Gays Gone Wild

I gotta admit I’m not 100% surprised at all the violence (not being covered much on National television, btw, but good links below) that’s suddenly coming from radical homosexual groups across the nation, a reaction to the democratic process which shows that most Americans disagree with their lifestyle choices. I am surprised, however, that those homosexuals who aren’t of the violent radical bent, aren’t coming out against the violence and are instead letting them speak for the entire group.

It should be no surprise that the violence is aimed at Christian and Mormon groups, probably those most vocally opposed to the homosexual lifestyle. The vote results that have angered the gays, however, show that it isn’t just the Christians and Mormons who disagree with their choices, but the majority of the population.

I’ve said before but it’s worth saying again, I don’t hate homosexuals nor does anyone who I know and associate with. I think gays have made wrong choices, but I think that folks who use drugs make wrong choices, too. I don’t think that a druggie should be allowed to marry his bongpipe though.

All kidding aside, I’ve known and worked with those of the homosexual persuasion for many years. The first one openly admitted, I met as a college sophomore. Homosexuals make up a larger portion in the creative industries than probably any industry…okay, except maybe hair dressers.

And yet, I find it incredibly ironic that those who yell and scream and say folks like me are intolerant and bigoted are acting…well, intolerant and bigoted. And, recently, very violent. Why is it that they suddenly have absolutely no respect for the democratic process of the United States? Why is it that they think they’re better than the rest of the folks and have the right to tell the majority what to do? The United States has this process in place for a reason, and that is to serve the people. The people voted, the people spoke. Now, a very teeny tiny portion of our population is out to prove those people wrong…and they’re doing it with violence. Yeah, that wins over a lot of people.

I’ve always been of the opinion that, sure, they’ve made a dumb choice, but it’s their choice to make. But when they start trying to change laws to gain special favor (such as the so-called hate laws), then I get agitated. Why is the violence they are now committing not considered hate violence? It should go both ways.

Oh. And before I forget, my Mom reminded me that I haven’t updated the McDonald’s Boycott status. Well, the boycott is off. McDonald’s has withdrawn their support of the homosexual agenda. Many will claim it is because of the downturn in the economy. That’s okay. Whatever the “real” reason, McDonald’s has regained their senses and the boycott is off. I had a BigMac today. J

NOW, links to homosexual violence videos so you’ll know I’m not just making this stuff up! Keep in mind, some of the videos have vulgar language.

Gays “invade” a church service (news report) http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=315400

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80743

Gays grab a cross from an elderly lady, throw it on the ground and stomp on it. Also, very loud and abusive intimidation of her. http://www.kpsplocal2.com/global/video/popup/pop_player.asp?vt1=v&clipFormat=undefined&clipId1=3115942&at1=News&h1=&playerVersion=1&hostPageUrl=http%3A//www.kpsplocal2.com/global/video/popup/pop_playerLaunch.asp%3Fvt1%3Dv%26clipFormat%3Dundefined%26clipId1%3D3115942%26at1%3DNews%26h1%3D&rnd=82928749

53 year old gay man assaults husband and wife (77 and 76) and punch the husband in the face because they had a sign supporting Proposition 8 in their yard—their own private property! http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/northcounty/20081103-2312-bn03batter.html

News report of assorted hatred from gays: http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=80220

Gay militants target Christians: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Persecution/Default.aspx?id=324848

Vandalism before the vote: http://christiannewswire.com/news/758478309.html

Gays chase Christians (escorted by police) out of a gay neighborhood.

A little older. 11 Christians arrested for appearing at a gay parade. All of it caught on video!

Advertisements

7 Comments

Filed under Columns

7 responses to “Gays Gone Wild

  1. Christopher Wilson

    More often than not I enjoy reading your blogs. This one raised several issues that I believe are a little more complex than you’ve set out.

