TradYouth Stands for Traditional Marriage


TradMarriageTrue and eternal love between a husband and wife, until death do they part, is the keystone of the traditional family, which is the bedrock of a healthy and vital traditional society. The recent campaign in favor of homosexual “marriage” is merely one battle in their generational campaign against the ties that bind our peoples. They encourage youth to “explore” perverse and perverted alternatives to traditional marriage. They encourage youth to indulge every impulse that tempts them away from traditional marriage. Even Christian couples who’ve entered traditional marriages in good faith are subjected to a whirlwind of excuses for giving up, for letting go, for breaking the homes and families of countless tens of millions of our youth.

The people of Michigan overwhelmingly support traditional marriage. The authors of both the federal and state constitutions would struggle to fathom their intentions being perverted so completely. And yet, the activist judges and Leftist agitators are on the march and the people of Michigan powerless to stop them. We lack the financial power, the political connections, and the media dominance, to win this battle unless we all learn to unite in solidarity and pool our talents and resources in defense of our families and communities.

Our humble organization is joining numerous grassroots conservative and Christian organizations in opposing the Leftist social engineering campaign to destroy every last vestige of Western Civilization. We are filing a motivation to file an amicus curiae brief in support of the people of Michigan’s effort to defend our cherished institution of marriage. We did it despite the legal system being stacked against us. When your cause is truly just and worthy, you can’t calculate the odds. Whether it’s facing down hundreds of Marxist agitators, engaging mainstream media smear campaigners, or challenging anti-White extremist Tim Wise’s lies on our college campuses, we’re going to fight for family, folk, and faith wherever it’s under assault.

DeBoer v. Snyder (Michigan) Doc 23

Amicus Brief of Traditionalist Youth Network (w/motion for leave to file)


  • “True and eternal love between a husband and wife” works fine for heterosexuals. Gay men should not be forced to marry heterosexual women. Gay men should only marry other gay men. A woman should find a heterosexual man with genuine feelings for her of “True and eternal love”. I am a gay man, and I do not have, nor have I ever had romantic or sexual feelings for a female.

    • Matt Parrott

      Gay men should not be forced to marry heterosexual women.

      Nobody’s proposing that, of course. Nobody’s even trying to terminate your relationship. We’re merely refusing to confer institutional endorsement and support for it on the same level as actual marriage.

      I am a gay man, and I do not have, nor have I ever had romantic or sexual feelings for a female.

      I get that, and I sympathize with your situation. People who for whatever reasons cannot perform certain roles do not have an implied right or obligation to redefine or compromise those roles.

    • We’re merely refusing to confer institutional endorsement and support for it on the same level as actual marriage.

      For what reason should gay people be punished with higher taxes and be treated disrespectfully, just because our marriage (yes, it will soon be legal in all US states within 2 years as it now is in the UK, and most of Europe, Canada, New Zealand and South America) is to the same sex?

      I sympathize with your situation. People who for whatever reasons cannot perform certain roles do not have an implied right or obligation to redefine or compromise those roles.

      I don’t have any “situation” other than your desire to treat me as a lesser individual than yourself because the person I love is a different gender to the person you love. “Certain roles”? What are they? Child rearing? If so, do you prohibit marriage by infertile couples, such as those over the age of 50? And what of the 122,000 same sex couples raising children in the USA alone? Why should their children be told their adoptive or biological parent is a less valued citizen? And if you insist that children be raised by both biological baby makers, do you prohibit adoptive heterosexual parents from getting married to each other?

    • Matt Parrott

      Like clockwork, you carry on about all the marriages and arrangements (infertile couples, mixed families, old people, on and on) which are indeed reflections of the ideal nuclear family. A certain degree of compromise and fluidity is necessary and expected when trying to fit a divine institution to human beings.

      That’s all really beside the point, though, as you and every other advocate of “gay marriage” have been actively opposed to religion and tradition, and motivated in your support for this compromise of the institution by your spite for the institution in its pure and original form. There are plenty of ways that a man like yourself who’s sexually attracted to men (like you’re the only one with perverse temptations!) to be a supporter and defender of your folk and tradition.

      You choose not to be, because you’re anti-traditional, anti-white, and anti-family. Your being homosexual is honestly a separate concern. You can even be on our side even as you’re indulging in that, just as I continue to defend Christianity while flagrantly indulging in gluttony and a host of other major and minor sins.

    • You are 100% mistaken in everything you repeatedly say, like clockwork.

      Organised religion has for the most part been loaded for bear against homosexual people, portraying us as “children of Satan”, “possessed by demons”, and you keep trying to “pray away the gay”, excommunicating us, denying us the sacraments, and turning a blind eye to pogroms public stonings and burnings, or even participating in them. You can easily research all the above with Google.

      In response to this, you accuse gay people of opposing the very religion that wants us to cease to exist. Why would we support such an evil organisation that seeks to eliminate us, and estrange us from our families, friends and religion of birth? There is nothing to be gained for a homosexual person to belong to such a religion as yours and there’s the nub, right there. There is no single policy on anything in Christianity, because nobody can agree on whether artificial birth control is good or bad, divorce is permissible, or women’s ordination is godly. Some religions agree some disagree. There’s no rational way these completely contradictory policies can come from a common god. That leaves only two possible conclusions: either there is no god, or there are many gods.

      You see yourself as having the divine right to sit in judgment upon me, when I never touched you, tried to convert you to a homosexual, or interfered with you, your family, your friends, your children, your job in any way whatsoever. All these things in that last sentence are what so called Christians try to do to gay people. We are no threat to you, and never can be, because we such a tiny minority that you can get away with tyrannising us for the rest of time itself.

    • Matt Parrott

      The Church doesn’t want to eliminate “you”, it wants to help you identify and overcome your sin.

      If somebody compelled me to go on a diet, I wouldn’t cease to exist. I would just be myself without gluttony.

      You need to choose between “Christianity is out to get me” and “Christianity is all over the map”.

      “You see yourself as having the divine right to sit in judgment upon me”

      Meh. Sort of, but not really. I do believe that certain behaviors and lifestyles must necessarily be promoted, encouraged, and discouraged in the public square. Conversely, I believe your privacy and free will should largely be respected and protected and that your private business is your private business. When you try to officially change the definition of marriage, you make it a public square thing.

      If I tried to redefine the healthy BMI to 32 and insisted that powdered donettes should be labeled and sold as health foods, then you would have every right to call me out on it. If I’m quietly sitting in a dark room gobbling up powdered donettes, then it’s not really your business.

      Nobody’s “tyrannizing” you.

    • “Nobody is ‘tyrannising’ you”

      Gay men are whipped publicly at punishment at law, hanged, burned to death, stoned, tortured, imprisoned, sacked from their jobs, disowned by their families, excommunicated by their churches, evicted from their living accommodation, all in the name ot religion. Exactly which part of “tyranny” don’t you understand?

