In response to:

One of These Things is Not Like the Other

rodom Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 6:47 PM
The Sexual Revolution, which dominated the late 60's and much of the seventies, encouraged an " If you FEEL good about something, just DO IT " mentality, reducing the marital sex act, which is supposed to be all about love and commitment--with the possibility of children--to a, mere, pleasure-seeking recreational act. So, what, naturally, followed were the legal " break-throughs " of " no-fault divorce ", " a legal right to an abortion ", and, gradually, more and more legal recognition, protection, and sanctioning of the gay, lesbian, bi-sexual, trans-gendered, and other perverted sexual lifestyles of choice.
Danny46 Wrote: Mar 26, 2013 4:29 AM
The destruction of conventional marriage is rooted in the same contraceptive mentality & leftist moral relativism that now seeks normalization of homosexuality and same-sex "Marriage". The left aligns with the homosexual activists largely because they see a common enemy in Christianity. Christianity condemns the sinful destructive behavior of the homosexual, & is the primary obstacle to leftist tyranny.
Robert1824 Wrote: Mar 23, 2013 12:06 PM
Rodom, there has never been a time when sex was purely for procreation, nor will there or could there be. It's totally unrealistic to expect and demand that no one have sex unless married to an opposite sex partner, and then only for procreation . To expect this is not only unrealistic but patheticaly foolish . And abortion has been common all over the world for thousands of years , as well as homosexuality, sexual promiscuity etc. The so-called "sexual revolution" has been greatly exaggerated by right-wingers.
nawlins72 Wrote: Mar 23, 2013 8:12 AM
"First-off, I find it interesting that Mr. Goldberg did, NOT once, mention anything about the basic, human rights of children, to--whenever possible--be raised by a married mother and father, in order for that child to receive everything he or she needs, for proper emotional, psycological, social, academic, as well as physical dvelopment"

Their is no such right. That is an ideal, not a right. If it were a right, then the State could argue for removing children from single parent homes and placing them in the care of a two parent home under the guise of protecting the rights of the child.
rodom Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 8:07 PM
sbemis, is that REALLY an arguement. This, only, further, affirms the fact that arguements for " gay-marriage " are, just, solely, based on emotion, and NOT fact.
sbemis Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 7:47 PM
all my lif e,being around ring wing fundemtalists,i've heard that the gays were godless and that they were unabel to make commitments,and that sex is only ok during and in marriage,so now,guess what?divorces abound and the gay community sez they want to be able to be married.Omg,they want commited relationships?!that's horrible-we can't have that.!don't worry,you'll always be able to bash them,for you-married or not-they'll always be perverts .
rodom Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 7:44 PM
Now, if anyone ( including Mr. Goldberg ) doesn't think that the arguement that all children--whenever possible--have a basic, God-given, human right to a normal, stable, homelife, then let me ask the obvious question: Would you, instead of being raised as you were, honestly, have preferred to be raised by two, promiscuous, substance-abusing gay men, or two, angry, man-hating, promiscouous, substance-abusing lesbian women? Hey, if you CAN'T answer the question with an enthusiastic " yes ", then, I think I've made my point.
rodom Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 7:31 PM
For example: First-off, I find it interesting that Mr. Goldberg did, NOT once, mention anything about the basic, human rights of children, to--whenever possible--be raised by a married mother and father, in order for that child to receive everything he or she needs, for proper emotional, psycological, social, academic, as well as physical dvelopment. There are also the obvious arguements about polygamous and incestuous arrangements being recognized under law, and, of course, how the " gay-marriage " issue will affect our religious liberties. ( Which is, already happening! )
rodom Wrote: Mar 22, 2013 7:09 PM
So, yes, I would agree with many " conservatives ", such as Jonah Goldberg, that America is, pretty, far off-the-rails, when it comes to issues of sexual morality. However, that doesn't mean that people of strong, traditional faith and morality shouldn't, ALWAYS, stand-up for what they know to be true and the right thing--no matter what! And, also, I may add, that if one legal arguement isn't working--that the sanctioning of homosexual activity, not only leads to more homosexual-related acts and disease, but also devalues and minimizes the importance of traditional marriage in the eyes of the law--then, other, even more effective legal arguements might work, instead.

Just because things can be put on the same list doesn't mean they are necessarily similar. My attic contains within it thousands of comic books, an inflatable bed, some jigsaw puzzles, some family pictures and a "Frampton Comes Alive!" album. These things are, roughly speaking, in the same location, but they're hardly of equal value, importance or function.

I bring this up for the simple reason that we're hearing a lot about how the GOP must deal with "abortion and gay marriage" as if they are almost the same issue.

Well, in my house, I hear about my dog and...