Pro-gay letter fell flat

  • Follow Letters

The letter “Gays merely want rights” by John Cashin (Feb. 22) was the lamest attempt to be cool and progressive that I have ever seen.

When did unnatural sex become a civil right? Funk & Wagnalls defines unnatural as “contrary to the laws of nature.” Homosexuality rarely occurs in the natural world because snakes know better, monkeys know better, and birds, fish, lizards and even insects know better.

Mr. Cashin states that gays have no agenda. That is the second-most preposterous statement in his letter. His most ridiculous statement is that no laws have been broken. A Georgia law criminalizes sodomy. Sheriffs’ deputies have a legal obligation to arrest any person they witness engaged in any act of sodomy.

He asks why we don’t write letters protesting rape, murder or incest. The answer? We don’t have to. Society has the good sense to arrest and jail those people.

He says “They just want their rights.” I guess he means civil rights, which are described by Funk & Wagnalls as private and nonpolitical. Do us all a favor and keep your sexual preferences private and nonpolitical.

By one reliable estimate, more than 97 percent of U.S. citizens are heterosexual. Why do we have to cater to the 3 percent? After years of research and billions of dollars spent, geneticists are unable to find a gene that causes people to be homosexual. Until we know that a person can be genetically predisposed to be homosexual, it remains a matter of choice.

Today’s gay rights movement may be the first time in history that such a small group of people have been so vocal, so adamant and so public to promote a sexual activity. The 97 percent have much more important things to attend to, such as God, family, jobs, food, clothes and shelter.

Comments (195) 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.
burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 04:43 pm
3
6
Did someone say marriage was

Did someone say marriage was Christian? I certainly didn't. Pretty sure marriage was around LONG before Christ.
-------
Yes, and that pre-Christian history of marriage included legal recognition of same-sex couples.

Here are some sources:

Alderson, Kevin; Lahey, Kathleen A. (2004). Same-Sex Marriage: The Personal and the Political. Insomniac Press. p. 16. ISBN 978-1-894663-63-2.

Hinsch, Bret (1990). Passions of the Cut Sleeve: The Male Homosexual Tradition in China. Reed Business Information, Inc.. ISBN 0-520-07869-1.

The historical tradition of marriage is not strictly heterosexual; but the Christian definition espoused in these forums is.

"Whether the two worship the God who created the religious sacrament is another matter but they are sill following the religious sacrament ordained by God."

Human marriage far predates the biblical sacrament. The mere fact of two people getting married is no more a sacrament than merely drinking wine is a sacrament.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 04:50 pm
7
2
Sorry Burninater, since God

Sorry Burninater, since God created the earth and man, and our religious text states in Genesis 2, just after he created male and female, verses 24 & 25 state "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.” which was when God ordained the first marriage I'd say marriage has been around since the begining of time.

burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 04:52 pm
2
5
I should clarify my last

I should clarify my last post: legal unions that are now called marriage have existed into pre-history.

However, the word "marriage" that everyone is so serious about in fact POST-DATES Christianity -- it is dated back to the mid-1200's.

burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 05:02 pm
3
6
Come now ICL, enough of the

Come now ICL, enough of the "this is what it means because I say it's what it means".

"Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh. And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”

This passage says NOTHING of marriage. It appears to be literally and simply a description of sexual intercourse. You want to decide it's a description of marriage? Great! That's not what it says though.

harley_52
23452
Points
harley_52 02/26/13 - 05:08 pm
5
3
An Excellent Letter....

...and I agree wholeheartedly with Mr. Sullivent. In fact, this letter states my position to a "T."

The only other thing I have to say about it is that I am thrilled I didn't waste another day arguing the same old baloney with the same old baloney lovers.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 02/26/13 - 05:19 pm
3
2
Harley

You're right, these arguments do get tiresome. I guess I just can't sit back and allow only the other side to be heard. I know I'm probably wasting my time on here, but so be it.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 05:20 pm
5
3
burn, although this scripture

burn, although this scripture does not use the word "marriage" according to the Scriptures God made man and then God made the woman, and subsequently “He brought her to the man” (Gen. 2:22); thus, a covenant or "marriage" is ordained by God and was initiated by Him at the time of creation. Properly understood, therefore, marriage is Theistic: it is of God not man. Through scripture He gives us the roles of husbands and the role of wives and also references marriage between husband and wife to that of Himself and the Church.

