Wednesday, November 4, 2009


Hurrah!!! With about 85% reporting so far, 53% of Maine voters have repealed the law allowing gay marriage, made by their legislators. The ministers of the state were said to take an active role in preserving the sanctity of marriage for hetero relationships.

Needless to say, I couldn't be happier --for the sake of the future of civilization --and future children. As I say (like a stuck record!) we do not want our offspring to experience sex homosexually, become addicted to it and identify as homosexuals before they get a chance to mature and experience committed hetero love. One goal of the gay agenda is to persuade children and youth to think gay is ok --to explore their sexuality -- so they will vote for gay marriage in the future and also fulfill homosexual lusts of others, entering that trap door to gay lifestyle. All late-blooming kids and socially insecure kids whose parents failed to give them confidence as males or females are vulnerable --not that we parents can always impart such confidence when peers are telling kids they are fags, lesbians, etc. I certainly agree with "no harrassment" policies --but harrassment policy must not preclude the right to oppose homosexual activities and the right to encourage normal hetero identification among youth. We need to stop assuming that kids who are not stereotypically feminine as girls or masculine as boys MUST be homosexual in orientation and MUST enter into gay experience. Many have left that lifestyle successfully and received nothing but scorn for doing so from gays and liberals.

As for the GOP governors' races --the GOP ain't dead yet --contrary to all the pundits who pronounced the party's funeral --along with the death of the Religious Right.

It's not just the Religious Right that objects to profligate spending, indebting ourselves into the trillions, giving industries to gov't to manage when gov't can't operate in the black on anything themselves. Independent voters aren't happy about that either!

ONE GOOD THING -- but too late. Obama has made feeble attempts to cap the bonuses of the failed company heads who borrowed from gov't --but many leaders have already made out like bandits with the government payroll! And continue to do so, saying it is contractual! Ridiculous. If a company borrows money, it needs to pay it back --starting at the top.

Keep up the COMMON SENSE, Voters!

"God is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance and have eternal life."--the Bible


steve said...

I think homosexuality is caused by some kind of epigenetic anomaly, so I don't think you have anything to worry about as far as bringing down civilization. Only 1.5% of US citizens identify themselves as Gay. Interestingly enough, while looking up that statistic, I found out that of all places, Texas has the most homosexuals!

Barb said...

Is pedophilia caused by epigenetic anomaly? They feel just as driven to the forbidden abnormal as the homosexuals do.

steve said...

I saw an episode of Nova a few years ago dedicated to epigenetics. And the conclusion these scientists came up via experimental data was that epigenetic environmental effects, and choices people make in their lives are passed on 2 or 3 generations. So the things your great grandfather/mother experienced may effect your genes today. So yes, pediphelia could be an inherited genetic trait passed on from generation to generation.

But I see where your going with this.. the moral aspect of condoning homosexuality vs pediphelia regardless whether these things are genetic in nature or not. But the difference is, is that pedophilia victimizes others, while homosexuality does not. Thomas Pain said in Commen sense, that the role of government is to be a necessary evil that protects us from one another. That's why pediphelia is a crime because it infringes on the rights of others.. and the gov steps in and enforces the law vis a vis the crime of victimizing a child. But homosexuality has no victim, therefore no gov action. So therefore the gov should not have a role in discriminating against homosexual unions, homosexuals should enjoy the same marital rights and financial / tax incentives as heterosexual couples. But unlike more liberal people, I don't believe homosexuals have a right to infringe upon religious rights to discriminate against them. I think there has to be a balance. Most religions are very clear about homosexuality being a moral issue and I don't think homosexuality has an intrinsic right to step on the toes of religious institutions and water down their doctrines to accomodate homosexuals. For example, the boy scouts; the boyscouts is a Christian organization, so therefore, as a private organization they should be allowed to exclude homosexuals. Same thing terming homosexual unions as "marriage". Marriage is generally a religious sacriment held dear by believers of various religions the world over. So should homosexuals be allowed to trample the rights of followers of various religions by usurping their sacred sacrement of marriage? I don't think so, just give them the rights of "civil unions", but don't call it marriage.. that's how I feel. But homosexuality is going to be shown to be a genetic anomaly.. it's inevitable. So might as well accomodate that possibility in your thinking.

Barb said...

Well, Steve, that's just what the Bible says: the sins of the parents are visited upon the 3rd and 4th generations.

That doesn't necessarily mean they have all the same sins --parental sins can give kids problems the parents didn't have themselves which can affect for generations. (Inter generational poverty, e.g., has many causes passed down.) Granted, homosexuality is not passed on genetically because they typically don't parent. But I suspect that "being on the downlow" among black straights goes back to the secret African tribal rituals of initiation of the boys into manhood. Thus, AIDS in Africa along with hetero promiscuity.

