Gays merely want rights

  • Follow Letters

Regarding Brian Green’s Feb. 14 letter “Homosexuality politicized”:


He wrote of weak politicians compromising their morals to allow provocative homosexuals to infiltrate and compromise organizations such as the Boy Scouts of America. He argued this would wound the moral fabric of our society, and he urged other heterosexual men to stand up for what is right and to fight this homosexual assault.

As a proud father, husband and a member of the heterosexual majority of this country that supports rights for all Americans, I would like to explain exactly why I would not stand with Mr. Green but against him.

He and others have elevated the sinful status of homosexuality to something beyond adultery, incest, rape or murder. Where are the letters demanding we defend our children from adulterers? Where is the outrage for heterosexuals who have left their wives for younger girls and abandoned their children?

Where are the demands to keep out of the Scout troops those who made a vow before God to be faithful but chose instead lust and deviance? Why is it that a man who has been convicted of raping his own children is allowed to remarry in any state in the country? Call homosexuality a sin, but remember: There are many others sinners who have the same rights as you and I.

I also find Mr. Green’s assertions that homosexuals are forcing their “preference” on others and demanding special treatment to be absurd. Americans are demanding their equal rights – that’s all. They don’t care if you know they’re gay; they just want to have the same rights you do. They have no agenda; they are just like you, but they prefer their own sex. That’s all.

Finally, the false idea that being homosexual is a choice is simply a red herring. If no laws have been broken, how do genetics or choice affect the argument for equal rights? If two grown men choose to live together, they should be allowed to. If they choose to be Scoutmasters, they should be allowed. Pedophiles – often married to the opposite sex – and those who protect them in the name of preserving the dignity of their institution have broken the law. They should be prosecuted, and they should be the object of Mr. Green’s derision.

There is no infiltration. There is no conspiracy of gays. There are only sound-minded men and women demanding equal rights for all law-abiding Americans.

John Cashin

Augusta

Comments (157) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
myfather15
59559
Points
myfather15 02/22/13 - 03:44 pm
4
4
@duffstuff

Yes, I've read articles about how harmful substances effect the body and the side effects. No, I can't recite them at this moment (and I know that seems decietful) but just do your own research; you have the information superhighway at your disposal. Research it, just as I have.

Also, how many commercials do you see on TV, where lawyers are saying "If you've taken (Place just about any medication here) and you've experienced this or that, you may be entitled to compensation; call for a free consultation."

Seems every year they are coming out with new lawsuits on medication that just came out a year or two before; which at that time were considered miracle drugs to fix this or that.

What about all the side effects and cancer causing exposure to asbestos? It's not just cancer, but mother's exposed to asbestos can develop birth defects.

What about such food ingredients as MSG being consumed during pregnancy? Extremely high in sodium which can lead to many complications during pregnancy, which those complications can lead to birth defects.

What about the effects of alcohol, illegal drug consumption and prescription drug consumption during pregnancy? Many cause possible birth defects that people tend to ignore, maybe becaue their pain to to horrible to ignore.

My gosh, just google causes of birth defects and do some extensive reading. They are almost ALWAYS cause by man made substances or sustances which might be natural but MANKIND chooses to ignore the dangers and WILLFULLY place themselves in danger by using them or being around them. Bottom line; mankind is still at fault.

duffstuff
722
Points
duffstuff 02/22/13 - 03:50 pm
4
3
So you don't believe easy

So you don't believe easy peasy divorce undermines the sanctity of marriage? I certainly do, but thats my opinion.

And of course some birth defects are caused by man made factors. No one will dispute that but I doubt all are

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 02/22/13 - 04:03 pm
3
3
Lord have mercy, I feel like

Lord have mercy, I feel like I'm trying to chase a rabbit so to speak. First on one topic, ask a question and when you get an answer you don't like change the topic to something else and ask another question. Once you get an answer which has some logic to it, oops there you go, moving on to another topic.

Duff, please reference where anyone said they don't feel "easy peasy" (you're telling your age son) divorce undermines the sanctity of marriage and if you agree that some birth defects, but have no proof all are caused, by man made factors, why did you pose the question as if you were in disagreement.

