Why doesn't anyone ever ask about how a person becomes gay? Too many just assume that this is an uncontrollable orientation that has become equal to one's race,ethnicity or gender (born with,innate and unchangeable)! You that accept this false idea have been brainwashed by homosexuals who have carefully and very quietly invaded our legal system by including the BEHAVIOR (sexual orientation) as a characterization that must be added on to every "do not discriminate" law of every stripe! There is no simple, single CAUSE for sexual orientation that has been conclusively demonstrated, but research suggests that it is by a combination of genetic,hormonal, and environmental influences, with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Rooted in biology or not, there is a difference between gender, ethnicity, and "orientation." Orientation consists primarily of—is lived out through—desire. And the fact that it involves desire means it is subject to moral evaluation in a way that "being male" or "being black" are not. Here is what's often missed: neither the fact of the desire, nor its possible biological basis, gives it moral legitimacy. There are several assumptions behind the idea that a person with same-sex attraction might say "I am a homosexual" in the same way someone might say "I am a male" or "I am black." First, one assumes that homosexual desires are rooted in biology and therefore a natural part of being human. Second, one assumes that our natural desires are basically good, so long as they don't hurt others. Third, one assumes that fulfilling such basic and good desires are part of being fully human. All the talk about "equality" depends upon these foundational assumptions about what it means to be human. Shouldn't our moral calculations for human beings involve something more than assent to the biochemistry of desire? We are more than animals. We are souls and bodies. We are created in God's image. To legitimize homosexual desire simply because it's natural or biological, ironically, is to treat a person as less than human.

Homosexuality,sexual immorality (Matthew 19:9) and fornication (Matthew 15:19). These terms describe any type of sexual intercourse that is not within the confines of a marriage ordained by God. "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate (Matthew 19:4-6). By defining marriage as between one male and one female, all other arrangements are condemned, including but not limited to one man and two women, one woman and two men, three men and one woman, three men and three women, one man and one man, one woman and one animal, etc. You can see the overwhelming logic of such. When God defined marriage between one man and one woman, He clearly showed that such an arrangement is the only one authorized by God. [Homosexual marriage enshrines into civil law immoral activity. The natural law, the Holy Scriptures, and long-standing religious tradition are very consistent in affirming that homosexual activity is sinful, contrary to God's plan. It should never be encouraged, ratified or "blessed" by the state. The proposal to legalize same-sex marriage is an attempt to redefine the institution of marriage as it has existed in every culture from the very beginning of human history. Marriage between a man and a woman was designed by God for two specific purposes: to affirm the complementary roles of males and females in a loving relationship, and to provide a stable foundation for the procreation and raising of children. Homosexual relationships can achieve neither of those goals.

If you are reading and commenting here-you only need to see one word- ALINSKY! And if this word does not ring a bell-please Google the name!

It is very simple! When the people vote-America says NO GAY MARRIAGE! When liberal,anti-God, Democrats get into the legislatures-they vote their degenerate immoral minds and hearts-and place same-sex "pairings" (cannot be called marriage) into law! And the disgusting point is that a majority of them claim to be practicing Catholics, as they vote for abortion at any stage and same-sex "marriage"-both which are against the Biblical philosophy of the Catholic faith!

Why doesn't anyone ever ask about how a person becomes gay? Too many just assume that this is an uncontrollable orientation that has become equal to one's race,ethnicity or gender (born with,innate and unchangeable)! You that accept this false idea have been brainwashed by homosexuals who have carefully and very quietly invaded our legal system by including the BEHAVIOR (sexual orientation) as a characterization that must be added on to every "do not discriminate" law of every stripe! There is no simple, single CAUSE for sexual orientation that has been conclusively demonstrated, but research suggests that it is by a combination of genetic,hormonal, and environmental influences, with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment. Rooted in biology or not, there is a difference between gender, ethnicity, and "orientation." Orientation consists primarily of—is lived out through—desire. And the fact that it involves desire means it is subject to moral evaluation in a way that "being male" or "being black" are not. Here is what's often missed: neither the fact of the desire, nor its possible biological basis, gives it moral legitimacy. There are several assumptions behind the idea that a person with same-sex attraction might say "I am a homosexual" in the same way someone might say "I am a male" or "I am black." First, one assumes that homosexual desires are rooted in biology and therefore a natural part of being human. Second, one assumes that our natural desires are basically good, so long as they don't hurt others. Third, one assumes that fulfilling such basic and good desires are part of being fully human. All the talk about "equality" depends upon these foundational assumptions about what it means to be human. Shouldn't our moral calculations for human beings involve something more than assent to the biochemistry of desire? We are more than animals. We are souls and bodies. We are created in God's image. To legitimize homosexual desire simply because it's natural or biological, ironically, is to treat a person as less than human.