      Your church says my love for my male partner will take me to hell. Other religions say the opposite, they say your hate and judgmentalism will take you to hell. It’s a buyer’s market in the religion megastore. I don’t belong to your religion, so your rules do not apply to me.

    • Matt Parrott

      Gay men are [awful stuff]

      None of that awful stuff is happening where you’re at, and I condemn the torture and injustice wrought on homosexuals in the far away places neither of us have ever been to. And pretty much no American homosexuals are sacked from their jobs or evicted from their living accommodations anymore. That’s all part of the elaborate unfalsifiable victim mythology within the gay community.

      I don’t belong to your religion, so your rules do not apply to me.

      Not yet, they don’t. 🙂

      And Christ loves you and is eager to welcome you back into his fold. You don’t have to be sinless or blameless.

    • All the things I listed are happening in Africa, Russia, and most of the Middle East, and all are fomented by evangelistic religious zealots like Scott Lively and Paul Cameron. They’re not happening so much where I live nowadays, which is a big part of why I choose to live here, where we have freedom from your religion.

      Christ said nothing about my homosexuality and spent most of his time encouraging people to love one another, condemning religious fundamentalists like you, who stone sinners (albeit metaphorically in your case), and judge others before you look into your own heart.

      I was born gay. I do not with to spend my time in the company of people like you who hate what I am, judge my same sex love as from Satan, and believe I will burn for eternity just for having this joy in my life. Your religion and others like it are responsible for most of the persecution that is inflicted worldwide upon LGBT minorities.

      Preach all you like, I am 61 years old and have never felt the slightest heterosexual twinge, even when i was a teenager going to a religious school with a Christian 100% heterosexual upbringing. You’re wasting your time trying to make homosexuals feel so bad about ourselves we transform into heterosexuals. Quit judging me and let your god do it if he’s that concerned about the mistake you think he made in building me as a homosexual.

    • Matt Parrott

      Derek,

      Christ said nothing about my homosexuality and spent most of his time encouraging people to love one another, condemning religious fundamentalists like you, who stone sinners (albeit metaphorically in your case), and judge others before you look into your own heart.

      There’s a subtle yet important difference between a religious traditionalist and a religious fundamentalist. I don’t expect you to understand it. The bottom line is that no matter how much you insist that I’m “attacking” you or “judging” you or whatever your fevered victim-mentality mindset craves, all I’m actually doing is insisting that your lifestyle not be endorsed and condoned in the public square.

      I’m not trying to force you to be straight, or to marry women, or to be ashamed of yourself. I definitely don’t presume to know whether you’ll go to hell or not, least of all for the one particular sin we’re arguing over.

    • Homosexuality is not a sin.

    • Matt Parrott

      Homosexuality is not a sin.

      Yes, it is. Though, prelest happens to be a greater and more dangerous one. I would be more alarmed about the prelest than the sodomy, if I were you.

    • If homosexuality is a sin, then according to your personal religious belief, gay men should marry straight women, then you wouldn’t think they were sinners any more.

    • Matt Parrott

      If homosexuality is a sin, then according to your personal religious belief, gay men should marry straight women, then you wouldn’t think they were sinners any more.

      Nope. It would also be sinful to deceive a straight woman into marrying you, no? Abstinence is an option. Humility and discretion while continuing to go about doing what you’re hellbent (literally?) on doing is also an option. But don’t ask me, humbly and sincerely pray until you have some real answers to your questions.

      Nobody expects you to stop being sinful. If you did perfectly abstain from this sin, you’ll surely sin in numerous other ways throughout the course of your daily life. I’m sinful, too, just in different ways. And I’m a little more humble and less self-congratulatory about my wayward shenanigans, perhaps.

    • The Catholic Church teaches that all artificial birth control is sinful. Do you believe that too?

    • Matt Parrott

      The Catholic Church teaches that all artificial birth control is sinful. Do you believe that too?

      Are we just fishing for random issues to disagree about, now?

      Generally, I think a culture of fertility and fidelity should be encouraged, and I dislike how birth control drugs facilitate unhealthy and infertile lifestyles. The ones which effectively function as first trimester abortifacients are a bigger concern for me than the ones which merely preclude conception.

      As long as it doesn’t involve promoting the decadence as a virtue on the public square, and doesn’t involve killing fetuses, my position is to respect privacy. The general rule of thumb is that I’m a fascist about what happens in public and an anarchist about what happens in private. I would certainly hope people would avoid decadent habits in their private homes and private lives, but it’s not my business.

    • You’re equivocating. Aside from abortion, artificial birth control is either a mortal sin (as per Catholic Church) or not a sin (as per all other Christian denominations to the best of my knowledge). The point I am trying to make, which you’re studiously dodging, is that something which is a sin in one religion isn’t in another.

    • Matt Parrott

      My Christian denomination is Eastern Orthodoxy.

      I get your thing about there being eleventy billion denominations. I get that it all seems pretty arbitrary from your perspective. From my perspective, you have one church which has studiously kept the original faith, and a series of schisms and heretical factions branching away from that straight and singular trunk.

    • That’s the nub. Every religion makes the identical claim you do, including the Catholic Church, that they alone have the direct path to St Peter. Some among those religions accept that LGBT are made in the image and likeness of God, and welcome us, not as living in a perpetual state of sin because we love someone of the same sex, but as fully functional, viable human beings, and offer full sacraments including communion, ordination to the clergy and same sex marriage. For so long as there are all these available, cashed up religions vying for the same buyers, with opposite truths to each other, I remain a skeptic, but if I had a mind to go to a particular church, it could never be yours, which is exclusionary.

    • Matt Parrott

      Well, the Catholic Church shares an equally credible case for apostolic legitimacy, with the other denominations having less and less credible cases all the way down to non-denominational non-apostolic churches which don’t even bother arguing their case.

      My Church is definitely inclusive. One of my most beloved Orthodox inspirations is Seraphim Rose, a man who also struggled with a homosexual inclination. I reject the whole notion that your sexual habits are an integral part of your “identity”, and I reject the notion that my church “excludes” you.

      We’re not going to lie to you or comfort you in your sin, as that wouldn’t be doing you a service. But every single person who walks into the Church has sinful habits and most of them are even convinced to some degree of the virtue and necessity of their sins. You’re not that special here, either in a positive or negative sense.

      That being said, I hope you’ll consider joining an LGBTQWERTY-friendly denomination if you positively refuse to accept that homosexuality is a vice.

    • Matt Parrott

      And I’ve been enjoying your composition samples from your site while working today.

      You’re quite talented.

      Hopefully you don’t have mixed feelings about your music putting an extra pep in my fascist projects.

    • Your church’s anti gay policy is harmful. The “ex gay” ministries like Exodus all eventually folded after they realised that you cannot turn gay to straight, and many of their “clients” became so damaged by the hocum and self hatred they inculcated, they took their own lives.

      It isn’t possible to post links into this thread, but the information is readily available with a Google search.

    • Matt Parrott

      I don’t endorse the anti-gay ministries projects, either.

