Senate vote on gay marriage should ease fears
One of the threads that unraveled in the wake of the Supreme Court decision to strike down Roe v. Wade was a fear among married gays – and supporters of gay marriage – that the High Court could overturn the Obergefell v. Hodges decision that gave gay marriages constitutional legitimacy.
The fear was heightened when Justice Clarence Thomas offered up an unsolicited comment that the grounds for removing federal constitutional protection from abortions could be applied to other matters – specifically gay marriage.
Gay marriage would not be outlawed, just as abortion was not outlawed. Rather the matter would be left to the citizens of the several states. Under the current situation, gay marriage is a constitutional right.
Thomas’s casual remark was made even though the majority opinion on Roe v Wade specifically stated that it was narrowly drawn and would not apply to the issue of gay marriage. That was less than comforting to the gay community.
As a prophylactic against any future Supreme Court decision that would lift the federal protection for gay marriage – leaving it to the states to decide – a bipartisan measure passed by the Senate in a 61 to 36 vote — declaring that any gay marriage performed in a state where such unions are legal must be accepted as legal in all states.
The measure was sent on to the House where it is expected to be approved and subsequently signed into law by President Biden.
This should lay to rest any anxieties among proponents of gay marriage – even though the threat was unrealistic despite Thomas’ unhelpful academic comments. He needlessly increased the anxiety and gave Democrats another fearmongering cudgel to use against Republicans in the 2022 Midterm elections.
Gay marriage is widely accepted in America today – and gay relationships are largely normalized within the secular American culture. As well among many religious organizations, leaders, and supplicants. There is no chance that the right of gay folks to get married will be reversed – even without a new law. Hopefully, the law will put the matter to rest.
The speed with which the American culture changed on gay marriage and gay rights is remarkable. It was just 20 years ago when a constitutional amendment was being floated to declare that marriage is ONLY between a man and a woman.
Incidentally, the new legislation protecting gay marriage also covers interracial marriages that were once banned as late as the 1960s. Like gay marriages, interracial unions – meaning whites and blacks or Asians, and even blacks and Asians – was not under any serious threat, but if the new law makes folks feel better, no harm done.
So, there ‘tis.
Things change fast, we’ll see
I have no objections for a gay couple living as a man and woman married couple do, having the same rights and responsibilities as the married couple does. What I object to is the changing of the thousands of years old definition of the word marriage which is a covenant between one man and one woman. The gay couples could have a ‘Civil Union’ (or some other words or word) which grants them the same rights and responsibilities as a married couple. Changing the definition of the word marriage was simply done to attack religion, in particular Christianity.
I think a large portion of American society does not accept gay marriage, they tolerate it because there are many more important issues. The whole reason gays pushed the gay marriage thing is because they want to have homosexuality legitimized as a normal way of life. And what better way to do this than to be married just like normal non-homosexual people. Many Americans will tolerate it as long as they do not shove it down our throat and make us call them MR. and Mrs. More states rights being taken away as now a state that does not want to recognize gay marriage will be forced to, even though gays are not the majority.
The good side of this is that this will make the employment picture better for non-homosexual married couples. In a state that does not recognize gay marriage, employment health benefits do not have to be extended to a gay persons married dependent. Now that little hidden benefit of hiring gays to lower corporate health expense costs will be gone.
It’s tolerated because it’s been rammed down our throats. No pun. Good people know that it’s a bad character flaw to be queer.
I agree. I was rather ambivalent about the whole issue until it started getting forced on me to believe that the homosexual lifestyle is as legitimate as a man-woman marriage, AND that it should be honored in the same way. I do not believe in giving any honor to immorality and perversion. What we are seeing is further moral decay that has now become legitimized by politicians so that they do not have to lose votes. Welcome to the new Sodom and Gomorrah!!! And you know what was done to those two towns! Gen 19. They may have created a carve-out for faith based organizations, but it will only be a matter of time until the churches are attacked and forced to marry homosexuals. Stay firm in your belief and do not be swayed by these decadents. It is written in 1 Corinthians 6:9-11 “You know that wicked people will not inherit the kingdom of God, don’t you? Stop deceiving yourselves! Sexually immoral people, idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexuals, thieves, greedy people, drunks, slanderers, and robbers will not inherit the kingdom of God. ” We may have to suffer this immorality for a season, but it will not last.