One of the extraordinary measures of social regression that we have seen in this country has been the insistence that the interests of the LGBT community be interjected into every aspect of American life. Now, the agenda is even present in kindergarten sex education classes in Massachusetts. At first, it was placed there by those who insisted that such educational classes would be fully optional for objecting parents. Now, parents who show up at these schools objecting to the sexualization of their children are threatened with prosecution for trespass. None of this would be happening if homosexuals were content to live their lives privately and peacefully without imposing their agenda upon those who respectfully disagree with them. Everyone deserves full equality. But, the so-called LGBT community already has full equality, not just partial equality. For example, the now "gay" NBA player,had a right to marry his fiancé of seven years. But just because he decided to relinquish that right, it does not mean the courts need to create a new right for him to exercise. The polygamists tried that in the 1800s and the Supreme Court rightly said ‘no’ to their legal arguments. Given that there is far greater historical acceptance of polygamy than so-called gay marriage, he has no broad right to marry anyone he chooses. The LGBT community is no longer seeking tolerance, but instead seeking acquiescence to the notion that their lifestyle is every bit as healthy as the traditional American family. Of course, this is simply absurd! I reminded you that even Elton John recently recognized that his adopted son would suffer because he had no 'mummy.' I urge all gays to avoid adoption as it is not in the interests of the child - although it might be an effective publicity stunt once the first round of media adoration has subsided. This is just one more exploit reinforcing the ongoing illusion that we do not treat everybody fairly, and that we judge people on the basis of their sex life rather than their character and their job performance. We can't judge them on the basis of those things if they keep interjecting sex into the workplace. That just isn't right. The gay agenda teaches that they are to be judged, not by the content of their character, but by the many colors of the banner of sexual political correctness.

The advocates arguing to the Supreme Court that five or more justices should band together and declare a "right" to same-sex marriage are not arguing that there is a God-given right to such a thing. Indeed, the more candid among them see morality itself as an obstacle to their desired end. In the case challenging the constitutionality of California's marriage amendment, U.S. Solicitor General Verrilli argued that it is illegitimate for the government to base a policy on "a moral judgment" -- in this case, a moral judgment about homosexual behavior. "Protecting children from being taught about same-sex marriage is not a permissible interest insofar as it rests on a moral judgment about gay and lesbian ... intimate relationships," he says. But it is going to be either one way or the other: The government either will teach children about same-sex "intimate relationships" or it will not. The advocates of same-sex marriage want the government to teach children that same-sex "intimate relationships" are not only right, but a "right." To do that, they must reject the natural law and more than 2,000 years of Western tradition. They must teach that the God of Genesis, who created all things, was wrong about marriage. They must teach that Jesus Christ was wrong about marriage. And they must teach that the Declaration of Independence was wrong when it insisted our rights come from our Creator. So, if God did not give Americans a right to same-sex marriage, who did? Its advocates are hoping it will be Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and ... A state that no longer recognizes that it is subservient to the Laws of Nature and Nature's God will also no longer recognize the God-given rights of individuals. In such a state, there will only be those privileges the powerful decide to grant us -- until they decide to take them away.

One of the extraordinary measures of social regression that we have seen in this country has been the insistence that the interests of the LGBT community be interjected into every aspect of American life. Now, the agenda is even present in kindergarten sex education classes in Massachusetts. At first, it was placed there by those who insisted that such educational classes would be fully optional for objecting parents. Now, parents who show up at these schools objecting to the sexualization of their children are threatened with prosecution for trespass. None of this would be happening if homosexuals were content to live their lives privately and peacefully without imposing their agenda upon those who respectfully disagree with them. Everyone deserves full equality. But, the so-called LGBT community already has full equality, not just partial equality. For example, the now "gay" NBA player,had a right to marry his fiancé of seven years. But just because he decided to relinquish that right, it does not mean the courts need to create a new right for him to exercise. The polygamists tried that in the 1800s and the Supreme Court rightly said ‘no’ to their legal arguments. Given that there is far greater historical acceptance of polygamy than so-called gay marriage, he has no broad right to marry anyone he chooses. The LGBT community is no longer seeking tolerance, but instead seeking acquiescence to the notion that their lifestyle is every bit as healthy as the traditional American family. Of course, this is simply absurd! I reminded you that even Elton John recently recognized that his adopted son would suffer because he had no 'mummy.' I urge all gays to avoid adoption as it is not in the interests of the child - although it might be an effective publicity stunt once the first round of media adoration has subsided. This is just one more exploit reinforcing the ongoing illusion that we do not treat everybody fairly, and that we judge people on the basis of their sex life rather than their character and their job performance. We can't judge them on the basis of those things if they keep interjecting sex into the workplace. That just isn't right. The gay agenda teaches that they are to be judged, not by the content of their character, but by the many colors of the banner of sexual political correctness.

Wrong-wrong-wrong! When the people vote, America says,"No gay marriage!" The only way this degenerate idea becomes law is with anti-God secular humanist immoral legislators!

Getting the government out of marriage would mean voluntary lifestyle arrangements governed by contract -- a practice that has roots stretching back millennia. Religious people would not be forced by the state to approve behavior they find morally problematic. They would not have to worry about their children being taught about such behavior. Conservatives would be forced to rebuild a culture of marriage rather than focusing on a crumbling legal bulwark. Conservatives lost the culture. Then they lost the law. They can only regain traditional values by removing legal coercion and incentivization from the table -- the left will never hesitate to use those means -- and focusing once again on the raising and production of children within a culture of traditional morality.