficient strength.  Until then, they don't come out into the open but instead rely heavily on secret society tactics including endless denials– just as the Cosa Nostra Mafia did until Joe Valachi started singing.  What is publicized meanwhile is propaganda contrived to appear palatable, if only the target audience can be properly anesthetized first.  What isn't publicized  by the actors in the racket is documentation of homosexual racketeering such as can be found at http://www.johnnygosch.com thanks to stories from victims of the racket.  Facts derived from the Gosch family experience are of course hidden and denied as much as possible in proportion to the fact the guilty know they are guilty, and they don't want to be held responsible for doing what they know they are responsible for doing.  If you don't know, you won't do anything to expose or slow down the racket, and that is exactly what any racket wants.
     
    Jeff Angelo is most likely wheedled and anesthetized to the point he can see only the Emerald City colors his homosexual handlers have rigged for him via his homosexual Land of Oz spectacles.  What a person doesn't know won't bother them as they are being exploited as a useful tool of the propaganda campaign.  One of the biggest scams is the focus on homosexual pseudomarriage, when that "issue" (under the contrived label "gay marriage') is merely another incremental stepping stone point on the pathway of the homosexual agenda.  "Gay marriage" is just a small calculated distraction from the real larger issue, which is the obsolete nature of homosexuality itself.  Why waste time being distracted by the red cape when the real issue is the matador's sword?  Homosexuals don't want normal people noticing homosexuality, when the gullible can be distracted into keeping their heads bowed down to stare at myriad contrived irrelevant sideshow amusements.  "Gay marriage" fits the bill quite nicely for serving the distractive irrelevancy objectives of the homosexual agenda.  But only if the gullible and anesthetized can be manipulated into not noticing that atrocious obsolete irrelevance of homosexuality which is itself the larger issue.
     
    Once a person has seen the selfish and vicious nature of homosexual racketeering in a place like Iowa City, or any other setting, it makes one wonder as to the larger picture of homosexuality itself:  how can it be that such dysfunctional individuals and networks would come into existence and occur across the planet?  Considering how selfish, egotistical, narcississtic, and pathological homosexuality is, it is amazing it wasn't long ago eliminated to extinction by the ordinary evolutionary processes of Darwininan natural selection. Although homosexuality is rare in the animal world it is seen more often in humans.  Why?  It's because our children have prolonged vulnerable juvenile phases and need extra layers of protection. 
     
    During most of historic time throughout the evolution of Homo sapiens, our ape and caveman ancestors had to live marginally as migrating tribes of highly competitive hunter-gatherers.  The average tribe consisted of about 100-150 individuals because fewer couldn't support and defend themselves well in most parts of the world, and a larger tribe tended to overgraze the local ecological niche to the point of starvation. Population density was about one person per square mile in any temporary hunting territory of about ten or twelve miles by about ten or twelve miles– the area that could be patrolled, used, and protected against intruding caveman competitors. The core of each tribe was about a dozen guys bred to go off on hunting and warring trips.  This is reflected in the modern fascination with watching about a dozen muscle-bound maniacs chase some kind of ball or another in the face of another dozen or so adversaries.  That type of thing used to determine who hunted down food and who starved, plus who did the slaughtering in battle over hunting territory vs. who was slaughtered, so to this day we are hard-wired by the results of Darwinian selection to be interested in contests of a dozen on this team vs. a dozen on that team.  A much smaller number has a hard time cornering and spearing antelopes or deer and defending against rival tribes, and a much larger number is hard to direct for stealthy hunting or keeping under one strongman's rule.  For similar practical reasons of achievement, stealth, command, and control, an Army squad is about a dozen soldiers as a further reflection of what evolution has selected for human vs. human competition as to effective unit size.  
     
    For hundreds of thousands of previous years, and for most of the thousands of years since the latest version of our species has come into existence, male mortality was so high from daily hunting and combat that for each adult male there were about three or four adult females.  This in modern times is reflected in that a modern woman will be fertile for only about a third of any given month because her current newly-matured egg will live for only about 11 days.  Also, this is why during the infertile menstrual period, when women cannot become pregnant anyway, it is good for the species for the non-impregnable women to be behaviorally obnoxious and thus drive the caveman and his sperm cells off in the direction of other women who might be in the fertile phase of the month.  There is a reason why, when a woman is temporarily infertile and low on her essential estrogen, it is good for the species for her to act as (not like) a bitch on a rag.  
     
    Beyond the dozen cavemen and forty or so cavewomen were the children, produced at the rate of about one per woman per year but with a very high rate of child mortality depending on weather, starvation, and diseases as simple as diarrhea, as seen in modern impoverished nations.  Cavemen and their harems were self-sufficient and producing the next generation about age fifteen, which means that once they got to about age thirty and their children had grown to fifteen, the "anyone over thirty" crowd was, to the evolutionary needs of the species, obsolete, discardable, and just plain basically in the way of the younger crowd who needed whatever food the ecological niche could supply.   This is why we are evolved to start falling apart past the age of thirty– for thousands of years anyone older than that hasn't been essential to the severe demands of Darwin's survival of the fittest.  More specifically, our immune systems are controlled by the T-cells from the thymus.  These are the cells specifically attacked by the AIDS virus, and when they are taken out the immune system falls apart to the mortal danger of the human so afflicted.  When we are born our thymuses are at their apogee of size and they slowly wither or involute as we develop through childhood.  By age twenty-five little of the thymus is left, and about age thirty nothing functional is left of the thymus– only perhaps some wasted wisps of useless tissue residue.  Who needs an immune system to stay alive in the Stone Age past 30 or 35 when you are just an aging cripple who is in the way of those members of the species bearing fresh new combinations of DNA? So, very few in that harsh world made it to the ripe old age of even 39. (Note:  the last T-cells produced in the late 20's can if pampered survive in the blood for another thirty years or so, which is why modern humans with cushy lives supported by agriculture and technology can survive ordinarily until our 60's.  After that, we irrevocably fall apart at an increasing rate as the remaining T-cells decline in number rapidly, and can therefore no longer protect us from infectious, degenerative, and malignant disease processes.) 
     
    To avoid starvation, the tribe's men had to frequently take their squad off hunting and patrolling the manageably-sized hunting territory, as well as prospecting for new areas to hunt when the current game supply was depleted or migrated away.  Who would be left during hunting to guard the women and children from enemy tribes and hungry beasts meanwhile?  Enemy tribes survived best if they destroyed competing broods such as yours.  They loved to plunder, rape, and pillage– carrying off the most desirable women and booty to their own harems.  Just look at modern soliders run amok and exhibiting the uncivilized behavior of apes.  There were also roving wolves, cave bears, and other ferocious beasts who had their own young to feed at your expense.  So, who would be left to guard the women and children back at the cave when the men were off hunting?  The tribes that evolved homosexual males had an advantage in evolutionary competition.  They were functional eunuchs who could be trusted back home to not impregnate the harem, yet they had the muscular strength of men for defending the cave even if they preferred painting it or killing time in theatrical performances with costumes done up in the latest B.C. fashion.  If a homosexual male were killed defending the cave in exchange for food, his death didn't cost the life of a father who had a greater survival interest in his own children.  
     
    At the same time, if a few women hated to engage in reproductive frolicking and/or were too ugly to be alluring, it would be an evolutionary survival advantage to have a few lesbians around to help with the time demands of childcare.  Human babies need a lot of attention, and so without grandparents surviving to old age past 30 or 40 to help with defense or childcare, the lesbians could help the species survive by babysitting in the caves while mama got some rest or went foraging.  The lesbians were also expendable foragers themselves, since if a predator bagged one instead of mother it wouldn't be a risk to baby's survival. 
     
    That's the way it was thousands of years ago, when there was a Darwininan caveguard and babysitting use for homosexuality.  The tribes doing things that way prospered, and those that didn't tended to be outcompeted.  Similarly, those who practiced murder and rape and stealing prospered at the expense of those who didn't.  In the absence of law, the only rule was by muscle and fang.  Then we evolved enough in various places around the world about 6,000-8,000 years ago that we could develop agriculture, and later some technology, so we could settle down in fixed locations for a stable food supply and easier lives.  People could live commonly rather than rarely past the age of 30, so surviving grandparents and their accumulated wisdom toward law, government, science, history, techology, and writing became possible. That wisdom accumulated from experience became an asset in Darwininan selection favoring the tribes that possessed it.  Population density and the frequency of venereal disease became more common, particularly leading to taboos about previously unregulated sexual behavior.  These taboos were expressed in newly evolved law, religion, and religious laws.  Population density, proximity, and interdependency made murder, rape, and stealing deleterious to a society that had previously not existed, and villages that were harmonious and responsibly governed prospered in Darwinian competition against villages that could not cooperate amongst the inhabitants under any system of laws observed in common.  
     