Well said, Tom! Someone had to say it, and we must keep saying it. BTW, it truly irks me when so many people refer to deviants as “gay;” that word does not apply; it means happy and carefree, but they are obviously not. They are sick indiividuals who need help but will never get it due to the immoral beliefs and cowardice of so many. The whole thing sickens me.
Thank God you are willing to help ungay America.
How’s that working for you.?
Except rwality says you are wrong. There’s many a gay with exemplary character traits. .
I did not say homosexuals cannot have exemplary character traits. There is honor even among thieves. I isolated my discussion to the practice of homosexuality only. It is against God’s great command to go forth, multiply, and subdue the earth. And by the way, do see Deuteronomy 22: 5-8 on cross dressers and gender switching while you are at it.
I can quote plenty bible disagreeing with you. Not to mention knowing plenty that be in line in front of you at heaven’s gate. Mayor Pete for example. Do you really think Jesus would thumbs down these folks.
Most are Independents. 😉
I won’t support this Evil Bill I follow Jesus Christ he said to love them not embrace their SIN.
A true minister of God would refuse to perform marriages for queers even under threat of jail. I know I would refuse.
It has already been shown that you will go to jail if you are a baker and you refuse to bake a cake for a same sex marriage. Instead of going down the road to another bakery, they want to force it on the one that does not agree with their way of life. In the sacred scriptures, Yahuwah says clearly that man lying with man is an abomination to Him. And, also that anyone practicing such behavior will not make it into His (Royal Power) Kingdom.
I think the baker won……
Actually, the baker won at the SCOTUS level but there are state laws that he also needs to fight. The baker has spent over $100,000 in his defense. There is also a case before the SCOTUS now dealing with a young woman who has a website design business and has been maliciously targeted in the same way.
I think they all ultimately won.
Yeah. Jesus only accepts whores……
Your mother should be ok
You seem really fixated on Moms. Care to illuminate?
Tough guy on anonymous web site.
Closet case no doubt. Come on out.
Actually your depiction is not quite accurate. He accepted Mary and forgave her as Jesus said, “Because of the depth of your love.” And then he gave her an order to “Sin no more.” and then “Save this ointment for my burial.” Now in response to your comment, “Jesus only accepts whores…” this is also inaccurate. Luke 5:31-32 Jesus is very clear. He said, “31 Jesus answered, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance.” So it is clear that “the righteous” already have the acceptance of Jesus – which lays waste your claim (above). It is also clear that Jesus wants to reach sinners (and that would include those practicing homosexuality) to repent (which means to turn from your sin) and Jesus wants to give them acceptance too. BUT, it is based on the condition of their heart and if they will repent – its not for free! I do not oppress, humiliate, or descriminate against homosexuals, and I will have a beer with them as well. But I will not go against what Jesus says, nor do I want my socialization with them as an acceptance of their practice. I am always quite clear that I will love the person but not accept their sinful practice. IF they are ok with that, then I am ok with having a beer with them – and why not, Jesus drank with sinners, so I can too. But he did not budge on what was righteous, nor did he accept their practice. He drew them onto himself and gave them a higher righteous way to live. I sincerely hope I have provided some clarity for you.
Why is it even worthy of mention.
Why is everyone so preoccupied with others sex?
Keep your eyes to yourself. Get out of other’s pants, wombs, whatever. Live and let live.
Don’t ask, don’t tell has some merit.
And if your kid is gay, retrain them, that’ll turn out just swell.
Actually if you read and understand my posts on this topic, you will see that I am preoccupied with living a clean and healthy life and staying away from immorality whenever I identify it using scripture as my reference. It seems to be you that is preoccupied by sex.
Use your scripture. Judge others as deviant if they don’t fit your bible translations. Let us judge you on that, fair is fair. Have others do to you as you have done.
You don’t think there are bible passages that say gay is ok? Jfgi.