    Let me qualify everything I’m about to write with this: I am a heterosexual, happily married, conservative, born-again Christian. I believe that people who commit illegal, violent acts against others should be prosecuted for those acts. I believe that people that trespass upon the property of another to destroy/steal/deface a campaign sign should be prosecuted for that trespass and property damage. With all that said, I understand the frustration of the gay community.

    At one point in this nation’s history the majority of the citizens believed it was acceptable for members of one race of people to own people who were members of another race. Did that make it right? No.

    At one point in this nation’s history the majority of the citizens (or at least a very large, well-armed minority) believed that it was NOT acceptable for the minority to secede from the Union. Did that make it right? No.

    At one point in the history of Germany the majority of it citizens believed (or at least condoned by their silence and failure to act) it was acceptable to exterminate members of a particular religious group. Did that make it right? No.

    The will of the majority should NEVER be justification for trampling the rights of the minority.

    If we ever reached a point in this country where the majority of people believed that Christians should NOT be allowed to practice their religion, should that majority be allowed to ban the practice of Christianity by the minority? Absolutely not. Our forefathers had the foresight necessary to protect such an important right in the Bill of Rights.

    The same can be said for our freedom of speech, assembly, press, etc.

    The question then becomes “What is a right?”

    There are those that believe that the Bill of Rights is exhaustive and that Americans have those rights contained therein and no more. That’s it. There is no “right of privacy” set forth in the First Amendment therefore you don’t have one. I believe that is hogwash.

    I see the Constitution as our forefathers’ way of saying that the government is limited and the freedom of the people is the rule, rather than the exception. The Bill of Rights was the product of compromise and a way of our forefathers saying at the end of the Constitution – “Seriously. We’re not kidding.”

    Do I have the right to spend the rest of my life with the person I choose?
    Do I have the right to have sexual intercourse with any consenting adult with whom I choose?
    Do I have the right to have my spouse/partner share a legal relationship with me and our children?
    Do I have the right to have my spouse/partner share in decisions about my health/medical care when I’m not able to do so?
    Do I have the right to create a legal relationship with another adult so that person receives my Social Security benefits or pension even if that person happens to be of the same gender?

    I think that the answers to all of those questions are yes. That is freedom.

    Loving whom I choose to love. Spending my life with whom I choose. Raising children with whom I want. Caring for the person I love and knowing that they can care for me. Those are rights. Those mean something. Those should not be given to me or stripped from me based on the whims of the majority of people through the democratic process. That is what our forefathers meant by inalienable rights guaranteed to us by our Creator. Such rights are not up for debate. They are ours. Period.

    Just because the majority of people are heterosexual should not mean that the minority of people that are homosexual should be prohibited from entering into legal agreements (civil unions, gay marriage, whatever you want to call it) that give them the same rights, privileges, freedoms, etc., of heterosexual people.

    Gay people assaulting others and/or destroying the property of others because those people have exercised their right to freedom of speech is hypocritcal and intolerant. On the other hand, being on the receiving end of your rights being trampled at the whim of the majority is something that should piss you off and make you want to kick a little butt. It pissed of African-Americans. It pissed off Southerners. It pissed off Jews.

    The majority of people preventing gay people from enjoying all of the rights they should be allowed to enjoy in our country is tyranny. It’s tyranny of the majority, but tyranny nonetheless.

    You don’t have to condone another person’s words in order to believe that they should have the right to freedom of speech.

    You don’t have to subscribe to another person’s religious beliefs to believe that they should have the right to have freedom of religion.

    You don’t have to agree with everything presented to you by the media to believe that freedom of the press is important.

    You don’t have to agree with and belong to a group in order to believe that a person should have the right to freedom of assembly.

    Finally, you don’t have to condone another person’s behavior or “wrong choices” to believe that they should have the right and the freedom to engage in that behavior or make those choices. Otherwise, none of us are really free unless we agree with the majority on every, single issue.