WalterBradfordCannon
1521
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/22/13 - 04:03 pm
4
4
@myfather15, so, then since

@myfather15, so, then since you disfavor allowing equal rights for couples that can procreate compared to those who cannot, answer the following. Do you favor different rights for couples in which one of the couple is sterile (vasectomy, tubal ligation, hysterectomy, etc) from those in which both people can procreate? Do heterosexuals have lesser rights after the woman goes through menopause?

No. Those questions are silly, just as is your supposition that giving unequal rights to homosexuals should occur because they cannot procreate. In fact, homosexuals often have, or adopt, children using some of the same means as heterosexual couples. Research on those children finds that, by and large, they have fewer social/criminal problems than those of heterosexual parents. Homosexual couples that become parents are always prepared and planned.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 04:09 pm
4
3
This is the

This is the thread..appropriate leadership in the BSA.

This is the Scout Oath:
On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and my country and to obey the Scout Law; to help other people at all times; to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.

It should either be upheld or done away with. Parents will then be on notice. Whatever sin is being practiced, do you want your children to endorse it?

duffstuff
722
Points
duffstuff 02/22/13 - 04:14 pm
2
3
My point was, it seems

My point was, it seems protecting the "sanctity of marriage" is the reason for not wanting gays to be able to get married but easy peasy divorce also undermines the sanctity of marriage as well. (in my opinion) So why isn't there a crusade to make unmerited divorce illegal? I personally see this as a double standard. I guess you can disagree but this is how I see it.

All I said was I doubt all birth defects are caused by man made factors. I stated no certainty there but I do have a brother in the medical field. I'm sure he can clear that question up soon enough one way or another

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 04:18 pm
3
3
The problem we really have in

The problem we really have in the conversation is not new; it is not agreeing what is sin and whether it really matters or not.

Again, differing foundations.

WalterBradfordCannon
1521
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/22/13 - 04:22 pm
4
4
@YoungFred, let's go over

@YoungFred, let's go over your examples. First of all, there ARE differences in Caucasian and Negro brains (and East Asian). East Asians have slightly larger brains than Caucasians who have slightly larger brains than Negros. This translates into a small but statistically valid difference in IQ (on the order of 2-3 IQ points). These results were previously interpreted as large differences in intelligence based on race, but research since then has demonstrated that the impacts of environment (how a child is raised) has a much much larger impact on IQ - more like 20-30 IQ points within the range of reasonably common experience. So yes, race does provide some information about intelligence, but not nearly enough to be useful in evaluating a single person.

And yes, there are brain differences that relate to psychopathy/sociopathy, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's, and other conditions, and we are making progress each year in furthering our understanding. In the case of Simon LeVay, the INAH3 nucleus is part of the SDN cluster of neurons. This brain area is phylogenetically old (rats have it too) and research in many species has demonostrated a systematic relation between this specific part of the brain and sexually oriented behaviors. It was not just some nucleus that LeVay pulled out of a hat like a rabbit. It is the specific region in the SDN cluster that can most easily tell you if the brain is sexually oriented towards males or females. And that is not the only evidence that sexual orientation is determined prenatally - just one piece of it.

Again, the great thing about science is that its findings are true whether you believe them or not. And the strong consensus of scientists working in the field of sexual orientation is that the vast majority of the biological underpinnings are occurring prenatally.

Young Fred
25124
Points
Young Fred 02/22/13 - 04:26 pm
5
2
Giant can't hide from his own subconscious

“Someday, Georgia will be pulled, kicking and screaming into the next century. In Georgia's case, that would be the 19th.”

Giant, I do believe your subconscious got the better of you. “Pulled” suggest going backwards. As in, “a majority in Georgia society has set it’s standards and we’re not going to let a fanatical, name-calling, minority pull us back”.

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 02/22/13 - 04:28 pm
4
3
Well duff to rest your

Well duff to rest your mind....I am as equally against unmerited divorce as I am against homosexual marriage. Unmerited means not deserved and if a divorce is not deserved then it means there are no grounds to grant it so using the term "unmerited divorce" is not logical.

Because we live in a sinful world there will always be marriages that should never taken place and because of that fact, there will always be divorce. May not be right in the eyes of God but then again so much we humans do falls into that category.