Bibfy, if you can do as you say when you say, “I can quote plenty bible disagreeing with you.”, then please do share some quotes from the bible that say the practice of homosexuality is not immoral. For some reason, all of the scriptures I read indicate the practice of homosexuality is immoral. So I am awaiting direct quotes from you and your bible (and make it KJV or at least NIV – not the Satanic bible) that have the word homosexuality in it and say that it is moral. Remember that when Jesus said, “Love your neighbor as yourself.” the Greek word was “Φιλαδελφία (Philadelphia = “love of brothers”) where the enduring qualities of love are described in 1 Cor 13, and have nothing to do with sex. Jesus was not talking about having homosexual relations with you brother. Honestly Bibfy, I really do not care if you are gay, nor do I care if you have a homosexual lover. And I think you should be treated as anyone else with regard to finance, civil union rights, emergency room rights, employment rights, etc. Just do not try to force me to believe that homosexuality is normal – because it is not. Deep down, most homosexuals know that what they are doing is immoral (where immoral is defined by Webster as “against moral standards) so rather than change their behavior and seek help, they choose to alter society’s view of “what is moral” so that they can say they are moral. And I am not buying their slight of hand.
It may not be normal for you, but maybe eating raw clams is not either; do you decide your morality on that one? I know, apples n oranges, but who are we to judge —- think that’s pretty Jesus.
To your question, kinda misspoke. It’s not like the Bible says: “thou shall not be homosexual,” they didn’t have a word for it. And much of the “man with man” stuff is an interpretation on top of a translation. There’s also much you already discount in the Bible due to times, knowledge, and science of the day. So, here we go:
https://www.sthugh.net/lgbtq-affirming-scripture
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/assault/bible/doesnotoppose.html
http://religiousinstitute.org/denom_statements/homosexuality-not-a-sin-not-a-sickness-part-ii-what-the-bible-does-and-does-not-say/
tis being moderated
Larry,
In my opinion America is a pluralistic country boosting a myriad in its diverse people beliefs. Faith beliefs and religious agnostics, personal gender identification and same gender attraction practices, two person legal union same sex and heterosexual marriages, political party preference -Republican. Democrat, independent, and agnostic- and shots of other differences. Yet. all of us make up, We the people… being equal. Each one of us guaranteed certain rights under the Constitution.
Those same rights for all apply regardless of who has the majority at every level of government. Those with a majority in a local community, a state wide organization, or a national institution. Certain individual rights enumerated in law or unenumerated although recognized as lawful, are there for just purposes that equal treatment is made practice.
This equal treatment for all means giving respect to all. Pluralism means a culture in which people will be interacting with other people who do not look like them. In addition to skin color, others do not speak the same language, and appear not to have anything in common with us. Then, one’s attitude toward those “different people” depends on one’s perspective on and understanding of pluralism in America.
In my experience as a white male Protestant Christian reared in predominantly white Protestant Christian neighborhoods the whole notion that America is pluralistic was foreign for me. as it was not a familiar term. Mid 20th Century America historically is known for race riots and a fight for equality by Black people. Recognizing America as pluralistic nation by white America in that period did not exist and in the present age much the same. Ignorance.
A different topic, but applicable, is polling done reflecting an individual’s spoken beliefs says one thing. While those same individuals when asked to answer candidly of record offer their true beliefs, not any bit like the poll tally. People know how they should respond in accordance to proper social/political conversation on those topics. While among their friends social group beliefs are shared frankly. Possibly due to peer pressure forcing compliance with the group’s biases toward prejudice against LGBTQ ideas and subjects in conflict with the peer group’s worldview.
What you have here is a failure to communicate. Not actually, it’s a false communication about others communication’s intention. If It is fear resulting from Biden’s communication, why is that, where does that emotion come from? If true facts produce fear, why is that? It’s the place and why that has one reply one way anonymously on a poll and the opposite way in person with friends of like mind. The same mind set that does not want any talk of pluralism in reference to America. And, who in this great land would deny pluralism is a fact? The people saying the are fighting for democracy and in the same breath believe Trump should have won in 2020. People, you can not have it both ways . That’s not how this democracy works. Disagree if you wish, democracy is strong and allows for voicing dissenting opinions. When tides go one way, those in opposition will fight the tide. They work against the natural law of democratic decision making.
States’ ballots show where those electing to vote stand on the issues like abortion and gay rights.
States are well to decide on their own.
have
Yeah. They stand on killing babies and traveling the chocolate highway. Enjoy AC
And you live more unloved, unwanted, unsupportable, babies and have offered nothing but rhetoric and a government that forces mothers to deliver rape babies, incest babies, catastrophically sick babies to serve your vanities.