    Homosexuality evolved to serve the Darwininan competition needs of Stone Age and earlier bonobo-level primate existence.  But once we progressed out of the Stone Age, homosexuality became obsolete particularly as to the tendency toward avoidable diseases originating in the homosexual males.  With grandparents, babysitters, and occasionally police now available to protect children, the utility of homosexuality has become an obsolete atavism.  Other atavisms include the monkey tail our ancestors used to need.  It  has withered to the vestigial coccygeal bones, which are seen protruding like a monkey's tail only among a few babies born with that atavism. Treacher-Collins and Pierre-Robin Syndromes are atavisms harkening back to the days when our ancestors were fish and needed gill slits to survive.  Lanugo seen on some babies born a few days early is another atavism that reflects the fact that not too long ago our ancestors were hairy apes.  Behavioral atavisms include the Moro reflex, a harkening back to baby monkeys surviving best when falling if they reach out and grab passing tree branches.  Another behavioral atavism is the instinct to cough when the ear canal (a relic of ancient fish gill slits) is cleaned with a Q-tip, harkening back to fish wanting to keep their gill breathing apparatus cleared of debris. 
     
    Homosexuality is just another obsolete atavism, and we are fools if we allow those exhibiting it to pose as dictatorial leaders of other humans when homosexuality was evolved as an accessory function for tending to the harem and the brood.  Homosexuals by their actions exhibit their evolved unfitness for leadership in the modern world, just as they were subservient in the prehistoric world.  And by tending to congregate around the young for purportedly educational purposes they further illustrate the ends to which they were designed by evolutionary processes.  The job of homosexuals is to serve rather than direct society, and the job of society is definitely not to serve the selfish agendas of homosexuals no matter how intricate their guile may be.  Homosexuality although formerly useful has evolved to become irrelevant, and imaginary pseudomarriages based on an obsolete irrelevancy are likewise irrational.

    • http://www.facebook.com/MichaelKeithJohnson74 Mike Johnson

      Randy,

      Recycled material is recycled.

      http://easterniowalife.com/2011/04/28/talking-with-discussing-professor-ellen-lewin%E2%80%99s-%E2%80%9Cf%E2%80%94-you-republicans%E2%80%9D-email/

      Do you have a website that you copy and paste from? I’d like to subscribe to your news letter.

      /not really

      • Anonymous

        How many years did you have to study philosophy and logic before you came to the profound realization that recycled material is recycled?  I write my own material, and at times re-use segments of my previous text when old issues are re-used by someone else.  

        • Anonymous

          Hey Randy, your own material is a load of entirely worthless crap.  Seriously, your made-up-in-your-crazy-head caveman theory?  Are you off your meds?  Is this like your crazy “everyone is out to get me because they’re gay and THAT’S why I flunked out of med school” theory?  

          Might I suggest you stand behind a horse with your hands out and wait for something with both more validity and more usefulness?

          • Anonymous

            Like the other homopropagandists, you speak only for yourself and not for me, which is why waiting for inspiration on the rear side of a horse is definitely the league you’re in.

    • http://twitter.com/Warfreak2 Andrew Kay

       TL;DR

      • http://twitter.com/albos_circus Alison

        ^this

      • Anonymous

        Too long for you.  Probably too many multisyllabic words also.

    • Anonymous

      I’m sorry to say, I share your moniker, my name is Randy too, I just hope having the same name does not mean I will be infected by this spieled nonsense.
      An amazing fantasy you just spewed there. No references, no evidence, no real perspective, other than heterosexual=good,  homsexual=bad, nothing, just well worn talk, and anybody can do that.
      Using the FRC as a credible source is one of your first mistakes, of which you have made many. Here is a reference for you:
      http://holybulliesandheadlessmonsters.blogspot.com/2011/05/marriage-equality-simple-answers-to.html

      By the way, I am not Gay, nor have I been coerced, cajoled, or manipulated in any way to support the “gay agenda” I just think that individual rights are for all citizens, not just heterosexual, and gay marriage is a right citizens give to each other, it is not god given. The homosexual community have for centuries been villified, in part, probably due to verses in that archaic book, the bible, that is promoted by the BABBLE community of Xians, alive and well in the South, BABBLE central. There are also verses in that book which says genocide is good if god promotes it, and if you do not revere the sabbath, you should be put to death. So why, would anyone give credibility to a book that has had nothing new written in it since 98 AD? While human knowledge has grown by leaps and bounds, that book, the HOLY BABBLE is stuck in the Bronze Age, where folks thought the sun revolved around the eaarth, that the eaarth was flat, that there could have been a flood that covered the eaarth, yet they knew very little of the other continents they were surrounded by. Shimkus is the Congressman who refers not to science boks about climate change, but the HOLY BABBLE. WOW! WTF!!??
      And it is so bad today, that a Congressman quoted from the HOLY BABBLE a verse which he said told him all he needs to know about manmade global warming, to him it does not exist, because even if it is true, the world will not end in a a flood again, says so, right there in the HOLY BABBLE. It also says a lot about killing innocent animals on the altar and spreading their blood all over yourself. So, anyone who gives credibility to the HOLY BABBLE is supect and probably mentally ill, there just has not been an official designation in the psychiatrists DSMR IV book.
      There is so much crap in the HOLY BABBLE, contradiction at its very best. Yet it is used in many evangelical religious schools which are just indoctrination centers, nothing more.
      As a nation, if we as citizens do not fight back against this agenda by the Religious Right and the conservative claptrap that goes on, we are in big trouble.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry, I’m an agnostic.  Whining about what someone wrote in the Bible years ago isn’t particularly relevant except for the fact that wise observers noticed thousands of years ago where homosexuality led.  They ascribed the associated diseases to punishment from this or that deity, which is all the technology of the times understood.  Murder is also in the Bible, so are laws against murder bad because they have a religious association?   The FRC quote is totally appropriate, because it shows the homosexual agenda is indeed chronically about lying & about getting to little boys in schools and abusing them.  This was further illustrated 6-4-2011 when principal Robert Burke was caught sneaking a video camera into the boys’ bathroom in Dubuque.  Do you really want your doubletalk to cover up reality, much as it is uncomfortable to face up to it?

  • http://profiles.google.com/iamjeffwil JJ Wilfahrt

    @RandyCrawford:disqus Just say it more simply Randy, just say “I am a homophobe”. No need for so many words, no one will read all that argument.

    • Anonymous

      Actually, the correct terminology involves homodisgustia rather than homophobia.  Perhaps you will someday evolve far enough to understand the distinction, but that is unlikely to happen any time soon. As usual, you don’t speak for me or anyone else much as your ambition for dictatorship leads you to aspire otherwise. Too many words for you to handle?  In what way should your advocacy for the simple surprise anyone?

      • http://profiles.google.com/iamjeffwil JJ Wilfahrt

        Actually Randy, the correct term would be devolve, not evolve. Again, short and sweet.

        • Anonymous

          No, the correct term is evolve, as opposed to hanging onto obsolete relics of a more primitive past.  Short and sweet is conducive to lying, which is why liars tend to prefer it.  Think of Watergate’s perversion of legitimate society, which like the homosexual perversion of civilized society was a quick deception followed by a prolonged elucidation.  The clarification response is more than a criminal or a moron can face, but that doesn’t mean you have to lower yourself to pursuing it.  

      • http://twitter.com/Warfreak2 Andrew Kay

        Homophobia is not a fear of homosexuals, it is a fear of being homosexual. The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

        • Anonymous

          (anything)-phobia is fear of the ‘anything’ invoked.  The word ‘homophobia’ was invented in a political-correctness attempt to manipulate the language with doubletalk, and you are attempting the same type of weaselling irrelevant doubletalk.  That’s why homodisgustia is a better word, because it addresses how disgusting, primitive, and backwards homosexuality is as a leftover obsolete atavism from our Stone Age past.  Right up there with murder, thievery, rape, and other crimes adapted to our former troglodytic habits.  They are former to most of us even if you aspire to retain them– unless you can evolve in the direction of civilization.