WalterBradfordCannon
1521
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/22/13 - 04:28 pm
4
3
@Willow Bailey, who defines

@Willow Bailey, who defines what morally straight means? The Boy Scouts of America accepts all religions, including wiccans, Hindus, and Buddhists. Maybe they chose to accept the definition of morally straight in the Episcopal, Lutheran, Anglican or Presbyterian Churches (which accept monogamous same sex relationships). Or maybe they decided to use their common sense after they found outstanding scout leadership was provided by some adults who also happened to be homosexuals but kept that aspect of their lives their own business. Do you, or would you, decide to kick out someone who had devoted decades of their life to furthering scouting goals, someone who provided outstanding leadership and service, because it was discovered they were homosexual? That has happened, and if the BSA made a change, it would not happen again. They could kick people out for actions the rest of scouting deemed morally unfit instead.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 04:38 pm
5
3
Who defines what is morally

Who defines what is morally straight Mr. Cannon for me is God. The One God, the True God, the Creator and Sustainer of the Universe.

Forget homosexuals for a moment. What if it were discovered they were a bank robber, but other than that small problem, they had excellent leadership skills and could rub two sticks together until they sparked liked nobody's business?

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 04:42 pm
5
3
ICL, we should also remember

ICL, we should also remember that not every marriage is joined together by God. God's been left out of the picture many times; hence the failure of it.

I'm sure you will agree with me, that too many misunderstand the purpose of marriage to begin with.

Young Fred
25124
Points
Young Fred 02/22/13 - 04:49 pm
5
3
Walter, your “grasping” my

Walter, your “grasping” my man! Just as LeVay was grasping. Simon LeVay’s work was considered groundbreaking precisely because he set out to confirm preconceived notions. His peers called it “groundbreaking” because they had a script they wished confirmed. With preconceived notions comes biases. Biases should be combated in scientific research, not embraced.

The soft sciences in the not so distant past considered homosexuality as not just an abonormality, but a mental, let’s say “shortcoming”. Do you suppose totally neutral scientific observations caused a reversal of their views? Why no, progressives from the academic, liberal arts community convinced scientist they should rethink their views. This in itself is not a bad thing, except that the soft sciences went into studies fully embracing biases and seeking to come to a predetermined conclusion.

WalterBradfordCannon
1521
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/22/13 - 05:09 pm
2
4
Simon LeVay did over 25 years

Simon LeVay did over 25 years of groundbreaking neuroanatomical work prior to his work on INAH3. His scientific reputation was, and is, impeccable. His work on INAH3 is freely available online so that you may check it for "confirmation bias."

And again, as you accusing soft sciences of swaying in the wind, science does not care. You do not have to believe in it for its findings to be true.

WalterBradfordCannon
1521
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/22/13 - 05:19 pm
2
5
@WillowBailey, robbing a bank

@WillowBailey, robbing a bank is a crime with victims. Being gay is neither a crime, nor does it have anything that could be construed as a "victim." The analogy is wanting.

As to the One God, True God, defining your morality. If you were raised in the Episcopal Church, as I was, the One, True, God is not horribly concerned with your sexual orientation. The same is true in the Presbyterian Church. I was raised in the Episcopal Church. Is your God different from mine, or are the sinners interpreting his word different? As you may or may not know, Jesus was notably silent on issues relating to homosexuality, at least as is written in the gospels. In the Old Testament homosexuality was equated to adultery in its offense/sin. However, there is one thing the church can learn from Buddhism. The Dalai Lama once told me (and many others) that Buddhism is not opposed to scientific truth. If scientific evidence converges that some principle in Buddhism is wrong, he will change Buddhism, because you cannot change science. As a human society, we learn things over centuries and millenia through application of the scientific method. We learn about heliocentrism, and evolution, and if our religion becomes inconsistent with these scientific findings, then our religion becomes irrelevant. If religious figures state their opposition to these scientific findings, then any well read, logical thinker will know that those religious figures are knowingly stating falsehoods to advance their agenda. There has been an enormous accumulation of evidence on the biological origins of homosexuality in the last 100 years, and it directly challenges the Old Testament (as well as Acts) to either change or be inconsistent with science. The Episcopalian and Presbyterian Churches change for this reason.

Young Fred
25124
Points
Young Fred 02/22/13 - 05:50 pm
4
4
Just as a small

Just as a small example….LeVay states: “ It is the specific region in the SDN cluster that can most easily tell you if the brain is sexually oriented towards males or females”.

He could have also postulated "this specific region could “most easily tell you if the brain is” oriented towards INSECURITY. But since LeVay was embracing his and his collegue’s biases, they went with what they were specifically “looking” for.

Society in turn, would allow a young person to misenterpert that insecurity, and rather than do the hard thing, face it and grow stronger, they’re allowed to do the easy thing and “swing”.

allhans
25543
Points
allhans 02/22/13 - 05:36 pm
6
3
It seems there is no limit to

It seems there is no limit to "rights" anymore. If you want it, then it must be right?? what a crock...

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 05:40 pm
5
3
Mr. Cannon, the example of

Mr. Cannon, the example of the robber vs. the homosexual are both sins according to God, the same ONE of the Scout Oath.
One can insert any sin they choose.

The Bible, God's Holy Word, has quite a bit to say about all sin, particularly sexual sin. You may want to spend some time researching that in your quiet time with the Lord.

It is very sad that the churches you mentioned, have and are changing to concur with the world instead of lining up with God, who is Lord over all of the universe. Your statement brings to mind what the Reverand Billy Graham said about a huge percentage of the church being unsaved.

However, what ANY sinful man does or states, regardless of his social, educational, political or religious standing, does not change the Word of God.

And like you say, sir, whether you believe that or not, does not change the truth.

InChristLove
22491
Points
InChristLove 02/22/13 - 05:45 pm
4
3
Willow, you have been on

Willow, you have been on point with every comment and I must agree with you.

Young Fred
25124
Points
Young Fred 02/22/13 - 05:53 pm
4
4
I couldn’t agree more

I couldn’t agree more allhans!

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 05:57 pm
5
3
@ WalterCannon ..."There has

@ WalterCannon ..."There has been an enormous accumulation of evidence on the biological origins of homosexuality in the last 100 years, and it directly challenges the Old Testament (as well as Acts) to either change or be inconsistent with science. The Episcopalian and Presbyterian Churches change for this reason."

I disagree with you as to the motivation of these changes. Sexual Sin is the SECRET SIN of the church. THE OLD RULE is COVER THAT STUFF UP. The churches who are in debt up to their eyeballs see no other way out of endorsing sexual sins if they are to continue their business of BIG buildings, BIG programs, BIG staffs, and BIG collections. WHO IS SOUL WINNING in the midst of THIS MESS?!? WHO IS DISCIPLING OTHERS IN CHRIST?

THE NEW RULE: Admit it, confess it, repent from it, get healing from it, start a ministry in it....so that your life and others can be CHANGED BY IT!!!

THAT IS THE GOSPEL OF JESUS CHRIST, PEOPLE!!!

Little Lamb
55378
Points
Little Lamb 02/22/13 - 05:58 pm
3
3
Sanctity 2

duffstuff posted:

So you're saying morality or making laws that enforce "the moral sanctity of marriage" (or its ideals anyway) has nothing to do with why it [i.e., same-sex marriage] should be illegal? So it's not a religiously moral argument then?

It's not a religiously moral argument. State government should not get into religiously moral arguments.

Little Lamb
55378
Points
Little Lamb 02/22/13 - 06:01 pm
4
3
Defining

WalterBradfordCannon posted:

Who defines what morally straight means?

With regard to the Boy Scout oath, the Boy Scouts of America organization gets to define what morally straight means.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 06:08 pm
3
3
I agree with you LL. Any

I agree with you LL. Any organization defines their values and it is up to us whether or not we participate in it. I believe they should be CLEAR about it, though. If the intention is to be godless then don't hide behind or use God's name for marketing purposes.

THE OLD RULE...It's all about... HOW WE APPEAR.
THE NEW RULE...It's all about... WHO WE TRULY ARE.

Willow Bailey
20619
Points
Willow Bailey 02/22/13 - 06:42 pm
2
2
Marriage and sex are gifts

Marriage and sex are gifts from God. Each and everyone of us are gifts from God. If we put our eyes on the Creator instead of the creation, we will see and understand God's purpose for our lives. He love us and wants the best for us, just as we want the best for our children.

myfather15
59559
Points
myfather15 02/22/13 - 06:45 pm
3
4
Nice irrational argument

Mr. Cannon says; "Do you favor different rights for couples in which one of the couple is sterile (vasectomy, tubal ligation, hysterectomy, etc) from those in which both people can procreate? Do heterosexuals have lesser rights after the woman goes through menopause?"

Again, irrational because you're comparing persons born with the ability to conceive and bare children, but through health problems and NATURE (menopauase), they are unable to do so, to people who at birth are uncapable of natural procreation.

A male person is UNCAPABLE of EVER conceiving a child, especially from another male. A FEMALE is uncapable of conceiving a child from another female, PERIOD; end of debate. IT CAN'T POSSIBLY HAPPEN.

So it's ridiculous to compare the two, using any rational logic; only leftist rhetoric.

Mr. Cannon, you have nice word play, maybe to someone who doesn't pay attention.

Another line from you; " In fact, homosexuals often HAVE, or adopt, children using some of the same means as heterosexual couples.

WRONG; They do not HAVE children using the some of the same means as hetrosexual couples, because the don't HAVE children, they ADOPT; THATS IT!! But nice try with the word play. It sounded nice, if your a liberal thinker.

Then you stated; "Research on those children finds that, by and large, they have fewer social/criminal problems than those of heterosexual parents. Homosexual couples that become parents are always prepared and planned."

This is just an outright LIE. Show where you got this information, please. I've read on this and many have shown they are on equal scale as hetrosexual couples, but I've NEVER seen one that said those children have fewer social/criminal problems. Just liberal rhetoric to press your agenda. Provide the EXACT reference for this "study"!!

Then you say homosexual couples that become parents are ALWAYS prepared, as if there is no such thing as an irresponsible gay human being. This is ridiculous and you just lost any credibility with anyone that possesses the slightest amount of common sense. Why? Because anyone with the slightest shred of common sense knows there are irresponsible individuals and couples in EVERY facet of society. Every race and sex has irresponsible people and to attempt to potray gays as completely void of irresponsibility, is ridiculous.

harley_52
32204
Points
harley_52 02/22/13 - 07:01 pm
5
4
"I've read on this and many have shown....

....they are on equal scale as hetrosexual couples"

I doubt that's true, but I'd love to see the data. I'm not questioning that you saw it, but rather that it's not a credible study.

palmetto1008
9782
Points
palmetto1008 02/22/13 - 07:38 pm
2
6
I, too, reject any study that
Unpublished

I, too, reject any study that is inconsistent with what I believe to be true. It's not credible.

myfather15
59559
Points
myfather15 02/22/13 - 08:24 pm
1
3
@palmetto

Instead of being sarcastic, why not simply provide the source of the "study" that WE may do our own research and form our own opinions of what to believe and not believe? Is that not relatively simple?

Heres an idea, I'll do it for you and before you quetion the source, its a left wing mega-leader Huffington Post.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/16/gay-parents-better-than-straigh...

Now, the ONLY thing they say gay parents are better at is basically PREPERATION because they CHOSE to be parents, unlike a lot of hetrosexual couples that it's a surprise to them. Now, why would it be a surprise to them? Because when hetrosexual couples have intercourse, there is ALWAYS the possibility of conception, unlike gay couples where there is NEVER the possibility of conception. Just another example to show homosexuality is NOT natural.

Pay attention to the 5th paragraph; but I will copy part of it. Remember, this is a EXTREME left wing website who chooses their words very carefully, just as Mr. Cannon did.

"And while research indicates that kids of gay parents show FEW differences in achievement, mental health, SOCIAL FUNCTIONING and other measures, these kids may have the advantage of open-mindedness, tolerance and role models for equitable relationships, according to some research."

Now thats according to "Some research", of who the author is, I don't know. But even the EXTREME left wings Huffington post disagrees with Mr. Cannon's ridiculous statement. There is virtually no difference in their social functioning and CRIMINAL behavior, unlike he spouted earlier.

Actually, if you read on down to the "good parenting section" it says "Research has shown that the kids of same-sex couples — both adopted and biological kids — FARE NO WORSE than the kids of straight couples on mental health, social functioning, school performance and a variety of other life-success measures."

Huh? Wait, I thought they outpreformed hetrosexual children?

Back to Top
loading...
Search Augusta jobs