We say live and let leave, all created equal and fair is fair.
You were probably an asshole baby
Brilliant Timmy. Got me, pardner, oh the burn, the 🔥
Do any of these jerk wads think this shit strikes a nerve? Oh Timmy, I am so hurt, I will never be the same.
I laughed, I cried, most memorable taint I will ever forget. Just like Timbo, more fleeting than a fart in a stiff breeze.
Frank, I have read your referenced articles. In my previous responses I have tried carefully to restrict my replies to the act or practice of homosexuality, not to judge or condemn the people. Clearly God loves his most prized creation, Man. And just as clearly, God desires to love all people regardless of their practices – not because his love is a sign that God agrees with the specific practice as in homosexuality. LGBTQ folks like to blur the lines that because God loves them then God must agree with my practices – which is humanizing God. But the articles fail to examine their knowledge and theories against God’s intention for his creation which is given in terms of the commission (Gen 3) to 1) Mulitply, 2) subdue (or spread) throughout the earth. God said it was not good for man to be alone. So God created a helper which had complimentary sexuality to Man, and man named this creation Woman. The only sexual union blessed by God in all of the bible is the union between a man and a woman – because this is the only union that fulfills God’s commission! LGBT unions do not fulfill the commission and are there for against God because they are against his commission – the articles fail to point out this fact.
I have asked any LGBTQ person to identify specifically in the bible where God directly blesses homosexual unions. I have not had a single response to date.
I have asked LGBTQ how they feel about gender changes in light of Deuteronomy 22:5-8 where God clearly says men dressing as women (and this would include the ultimate gender changes) and I have yet to get an answer.
In the second article listed, the most important sentence in the article is, “My purpose, however, is to show that the scholarly machinery is available for one who would want to eliminate the Bible completely from the current discussion.” This is exactly what many within the LGBT community attempt to do, eliminate the bible thus eliminating the absolute moral standard – and then supplant their standard which often is stated that God loves me too and then extended to God does not mind my homosexuality (because He loves me – a circular logic). This is wrong, God “long suffers” their acts that are against God’s commission to multiply and subdue.
The third article has many good observations but does assume that the reason for the refusal to accept Lot’s daughter is because the crowd was heterosexual. This is possible. But it is equally as possible that the reason was they were interested in a male-male union, not a male-female union. I do agree that there was more than just homosexuality going on in Sodom and Gamorrah and that most likely had the only problem been homosexuality then God may not have done what He did. I do think it is a fallacy for many reasons to assume homosexuality was small then because the numbers today are small. Now, Jesus (and the Gospels) did not have to say anything about homosexuality because 1) It was accepted as wrong, 2) Romans often had homosexual relations and it was wise for him not to say anything that would be viewed as going against Rome. He also said nothing about the evils of slavery (and actually stated if you were a slave, be good to your master because your position is given you by God above) yet we today believe slavery to be an evil institution – and there was a civil war over slavery. So the fact that Jesus was silent on homosexuality does not imply that he accepted it – it was widely considered wrong in his day and religion, a pagan practice, fruits of idolatry, hence no need to discuss. And to conflate the facts that back then homosexuality/relationships was somehow different than today’s is simply ridiculous and academic demagoguery. Then the article makes a perverted logic example of what is natural and unnatural, totally ridiculous. And in the conclusion, stating that because Paul did not say much about homosexuality or sexual practice then one cannot conclude against homosexuality is also ridiculous. The conclusion fails to mention that Paul told the Corinthians that that if they wished to have sex, then they should take a wife, otherwise, be like him – celibate. He did not say take a male lover if you are a man or a woman lover if you are a woman!
I am in favor of LGBTQ and whatevers having the same rights to insurance coverage, recognition of civil unions, emergency room rights, employment rights, etc. Just do not force their beliefs onto me, and do not take those beliefs into the school system to groom small children, and do not attempt to eliminate the bible as the absolute moral standard that should guide our lives.
Tom,
Got it. To be honest, I don’t care what people do in this regard. They can be found across history in every culture so seems pretty much the same the world over .
I do believe in monogamy irregardless of all this and therefore agree that those rights should be equal, like you. To me, this helps be our society more stable.
Don’t know much about the bible; I like Jesus. think do unto others pretty much says it all.