Your opinion can be that the first union between man and his helpmate (his wife) was nothing more than a sex act but then I wouldn't expect anything different from someone who does not understand The Word.

burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 05:35 pm
3
6
ICL, I understand that the

ICL, I understand that the specific meanings of Scripture have been, and continue to be, debated by intelligent men and women for thousands of years. These disagreements on meaning are the source of the disparate traditions and denominations currently extant.

I understand the immense pride that accompanies the belief that one has the single correct interpretation of Scripture, despite centuries upon centuries of dispute by intelligent people without resolution.

I understand your proclamation of my ignorance stems from that position of pride and do not take umbrage with it.

I will reiterate, however, that the belief that one has the single correct understanding of a body of work debated for millennia is impossible to treat seriously.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 05:37 pm
5
3
I suppose burn, that all the

I suppose burn, that all the other scriptures relating to husbands and wives and how they train up their children in Godly manners and how a husband is suppose to treat his wife and how the wife should honor the husband has nothing to do with marriage, it's just a sex act. Remove the Godly value of an ordained union and I guess you can justify anything you like.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 02/26/13 - 05:40 pm
3
4
I guess thats the bottom

I guess thats the bottom line; they don't believe this Country was founded on Judeo-Christian philosphy, but the majority do. There is MUCH evidence to prove this, but they refuse to listen; continuing to spout non-sense. The VAST majority of our laws (even ones they don't realize) are based upon the Bible. Even such laws as bankruptcy are based upon Biblical scripture, but you won't see them raising sand about that. This Country WAS indeed founded on Christian principals. We certainly weren't founded on Buddhist philosophy, or Islamic.

Please, don't waste my time and yours by posting about the letters written from Thomas Jefferson about seperation of church and state, or John Adams letter to a muslim Country, saying we aren't founded on Christianity. I'll choose to believe letters which have been written to say we have, including from those same men and other founding fathers, including the wording of our own laws. The list of which are too expansive to list, so do your own homework, they are there.

Yes, this Country was founded on Christian principals; and YES those principals are slowing being eroded. We can not deny this is happening, because we are losing more and more battles. But, the simple fact is that we were warned that the "Falling away" was coming, and it's now here, full force. It's hard to stomach, but they shall see with their own two eyes very soon, just how wrong they were. He DOES exist, He IS our Savior, and he shall save us in more ways than we can count.

This IS the last Stand spoken off, there is no new land for people to flee from this oppression. Christians have fled from the face of oppression for centuries and God has paved that way for them. Everwhere they've fled, oppressive communism has followed and consumed like a disease. They only wanted a place to worship and live freely and to have a Christian nation, but just as then; they just won't leave us alone. He brought us to this land of "In God we Trust" and it has now become "In MAN we Trust" or better said at this moment "In Obama We Trust". But, there is no new land to flee too, we now know that; this is the last stand. The battlefield is being staged; God be with those who love Him, give them strength to stand strong. Strength and Honor!! Stand strong!!

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 05:52 pm
5
2
Burn, and I will reiterate,

Burn, and I will reiterate, If you believe in Christ, and If you believe in His Word, you can know and understand the correct meaning of the Word of God. Scripture tells us over and over again.

1 Timothy 2:4 - God desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. God does not want some to understand, but others are incapable. He wants all to know the truth.

Problem is, some do not want to submit to a Holy God and understand.

2 Timothy 3:15-17 - The Scriptures were revealed by God to teach and instruct us in righteousness and provide us to all good works.

These words are just not black ink on white paper, they are instructions on how a child of God is suppose to live their life.

1 Corinthians 2:12,13 - Inspired men received God's Spirit so they could know what God revealed and could speak them in words which the Holy Spirit taught them.