      People get the best help when they’re helped within their home churches by their neighbors, friends, families, and elders. I also think the whole “shunning” and “disownership” thing is a destructive cultish practice. I couldn’t imagine kicking my own child out or disowning them for being gay or having a crisis of faith or just about anything else which didn’t pose an immediate danger to other family members.

      Whether people who struggle with homosexuality can help it or not (and I believe that the answer, like with gluttony, is complicated and somewhere between the extreme camps), it shouldn’t be endorsed or approved of. I don’t insist that my community confirm that my waistline is healthy or that my daily caloric intake is reasonable. Doing that would lead children astray from more healthy, fulfilling, and virtuous lifestyle habits. I try to be a mature adult who’s not constantly demanding “validation” from everybody around me of everything I do.

      You mistake me for a representative of the Fundamentalist Protestant position on homosexuals, one which agrees with you that to practice homosexuality makes you a separate and special type of human (an evil type, in their perspective, but still a type). I don’t. I reject the notion that your sexual habits are integral to your identity.

      My problem with you is your virulent hatred of the Church and your insistence that your habits must be promoted in and endorsed by our shared community. I confirm that homosexuality is sinful and I’m not going to lie to you or comfort you about your vices. But society’s always going to struggle with gluttony, sexual immorality, pride, greed, and all the rest. I don’t think homosexuals should be forced to stop being homosexual by the government anymore than I think the government should come into my house and force me to stop eating cheeseburgers.

    • I am in love with my same sex partner and he is in love with me. Your religion condemns this as “sinful”, leading to only two possible outcomes:
      1. Separate from each other and live in solitude, thinking every moment of every day about the other person
      2. Marry a person of the opposite sex who is in love with me, but for whom I have no feeling at all, destroying the happiness of both

      In return for making this decision to destroy my happiness in “this life”, I get to spend Eternity in the company of guess who? People like you! I despise your bigotry, your judgmentalism, your paternalism, your false love, your fake emotions. Why would I want to be unable to escape from your insufferable company? Moreover, this is all on the basis of your words for which you’re unable to offer single shred of proof, and which are hotly disputed by a substantial number of well regarded clerics, and entire religions whose claim to legitimacy is equal to yours.

      Now to your extracts from the “Seven Deadly Sins”:
      1. Gluttony: causes obesity which is damaging to the individual
      2. Pride varies in its manifestations. Pride in your achievements and in those of your family is positive and affirming, whereas conceit is not. Conceit is tantamount to making exaggerated claims about your abilities and your accomplishments. It is harmful because it causes resentment in others, or it may lead to your being given opportunities you don’t deserve, depriving others of them in the process.
      3. Greed. This means taking more than your fair share. This is harmful to other people.

      Homosexuality is not one of the Seven Deadly Sins, nor is it in the Ten Commandments, nor is it in Christ’s Two Commandments to love one another, nor is it in his Eight Beatitudes, nor his Seven Last Words. In fact the only place you hear Christs talking about LGBT, he speaks positively, never negatively. He speaks negatively of divorce and judging others, the latter of which you’re too steeped in to even see it in yourself.

    • Matt Parrott

      Derek,

      “Leading to only two possible outcomes:”

      No. Another possible outcome is to live together and carry on doing what you’re doing, either encouraging people to mind their own business when they ask or offering some transparent half-lie about being “roommates” or “close friends”. You could even politely confirm that you’re indeed homosexuals, while resisting the urge to actively promote that lifestyle and lobby for its being endorsed and celebrated by the entire community.

      While it’s sort of slipped through the cracks owing to the promotion of homosexuality, historically plenty of men were effusively devoted to and fond of one another. It’s been speculated (plausibly) that these historical couples were clandestinely homosexual, but that was assuredly not always the case. Even if that was the case, that’s between them and their priest in confession. It’s not my business.

      And knock it off with the “forced to marry a chick” scenario. Nobody here is suggesting that. It would be unfair to both you and the woman. Plenty of people are unfit for the institution of marriage for one reason or another (like myself, for instance). You’re not required to get married, and there are plenty of ways to enjoy a rich and fulfilling life without entering into that specific covenant.

      I get to spend Eternity in the company of guess who? People like you!

      Fortunately for you, there’s a difference between being with me and being with the hateful and judgmental parody of me goosestepping around in your fevered imagination. I’m sure we’d get along swimmingly once you learned to be more tolerant of diverse belief systems.

      As for Christ’s ministry not really making a big deal of homosexuality, I’m with you. My message here has been consistent about it being a sin, but not the turbo-sin that either you or the fundamentalists imagine. My position from the outset is that it should not be publicly endorsed or promoted because it is a sin. Nothing more nor less than that.

      judging others

      You’re a gifted composer. You’re a bright guy. You’re so much more than that one vice you mistake for a virtue. For all I know, aside from that vice you may live a truly virtuous life which makes you a better man than me in the final analysis who’s more worthy of salvation.

      You’re absolutely mistaken about my supposed eagerness to harshly judge others.

    • I never said, nor do I believe that homosexuality is a “virtue” as you claim. Nor is heterosexuality. Both are simple attractions between human beings. Procreation that results from heterosexual congress is an animal function. Love on the other hand, is a human function, and romantic love exists regardless of gender. Same sex love is portrayed by you as sinful, when it harms nobody, compared to the destruction to the individual caused by forcing same sex attracted people to marry the opposite gender.

      You’ve subjected me to an unmitigated sermon about the “sinfulness” of living my life as I was born, a homosexual. You’re not a homosexual, yet you have the effrontery to lecture me about what I am, what my presumed feelings are, and how sinful I am, like a glutton, a greedy person, a conceited, prideful person, all of whom you place in the same level of unsatisfactoriness.

      Every human being likes to be well thought of by others, not out of the inability to function if they are not, but out of comradeship, mutual respect and always looking for the best in other people. I expect even higher standards of myself than I expect of others. If for ONE MOMENT I thought that my being in a loving relationship with another human being was immoral, unethical or harmful either to myself, each other, or the community at large, then I would run not a mile but an infinity of miles away from it.

      There’s the bottom line. Nothing you say about my same sex relationship being an offence against your god and your religion resonates with me in any way whatsoever. Moreover, your view and that of your religion is vehemently disputed by significant numbers of other religions, too significant for you to claim to be able to speak on behalf of all Christians.

    • Matt Parrott

      Derek,

      Same sex love is portrayed by you as sinful

      Actually, I parsed that carefully, only describing the sexual act itself as sinful. The romantic love may or may not be sinful; that’s beyond my theological pay grade. The romantic aspect of marriage is charming and all, but the Traditional perspective is that the covenant undergirding the relationship is more important than the hallmark sparkle magic of romantic love itself.

      That’s really an important part of the disconnect, here. As marriage has been recently redefined around the sparkle magic instead of the grim oath between a husband and wife, it’s easy to see why other kinds of sparkle magic relationships would also want to have a big public celebration of their dew drop love connection.

      forcing same sex attracted people to marry the opposite gender.