I did laugh at your passage about God, created man and think he needed a companion, so he created woman. I am sorry, but he is God. Why wouldn’t he figure that out before even started? It almost sounded like he came to a conclusion after the fact of creating man. Just like why would god really need to take a rib from man to create woman. He’s God, he could just create it. Last I checked, he doesn’t need raw materials…
But I think my bottom line is that there are many things in the Bible that we just disregard nowadays due to what we know. I’m pretty sure you know that and I’m not gonna look it up.
But I think of two people want to live a life together, and they have a stable relationship, perhaps kids, then we should extend the same benefits that we would extend to any married couple. To me that just builds a stronger America.
I do take a different view of some of the things wrote re-grooming., gays, forcing their believe on you, gay training in the schools, I find this all to be fear, mongering for things that are just not happening our least happening in the great numbers that everyone thinks they are. I just can’t even imagine why a vast concerted effort would ever be made by the gay community to groom, young kids to be gay later in life. Whole thing just sounds pretty preposterous to me. Sure, people do bad things every day, but the rugged right makes the sound like some sort of concentrated, concerted effort across America. I just don’t see it.
When they shot up the trans bar in Colorado the other day, we learned that many of the patrons or families coming to see their friends up on stage at the show. It was a show. The cross dressers were generally professionals, and do not scream let’s have sex from the stage. It’s a show. Frankly, I think that crap is beneath you, and you’re better than that. I can’t imagine you’re really afraid of kids being groomed in school to be gay. Across America. And great numbers.
Let’s try another topic, this one is kind of boring. I just think it is really just not that important.
I agree Frank, the topic is getting old. A few final thoughts though. God was making a declarative statement in that verse, not suddenly coming upon a new thing that he did not know. In the next verse God says, “Let us make man a helper”. The us implies that others were there, most likely Jesus, Angels, etc, and God was teaching them. In New Testament Jesus is quoted as saying, “The son does only what the father teaches him to do.” So most likely, God was teaching Jesus and others whom might have been arc angels which are very powerful created beings that do have some powers entrusted to them by God. Satan, original name Lucifer which means “Morning Star” was another such angel.
I am a bit shocked that you have not read articles on “Drag Hour” being instituted in many schools at the grade school level, usually kindergarden through 3rd or 4th grade. Many parents around the nation are enraged at this. We had one such hour here in my town. Parents hit the roof. They read stories that were LGBTQ friendly and did have relationship / sexual content that was inappropriate. And as you might imagine, the kids went home and asked their parents. This was a huge issue in VA, and several other states. Parents are now pushing back against it and taking control of their school systems to ensure this kind of activity is kept out of the schools. The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 60% of American Adults consider “Drag Queen Story Hour” not appropriate for children, including 44% who say it’s Not At All Appropriate. Only 29% think “Drag Queen Story Hour” is appropriate for children, including 11% who consider it Very Appropriate. Another 10% are not sure. (To see survey question wording, click here.) It has been quite an issue for the past year. My children are grown so this does not directly affect me, but, this cross dressing stuff does not meet God’s plan for what we are to teach our children either in the books they read or the cross dressing they display. Read this article if you want to see how sick it can get. https://www.christianpost.com/news/most-parents-say-drag-queen-events-are-inappropriate-for-kids.html
I do find it funny that these drag queens can dress up in their costumes and have a tax payer funded event about their ideology in a school or public library, but if a group dresses in costume to do a Nativity Hour play at Christmas time in school they will be arrested for their ideology, and local ordinances will be created to ban such plays. Seems a bit unfair to me!
OK. I am done. LOL
Let’s be clear, “God” did not say that. It’s a book, written by others, attempting to recall what God said to someone, translated many times. Like we have SCOTUS to clarify the Constitution, you have Biblical scholars putting their “spin” on it. Like the SCOTUS, these interpretations can even change over time.
So it means what you say, to you, based on your readings. OK.
And, again, there are so many passages in the Bible that you discount because of science, medicine, or just plain ole passage of time, history. I once asked a Jewish friend how he could not eat shrimp, it’s just so good. He said: “I wouldn’t know so it’s OK because I have always believed it to be true.” I laughed and said, more for me! Frankly, and I can be Frank, I think it’s silly to give up shrimp because of a good book…….