Matthew 10:19,20 - Inspired men did not have to worry about how or what to speak, because it would be given them what to speak. It was not them speaking but the Spirit of the Father speaking in them. If God gave the message to inspired men so we can know God's will, then He must have intended to give an understandable message.

Ephesians 5:17 - Do not be unwise, but understand what the will of the Lord is. Does a just, loving, gracious God require what is impossible?

So, please tell us again how we can't possibly understand God's Word when His Word tells us over and over again that we can?

And it is not a matter of "pride" that I boast in the Lord or proclaim that your ignorance stems from that pride. I sincerely believe that you believe you are correct and your spiritual ignorance comes from nothing else but a lack of the Holy Spirit, that is all. It is correctable but only by submitting yourself to the Lord which for some reason I highly doubt will occur without some major Jesus movement. I can only continue to pray it so.

burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 05:56 pm
3
5
I suppose burn, that all the

I suppose burn, that all the other scriptures relating to husbands and wives and how they train up their children in Godly manners and how a husband is suppose to treat his wife and how the wife should honor the husband has nothing to do with marriage, it's just a sex act.
-------
That is not at all what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that your presumption that the passage you quote from Genesis is necessarily referencing all other Scriptural passages relating to marriage is purely presumption. You have chosen to interpret that passage in a specific way, to support a specific interpretation of Scripture (namely, that your specific Christian tradition was always implicit in Scripture, even prior to the appearance of Christ and the writing of the New Testament).

There is nothing wrong with maintaining a belief tradition, and interpreting Scripture accordingly. It is prideful, however, to consequently believe that your belief system is the proper interpretation of Scripture, and that those who do not share that interpretation lack understanding.

burninater
9606
Points
burninater 02/26/13 - 06:01 pm
3
5
So, please tell us again how

So, please tell us again how we can't possibly understand God's Word when His Word tells us over and over again that we can?
-----
ICL, please specify where in the Scripture you quote that A) there is a single correct interpretation of the Word of God, and B) the interpretation of ICL is that single correct interpretation.

I didn't say we couldn't understand it. I said the belief that there is only one possible understanding, and that it is one's personal understanding, is prideful. Also, as I point to above, it is not a position supported by Scripture.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 06:12 pm
4
1
Burn, original scripture

Burn, original scripture calls the wife a "help meet" which means "at the side of, or mate." A rib was taken from the man to create the woman and was given to the man and they were as of one. Whether you view this union as marriage or not is up to you but just because you don't agree does not mean my interpretation is incorrect.

As always, discussions with you have been cordial if not interesting but as always comes to a dead end and non productive. I do believe if you would research some valid religious sites on the meaning in Genesis 2 you will soon discover that my interpretation is not prideful but accurrate. If you choose to believe otherwise, as always it is your choice. Enjoy the rest of your day.

harley_52
23452
Points
harley_52 02/26/13 - 06:29 pm
3
1
" I know I'm probably wasting my time on here....

.... but so be it."

Myfather15, I know what you mean. I'm the same way on many of these topics. I've been in here for a couple of years now and what I find is that the same people argue the same topics, stating the same positions, over and over again. If anybody is under the misconception that the brilliance of their arguments is going to change anybody's mind they are sorely mistaken.

I've probably argued this one more than any other on here. In fact, my first entry onto these boards was at the time of the "gay pride" celebration two years ago. I've found that when the issue is homosexuality, people come out of the woodwork to argue the "pro" position and whenever someone on the other side says something they don't like they turn them in to the censors.

In my very first discussion I was kicked off the board and threatened with banishment and I didn't say anything worse than anybody who was arguing the "pro" position.

dahreese
4717
Points
dahreese 02/26/13 - 06:37 pm
1
5
@Mr. Sullivent
Unpublished

"Until we know that a person can be genetically predisposed to be homosexual, it remains a matter of choice."

I am the father of three straight children and two homosexual children - all determined by genetics.

Choice had nothing to do with it.

But, I'd be willing to read on here your account of your making a 'where', 'when' and 'how' conscious decision to "decide" whether you wanted to be homosexual nor not.

You are who you are and you couldn't change that even if you wanted to.

You could 'choose' to have a homosexual affair, but that wouldn't 'change' you into a homosexual.

A homosexual could chose to have a 'straight' affair, but that would not change them into being 'straight.'

As to the 3%, no one knows for certain just how many homosexual there are in this country.

But there are millions. Not just a few thousand.

Give or take a year, around 1981/82, the Presbyterian Church did a three year study of human sexuality (which covered homosexuality, teen sex, sex among older unmarried adults, and sexual activity among the handicapped) and it was determined then that there were not less than 20 million homosexual people AT THAT time.

Most likely there are millions more today.

palmetto1008
9782
Points
palmetto1008 02/26/13 - 07:05 pm
2
3
REAL Christians don't need to
Unpublished

REAL Christians don't need to twist and turn scripture to fit their political agenda.

RMSHEFF
16001
Points
RMSHEFF 02/26/13 - 07:35 pm
4
1
palmetto1008

is correct, the Word of God is crystal clear on this subject and speaks for itself.

carcraft
25944
Points
carcraft 02/26/13 - 08:09 pm
3
1
I have two sons and a

I have two sons and a daughter. My youngest son questioned his sexual orientation. I laughed at him because his choice in "literature " was definitely heterosexual. I was talking to a sexual psychologist and she told me that this sexual questioning was rare in the past but common today. I am not surprised that people profess to be gay more out of confusion than orientation. My sister in law used to go out with "gays " and some how they would become aroused with her. I certainly don't understand gay orientation but neither does science. No gene, no differance in maternal hormones etc during pregnancy. Most theory now is conjecture! And don't forget that correlation does not prove cause.

yesthatjohn
15
Points
yesthatjohn 02/26/13 - 08:14 pm
0
0
not really a "response"

"The letter “Gays merely want rights” by John Cashin (Feb. 22) was the lamest attempt to be cool and progressive that I have ever seen."
-This is pretty funny actually, doesn't pertain to anything in my letter but very funny.

"When did unnatural sex become a civil right? Funk & Wagnalls defines unnatural as “contrary to the laws of nature.” Homosexuality rarely occurs in the natural world because snakes know better, monkeys know better, and birds, fish, lizards and even insects know better."
-Whether you consider it natural or unnatural, two people who spend their lives together should be able to visit each other in the hospital as a family and get all of the other rights granted married couples. Our opinions of nature do not have any place in the argument, which is why I left them out of my letter.

"Mr. Cashin states that gays have no agenda. That is the second-most preposterous statement in his letter."
- I know several homosexuals and their only goal is to be given the same legal rights as everyone else. If that's an “agenda” then I'm wrong but the agenda I was referring to was the conspiratorial, systematic infiltration of groups like the BSA, which Mr. Green referred to in his letter.

“His most ridiculous statement is that no laws have been broken. A Georgia law criminalizes sodomy. Sheriffs’ deputies have a legal obligation to arrest any person they witness engaged in any act of sodomy.”
- This law was repealed by the Georgia Supreme Court in 1998.

“He asks why we don’t write letters protesting rape, murder or incest. The answer? We don’t have to. Society has the good sense to arrest and jail those people.”
- Actually, one of the things that most outraged about Mr. Green's letter was precisely our society's silence on issues like those at the Boy Scouts, Penn State and within the Catholic Church. I would say that our society is doing a pretty horrible job at arresting and jailing those people. Far too often these people are being covered up for and protected. It is outrageous and deserving of far more attention than gay rights.

“He says “They just want their rights.” I guess he means civil rights, which are described by Funk & Wagnalls as private and nonpolitical. Do us all a favor and keep your sexual preferences private and nonpolitical.”
- Thank you. Amen. Keep your sexual preferences out of the debate. Let people marry other people, don't let sexuality play into it at all. I completely agree with this.

“By one reliable estimate, more than 97 percent of U.S. citizens are heterosexual. Why do we have to cater to the 3 percent?”
- Shocking isn't it? Only 3 percent. Several other credible estimates are actually lower than that. Even if the number was .0003 percent I would argue that while we should not cater to them, we should not deny them the same rights as others. I made no mention of the size of the homosexual population in this country in my letter so I'm not sure what this was in response to.

“After years of research and billions of dollars spent, geneticists are unable to find a gene that causes people to be homosexual. Until we know that a person can be genetically predisposed to be homosexual, it remains a matter of choice.”
- So, as I said in my letter, this is a red herring, a contentious point meant to derail the actual argument that does not actually having any bearing on that argument. Even if it is a choice, how does that impact the argument? If two women chose to live together and marry they should be allowed to. If they aren't then they can't even see each others medical records or get coverage under spousal medical benefits.

“Today’s gay rights movement may be the first time in history that such a small group of people have been so vocal, so adamant and so public to promote a sexual activity. The 97 percent have much more important things to attend to, such as God, family, jobs, food, clothes and shelter.”
- Homosexuals actually attend to those things as well. You work with them, you probably have some in your family. 3 out of every 100 people you meet or know are homosexual. They are not promoting their sexuality, you probably have no idea who they are. As I said in my letter, they are just asking for the equal rights.

WalterBradfordCannon
1452
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/26/13 - 08:20 pm
1
4
InChristLove, you posted the

InChristLove, you posted the opinion of one person. He notes there is a consensus that there is SOME genetic contribution to homosexuality, and that there is further evidence that prenatal androgen exposure contributes to sexual orientation, then says he doesn't know. I posted a thorough review of all available evidence that says the same thing, and a position statement by professional psychiatrists that says the same thing. It is very clear many, if not most, homosexuals are born that way. In contrast to the clear evidence of some genetic involvement, and some influence of prenatal androgens, there is absolutely zero, zilch, nada evidence of any postnatal influences on sexual orientation, and absolutely no evidence that the majority of homosexuals could undergo any treatment whatsoever that could change their sexual orientation. There is no evidence that how you raise a child has any impact on their sexual orientation. The only existing evidence is prenatal and genetic. The great thing about science is that it is true whether YOU believe it or not.

InChristLove
22473
Points
InChristLove 02/26/13 - 08:32 pm
4
1
"It is very clear many, if

"It is very clear many, if not most, homosexuals are born that way. "

If it was very clear, we wouldn't be having these discussions.

HenryWalker3rd
2393
Points
HenryWalker3rd 02/26/13 - 08:35 pm
2
2
Time not wasted.
Unpublished

Many people read the comments, believe it or not.
Some learn from them, believe it or not.
I have learned and changed, believe it or not.
My view on various topics has evolved.

carcraft
25944
Points
carcraft 02/26/13 - 08:35 pm
2
1
A study that raises some questions

http://www.mygenes.co.nz/Change.htm This study seems to indicate that young people change their sexual orientation and the number that remain exclusively homosexual decrease young people mature. This would seem to indicate that a homosexual orientation isn't as set in stone as has been expressed in some of the arguments on this board. This should raise flags about being forceful in saying that young people, if they have a homosexual orientation can’t change! It also lends credence to the argument that homosexual behavior may be a choice.

WalterBradfordCannon
1452
Points
WalterBradfordCannon 02/26/13 - 08:53 pm
2
1
carcraft, I don't think

carcraft, I don't think anyone would question that there are people who do change in their stated sexual orientation. This is quite a different statement from saying homosexuality is a "choice" for most people. An equally acceptable hypothesis is that adolescents are in the process of becoming firmly in touch with their sexual preference (a hypothesis for which much other evidence exists). None of this changes the complete lack of any evidence that any treatment could cause adults (or children) to change sexual orientation. If you are a parent, there is nothing you can do to change your child's sexual preference, nor was anything you did in raising them causal. The only evidence for things that do impact sexual preference are prenatal exposure to androgens and genetic factors.

carcraft
25944
Points
carcraft 02/26/13 - 09:00 pm
2
1
I think the Spartans would

I think the Spartans would present a strong arguement against your statement! The Greeks refereed to it as being "Spartanized "

RMSHEFF
16001
Points
RMSHEFF 02/26/13 - 09:15 pm
2
1
ICL

ICL, you are correct, it is not settled science at all. Whether there is "genetic involvement" or not is irrelevant because it is ultimately a choice to engage in any sexual behavior. Just as it is in adultery or any other sinful activity. Alcoholism is also thought to have a genetic component but the alcoholic chooses to drink.

RMSHEFF
16001
Points
RMSHEFF 02/26/13 - 09:22 pm
2
1
Our sin nature is genetic

Our sin nature is genetic. We all inherited our sin nature from Adam about 6000 years ago after the fall of man. Sin takes many forms and is displayed a little differently in each person. The real problem is when we say we have no sin.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 02/26/13 - 09:50 pm
1
1
Just heard about the new

Just heard about the new equality push; transgender equality. Massachusetts just passed legislation allowing schools and TEACHERS to allow and encourage their students to change their gender during school hours. Also allowing them to dress in clothing of the other gender, play games as the other gender. If you don't believe me, just google and you'll find it.

Wow, this is absolutely INSANE. And our secular leftists "friends" (and I use that term very loosely) think this is swell; just as Alan Colmes does. People, we are losing this Country to complete insanity and if we don't wake our friends up SOON, it will be too late.

Just as with the argument on this thread; this movement WOULD NOT stop with legalized gay marriage. They would continue to PUSH and PUSH; continuing to indoctrinate our children, until THEY are the majority, then God help those traditional Americans.

Honor, Intregrity, Decency and Truth are about to be things of the past in this Country. God please help us, because no one else can. And I certainly BLAME the majority of my own friends. I'm probably the only person I know that is ACTIVE in openly fighting the downfall of this Country. The vast majority of my friends, if not ALL of them; just live life not caring about whats going on in the world, especially politics. Most of them won't even engage in a discussion about politics because they don't know anything about it or if they do, they don't want to talk about it. This is EXACTLY what the secular left counts on. They LOVE, LOVE, LOVE the fact that traditional Americans are detach themselves from politics.

These people are at fault, almost as much as the extreme leftists. Because they don't open their mouths.

myfather15
55706
Points
myfather15 02/26/13 - 10:03 pm
1
1
@Burninator

If a person believes there exists a SINGLE GOD, then they MUST believe there is a single truth. One would think if there is only one God, He would get his message out to the people, wouldn't He? That would make sense wouldn't it? The truth is, MEN like to twist and turn God's word, just to fit their agenda.

For example; when people say Christ never taught against homosexuality. Although, when Christ was asked about MANY topics, he didn't answer directly, but stated "Have ye not read?" Because he KNEW the answer to the question was in the old testament, and HE wanted people to READ it on their own. The WORD answers the questions, people will just believe whatever they CHOOSE to believe.

Finally, the SINGLE TRUTH is out there; it's just not taught in the VAST majority of Churches, or anywhere else or that matter. Instead, we are taught such things as "The earth is 6000-9000 years old, which is RIDICULOUS and NOT in the Bible. We are also taught that Eve, eat an apple and gave to her husband and he did eat, another LIE. We aren't told where Cain got his wife. We aren't told when the dinosaurs actually existed. Believe it or not, the Bible speaks of "Times of Old" and actually speaks of an entire dispensation of time which was before now. This was when Satan's rebellion occured; and Satan was already on God's bad side in the Garden of Eden, so that should be a clue of when this happened. BUT, we certainly aren't told ANYTHING about this in Church; as a matter of fact, I fully expect other Christians on here to come after me for these very statements.

Bottom line is, the TRUTH is out there; You just have to SEARCH THE SCRIPTURES and most importantly, PRAY TO HIM to be brought to the truth. TRUST IN GOD, NOT IN MEN!!

Back to Top

Search Augusta jobs