      *face palm*

      You’ve subjected me to an unmitigated sermon about the “sinfulness” of living my life as I was born, a homosexual.

      In fairness, you did wake up this morning, with a whole list of other priorities to attend to, and make an active decision to log in to the most radical corner of the Internet and ask us for our opinion. You’re welcome here, but please don’t act as if we’re pestering you.

      how sinful I am, like a glutton, a greedy person, a conceited, prideful person, all of whom you place in the same level of unsatisfactoriness.

      My job isn’t to determine or discern the relative weight of sins. My point was that sin is sin, and that I’m not passing any more judgment on you than belongs on myself and just about everybody else for the sins we all struggle with on a daily basis. I know you positively cannot tolerate my belief that sodomy is sinful, but you’re just going to have to live with my believing that.

      There’s the bottom line.

      You’re confirmed in your lifestyle choices. I think they’re decadent and am opposed to your promoting and encouraging them in public. You think they’re virtuous and you’re trying to promote and encourage them in public. The real “bottom line” is that your side has the momentum for now, but decadence, infidelity, and infertility always lose in the long run.

    • I get notifications from this blog when someone posts to it. Mostly I have ignored them, but in this case I rejoined this wearisome debate knowing full well I was re-entering a hostile forum, because lies should be rebutted with facts. Religion is a set of beliefs that mostly cannot be proven, and when it is used to destroy the lives of LGBT people, I reserve the right to defend the vulnerable against the indefensible.

      The fact that you describe the heterosexual marriage pact as “grim”, is a pretty depressing way of looking at it. Have you been disappointed in love and now regard marriage as some ordeal that has to be gotten through in order to please your god? That’s really not true for the majority of heterosexual couples of my own acquaintance, who find joy in their lives together.

      Face palm – when you cast gay people out of your inner circle because you look down on our relationships as “sinful”, the message is clear. Gay people are led to believe that if they marry a person of the opposite sex, it will change their sexual orientation from gay to straight. Social pressure and ostracism are forms of force, and in diverse societies, marriages are still arranged without the consent of their protagonists.

      There is nothing homosexuals do that heterosexuals do not also do. Do you not kiss? So do we. Do you not embrace in love? So too do we. Oral sex? Yep, us too. Do you hold hands walking down the street with your partner? Well, we’d like to, but risk being abused in the street by hateful people like you.

      As for your preoccupation with anal intercourse and homosexuality, explain how lesbians commit “sodomy” and why the sexual practices of complete strangers to you are your business? Come to that, statistically speaking, most anal intercourse is practised by heterosexual couples, and not all gay men prefer it. Your issue isn’t with “sodomy” at all, its with same sex relationships.

      Your sexual orientation isn’t a ‘lifestyle’ you choose, like living near the beach or buying a fashionable new pair of shoes, it is the innate romantic attraction to another human being bestowed upon you by Nature at birth, and discovered by you at puberty, not chosen. The only choice Nature allows is in your partner, and the hope they want you with the same intensity you want them.

      No-one in their right mind would ‘choose’ to be gay. Look at all the violence, abuse, repression, ostracism that LGBT suffer across the world. Even in societies like ours that tolerate gay people, we’re still faced with “coming out” and all that involves and dealing with the ignorance of the likes of you. If there ever was an easy ‘choice’, it was always heterosexuality, where you get congratulated by society every single day, just for being the way you born, where what you are is portrayed by religion as quintessentially virtuous.

    • Matt Parrott

      Well, we’d like to [hold hands], but risk being abused in the street by hateful people like you.

      My homosexual friends and acquaintances know exactly where I stand, and don’t flinch or run in terror from me.

      As for your preoccupation with anal intercourse and homosexuality, explain how lesbians commit “sodomy” and why the sexual practices of complete strangers to you are your business?

      You’re making it our business by insisting that our government should condone and celebrate it. The last place I want to be is in your bedroom, interfering with whatever goes on in there.

      The only choice Nature allows is in your partner, and the hope they want you with the same intensity you want them.

      The science suggests there’s more plasticity than that. Granted, a lifestyle and habit reinforced and entrenched for your entire pubescent life might as well be genetically hardcoded after a certain point–especially if you’ve constructed your very identity around that habit. But even then, you can still choose as many have done to simply abstain.

      Look at all the violence, abuse, repression, ostracism that LGBT suffer across the world.

      I disapprove of the persecution of homosexuals, either here or where it’s actually happening. This is about your identity group grasping for a new privilege, not whether or not your identity group is persecuted.

    • “My homosexual friends and acquaintances…”
      Really? I’ve heard that line, “some of my best friends are gay” before. Most of MY friends are heterosexual. None of my friends are homophobic. Something doesn’t resonate well there, if your “gay friends” keep company with you. Are they so short of friends that they need to consort with someone like you, who is disgusted by their sexual orientation, and what it connotes?

      “You’re making it our business by insisting that our government should condone and celebrate it.”
      The government hasn’t been asked to “condone” homosexuality, it has merely agreed to decriminalise it, for the very good reason that imprisoning, executing or otherwise persecuting homosexuals is monstrously unjust and doesn’t serve the interests of the heterosexual majority, nor the LGBT minorities for that matter. So far as “celebrating” homosexuality goes, that’s a pointless argument, because we’re not asking the government to “celebrate homosexuality” in any way that is different to the way it already celebrates heterosexuality in the legal sense, and unless you’re referring to equal marriage rights, the only other “celebration” is of civil rights advances, analogous to giving African Americans the right to vote, sit in the front of the bus, share water fountains, or to marry whites.

      “The science suggests there’s more plasticity than that.” Please cite your sources.

      This doesn’t match with anything I have read that is university based, government commissioned, peer reviewed research conducted by reputable, credentialed individuals or associations, and it doesn’t match my own life experience, or that of any gay or lesbian people known to me. Even if it does, who are you to lecture them or me about “sin”?

    • Matt Parrott

      Really? I’ve heard that line, “some of my best friends are gay” before. Most of MY friends are heterosexual. None of my friends are homophobic. Something doesn’t resonate well there, if your “gay friends” keep company with you. Are they so short of friends that they need to consort with someone like you, who is disgusted by their sexual orientation, and what it connotes?

      Well, I’m obviously not using the line to excuse myself. I’m merely contrasting that fact with your fantastical presumption that I’m a physical threat to homosexuals walking down the street.

      And I never said that I’m “disgusted” by what you do. I’m merely convinced that it’s indeed sinful. I have friends who are disgusted by my eating habits, and I suppose they’re so short of friends that they’re stuck with me, anyway. It’s a lonely world, I guess.

      The government hasn’t been asked to “condone” homosexuality, it has merely agreed to decriminalise it

      Erm, you guys have already decriminalized it across the board. You’re now running victory laps at this point. Homosexual couples living together isn’t illegal in any jurisdiction.