  2. Hey Christopher, I HOPE you still enjoyed it, even if it raised issues. If nothing else, it’s caused you and I–if no one else– to consider this issue deeper. 🙂
    There is very little that I would disagree with in what you say…in fact, I agree with MOST of it. I certainly don’t believe in tyranny of the majority either. One of my favorite lines from The Patriot is when South Carolina is considering secession and Gibson’s character asks the question: “Why should I trade 1 tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants 1 mile away?” –gives me chills just typing it.
    HOWEVER, and you knew that was coming didn’t you? “THE RIGHT” and “RIGHT” are not the same thing. Just because we have “the right” to do something doesn’t make it the “right” thing to do.
    Let me use a “for instance” that doesn’t involve homosexuality. In the US currently, women have “the right” to kill their unborn babies. Just because they have that right, doesn’t make that action the “right” thing to do.
    As you’ve pointed out and I agree with you, there IS a right and a wrong. The determination of what is right and what is wrong has to come from somewhere, and as a conservative, born-again Christian, I get that determination from the Bible. Changing the “definition” of marriage as established by God and used for the last 6000 years is NOT the “right” thing to do. It MAY happen in my lifetime in the same fashion that abortion has happened…but it doesn’t make it “right.” As that same born again believer, I must stand up for what is right and what is wrong–AND, I must first vote that way. Not just this one issue, mind you, but anything in which the Bible opposes, I should oppose with my voice and my vote.
    But…just because I don’t believe that gays should marry, doesn’t mean I believe they should be beaten or discriminated against. To try to put those two ideas (not suggesting you’ve done so, but others do) is wrong. Instead, Christians should reach out to them in love, in the same way we should reach out to alcoholics, drug users, adulterers…fill in the blank.
    THANKS for taking the time to comment.

  3. Roland writes: There IS a right and wrong. The determination of right and wrong has to come from somewhere, and as a conservative, born-again Christian, I get that determination from the Bible.

    Hi, Roland. May I ask a question?

    As you note in your comment above, your opposition to gay marriage is rooted, primarily, in your religious beliefs. I can understand how your religious beliefs would play a role in preventing *you* from entering into a gay marriage.

    That said: in America, why should your adoption of certain religious beliefs limit the options of Americans who don’t share that belief?

  4. Thanks for writing Mark.
    Nearly every law on the books in the US has its origins in “religious” beliefs somewhere back down the line.
    I believe that as a Christian, my vote must fall in line with my beliefs. Therefore, I can’t support gay marriage in the same way that I can’t support murder or abortion. Of the later two, one is legal the other is not. However, my religious beliefs tell me BOTH are wrong.
    Think of it this way. EVERYONE would think it absurd for us to think of legalizing murder. Yet–why? We say “it’s wrong.” SO, we vote for laws that support this is the way we believe and therefore murder is illegal. We ALL do it (vote our conscious/morals/beliefe)…Christians, therefore, SHOULD vote that way as well. AND…should continue to do so in Christian love.

  5. Hi, Roland. Thanks for the reply.

    Unfortunately, while your reply underscores the religious nature of your objection to gay marriage, it doesn’t address my question.

    With an eye toward staying on topic (and as a way of eliminating assumptions I made earlier — sorry!), may I break things down a bit?

    – Do you respect and support the American principle of Freedom of Religion?

    – Do you oppose gay marriage for primarily religious grounds?

    – If so, then how do you reconcile your support for freedom of religion with your desire to restrict the options available to consenting adults who do not share your religious beliefs?

  6. But it DOES address your question…it is just that you can’t see it.
    I believe murder is wrong because the Bible tells us such. Therefore, I support laws against murder.
    I believe homosexuality is wrong, therefore, I cannot support laws that would encourage the practice. Homosexuals are free to practice their activity, but I cannot support them getting married and destroying the sanctity of marraige between one man and one woman.

  7. Pingback: Has it really been a year? « Roland Mann’s Ramblin’ Weblog