I don't think it's "inevitable" as you do, that homosexuality will prove to be genetic or epigenetic. Some factors that are found typically in homosexuals will be genetic--but the same factors will also be found in straights. For example, talent in the arts. The artsy community tends to be anti-social --thriving on their "uniquenesses." They are gifted above the normal folks of society and think that means they don't have to abide by conventional social norms. Some are "lovers of self." They hang out together, dress uniquely but in conformity with each other --(like the punkers) and consider themselves 'above' the norm. Their artistic freedom translates to freedom from morals.

There are true homosexuals who think like --and identify with--the opposite sex in their attractions and interests --overly mothered and under fathered, they have their mannerisms and have suffered for their difference while growing up-- and these deserve compassion. But it's unnecessary for any actor --as so many are-- to act "queer" with extremely effected mannerisms and speech--which is done to be entertaining --to be somebody. More at home imitating mom than Dad.

It is a fault in upbringing (father has somehow failed to help his son feel like a normal guy) and possibly even homosexual molestation that got them where they are today. Permissiveness or neglect re: sexuality more than anything --or overly smothering parent of opposite sex. I've seen the latter.

But I also have seen where the parents really seem to play no role --in contrast to peers and a choice of adolescent rebellion. If a kid finds he's not the ideal macho guy and a girl feels she is not the feminine ideal, self-image can get out of whack and lead to homosexual admiration and involvement --especially if there's some need to rebel --or cultural trend influencing them.

There are many who really are gifted and arrogant about it --who don't resist homosexual thought and inclination --who, in fact, do choose --based on environmental factors --usually sexual experiences.

But the Bible says God gives them up to perversion--just lets them go. Because they choose not to be mindful of Him.

But the worst influence has to be sexual experience itself --with the same sex. If it becomes addictive, it becomes preferred --or at least the person sees himself as bisexual --like so many of the married men who visit the public park and public airport rest rooms for quickies.

whatever causes it, it's not for the best --and thus not something to celebrate or encourage to the young --and like you said, not something to make the same as hetero marriage in law and not something to force on people who have religious objections to what is simply, sodomy--a repugnant practice.

Barb said...

part 2 --no victims in homosexuality? Many homosexuals report they had under age sex with older gays as adolescents and that they also had experiences with under-age youth now that they are adults.

Is Tom Foley a pedophile? I don't think so. I don't think he's after children--but he liked young men --just as all hetero males admire young women. Many are in their prime attractiveness in their teens/late teens/early 20's--just like movie starlets.

It is a crime to pursue the under-aged, but homosexuals have already crossed society's big barrier --they have no compelling reason other than jail to pursue only adults. the risk is worth it to them, because this is how homosexuals are made addicts to homosexual preference. This is when young people are most pliable. Dr. Dobson spoke of the critical decade being --was it 16-26 or 18-28 --because this is where all the crazy stuff happens --where the addictions take hold typically --even in well-parented children. It's when the kids leave the home for college and have no chaperonage at all.And they are eager to taste all that life holds. This is when the marriages and babies happen, also --and too often babies out of wedlock --saddling parents with a life time responsibility and connection with someone they don't want to marry.

It's also when professors mess with children of faith --aggandizing old myths and equalizing them with the Bible.

steve said...

Everything I've ever read or seen about homosexuality, the person knows from a very early age, 4, 5, 6 YO, that they are different and begin to seek outlets to express those differences.. regardless of their environment.

Barb said...

This is the propaganda testimony --"I always knew I was different."

I've read a good book or 2 on the subject, too, and one psych who had many gay patients said they all had a precocious interest in sex generally--and were precocious in all ways--very bright children--who felt their "difference." But he didn't conclude they therefore had to be gay.

I remember reading about a girl who "loved" a pretty little girlfriend so intensely --well, so did I!!! I liked boys, too --but I really wanted to be this one pretty little girl's best friend --and was jealous to share her with another.

That's the sort of oddness that gays look back on and cite as evidence that they "always knew" they were "different."

Piffle! Poppycock! this doesn't mean they were doomed to have sex with and romantic inclination toward their own sex at all. And woe to the children and their parents who draw such erroneous conclusions! EXPECTING to grow up homosexual.

There are many ways to be odd as we grow up---and none of them need be "prescriptive" of same sex activity.

I see parents doing this with Asperger's syndrome, too -- my kid is an odd ball who has trouble relating socially--must be Aspergers.

And likewise with hyperactivity. "My kid drives me crazy; he must need a pill."