      This doesn’t match with anything I have read

      There are a variety of epigenetic and prenatal factors which may be involved in it, in addition to the plausible genetic factors and known environmental factors. There’s also evidence that obesity and perhaps even pedophilic impulses may be at least partially genetic. We all have sinful inclinations, and the mere presence of an inclination doesn’t make it axiomatically justified.

      Even if it does, who are you to lecture them or me about “sin”?

      Don’t kill the messenger, Derek.

    • Overeating and pedophilia are obviously harmful. Love between two people of the same sex isn’t harming you, nor is it harming me, nor is it harming my partner. The only thing that is harmful is prejudice, caused by followers of your religion and others like it. You’re not gay yet you think you have the right to criticise and judge my future on the basis of your religious belief, which i do not share, mandated into law in a country which separates church from state. I on the other hand haven’t told you to do anything in particular with your personal life except to butt out of the lives of strangers, which is what your campaign is doing when it seeks to deny equal rights to gay people.

      Yes, we are no longer made criminals because of our same sex relationships, despite massive efforts to keep these laws by religions, and we at last have same sex marriage in 18 out of 50 states, and in two years it’s likely to be all 50, along with the 18 other countries, including UK where I live with more being added every year.

      It may be going our way in the West, and it’s going the opposite way in the East, and why? Religion. Ask any African why he burns gays alive, and he will tell you he is “doing God’s work”.

      You might like to check out the following examples of what is done every day to gay people in God’s name in places like Africa, with the blessing of their religion (delete spaces to open links):

      w w w . worldstaruncut. com/uncut/38302 (gay man stoned and then burned alive)
      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=DSSAfBsPzsI (16yo iranian youths hanged)
      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=AZ_aSl3ktjg (Young and gay in Putin’s Russia)
      w w w . huffingtonpost. co. uk/2014/02/02/violence-against-gays-in-russia_n_4712741.html

    • more on Russia: w w w . channel4. com/news/hunted-russia-gay-dispatches-channel-4-video

  • Spelunker

    Love doesn’t see gender.

    • Didn’t a woman in France recently get married to a bridge?

    • What was the gender of the bridge, was it ratified by French law, did the bridge consent, where was the honeymoon and was the marriage consummated?

    • Sheeesh!

      @Spelunker

      “Love” doesn’t see much of anything. That is why it is fleeting and often ends badly.

    • @ Sheeeshi Does this mean you’re against marrying someone (of legal age and not your blood relation) for whom you have reciprocated romantic love and mutual sexual attraction?

    • Sheesh!

      You know what that meant wise guy.

    • Well I agree with you to the extent that 50% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce. I’ve no doubt that same sex marriages will have their ups and downs just like yours.

      Where are your “strongly held religious beliefs” when it comes to divorce? How many of you “Christians” are into your second, third or fourth marriage? Why aren’t you appalled by divorce? Why aren’t you upset to see a man and woman who have been divorced kissing?

      The bible clearly states:
      “Whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causes her to commit adultery; and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced commits adultery” (Matthew 5:32, 19:9 & Luke 16:18)
      “…whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, commits adultery against her” (Mark 10:11 & Luke 16:18), which applies to women as well (Mark 10:12)

  • FredS

    We desperately need federally funded day care centers and subsidized married housing on our college and university campuses. The birth rate in America correlates inversely with I.Q.

  • Thank you for standing up on behalf of traditional marriage. One man and one woman as our creator intended it to be.

    • So I should go marry a woman now? Why don’t you believe in love?

    • Sheesh!

      Do you want “marriage” or are you just a trend-chasing fabulous oh-so fabulous dude who is cool with whatever opinion is “in?”

      We all know how so many fabulous dudes are so fashion conscious after all.

    • @Sheeshi Sounds like you must be one of those “Christians” – your sneering contempt is a dead giveaway. If you have a point to make, make it. Colourful ridicule isn’t making you look as clever as you think it is.

    • Sheesh!

      Was I supposed to passive? Like a “bottom” perhaps? Chief, this is not a republican blog so we don’t worry about being passive while the antis bark at us. You guys are fashion conscious, that is why you say what you do. If it were not “cool” you’d either keep quiet or try to parrot the “cool” line. That’s all.

  • We’re merely refusing to confer institutional endorsement and support for it on the same level as actual marriage.

    For what reason should gay people be punished with higher taxes and be treated disrespectfully, just because our marriage (yes, it will soon be legal in all US states within 2 years as it now is in the UK, and most of Europe, Canada, New Zealand and South America) is to the same sex?

    I sympathize with your situation. People who for whatever reasons cannot perform certain roles do not have an implied right or obligation to redefine or compromise those roles.

    I don’t have any “situation” other than your desire to treat me as a lesser individual than yourself because the person I love is a different gender to the person you love. “Certain roles”? What are they? Child rearing? If so, do you prohibit marriage by infertile couples, such as those over the age of 50? And what of the 122,000 same sex couples raising children in the USA alone? Why should their children be told their adoptive or biological parent is a less valued citizen? And if you insist that children be raised by both biological baby makers, do you prohibit adoptive heterosexual parents from getting married to each other?

  • EricH

    “Love doesn’t see gender.”-Spelunker
    If all we need is some generic love that can be provided by anyone, why would a child ever leave loving parents and form friendships and sexual relationships with others? People have needs that go beyond simple love and, like it or not, men and women are not interchangeable. Homosexual relationships are inherently dysfunctional because men have needs that can only be met by women (and vice versa) and homosexual relationships are attempts by people to have those particular needs met by the same sex.

    There are so many people unable to get a clear picture of what their needs are, let alone of how to get them met, that even heterosexual relationships are very often dysfunctional, but through understanding how men and women complement each other in a relationship and by forming gender roles accordingly, dysfunction in heterosexual relationships can be eliminated and men and women can have those special needs met. Traditional marriage is a useful tool in that regard. Homosexual relationships, by their very definition, can only be dysfunctional. “Same sex marriage” is a lie.

    • The only “special need” I have from a woman, I got from my mother. The rest are good friends who accept me as a gay man with no problem whatsoever, and my same sex partner. Who are you to describe my relationship with my partner so sanctimoniously, self-righteously and paternalistically as “dysfunctional”?

      Unless you are gay, you cannot know whether it’s a decision or not. You have no practical experience of being gay. Therefore, you must accept the testimony of those of us who are gay, and what we feel. I was attracted to males well before I knew what sex was and I have never had romantic notions for females.

      I would have more respect for you, if you simply admitted you don’t know what it’s like to be gay and cease judging us. Leave it to your God to fix me up if I need fixing. If you don’t think he’s up to the job, then you’re certainly not in charge of me. If there is a god, and that god is all powerful, knows everything and created everything, then he knew in advance he was going to create Gays. It is counter-intuitive to suppose he would make upwards of 350 million Gays (5% of 7 billion) alive in the world today, just so we could be converted into Straights. Therefore, God is OK with Gays.