        • Anonymous

          xyz-phobia is fear of xyz, not fear of being xyz.  But the homosexuals habitually feel themselves to be special people entitled to special rules, and in trying to warp the usage of (anything)-phobia from ‘fear of xyz’ to ‘fear of being xyz’ you are once again illustrating yet again yet again yet again what is repeatedly wrong with the homosexual attitude of entitlement and privilege. Are you as special as Marie Antoinette, or are you a different kind of queen?

      • Anonymous

        Based on your made up terms and your misuse of “evolve”, I’m pretty sure you don’t really get how language works.  Maybe you should let someone else speak for you, because you kinda suck at it yourself.

        • Anonymous

          Maybe you will someday evolve far enough to understand that which currently eludes your cognition.  Maybe not, especially if your frontal lobes are insufficient for the job.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tristan-Robin-Blakeman/732277006 Tristan Robin Blakeman

    I don’t understand why heterosexual perverts are allowed to marry legally but homosexual perverts aren’t.

    • Anonymous

      Tristan:  Excellent recommendation.  Why does Billy WhatIsIs get to marry a transparent dyke and ceremonially rustle up one turkey-baster baby in a transparent attempt to look legitimate, so he can do his Bisexual Bonobo romps and leak out stories about ‘lady’ campaign workers he has so often molested while trying to appear to be his rapist idea of normal?  Why was John Edwards allowed to sucker Elizabeth, or why is the Weiner Tweeter still running loose?  How come Newt dumps wife after wife, especially when on a deathbed, without the average American idiot realizing what a bum he is? Why isn’t Trail Hiker obsessed with the Argentinian Pasionara left to hike into head-hunter territory?  Humans are 98% the same as chimpanzees about 100% of the time unless they learn to use their frontal lobes.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Tristan-Robin-Blakeman/732277006 Tristan Robin Blakeman

    re:Randy Crawford comments:
    “The homosexuals have already snookered their way to special legal
    protections that everyone else doesn’t have– unless you can find a
    prosecutor who will prosecute a homosexual for discriminating against a
    heterosexual.”

    Either you’re not paying attention (that has happened myriad times) – but are you REALLY condemning a law because one side is more likely to be guilty than another?! LOL That is absurd.

    “”Can we please just start admitting that we do actually want to indoctrinate kids?”

    Yes, of course, we want to indoctrinate kids into being accepting, tolerant, compassionate people. I HATE it when people distort and misrepresent phrases like “indoctrinate” and “recruit” as if gay people have designs on sexual activity with children. It’s about tolerance – not sex. Get your mind out of the filthy gutter.

    ” The job of homosexuals is to serve rather than direct society,”

    …only for the deluded

    “and the
    job of society is definitely not to serve the selfish agendas
    of homosexuals no matter how intricate their guile may be”.

    Law-abiding, tax-paying citizens demanding to be treated as first class citizens is selfish???? Really????

    “Homosexuality although formerly useful has evolved to become irrelevant,
    and imaginary pseudomarriages based on an obsolete irrelevancy are
    likewise irrational.”

    Your carefully edited and agenda-ized anthropology is suspect at absolute best – your conclusions are absurd. Just because you are willing to type for hours on a message boards doesn’t necessarily mean you SHOULD do so.

    A marriage is two people forming a legal family. Period. How does one form a “pseudo-family?” Your insulting and degrading phraseology may make clever cut and pastes for some people – but they’re still just silly and sophomoric

    • Anonymous

      Tristan– The law is engineered to be applied in one direction only, for homosexual favoritism.  The indoctrination of kids isn’t for tolerance and for compassion, it is for recruiting victims– like what principal Robert Burke was up to revealed 6-4-2011 in Dubuque with his video camera in the boys’ bathroom, or cf. johnnygosch.com  They DO have designs for sex with kids, like nursing professors at the Univ. Iowa nursing school wheedling nursing students into becoming lesbians and then using them as their own personal bed partners.  The homos at the university, in government, and elsewhwere want all the money and power they can con and manipulate from gullible taxpayers, but they do it only to the extent the intended victims can be anesthetized to thinking nothing is wrong. 

  • Anonymous

    Someone enlighten me please. When Republicans say that the Constitution represents a desire for limited gov’t, I just want to know where in the Constitution it is written or even implied that the Costitution advocates for a limited federal gov’t. There is in the Constitution explictly a great many powers given to the Congress and the three branches of gov’t, and it is even written explicitly what the states can and cannot do in the scheme of things. I have read the Constitution many, many times and there are conservatives who mistakenly think that the editors and architects, the writers of the Constitution had them in mind when they wrote it. But it was not written for conservatives, or the Tories of the times, it was written by radicals, revolutionaries, folks who did not want a theocracy, or a state religion, having had their fill of King George imposing his religion on everyone. This idea that the framers were Republican ideologues who wanted tax cuts, a Christian nation, limited gov’t, more pro corporate(the Founders actually spoke of the danger of the monied interests in the form of the corproations getting too much power) business policies implemented, and religious tests for holding public office(the VI Amendment outlaws that, but due to the Religious Right’s power grab of an entire political party, there is a majority of people who say they would not vote for an athiest or a humanist, so, in effect, in spite of the VI amendment there is a religious test that will disallow an atheist or humanist from getting into office),
    So, please, someone tell me, where does it say in the Constitution, limited gov’t and protecting the rights of individuals is the federal gov’t's main function. Uh, promote the general welfare, isn’t that part of what is in the Constitution? And it is not true that Democrats are for big gov’t, what is big gov’t anyway?. It seems that the size doesn’t matter as much as it being as big as it needs to be to do for we the people.

    • Anonymous

      Read the Federalist Papers, which go on at great length about what the framers’ thinking was in formulating the Constitution.  The Articles of Confederation has just shown themselves to be insufficient to do the job, so the Constitution was written in hopes of constructing a basic set of rules that would be more successful.  As to religion, which is largely a couple of thousand years obsolete, it was often used for philosophical guidance but its literal use was largely avoided when the Constitution was written down.  Homosexuality was once useful too, but it is now about 10,000 years obsolete.  Some people can’t give up formal religion because they can’t see past the Bible, and some people can’t give up homosexuality because they don’t recognize how it evolved and what it evolved for, nor do they understand it has been superseded by the evolution of civilization.

  • alleyhse

    When can we expect the Bible illiterate progressives on this blog to join the hippies and protest for gay blood donations? You could call it the “Blood donation equality movement” and lie to everyone about how safe the blood supply is from the homosexual community.

    • Anonymous

      Riiiiggghhhhht.  Hey, newsflash, it’s not 1986, blood gets tested, AIDS is not a gays-only phenomenon, and given the need, I’m pretty sure a gay blood drive is a win.  But hey, keep dwelling in a past largely made possible by a disregard for an epidemic because it was believed to be confined to those undesirable gay men.  We’ll be here in the now waiting for you to catch up or die out.

      • Anonymous

        Donated blood tested prior to the development of sufficient antibody titer will test disease-free even though the recipient is highly likely to develop AIDS from the sub-detectable levels of HIV.  That might be fine for you to inflict on the unknowing, but if you were the one developing AIDS as a result, even with modern tests, you likely would not be happy.  None of the lab tests are 100% reliable, so the donations from homosexuals are excluded to minimize risk.  This is because homosexual males in the U.S. have about 45 times as much AIDS as the heterosexual population (cf. Centers for Disease Control statistics.)

  • alleyhse

    Liberality – In 2007 the FDA said it would change its policy if given data that show doing so wouldn’t pose a “significant and preventable” risk to blood recipients. That was 4 years ago already so why hasn’t the law been changed? If you want to see the reality of what is coming to Iowa go to: http://www.massresistance.org and see for yourself. Don’t just read the information take time to actually look at the pictures and see what our Iowa cities will be subjected to shortly. Jeff Angelo is another Mitt Romney Republican who didn’t have an understanding of this matter to begin with and caved to the special interests of gays in Mass. There’s nothing worse than a RHINO in office!