Yes, Drag Hour is a concerted effort, nationwide, with crossdressers doing reading hour in schools and libraries. The point is: where is the “grooming” going on that you are so God-awful frightened about? The intent of these shows is to teach gender-fluidity as an OK thing. NOT GROOMING. They are there as role models, not sex traffickers. There are there to say “gay is OK,” not “Uncle Leroy Needs You!” Now, that said, I can understand the fear of some parents, perhaps most of the parents. I can not “un-fear” them except to say, you have nothing to fear but fear itself. Perhaps the schools are the wrong place to do this and certainly parents should have a say in what goes on there. But where do we draw the line? Do we stop presentations of The Lion King for fear it will make our kids turn into animals? Facetious, but you get my point. It’s OK to say no, but when do you say yes? When do you let them out of the closet and tell you kid there are different people in this world? Gimme shelter, but how much?
Growing up gay is tough. Being shunned for being different is tough. Lack of role models is tough. Being told ITS WRONG, ITS AGAINST GOD, is very tough. When do we accept people as people, admit it’s a rainbow out there and tell our kids the truth? Next time you are with your gay friends, ask them. Ask them what it is like growing up gay. It tends to build more awareness of how tough their lives are, growing up. And please, when your grandson comes out in a dress, don’t send him for retraining. Its probably a phase, and if not, thanks to Drag Hour, he can be made to feel “it’s OK, we stand with you.”
Again, I can understand the parents point, but when do they let the gay kids feel OK about being gay?
Let me just add: we should cancel all Blue Man Group shows in the schools lest our kids hold their breath to become blue…….
:>)
And lets be crystal clear, I am never giving up my smurf cartoons! But I will stay an olive colored Caucasian. I will absolutely refuse color altering injections unlike Michael Jackson – because God made me olive for a reason! And I will honor his handiwork! I must admit though, blue IS my favorite color! And though I be a man of stature, I will NEVER discriminate against height disadvantaged people, nor will I ever call them little people, shrimps, weebols, punies, small fries, midget, mini-humans, cuntswaylow, nor will I enter their home and put things on the top shelves so as to make life difficult for them.
You may be as sarcastic as you like, and I will love and respect you through all of it, as I consider it your growth process. But I am deadly serious about my smurf cartoons – do not EVEN attempt to get them banned because there is no “homo-smurf”!!!
wink wink
You and most all of the left call it “gender fluidity”, I as a Christian call it unholy, the right calls it grooming because it is doing more than just giving them a casual awareness that there are others who do not conform to gender stereotypes. They are actually teaching by participation and example how to be the other non-conforming gender fluid type. We will have to agree to disagree and respect each other’s opinion With regard to where such events should be held, I hope we can agree that a private rental venue, not a government building, where the performers pay rent and are free to do as they please would be appropriate with warnings on the advertisements that there is sexually explicit gender fluidity material and language used in the performance that may not be appropriate for young minds. And if some parents choose to pay admission for the show at the private venue, and take their kids, then let it be so for them. I may disagree with the parents that do this, but I will respect their right to enter such a private venue and sexualized world.
I know more than you give me credit for regarding growing up a male that acts more feminine than masculine, maybe gay, confused, and discriminated against. As a young male in high school I did all that I could to stop my fellow athletes from oppressing them. I befriended them. And we are friends till this day – I know their trauma, we have discussed it. The problem is not that God made a mistake when he made them. The problem is societal definitions of what it means to be male and female, and what we expect them to be like. God makes men and women all along the spectrum from very soft to very tough – but in our society it is hard to be a soft male or a tough female without suffering discrimination. The answer is to change society’ definition of male and female, and expand it to include all and eliminate discrimination based on a person’s gender assignment compared to how they act and what they like to play with and do. God created these people soft and tough in their gender assignment for a reason and fit them into his plan appropriately equipped for what he wants them to do. The answer is not accepting homosexuality as a practice and legitimizing it in marriages, nor is it to mutilate young people’s bodies to change their gender, and put them on drugs (hormone blockers) that have not been studied long term, nor is it to teach them how to be a fluid gender person. The answer is to accept all in their God given gender assignment and help them fit in and have success in their gender assignment. Soft males make great nurses and caregivers working in senior centers – but my generation was never told this, we instead were taught that nursing is a feminine employment roll and left to conclude on our own that if a man was a nurse he must be something less than a male – he must be a “fem”. Tough women make excellent linemen but we were taught if they are tough, they are not female, they must be some form of deviant male, and we were taught by society to call them a “butch”. This is what has to stop! We need to evolve to a society where men can be men, soft or hard, in their gender assignment without discrimination and without having to be homosexual to justify their God given naturally soft character traits. And the same goes for women who are tough women. Teaching them homosexuality and gender fluidity only screws up their minds more, and I am telling you this as a former ten year middle and high school math teacher.
I feel the same way about trumplicants. Can we be on them too?
Where do you draw the line? Is it based on your Bible? Can I draw the line somewhere else?
Sure, have at the Trumplicans! Sure you can draw the line somewhere else, just include a copy of the moral code you are basing your line upon.
An update on libraries. I am sure you have seen the earlier post where I showed Queer Hour being held for children at public libraries and at some schools, one in my county. A Christian author recently published by “Brave Books Publishing” a series of books for children called “As You Grow”. These books teach kids kindness, love, compassion, and many other healthy human qualities. He is being rejected by libraries, over 50, where he has asked to have a As You Grow Story reading hour just like the queers have for their Drag Queen Story Hour.
Many of the same libraries that won’t give Cameron a slot are actively offering “drag queen” story hours or similar programs for kids and young people, according to Cameron’s book publisher and according to a review of the libraries’ websites and current program listings. For full article see https://itsonnews.com/kirk-cameron-denied-story-hour-slot-by-public-libraries-due-to-racial-equity/
So you see, it is ok to discriminate against Christian organizations, but not queers and drag queens whom both want the exact same thing. This is where this is heading. Massive discrimination for Christian organizations and their ideology but massive acceptance for queers and drag queens and homosexuals and their ideology. IS that fair?
You just can’t give it a rest, can you. One note on the facts, drag queens are not necessarily gay. Throughout history, men have donned women’s clothing to take the stage. Drag queens accentuate the gender shift. They may be flamboyant, extravagant, and outrageous, but they are not necessarily gay. Please update your preconceived notions.
Kirk Cameron is decidedly, anti-gay, anti CRT, anti blm, even anti-1619 project. God only know what else under the rainbow he is against. Some libraries would not have him there as a speaker.
Drag queens are about inclusion, KC is about exclusion.
I would like to see him with some drag queens, gays, blacks, latinos, a few other minorities all doung a reading. Could call in JC and the Rainbow band.
Frank, I do not recall ever saying that drag queens are gay, although some may be – I dunno. I believe I called them crossdressers and referenced Deuteronomy 22: 5-8.
Now just in, an article you need to read. This Navy Seal is saying what I have been saying all along about kids experiencing trauma and being led into thinking they must be the wrong gender. This 20 year Navy Seal writes the following:
“Chris Beck, who later changed his name to Kristin Beck before going back to using his old name, served in the SEAL teams for 20 years in a variety of combat zones, including Afghanistan and Iraq, and received 29 medals for his efforts.
He now warns that “everything you see on CNN with my face, do not even believe a word of it.”
Beck said that traumatic things that happened to him as a kid and how he was raised was “not an excuse for a psychologist to push their agenda and that’s what happened.” He encouraged people to work on whatever inner issues they have and to deal with their trauma first before pursuing transgenderism.” See at https://rantsofizzo.com/rosalind/detransitioned-navy-seal-warns-americans-to-wake-up-trans-culture-ruined-his-life/
You see Frank, instead of working on the inner issues of the mind, many professionals are advocating the mind is fine, so change (mutilate) the body to match the mind! This is wrong my friend! Its bass ackwards! But I will still never give up my little blue guys! 🙂
I said it before. I’ll say it again, you cannot let this go. I’m starting to think it’s personal. If your kid came out, would you accept it? Personally, I wouldn’t even think about it except for the trials and tribulations of our society. I certainly wouldn’t suggest detransitioning as the cure.
You called drag queers just in the post above. Just saying, no big deal, I can make the same mistake myself, except I do not call people queer to begin with..
OMG, you cannot let it go. Just because one guy made a mistake and detransitioned back, does not necessarily apply to the rest of the world. I am sure that when you look at the transitioning statistics that the numbers will be low. This man made a mistake. Others will . Others don’t. About 1% 8% will “change back,” usually amongst younger participants. Let it be.