      Who are you to “believe” anything about the reality of my life? It isn’t your place, and you’re out of line. The problem with you “christians” is you think your right to free speech and to evangelise your religion supersedes anyone else’s right to exist free from prejudice and discrimination. You don’t know when to step off. I didn’t “choose” to be a homosexual. This is how I am, and I can’t change it. Your opinion about it and about me is irrelevant.

    • Sheesh!

      What? In a different era, when xtianity was as in-style as you are now, you’d have been the most fervent xtian and you know it. Being ‘with it’ is fabulous, you’d not be able to resist.

    • Either cite facts and argue in moderate language or stop wasting your time and mine.

  • John

    The term “traditional marriage” is not proper. There is only marriage, which is between man and woman, attested to by the realities of human experience and our fundamental biology. The primary purpose of marriage is the rearing of children and the perpetuation of the human race. Even if a married man and woman can’t have children, they are still the same form and type as a fertile couple.

    If two men wish to call themselves married, I won’t lose any sleep over it. They can call themselves unicorns for all I care. But unicorns don’t exist, and neither does “gay marriage.”

    • A same sex couple can and do raise children too. Over 122,000 same sex couples are doing this already in the USA alone.

  • Sheeesh!

    @Derek Williams

    “A same sex couple can and do raise children too. Over 122,000 same sex couples are doing this already in the USA alone.”

    WhooopDeeDooo Chief! Please set up a separate republic and live your sepcial lives awat from us eeeeeeevil folks mmkay?

    • The 122,000 couples have the backing of the government. You don’t. Perhaps you should set up your own anti-gay republic.

    • Sheeesh!

      @Derek Williams

      Derek honey, it’s not allowed, you’re soft-fuzzy democracy would kill us all (because you are non-violent of course). That is why I suggested that you guys do it. Since the gov’t is currently worshipping you (and not us as you might pretend), why not take the opportunity to get away from us benighted devils?

      Unless of course you don’t really want ‘freedom’ and just want to have somebody to lecture and bully?

    • How can 5% of the population in any rational sense “bully” the 95% who are heterosexual?

    • Sheesh!

      @Derek

      Cool ‘playing dumb’ comment bro:

      “How can 5% of the population in any rational sense “bully” the 95% who are heterosexual?”

      You tell me son, we’re certainly not doing it. I think gov’t fealty might maybe have a bit to do with it. Our foreign policy is now largely based on “gay rights.” How’s bullying Uganda? How can a small % of people known as “gangsters” bully entire blocks, cities, etc?

      Come on chief, this ain’t no republican blog, you can’t pull that.

    • The heterosexual majority certainly can do anything it likes – it outnumbers us at least 10 to 1. In 78 countries of the world, this majority is able to continue tyrannising and persecuting LGBT with your laws against same sex relationships, including the death penalty in 7 countries, as well as pogroms against us by gangs, sacking from our employment, eviction from our living accommodation, excommunication by our church, disowning by our families, when we never did a bad thing to any of you.

      In the remaining 116 countries of the West however, most of the heterosexual majority apart from you, now realises that we are your brothers, sisters, uncles, aunts, cousins, work colleagues and friends. Only through self disclosure by LGBT has it finally dawned on the majority that when you harm us, you’re more than likely harming one of your own.

    • Sheesh!

      Oh please chief, this ain’t a republican blog, you’ll not get over on us with that played out BS. The gov’t is on your side and so are the institutions- you are “the man” and not some outsider. Deal with it boss.

    • Either cite facts and argue in moderate language or stop wasting your time and mine.

    • Sheesh!

      Since when are you the one to tell us what to do in our own space? I told you sir, this ain’t no republican blog, them you can push around. Thanks for demonstrating the urge among your sacred people to try and use your current gov’t granted status to boss everyone around. You are the establishment wether you like it or not.

      As far as “wasting time” you don’t seem to have a problem writing a book with every comment.

    • I know I can’t stop you from commenting, any more than you can stop me. It’s a free country.

  • Russell

    I hope are state can stop this

    • Why?

    • Sheesh!

      Is he not allowed to have a heretical opinion about special people Derek?

  • John

    A same sex couple can and do raise children too. Over 122,000 same sex couples are doing this already in the USA alone.

    Yes, but as I said, they can’t perpetuate the human race. Nor can they do parenting as well as a married couple. Kids profoundly need a mom and a dad.

    • As for your contention that same sex couples do a bad job raising kids conceived by accident by heterosexuals, the research says otherwise (delete spaces so open links):

      h t t p : //thenewcivilrightsmovement. com/breaking-largest-study-of-children-raised-by-same-sex-parents-shows-theyre-healthier-than-their-peers/politics/2013/06/05/68146

      w w w .aifs. gov. au/cfca/pubs/papers/a145197/index.html

      About 11% of Australian gay men and 33% of lesbians have children. Children may have been conceived in the context of previous heterosexual relationships, or raised from birth by a co-parenting gay or lesbian couple or single parent.

      • Overall, research to date considerably challenges the point of view that same-sex parented families are harmful to children. Children in such families do as well emotionally, socially and educationally as their peers from heterosexual couple families.
      • Some researchers have concluded there are benefits for children raised by lesbian couples in that they experience higher quality parenting, sons display greater gender flexibility, and sons and daughters display more open-mindedness towards sexual, gender and family diversity.
      • The possible effect of important socio-economic family factors, such as income and parental education, were not always considered in the studies reviewed in this paper.
      • Although many Australian lesbian-parented families appear to be receiving good support from their health care providers, there is evidence that more could be done to develop policies and practices supportive of same-sex parented families in the Australian health, education, child protection and foster care systems.
      • Additional key messages, relating to specific family structures and psychosocial outcomes for children raised by lesbian and gay parents, are included throughout the paper.

      Who better to listen to about the results of same sex parenting, than the kids themselves:

      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q (Zach Wahls)
      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=IDqiTt7mfsQ (Riley Roberts)
      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=_qf0puHJ-KM (“Two Fathers” song)
      w w w . youtube. com/watch?v=B9x_E7Gj2qw (“Two Gay Dads”)

      More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents’ sexual orientation and any measure of a child’s emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment.

      We can turn to a host of experts and research findings on the topic including:

      American Academy of Pediatrics
      American Psychiatric Association
      American Psychological Association
      National Association of Social Workers

      Starting with the American Academy of Pediatrics, which said the following about same-sex parenting:

      h t t p ://pediatrics. aappublications. org/content/131/4/e1374. full

      “There is ample evidence to show that children raised by same-gender parents fare as well as those raised by heterosexual parents. More than 25 years of research have documented that there is no relationship between parents’ sexual orientation and any measure of a child’s emotional, psychosocial, and behavioral adjustment. These data have demonstrated no risk to children as a result of growing up in a family with 1 or more gay parents. Conscientious and nurturing adults, whether they are men or women, heterosexual or homosexual, can be excellent parents. The rights, benefits, and protections of civil marriage can further strengthen these families.”