    • Anonymous

      Another thing that happens to compromise Republican politicians, and earlier was used to solidify the homosexual grasp on Democrats, is (1) kidnap little kid off streets, like Johnny Gosch cf. http://www.johnnygosch.com  (2) gang-rape in the basement for several weeks until the kid is totally subdued into juvenile homosexual prostitution and afraid to escape and even contact his parents (3) toss into a back room with drunk politician at a late-night party (4) make hidden video of what transpires, (5) once the politician is on video sodomizing little kids they can be blackmailed into supporting pro-homosexual legislation or pro-homosexual judicial appointments.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1349336612 Danielle Inman-Bellofatto

    It is amazing that this issue is so overcomplicated and that in this day and age we still have not risen above marginalizing segments of society and calling it just.
    It is really very simple. 
    1)It is not a choice. Do heterosexuals choose to be ‘straight’? Therefore, you can not recruit, it is asinine. If you are so worried about your children being corrupted, perhaps you should protect them from all the image of pervasive and graphic heterosexual carnal depictions. Also, guess what, gay children were raised by straight parents and you could kill every single gay and bisexual today and tomorrow a whole new generation will be born.
    2)The constitution sought to protect our government from the grasp of religious zealots/idiots.
      a) When you talk about twisted, more people have been murdered in the name  
         of religion than for any other reason. Now that is what I call perversion. So
         much for an all loving God.  Oh, and by the way, freedom of religion also 
         means freedom from religion.
    3)The constitution sought to protect the minorities from the majority. Thus, ALL men are created equal and have the RIGHT to life, liberty and the pursuit of 
    happiness. Since when do citizens get the RIGHT to vote of the civil liberties of others?!!!!
    4)Equal rights are not special rights and seeking the same protections and benefits afforded every other citizen is not some insidious agenda, as framed by conservatives and the religious RIECH(they’ve done just about all but build gas chambers.) Marriage equality is not a special right NOR IS IT OWNED BY RELIGION!! As long as there are federal economic benefits attached to it then  ALL citizens are entitled to marry. Keep your religious weddings, gays don’t want them! They are not asking to be married in your religious institutions. They are demanding the access they are entitled to in the CIVIL institution of marriage.
    IF HETEROSEXUAL MARRIAGES NEED PROTECTION, THEY DON’T NEED LEGISLATION. THEY NEED COUNSELING.  WANT TO PROTECT STRAIGHT MARRIAGE? MAKE DIVORCE ILLEGAL. Perhaps then, straights won’t enter into it with such casual attitudes.
    5)As far as DADT: if you can’t concentrate because there is a gay man or woman standing next to you, then perhaps you shouldn’t be carrying a weapon. Discharging gay servicemen and women, with critical skills(like Dan Choi who is fluent in Arabic) is just plain dumb and it is discrimination.
    6)Stop wasting tax payers money –  which gays pay into – on bullshit discriminatory policies and protecting bullshit discriminatory policies and get to the things that are truly need our attention.

    Now see how simple that was?!

     

  • alleyhse

    1. There is no science that supports same sex behavior.
    2. The Constitution was primarily created to protect citizens from federal government power and overreach. The church has a different role and purpose from government.
    3. Historic data proves that it is the lust of power and control over people from mostly dictators which has slaughtered the multiple millions on the planet. These killers had a mix of secular humanism, atheism, and/or Marxism/Lennism world views. I won’t speak for all religions but to place Biblical Christianity in this group is total intellectual and historic dishonesty and disinformation.
    4. Same-sex marriage is legal in Argentina, Belgium, Canada, Iceland, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, South Africa, Spain and Sweden. In Mexico,
    same-sex marriages are only performed in Mexico City, but these marriages must be recognized by all Mexican states.[66] Israel
    does not recognize same-sex marriages performed on its territory, but
    recognizes same-sex marriages performed in foreign jurisdictions. Question: Are any of these nations not in decline? Do you think that the United States should strive to be more like these declining nations?
    5. Where do civil rights come from and by what standard are they created? You have already rejected natural law marriage so please share with us what other moral guidelines you wish to change.
    6. There are five institutions that a nation is expected to respect and maintain: personal responsibility, marriage, family, government, nationalism. These were created before the world was here and cannot be negotiated by man. Religion aside, general biblical truth is revealed to benefit all
    mankind including a common moral standard. When a culture rejects this
    standard then the nation eventually falls into decline and is removed
    from history.
    7. The church has failed to fulfill it’s responsibility in our culture in teaching biblical truth to the folks. Therefore biblical illiteracy is the result and we now face a culture where every man and woman wants to live according to their individual desires. Historically this is a proven disaster for our culture yet even gays and lesbians who are Christians don’t understand this. Is this what you want for our nation?

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1349336612 Danielle Inman-Bellofatto

      Your religion is your religion. Don’t try to force it down anyone else’s throat. What makes your religion the great authority in our civil and separate society. To blame gay marriage for the decline in any society is just plain ridiculous. I’d say all the hate spewed by religion would be a greater reason. Civil rights come from common sense and treat others how one would want to be treated. Respect each other’s rights, plain and simple.
      Don’t tell me there is no science to support same sex behavior. Why does science need to support it? There’s none that refutes it either. It’s just there. Just like your hetero relations. And don’t tell me about science when there is very little, if any science to support any of your religious beliefs. People like you pick and choose want you want from your religion to support your hate and bigotry. You want to use your religion, then start using the parts that say thou shall not judge and love thy neighbor.Until then, gays pay their tax dollars just like everyone else and deserve the benefits that you receive off of their dime.Once again, freedom of religion, freedom from religion.Maybe you have heard of all men are created equal and all entitled to the  life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.Get off your moral high horse.  Oh, and perhaps you’ve heard of 9/11.Talk about over reach; it’s funny how all of these righteous people purport to want limited government, yet would legislate every discriminatory policy it could.If religion is suppose to serve a different purpose, then how come it seeks exert it’s policies on governmental policiesAnd all those wars that you speak of, religion was and still is at the core of these conflicts.Religion has historically been a tool used to control the ignorant masses and is at the heart of why bigots try to deny marriage to gays. It certainly isn’t to perpetuate the species, because your God knows plenty of people are having sex and making babies without marrying.Oh, and why the bible? Why not the Koran or the Torah? Wait, that’s right, because Christians are the authority on all things.By the way these declines they speak of, are they in any more of a decline than we are? Oh, I guess drug cartels don’t have anything to do with Mexico’s decline.But no point in arguing with you. You’ll just cut and paste some other bullshit response to perpetuate discrimination. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10508182 Tara Inman-Bellofatto

    Hey alleyse,

    1. Where is the science that totally negates same sex behavior. Are you a scientist? There are heterosexual and homosexual animals. Period. 
    2. When the federal government is ultimately using biblical law to dictate marriage, it is already overreaching and violating citizens’ rights. If the church has a different role, it sure as hell isn’t obvious. This country is being held hostage by Christianity/Catholicism every day.
    3. Scroll to response 7.  
    4. You’re going to say that these countries are worse off than our own? Haha. What, economically? The U.S. is in a decline, regardless of homosexuals’ existence or not. The world is in a decline, sweetheart. That’s the way of things at the moment. To blame it on homosexuals is absolutely asinine. Is Mexico having an issue with drug cartels because of gay marriage? Really? Are homosexuals causing economic decline? Are homosexuals the cause of inflation? Are they making the housing market take a dive? Are banks closing because of gay people? Explain this one to me.
    5. Where do your civil rights come from? Nothing about homosexuality or heterosexuality is unnatural. People live. People love. People feel. That’s natural.   And how dare you call homosexuals immoral. I think there are considerably more cases of hetero rape, incest, and pedophilia. How many gays want the right to marry their first cousins? How many gays want polygamy? So how many moral guidelines do you heteros wish to screw?
    6. 
    Personal responsibility – Yeah. We want that. Our OVERREACHING GOVERNMENT won’t let us have it because religious leaders are afraid of nothing.
    Marriage – Heterosexuals seems to be screwing this up enough. Ban divorce if you’re so worried.
    Family – No evidence that states we can’t raise a perfectly healthy one. In fact, plenty of evidence proves we can. Plenty of evidence proves many heterosexuals can’t, so I think we deserve the right. 
    Government – Screwing that up enough without gays. Give us a chance, maybe we’ll be better because we understand what it is to be trampled on.
    Nationalism – We want to LOVE this country. We want to feel love from our country and our fellow man.
    If these were created before the world was here (that just sounds dumb no matter where you use it) and cannot be negotiated by man, man has seriously screwed up. When general biblical truth is taken literally, a lot of f*cked up things can happen. Have you read the bible? Not all nations adhere to the Christian bible. They are no better/no worse off than our own nation.
    7. The church has failed. Leave it at that. FAILED. Always will. Wanna talk about religion? All religions are institutions to control masses. In other words, they dictate. Religions themselves are the dictators you blame for war and death. All religions distort truth. Your bible is as ludicrous as someone still believing that sun rises because some god somewhere uses his chariot to move it. Our culture needs compassion, understanding, tolerance, and love. This is what homosexuals want. What they crave. Obviously, what you want for our nation is silence, obedience, dictation, hatred, bloodshed, and death.

    The fact of the matter is, we aren’t out there spending billions to trample on your rights. You and people like you are just sick and twisted. Disgusting.

  • alleyhse

    Sorry ladies but Iowa will eventually follow all 31 previous states that voted down gay/lesbian marriages in a public vote. The battle is just getting started in Iowa!  I’m not here to judge your sexual choices but I will petition my government to protect marriage between a man and woman and in the end you will be defeated. I’m sure that in the meantime you will both continue to call for a culture of hedonism and chaos, you will support hate crime legislation to have your opponents illegally arrested, you will continue to trash your country because of your heart of ungratefulness and freedom is already yours, you will continue to hurl your vulgar insults and diversions at anyone who stands in your way to promote anarchy. Your all the motivation I need to redouble my efforts to fight to save our culture from ruin.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=582330579 Charlie Cowan

      Homosexuality is not a choice. Please educate yourself, for the sake of humanity. You are literally ruining it for everyone. I have several gay friends and the question they always ask is “why do people think I would CHOOSE to be discriminated against?”

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10508182 Tara Inman-Bellofatto

    Haha! See, you’re wrong. People with tiny minds such as yours are soon to become the minority. Call me a hedonist, if you will, but I strongly doubt that every time you’ve gotten into bed it was for the sole purpose of conception. I will absolutely always support hate crime legislation for the likes of you, for people who are so ignorant as to enjoy voting against another’s happiness and well-being. You really don’t seem to understand that we’re not looking to redefine your religious marriage. Keep that. We want a civil marriage, one that has nothing to do with man and woman, but with two people who love and care for each other. That is never a negative thing. You don’t vote to protect marriage. You vote to keep those you don’t understand or identify with second-class citizens. I’d say you’re quite selfish. I don’t trash and insult you. I’m not trying to divert anything. I point out the facts and you simply cannot handle it.

    And, you see, we will never be defeated because we will never stop the fight. We will never be defeated because, as hard as you try to vote us away, we will always be here and our voices will only get louder. And don’t you dare call it a choice. The only choice is whether or not to acknowledge the truth or to hide it, and we don’t want to hide from bigots like you anymore.

    Good day. 

  • alleyhse

    I do not hate you or anyone else but I will petition my government to leave marriage alone because it doesn’t need fixed. I am not ignorant nor a bigot when I respect what is the best for our nation, when I see the pictures and information of what is happening to states like Massachusetts, etc, when I see the radical and vicious people that represent the homosexual movement. They sell low information politicians and judges their “we are just like everyone else” lies and then when the law is changed WHAMO we end up with a moral disaster in our schools and institutions! The gay culture is not just quiet people living in the suburbs, it is filled with a host of radical groups including the Man/boy, transgender, queer movements that are looking for our children. Anyway, your comment about not wanting marriage is interesting so you are wanting a civil union? What is the difference between civil unions and marriage as you understand it? Sell this idea to me here and I will consider it.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=10508182 Tara Inman-Bellofatto

      Your constant disregard for the truth speaks otherwise. Your source of “news” speaks otherwise. These websites and organizations pick and choose and misquote… intentionally to suit their own purposes. 

      Have you ever heard of a gay man/woman shooting a straight man/woman?

      Ever?

      So where are our radicals? Maybe the “radicals” are really just a group of people who are sick and tired of feeling senseless discrimination everyday. Maybe these “radicals” just want to finally speak out against hate. It is hate. And where did I say that I didn’t want marriage. Can you even read? I merely don’t want to marry under any religious institutions. People were getting married before your bible, or for that matter, holy books and even documented textual language was even written. Another thing: Perhaps you should just google the difference between civil unions and marriage. Educate yourself. I’m not selling you jack.Ya know. I don’t want to argue with you. You have no facts. You have no argument. And I’m convinced, YOU have no morals. Teach your children hate and discrimination. Teach your kids to keep all of their feelings inside. Wait for the day that they can’t handle it anymore because everyone around them tells them they’re wrong and they can see no honest reason why and they do something dramatic and tragic. Don’t say you don’t hate. You’re full of it.Fin

  • alleyhse

    What same-sex “marriage” has done to Massachusetts

    It’s far worse than most people realize

    October 20, 2008

    by Brian Camenker

    [NOTE: For a 4-page printable version

    (PDF format) CLICK HERE.]

    Anyone who thinks that same-sex “marriage” is a benign eccentricity
    which won’t affect the average person should consider what it has done
    in Massachusetts. It’s become a hammer to force the acceptance and
    normalization of homosexuality on everyone. And this train is moving
    fast. What has happened so far is only the beginning.

    On November 18, 2003, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court announced its Goodridge opinion,
    ruling that it was unconstitutional not to allow same-sex “marriage.”
    Six months later, homosexual marriages began to be performed.

    The public schools

    The homosexual “marriage” onslaught in public schools across the state started soon after the November 2003, court decision.

    At my own children’s high school there was a school-wide assembly to celebrate same-sex “marriage” in early December, 2003.
    It featured an array of speakers, including teachers at the school who
    announced that they would be “marrying” their same-sex partners and
    starting families either through adoption or artificial insemination.
    Literature on same-sex marriage – how it is now a normal part of
    society – was handed out to the students.

    Within months it was brought into the middle schools. In September, 2004, an 8th-grade teacher in Brookline, MA, told National Public Radio
    that the marriage ruling had opened up the floodgates for teaching
    homosexuality. “In my mind, I know that, `OK, this is legal now.’ If
    somebody wants to challenge me, I’ll say, `Give me a break. It’s legal
    now,’” she told NPR. She added that she now discusses gay sex with her
    students as explicitly as she desires.  For example, she said she
    tells the kids that lesbians can have vaginal intercourse using sex
    toys.

    By the following year it was in elementary school curricula. Kindergartners were given picture books
    telling them that same-sex couples are just another kind of family,
    like their own parents. In 2005, when David Parker of Lexington, MA – a
    parent of a kindergartner – strongly insisted on being notified when
    teachers were discussing homosexuality or transgenderism with his son, the school had him arrested and put in jail overnight.

    Second graders at the same school were read a book, “King and King”, about two men who have a romance and marry each other,
    with a picture of them kissing. When parents Rob and Robin Wirthlin
    complained, they were told that the school had no obligation to notify
    them or allow them to opt-out their child.

    In 2006 the Parkers and Wirthlins filed a federal Civil Rights lawsuit
    to force the schools to notify parents and allow them to opt-out their
    elementary-school children when homosexual-related subjects were
    taught.  The federal judges dismissed the case. The judges ruled that
    because same-sex marriage is legal in Massachusetts, the school actually had a duty to normalize homosexual relationships to children,
    and that schools have no obligation to notify parents or let them
    opt-out their children! Acceptance of homosexuality had become a matter
    of good citizenship!

    Think about that: Because same-sex marriage is “legal”, a federal judge has ruled that the schools now have a duty to portray homosexual relationships as normal to children, despite what parents think or believe!

    In 2006, in the elementary school where my daughter went to Kindergarten, the parents of a third-grader were forced to take their child out of school because a man undergoing a sex-change operation and cross-dressing was being brought into class
    to teach the children that there are now “different kinds of
    families.”  School officials told the mother that her complaints to the
    principal were considered “inappropriate behavior.”

    Libraries have also radically changed.  School
    libraries across the state, from elementary school to high school, now
    have shelves of books to normalize homosexual behavior and the
    lifestyle in the minds of kids, some of them quite explicit and even
    pornographic. Parents complaints are ignored or met with hostility.

    Over the past year, homosexual groups have been using taxpayer money to distribute a large, slick hardcover book celebrating homosexual marriage titled “Courting Equality” into every school library in the state.

    It’s become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for
    teachers to prominently display photos of their same-sex “spouses” and
    occasionally bring them to school functions. Both high schools
    in my own town now have principals who are “married” to their same-sex
    partners, whom they bring to school and introduce to the students.

    “Gay days” in schools are considered necessary
    to fight “intolerance” which may exist against same-sex relationships. 
    Hundreds of high schools and even middle schools across the state now
    hold “gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender appreciation days”. They
    “celebrate” homosexual marriage and move forward to other behaviors
    such as cross-dressing and transsexuality. In my own town, a school
    committee member recently announced that combating “homophobia” is now a
    top priority.

    Once homosexuality has been normalized, all boundaries will come
    down. The schools are already moving on to normalizing transgenderism
    (including cross-dressing and sex changes). The state-funded Commission on Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Youth includes leaders who are transsexuals.

    Public health

    The Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health is “married” to another man. In 2007 he told a crowd of kids at a state-sponsored youth event that it’s “wonderful being gay” and he wants to make sure there’s enough HIV testing available for all of them.

    Since homosexual marriage became “legal” the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. This year public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000. As the homosexual lobby group MassEquality
    wrote to their supporters after successfully persuading the Legislature
    to spend that money: “With the rate of HIV infections rising
    dramatically in Massachusetts, it’s clear the fight against AIDS is far
    from over.”

    Citing “the right to marry” as one of the “important challenges” in a place where “it’s a great time to be gay”, the Massachusetts Department of Public Health helped produce The Little Black Book, Queer in the 21st Century,
    a hideous work of obscene pornography which was given to kids at
    Brookline High School on April 30, 2005.  Among other things, it gives
    “tips” to boys on how to perform oral sex on other males, masturbate
    other males, and how to “safely” have someone urinate on you for sexual
    pleasure. It also included a directory of bars in Boston where young
    men meet for anonymous sex.

    Domestic violence

    Given the extreme dysfunctional nature of homosexual relationships, the Massachusetts Legislature has felt the need to spend more money every year to deal with skyrocketing homosexual domestic violence. This year $350,000 was budgeted, up $100,000 from last year.

    Business

    All insurance in Massachusetts must now
    recognize same-sex “married” couples in their coverage. This includes
    auto insurance, health insurance, life insurance, etc.

    Businesses must recognize same-sex “married” couples in all their benefits, activities, etc., regarding both employees and customers.

    The wedding industry is required serve the homosexual community if requested. Wedding photographers, halls, caterers, etc., must do same-sex marriages or be arrested for discrimination.

    Businesses are often “tested” for tolerance by homosexual activists.
    Groups of homosexual activists often go into restaurants or bars and
    publicly kiss and fondle each other to test whether the establishment
    demonstrates sufficient “equality” — now that homosexual marriage is
    “legal”.  In fact, more and more overt displays of homosexual affection
    are seen in public places across the state to reinforce “marriage
    equality”.

    Legal profession

    The Massachusetts Bar Exam now tests lawyers on their knowledge of same-sex “marriage” issues. In 2007, a Boston man, Stephen Dunne, failed the Massachusetts bar exam because he refused to answer the questions in it about homosexual marriage.

    Issues regarding homosexual “families” are now firmly entrenched
    in the Massachusetts legal system. In many firms, lawyers in
    Massachusetts practicing family law must now attend seminars on homosexual “marriage”. There are also now several homosexual judges overseeing the Massachusetts family courts.

    Adoption of children to homosexual “married” couples

    Homosexual “married” couples can now demand to be able to adopt children the same as normal couples. Catholic Charities
    decided to abandon handling adoptions rather submit to regulations
    requiring them  to allow homosexuals to adopt the children in their
    care.

    In 2006 the Massachusetts Department of Social Services (DSS) honored two men “married” to each other as their “Parents of the Year”. The
    men already adopted a baby through DSS (against the wishes of the
    baby’s birth parents). According to news reports, the day after that
    adoption was final DSS approached the men about adopting a second
    child. Homosexuals now appear to be put in line for adopting children
    ahead of heterosexual parents by state agencies in Massachusetts.

    Government mandates

    In 2004, Governor Mitt Romney ordered Justices of the Peace to perform homosexual marriages when requested or be fired. At least one Justice of the Peace decided to resign.

    Also thanks to Gov. Romney, marriage licenses in Massachusetts now have “Party A and Party B” instead of “husband and wife.”  Romney did not have a legal requirement to do this; he did it on his own. (See more on this below.)

    Since homosexual relationships are now officially “normal”, the Legislature now gives enormous tax money to homosexual activist groups. In particular, the Massachusetts Commission on Gay Lesbian Bisexual and Transgender Youth
    is made up of the most radical and militant homosexual groups which
    target children in the schools. This year they are getting $700,000 of
    taxpayer money to go into the public schools.

    In 2008 Massachusetts changed the state Medicare laws to include homosexual “married” couples in the coverage.

    The public square

    Since gay “marriage”, annual gay pride parades
    have become more prominent. There are more politicians and corporations
    participating, and even police organizations take part.  And the envelope gets pushed further and further. There is now a profane “Dyke March” through downtown Boston, and recently a “transgender” parade in Northampton that included bare-chested women who have had their breasts surgically removed so they could “become” men. Governor Patrick even marched
    with his “out lesbian” 17-year old daughter in the 2008 Boston Pride
    event, right behind a “leather” group brandishing a black & blue
    flag, whips and chains!

    The media

    Boston media, particularly the Boston Globe newspaper, regularly does feature stories and news stories portraying homosexual “married” couples where regular married couples would normally be used.  It’s “equal”, they insist, so there must be no difference in the coverage.  Also, the newspaper advice columns now deal with homosexual “marriage” issues, and how to properly accept it. 

    A growing number of news reporters and TV anchors are openly “married” homosexuals who march in the “gay pride” parades.

    Is gay marriage actually legal in Massachusetts?

    Like everywhere else in America, the imposition of same-sex marriage
    on the people of Massachusetts was a combination of radical, arrogant
    judges and pitifully cowardly politicians.

    The Goodridge ruling resulted in a complete cave-in by politicians
    of both parties on this issue. Same-sex “marriage” is still illegal in
    Massachusetts. On November 18, 2003 the court merely ruled that it was
    unconstitutional not to allow it, and gave the Legislature six months to
    “take such action as it may deem appropriate.”  Note that the
    Massachusetts Constitution strongly denies courts the power to make or
    change laws, or from ordering the other branches to take any action.
    The constitution effectively bans “judicial review” – a court changing
    or nullifying a law. Thus, the court did not order anything to happen;
    it simply rendered an opinion on that specific case. And the
    Legislature did nothing. The marriage statutes were never changed.
    However, against the advice of many, Gov. Romney took it upon himself to
    alter the state’s marriage licenses to say “Party A and Party B” and
    order officials to perform same-sex “weddings” if asked, though he had
    no legal obligation to do so. Technically, same-sex marriages are still
    illegal in Massachusetts.

    Nevertheless, we are having to live with it.  And furthermore, this
    abdication of their proper constitutional roles by the Legislature and
    Governor has caused a domino effect as “copycat” rulings have been
    issued in California and Connecticut, with other states fearful it will
    happen there.

    In conclusion

    Homosexual “marriage” hangs over society like a hammer with the force of law. And it’s only just begun.

    It’s pretty clear that the homosexual movement’s obsession with
    marriage is not because large numbers of them actually want to marry
    each other. Research shows that homosexual relationships are
    fundamentally dysfunctional on many levels, and “marriage” as we know
    it isn’t something they can achieve, or even desire. (In fact, over the
    last three months, the Sunday Boston Globe’s marriage section
    hasn’t had any photos of homosexual marriages. In the beginning it was
    full of them.) This is about putting the legal stamp of approval on
    homosexuality and imposing it with force throughout the various social
    and political institutions of a society that would never accept it
    otherwise. To the rest of America: You’ve been forewarned.

     

    • becie333

      Excellent!

    • Anonymous

      Sooo….you see it as a bad thing that homosexual couples are recognized in essentially the same way as heterosexual couples have taken for granted?  How would you feel about it if we went through your litany of griefs and substituted in ‘heterosexual’?  I imagine you’d be defending this things as improvements.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1349336612 Danielle Inman-Bellofatto

    Blah, blah, blah. get some real information from some real sources. It’s very telling how you have yet to truly answer any of the questions posed to you. You make insulting, wild accusations, but never cite any recognized research correlating gays being given their civl rights, that you so cavalierly enjoy, to your dumbass claims. Then you actually have the gall to claim you are the victim. You act like you walk the path of the righteous, yet you are absolutely the opposite. You want to know why religion has failed? It is because of hypocrites like you who PRETEND to be virtuous Christians but are nothing of the sort. Every hateful thing you spew is incompatible with you PROFESSED Christian beliefs. You conveniently forget things like “love thy neighbor” and “though shall not judge” and “we are all God’s children” to serve your vile, ignorant, simpleminded, spoon-fed view. Religion is supposed to be inclusive. It is supposed to be about spreading love and caring about the well-being of your fellow man; things you continue to prove you know nothing about. It is you and people like you who are responsible for the suicide of many young people. IT IS YOU WHO HAS BLOOD ON YOUR HANDS. I haven’t worked and spent billions to keep you from being able to determine the health care of a loved one, or tried to keep you from receiving your partner’s benefits. you want to deny us marriage because of the economic cost?!?! Really ?!?! How very Christian of you, you amoral hypocrite. I dare you to answer with SOUND logic or CREDIBLE research from a recognized institution. Don’t give bullshit responses based on your religion (of which I am still certain you know nothing about). Your religion is not the institution upon which this country is governed (you know, that little thing call “separation of church and state”). Your religion has no authority over our government.  Don’t tell me our law and constitution are based on the principles of your bible. Had the architects of this country intended the bible to be the governing authority of this nation, they would not have bothered to create an independent document called the Constitution. It is interesting that not once have you attempted to refute or even acknowledge the basic tenets of the Constitution, such as the aforementioned separation of church and state, all men are created equal and ALL MEN ARE ENTITLED to LIFE, LIBERTY, and the PURSUIT of HAPPINESS. You also have not been able to defend how you’re attempt to deny gays equal treatment under the law is not in conflict with the Constitution. I understand. It is the same reason the Obama administration has stated it will not defend DOMA, because it is indefensible. Except in the minds of the easily deluded. So, once again, utilizing actual credible research, answer these very pertinent questions, which you have thus far been unable to do. Exactly how is YOUR marriage endangered by MY gay marriage (or any marriage, for that matter)? The divorce rate for heterosexuals is over 50%. How has DOMA helped that? If straight marriage is so sacred, how come you can get drunk and go get married 5 minutes after you get your unappreciative ass to Vegas? Sixty percent of married couples cheat on their spouses, yet truly committed and faithful couples aren’t legitimate families? Do you even understand the difference between the civil marriage we seek and your religious one? What entitles you to vote on the civil rights of ANYONE else? What makes you or your religion the moral authority in a nation based on a separate, independent document which is universally acknowledged as the governing document of this nation? Why are you entitled to the civil benefits of MY tax dollars but I am not, remembering that marriage does not belong to religion? This is no different than taxation without representation. I doubt you’ve heard of that. Funny how gay tax dollars also pay for your spawns’ education, and the social security benefits YOUR family would be entitled to, but not mine, thanks to heartless people of ilk. Then you have the gall to complain about covering us in MA. Equally funny is how you have probably benefitted from the care of a gay physician, or inventions and innovations of gay scientists or artists, or had your food prepared by a gay chef. You’ll claim that this is nothing but an assault on your character. Try fighting for your very existence and let’s see you you respond. We will no longer stay in the closet just so that you can live comfortably with your hateful, bigoted views. We will never stop fighting for justice. More and more will continue to rise and we will one day have equality because truth and justice will always prevail in the end. Stop your insidious, despicable, and ludicrous claims about how allowing gays their equality will bring about the demise of the world. I don’t know a single person who wants to marry a goat or a turtle (and people who jump right to that from gay marriage are the sick and f*cked up ones, I say). Although, there seems to be plenty of “good Christians” who want and CAN marry their first cousins (how many arms do you need?) And all those other dumbass claims you made, there are already plenty of straights in jail for committing them. Now, go raise your little haters. Just think, all that time you wasted cut and pasting you could have spent doing some actual good in the world. I will post a link to a video just for you. Maybe you’ll allow yourself to learn something, anything! Maybe you will understand empathy, though I doubt it. Whether you watch it or not, I don’t care. I doubt you have the balls or the integrity to even see the error of your ways. I’m done trying to enlighten someone so obviously afraid of the truth. You need not respond because I won’t bother to look at any more cutting and pasting of text. I know the legacy I will leave behind when I am dead and gone (excited about that prospect? I bet you are!) and I can face the person in the mirror. And I will show you more compassion than you as such a “good Christian” has espoused for others in your comments. I pity you and your ugly soul. May your god also take pity because, if there is a Hell, you’ve got a first-class ticket.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JL-G8A34U14&feature=youtube_gdata_player

    • alleyhse

      Sorry Danielle your just another liberal throwing a temper tantrum and stomping out of the room. You have provided this thread no basis for your position other than alot of emotion and anger. You are likely from the Northeast and I resent people like you coming into my home state of Iowa to mock our values, our rights, and our sensibilities.

  • alleyhse

    Here is some information from Exodus International, an organization started and managed by former gays and lesbians 35 years ago. They are the largest ministry to the gay community out there so they know something about this issue.

    Exodus notes on Thought Crime legislation:

    1.Thought crimes offer more legal protection to certain citizens based on their sexual preference alone.
    2. These laws pave the way to prosecute biblical beliefs about homosexuality, instead of prosecuting illegal actions that harm others.
    3. Every human being is of equal value and worthy of the same treatment under the law so ex-gays would be seen as less valuable now than when they were living as homosexuals.
    4. Thought crime laws only further increase discrimination.
    5. Using sexuality as the basis for prosecuting a crime is a recipe for disaster. There are more than 25 different “sexual orientations” and deviations that are recognized today. Many people change their sexual orientation over the course of their lives so how can the law determine ones sexuality and prosecute a crime based on such ambiguity and unstable qualification?
    6. All crime is a hate crime. To uphold civil order and impartiality under the law, the government must be responsible for judging illegal actions- not ones sexuality, feelings, or perceived bias. This is the only way to ensure that each and every American is granted equal justice.

  • alleyhse

    Religion has been scorned on this thread and I do not promote religion because Jesus Christ replaced it entirely with a better solution. Because Exodus was created by gays and is committed to biblical truth I tend to respect and support their views for the most part. Here is what Exodus International says:
    Exodus International believes… that the Bible is the
    inspired Word of God and is the source for all truth — educating us on
    how we are to live our lives as physical, spiritual, emotional and
    sexual beings. Exodus believes that the only biblically sanctioned form
    of sexual expression is between a man and woman married to one another.
    Any other sexual expression is biblically defined as sinful and outside
    God’s intent for human relationships and sexuality. We believe that it
    is the role of the global Christian church to equip and encourage
    individuals to live God-honoring lives and to proclaim the hope of
    salvation through Jesus Christ to the world.

    Is homosexuality a sin?

    The Bible is clear that any sexual expression outside of marriage is.
    Many within Exodus International came to the personal conclusion that
    homosexuality was incompatible with the life they wanted to live
    pursuing God’s design as articulated in Scripture and chose instead to
    reposition their lives around what the Bible says, not around their
    personal feelings or attractions. While not everyone chooses this path,
    many have and along the way have experienced peace and contentment.

    Scriptural Backup – Multiple verses in both testaments of the Bible clearly show God’s disapproval of homosexual behavior (Genesis 19:4-11, Leviticus 18:22; 20:13, Judges 19:22, Romans 1:26-27, I Corinthians 6:9 & I Timothy 1:10).
    We also see that God’s created intent and design for a sexual
    relationship is recognized exclusively between a man and a woman and is
    the only approved sexual union in the Bible.

    Can you be gay and be a Christian?

    That obviously depends upon what the definition of a “Christian” is.
    Many at Exodus wrestled with that question and decided that if they were
    going to “follow Christ,” they had to find out whether God cared about
    the way they lived their lives. The Bible clearly shows that  He does.
    If the question is, “Can you commit a sin and continue to be a Christian
    and/or still go to heaven?” then that is a separate issue. It’s
    certainly true that being a Christian doesn’t inoculate you from sinning
    and doesn’t negate salvation. We do, however, as Christians, have to
    reconcile the fact that God does care about the way we live our lives
    here on earth.

    Scriptural Backup – Romans 1:18
    says, “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the
    godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their
    wickedness.” The rest of the chapter goes on to define what God
    considers “godless” and “wicked” and includes homosexuality along with
    many other sins. Several other passages in the Bible (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:9-10) confirm this — communicating that homosexuality is not God’s design for humanity.

    Do gays go to hell?

    Homosexuality isn’t the issue that determines where a person spends
    eternity. One of the greatest misconceptions about the Bible is that
    people go to hell because they sin, but the Bible tells us that Jesus
    Christ alone paid for our sin when He died on the cross. It’s whether or
    not a person accepts God’s atoning and sufficient sacrifice that
    determines where you spend eternity. Obviously, only God knows who has
    made this decision and who hasn’t.

    Of course, we all make decisions about how our beliefs play out in
    the real world so if the question is, “Does God care about the way we
    choose to live our lives?’” — the answer is — yes, because He cares
    about us. He designed us to be in life-giving relationships with others
    and with Him. Homosexuality is simply incompatible with His intended
    design.

    Scriptural Backup – The Bible is clear that our salvation does not
    depend on our works but on our faith in Jesus’ sacrifice on the cross.
    “As for you, you were dead in your transgressions and sins, in which you
    used to live when you followed the ways of this world and of the ruler
    of the kingdom of the air, the spirit who is now at work in those who
    are disobedient. All of us also lived among them at one time, gratifying
    the cravings of our sinful nature and following its desires and
    thoughts. Like the rest, we were by nature objects of wrath. But because
    of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with
    Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have
    been saved . . .. For it is by grace you have been saved, through
    faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works,
    so that no one can boast (Ephesians 2:1-9).”

    But Jesus never said anything about homosexuality . . .

    Jesus didn’t have a stenographer following Him around 24/7 so we
    don’t have a record of everything He said on every issue, but we can
    look at the whole Bible to understand His mindset on this one. We do
    know three major things by looking at other passages in the Bible.

    Jesus may not have said anything about homosexuality, but His Father sure did. Jesus said, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30). We know from Jesus that His mindset on this issue is the same as His

    Father’s as stated in the Old Testament.The Bible says that Jesus kept and affirmed the Law and all that the Prophets before Him had taught (Matt. 5:17-19) so this would have meant that Jesus affirmed heterosexual marriage and considered homosexual behavior a sin as they taught.When Jesus did speak of sexuality, he spoke of heterosexuality as the standard (Mark 10:6-9). In so doing, He reiterated God’s design for humanity from the beginning when He created a “suitable” mate
    for man — a woman. It was the male/female relationship that God deemed “very good” and no other.

    Scriptural Backup – The Bible says, “ALL Scripture is God-breathed”
    and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in
    righteousness” (2 Timothy 3:16).
    Therefore, Jesus’ literal words recorded in the gospels are equally
    authoritative on this matter and cannot be discounted for semantics.

    Are you saying people can just “pray the gay away”?

    Prayer is certainly an important part of a Christian’s life, but it’s
    not a magic formula. This phrase ignorantly dismisses a very
    complicated issue that often underlies a person’s same-sex attraction.
    Many who come to Exodus for help have a need to deal with substantive,
    underlying issues surrounding their same-sex attraction. While Jesus
    certainly changes lives, He doesn’t always change desires or erase
    problems, but uses them to help us grow and mature. Certainly, talking
    to God about these things is part of a dynamic relationship with Him —
    it doesn’t always change the fact that there it there is a lot of hard
    work involved in dealing with them.

    Scriptural Backup – Living with conflicting desires is very
    different from living a life dominated by them. This is the essence of
    Christianity — to bring our humanity in line with what we believe to be
    God’s plan for our lives. The Apostle Paul best proves this point when
    he mentions that he prayed three times for God to remove an unspecified
    affliction (II Corinthians 12:7-10)
    and mentions his own internal war with sin (Romans 8). While Paul’s
    affliction was never healed, that certainly does not disqualify the fact
    that his life was changed from murdering Christians to becoming a
    preacher of the Gospel!

    Should churches be allowed to discriminate against gays?

    Churches should be open to everyone because there is no one for whom
    the compassionate truth and mercy of Jesus Christ does not apply, but
    churches must also be able to teach and implement the whole truth of the
    Bible when it comes to moral issues.

    God expects churches to exemplify both His mercy and His holiness,
    which means compassionately upholding His design for sexuality and
    relationships among its leaders and members. In regards to the church
    and state relationship, it is clear that the government must uphold the
    religious freedoms of assembly, speech and conscience afforded all
    individuals and churches by the Constitution.

    Scriptural Backup – The Bible says that homosexual behavior is sin (Leviticus 18:22, 20:13; Romans 1:26-27; 1 Corinthians 6:9-10; 1 Timothy 1:9-10)
    and that unrepentent sin is rebellion against God. While the Church
    must uphold God’s moral code, it must also promote God’s plan for
    sexuality — a glorious gift meant to be offered back to Him either in
    marriage for procreation, union and mutual delight or in celibacy for
    undivided devotion to Christ and to the Church.

  • Anonymous

    Cannibals want to be equal too.  They were born that way.  Nazis and Charles Manson want to be equal too.  They were born the way they were born– they can’t help being the way they are.  When will Jeff Angelo pick up the glorious banner of equal rights for cannibals, Nazis, and Charles Manson?  Or, is Jeff Angelo just a selective hypocrite who favors only certain flavors of degeneracy?  Maybe he wants to get rid of the Code of Iowa, because it discriminates against an oppressed minority group widely known by the demeaning, derogatory, and disrespectful term “criminals.”  If Angelo wants to support perverted criminals, why isn’t he supporting all criminals?
    In the Stone Age, murder was a good thing for its practitioners. So were rape, homosexuality, stealing, and various other activities now regarded as less than civilized. Murder promoted transmission of DNA to the next generation at the expense of its eliminated victims. Rape did the same DNA promotion even more directly. Stealing enriched its practitioners and let them prosper more to reproduce more and transmit their DNA more down to modern times. Homosexuality directly limited (and limits) DNA transmisssion, but to the extent it let any Stone Age tribe avoid overgrazing the ecological niche, and allowed set-aside cavemen to protect the harem and their siblings’ children while the men were off hunting, homosexuality provided a net surivival benefit during the Stone Age, hence its being favored in Darwinian evolution until about 10,000 years ago. Then agriculture, technology, and civilization emerged. Homosexuality became obsolete with the rise of civilization– especially now that its earlier function is superseded by the existence of grocery stores, money, babysitters, telephones, grandparents, and police. Homosexuality, as an atavism, provides no benefit for society today, and its main effect is to excite those who are thousands of years behind the times as they selfishly inflict their AIDS, syphilis, and antibiotic resistant gonorrhea on the rest of the population through other confused backward people who are afflicted with various levels of bisexuality. Now we are in 2011 and society has suffered decades of stealthy homosexual infiltration of schools, banking, universities, government, today even the military, and all along from the beginning particularly the media. Homos work hard to cover their motives and methods, the same as any other criminal racket, to avoid being held responsible for their selfish manipulations. So, those of us who understand what is going on in their grotesque efforts at deception can help by warning the innocent targets of deception.

  • becie333

    What an idiotic statement, referring to those who want traditional marriage as emotional.  The only reason the pro-same-sex crowd can give are emotional.  It is harmful to society; it is harmful health-wise (why do men die younger if they practice abnormal sex?); it is harmful to children; why do they have to brainwash kids into believing it is normal; no civilization that has made same-sex “marriage”legal has lasted; why after millennia of man and woman marriage, is it suddenly considered wrong; it will lead to polygamy, incestual marriage, and bestiality.  There is no limit when once the protection for real marriage begins.  Homosexuals can get married, the same way heterosexuals can.  That is not discrimination.  It is like trying to make a fork a spoon; one can change the name and description, but the spoon will never work as a fork.  Get over it—mainstream America (and true Republicans) do NOT want this abnormal thing sanctioned.

    • Anonymous

      In rebuttal: SPORK.

Switch to our mobile site