      THEN the American Psychiatric Association:

      “Numerous studies over the last three decades consistently demonstrate that children raised by gay or lesbian parents exhibit the same level of emotional, cognitive, social, and sexual functioning as children raised by heterosexual parents. This research indicates that optimal development for children is based not on the sexual orientation of the parents, but on stable attachments to committed and nurturing adults. The research also shows that children who have two parents, regardless of the parents’ sexual orientations, do better than children with only one parent.”

      AND the American Psychological Association – which passed a lengthy resolution on this issue. The key parts of that resolution are below:

      “WHEREAS
      there is no scientific evidence that parenting effectiveness is related to parental sexual orientation: lesbian and gay parents are as likely as heterosexual parents to provide supportive and healthy environments for their children (citing research by Patterson, 2000, 2004; Perrin, 2002; Tasker,1999);

      “WHEREAS
      research has shown that the adjustment,development, and psychological well-being of children is unrelated to parental sexual orientation and that the children of lesbian and gay parents are as likely as those of heterosexual parents to flourish (Patterson, 2004; Perrin, 2002; Stacey & Biblarz, 2001);
      “THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the APA opposes any discrimination based on sexual orientation in matters of adoption, child custody and visitation, foster care, and reproductive health services;

      “THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the APA believes that children reared by a same-sex couple benefit from legal ties to each parent;

      “THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the APA supports the protection of parent-child relationships through the legalization of joint adoptions and second parent adoptions of children being reared by same-sex couples;

      “THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that APA shall take a leadership role in opposing all discrimination based on sexual orientation in matters of adoption, child custody and visitation, foster care, and reproductive health services”

      NEXT, the National Association of Social Workers:
      “Anyone who wishes to examine the 20 years of peer-reviewed studies on the emotional, cognitive and behavioral outcomes of children of gay and lesbian parents will find not one shred of evidence that children are harmed by their parents’ sexual orientation.

      “The empirical and clinical evidence suggesting same-sex parents are equivalent to heterosexual parents in their ability to care for children and provide loving homes is so compelling that there is a growing consensus among legal and child welfare experts that there is no rational basis to deny adoption to gay and lesbian couples solely on the basis of their sexual orientation.”

      AND the results of a study by the University of California at Los Angeles and the University of Amsterdam, in which children were followed from their adoption by same-sex couples during infancy through to adulthood – 17 years in all. Their finding was that children raised by same-sex parents “were rated significantly higher in social, school/academic, and total competence and significantly lower in social problems, rule-breaking, aggressive, and externalizing problem behavior than their age-matched counterparts in Achenbach’s normative sample of American youth.” This study was published in the American Academy of Pediatrics three years ago.

      Here is a sample list of US based organisations that are known to welcome LGBT: The United Nations, The American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, American Anthropological Association, World Health Organisation, American Academy of Pediatrics, Child Welfare League of America, National Association of Social Workers, North American Council on Adoptable Children, American Psychoanalytic Association, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy, Council on Child and Adolescent Health, American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Mental Health America, California Psychological Association, American Counselling Association, American Sociological Association, American School Health Association, National Association of School Psychologists, not to mention countless universities, local governments, labor unions, and virtually every human rights organisation that exists.

    • Sheesh!

      Derek baby, what you’ve written proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you guys are far superior to us. Therefore, in the interest of not bringing you guys down to out benighted level, you should demand of the gov’t that grants all of your wishes to take a state or two and give it to you as your own sovereign province. No “haters” and your wonderful families can flourish.

      What’s wrong with that.

    • I merely cited facts. Your sarcasm doesn’t speak well for you or your argument.

    • Sheesh!

      I don’t have an “argument” son. I don’t care about you and your sacred lifestyle. I don’t wish to prevent you from fabulousness. You can cited your facts all day- in your own independent, autonomous area. Unless you prefer to sit with us eeeevil folks and badger us and lecture us and have the gov’t that worships you impose your will on us (and Uganda) then you should want to be only among your own.

      What’s wrong with that?

    • How is your government “imposing its will” on you? Who is forcing you to marry the same sex? Who is denying you the right to marry the opposite sex? Both these are what you wish your government to continue to do to us, make marriage only possible if we marry an opposite sex partner, and forbidding us from marrying the person we really want to marry, the person we love who loves us in return, and who it just so happens is of the same gender.

      You still have the civil right to say how much you disapprove of same sex marriage, how you don’t like gay people, how you don’t recognise our relationships, how we shouldn’t have equal rights and on and on and on. You haven’t adduced a scintilla of evidence to show how my gaining equal rights is taking away any right of yours.

    • Sheesh!

      Nice try son. You know full well the gov’t is behind you. They make foreign policy about you. People don’t get fired for criticizing me. Holy specimen such as yourself are another matter all together.

      Once again: why not set up your own autonomous area where no friction with the other would exist? Do you enjoy badgering the eeevil ones?

    • “Why not set up your own autonomous area where no friction with the other would exist?”

      Why should we remove ourselves from mainstream society? We want to belong the our community and make our contributions just like anyone else. You have given me no incentive to leave behind my friends, family, and my job, to go on some distant “gay island” other than that my very existence offends you.

      Since you consider this idea so meritorious, it’s always open to you to follow your own advice.

  • Niemca

    I’d weigh in here but I’m not sure which sin is worse, needing to lose about ten pounds or not believing two gay parents can make just as good, and sometimes better, parents for a kid. My straight parents fucked me up pretty bad.

    I’d say Derek won the match overall, but it’s a close call.

    • 🙂

    • Niemca

      ‘Two gay parents ‘can’t’ is what I meant to write… shoulda been a double negative.

      I’ve given this thought as of late, having numerous lesbian friends in couples with a kid, usually the biological one of one partner in the relationship. I think overall if two parents are equally well-adjusted but one couple’s gay and the other straight, a mom and dad work better, plain and simple.

      But life isn’t reducible to a simple equation or a probability. It just isn’t.

      Lesbians can have kids easily (notwithstanding infertility) without medical help. I know some who literally ordered frozen sperm and voila, if you’re young and healthy ya get a baby.

      Gay men simply cannot, and that seems to me upon much reflection to be just the way it is. I’m certain society cannot be made to violate nature, and that the french left went nuts when they tried to make surrogacy for gay male couples paid for by insurance. As for them adopting, I don’t see why not when one considers how many homeless little babies and children need families desperately. I wonder how the militant pro-lifers on here feel about that. Do you even care about the lives of the needy and what do you propose to do with unwanted babies?

      As for gay marriage, I maintain what I’ve thought for years, which is that the gays should stop barging into people’s churches, but that bible thumping holyrollers like the one Matt P is now channeling need to get their version of god out of our government.

      That match goes to the holy-rollers, however, as it’s encumbent upon the gays to lead the changes they feel so sanctimonious about ushering in. Strengthen civil unions and bring your straight allies to come along with you.

      I happen to know that the egomaniac fags who lead the charge to argue endlessly about gay marriage are simply that – egomaniacs – and that the jews who fund them know exactly what they’re doing when they divide Whites.

      So I guess the first match goes to Big Fag and the second to Big God.

      Tie breaker…do we really want that, if you get the pun?

    • There’s no special funding category for Jews. Believe me, there really is not. I should know, I have worked in these sorts of organisations for decades. That said, we have a lot in common with Jews in the sense that we are one of the most disliked and persecuted minorities on the Planet Earth, and so if a wealthy Jewish businessman came along and offered to fund public education programmes to stop gay kids getting picked on and beaten up in schools, why would we refuse any more or less than if a Gentile businessman made exactly the same offer?

      FYI, “Jews” have nothing more to do with funding us than Gentiles do. Our funding is through pubic donation via websites, such as Human Rights Campaign, Matthew Shepherd, PFlag, GSA, GLAAD and myriad other fundraising, pastoral care and civil rights organisations. The vast majority of our support comes from heterosexual allies, who are usually our families, friends and colleagues. On rare occasions, governments will fund special projects like phone-in centres to sample how many LGBT kids are homeless, or suicide because of abuse, as part of their public duty in data mining. It’s a waste of public money and resources to feed, house, clothe and educate millions of gay kids only to have them throw it all away when they blow their heads off with daddy’s gun, hang themselves, or walk in front of a train. Then the public has to pick the cost of scraping their remains off the railway. We never earn tax back from these kids because they never make to adulthood, and of course if they do survive childhood, only to be sacked from their job because they’re gay, then we’re coughing up again for welfare, or psychiatric remediation for all the trauma. It is therefore not in the public interest to ruin the lives of LGBT citizens.

    • Niemca

      There’s a lot wrong with your post, Derek, but since I’m guessing you’re not american but scottish, I think, I’ll just leave it at this: no one chooses to be gay, for the most part.

      Judaism is a set of beliefs and values and it is a choice even more, for the ashkenazi, than it is a biology. And it is an evil one, especially for the ashkenazi, as they invaded Europe to suck off the european masses.

    • Care to adduce corroborated and peer reviewed evidence to substantiate your claim that a disliked minority managed to take over Europe? Try to avoid Mein Kampf if you can.

    • Niemca

      50% of the world’s wealth is in jewish hands, that’s just for starters.

      I’ve skimmed Mein Kampf here and there, but I’m not sure why it needs to be disqualified as a source. Please help me out on that one. Try to avoid apocrypha about ovens and lampshades if you can.

    • Your antisemitic opinion isn’t transmogrified into fact merely because you learned how to type it out. Kindly adduce evidence. Your statements aren’t evidence unless they’re backed up by sources we can check.

    • Niemca

      And on the subject, please let me know why anglo celt men were murdered in Afghanistan and Iraq for the jews’ god?

    • All Abrahamic religions, including Christianity, Islam and Judaism claim allegiance to the same god (‘God’ aka ‘Allah’ aka ‘Jehovah’) – disparate and multifarious though we’ve already agreed his/her/its manifestations to be.

  • The Cobb Diet™

    Simple answer to all of this:

    IF God exists, he is perfect. That means, he makes NO errors – ever.

    Since God is perfect, he would create ONLY heterosexual human beings. In fact, he would create PERFECT human beings. It proceeds that perfection cannot create imperfection.

    Therefore, since flaming faggots DO exist, God could not have created them. And since quivering queers DO exist, and are clearly imperfect, human though they otherwise are…there can be ONLY one logical conclusion:

    God does NOT exist.

    • Either that, or many gods exist. There certainly cannot be just ONE god. Look at how he disagrees with himself from religion to religion:

      Catholic God: against divorce, birth control and women’s ordination, says homosexuality is inborn yet claims that same sex relationships are sinful
      Anglican God: created by divorcee King Henry VIII, is ok with family planning, ordains women priests and bishops, agrees that homosexuality is innate and allows LGBT to be clergy, so long as they are abstinent (good luck proving that). In recent news, the Archbishop of Canterbury announced last week that the Anglican Church will start to recognise same sex marriages.

      There is no rational way these two oppositionally defiant gods – Catholic and Anglican can be one and the same entity.

      Then when it comes to same sex relationships, the following Christian religions welcome openly LGBT members to participate and receive sacraments:
      Calvary Chapel
      Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
      Reformed Church in America
      Oriental Orthodox
      Community of Christ
      Mennonite*
      Moravian Church
      National Baptist Convention*
      New Apostolic
      Unification Church
      United Methodist Church*

      The below also ordain, and bless same sex unions or marriage:
      Anglican*
      Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)*
      Church of Scotland*
      Episcopal*
      Community of Christ
      Church of Denmark
      Evangelical Lutheran Church of America*
      German Lutheran & United Churches in Evangelical Church in Germany
      Metropolitan Community Church
      Church of Norway
      Pentecostal*
      Protestant Church in the Netherlands
      Presbyterian Church (USA)*
      Religious Society of Friends (Quaker)
      Old Catholic
      Swedenborgian*
      Church of Sweden
      Swiss Reformed Churches in Federation of Swiss Protestant Churches*
      United Church of Canada
      United Church of Christ*
      Unity School of Christianity
      Waldensian*

      *varies
      SOURCE:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_homosexuality

    • Niemca

      Derek, besides hectoring people, what are you trying to accomplish by posting on TradYouth?

      If there are so many gods out there, why can’t you hector your own to marry you and not Matt Parrott’s?

    • If there is a god or there are many gods, then it’s a designer megastore of choice. While it bothers me that people can believe nonsense, given the amount of tax I am paying for public education, I have to accept people’s constitutional right to freedom of belief so long as they don’t hector me about how I and my relationship is inferior to theirs, and use their religion to condone mistreatment of LGBT people. Freedom OF religion also connotes freedom FROM it.

  • Spelunker
  • Blake

    Hey, well I’m not a Warmonger nor am I here to change anyone’s opinion. Just wanted to state that I disagree with your orginizations view on marriage for two main reasons. 1) one argument I hear a lot is that we shouldn’t “redefine” marriage. Well in actuality, marriage has been redefined thousands of times in hundreds of different ways. In many parts of the world, including Ancient Greece two men marrying was not unheard of. 2) although America was founded on the principle of religious freedom I understand that most of this country is Christian. So I understand if your view sides with the view of some churches. But the bible can be interpreted in many different ways. Although in my opinion what book written centuries ago matters little to me.

  • Pingback: Mailbag: RE: “Our Small-Minded Views” | Traditionalist Youth Network()

  • Pingback: Marriage and Semantics | Struggling with Modernity()

  • Pingback: Marriage and Semantics: “Gay Marriage” Does Not Exist | JewishProblem.com()

TradMarriage

By: Matt Parrott


Matt is a founding member of TradYouth and is currently the project's Chief Information Officer. He's been active in the White Identity cause for years, primarily as a blogger but also as a street activist and regional organizer.
%d bloggers like this: