In the case of the Gay Agenda in the Liberal arena

Or, I thought we were friends?

In a previous post, I noted that “an agenda is a clear and present danger; it poses questions and questionable tactics to gain a civil right to do an injustice to those that either cannot speak for themselves or are not smart enough to truly sort out the presumed fact from fiction that is presented. Thusly, we are inundated with their rhetoric and their ideology to support a selfish scheme for a sect of people that DO NOT have ‘tolerance’ for yours.”

“Until the Democratic Congress passes, and President Obama signs, legislation enacting ENDA, repealing DADT, and repealing DOMA, we ask you to join us in pledging to postpone contributions to the Democratic National Committee, Organizing for America, and the Obama campaign,” they added. Read the article here.

This is actually very entertaining watching these people cut off their nose to spite their face. Can it get any better?

“There has been little, if any, pressure from the White House for votes on the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA). The administration continues to send mixed signals on the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT).  And we’ve been told not to expect the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) to even be considered until President Obama’s second term.”

Interesting, to say the very least. Especially even considering Obama gets a second term.

The term ‘civil right’ gets thrown around a lot…what exactly is a ‘civil right’? We are all equal under the law. But consider this:

“Civil rights” are different from “civil liberties.” Traditionally, the concept of “civil rights” has revolved around the basic right to be free from unequal treatment based on certain protected characteristics (race, gender, disability, etc.), while “civil libertiesare more broad-based rights and freedoms that are guaranteed at the federal level by the Constitution and other federal law.

Ah…therein lies the ideological difference. Being LGBT is not a civil right, it is a concept and agenda to force their culture, philosophy – dogma – on those that understand homosexuality to be an offense and an abomination.

Let me get back on track…what’s happening here is exactly what I knew would…blue dogs and progressive liberals are fighting each other on LGBT issues while special interest groups in the gay community threatens to cut off funding politicians – ‘Don’t ask, don’t give’ campaign. No flies on you!

As usual, there is never enough to pacify the Gay Agenda; Obama made that clear as he drags his feet on campaign promises, which is fine with the Conservative Right, I assure you. But clearly, it is their agenda to have more liberties than anyone else in the United States of America. I guess they’re just so much more special than the rest of us grunts that pay taxes!

In Defense of Traditional Marriage and Natural Families, part 2

Defense of Marriage ActHR3396: (1996) To define and protect the institution of marriage; `In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word `marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word `spouse’ refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.’

The Human Rights Campaign called on the president to repeal DOMA, saying ‘it is time for you to use your leadership to translate these principles into meaningful action.’ House Democrats introduced legislation last month that would overturn DOMA. And of course, the Gay Agenda has their version, or fiction, of ‘marriage’ – the Respect for Marriage Act. Sounds nice, eh? Sounds so normal and almost soccer mom-ish, doesn’t it? Well, it’s Respect for SAME SEX Marriage – only.

The bill (Respect for Marriage Act, HR 3567) would repeal all three sections of DOMA – which federally defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman – including section 1, which is the name; section 2, which instructs states not to recognize same-sex marriages performed in other states; and section 3, which prohibits the federal government from recognizing legally performed same-sex marriages.

Essentially what the gay community wants, according to the RMA and Rep. Barney Frank, is recognition of their legal marriage in a state where same sex marriage is not legal in order to gain access to federal and state money and spousal benefits – along with defining legal marriage with ‘persons’, not a man and woman.

However, as I had reported just last week, a ‘couple’ moved to Texas and filed for divorce. Legally, same sex marriage is not recognized in Texas which would make their request null and void. Of course, they are taking steps to repeal instead of going back to the state where they got ‘married’ to get divorced.

Mark 10:6-9 says, in the words of Jesus Christ – v6 ‘But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made them male and female.’ v7 ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, 8 and the two shall become one flesh’; so then they are no longer two, but one flesh. v9 Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.’ –NKJV-

Jesus emphasizes that marriage, as a permanent relationship between a man and a woman, goes back to God’s purpose at the beginning of creation. His purpose being that married couples bear children; Genesis 1:27-28. Nowhere in Scripture was artificial insemination or IVF mentioned to populate the Earth for same sex couples. The gay community can do all they want to overturn traditional marriage, and there’s a chance that it may come to pass…but know this: God does not change; He will never change His mind about the sin of homosexuality or that marriage is between a man and woman so that they may ‘be fruitful and multiply to replenish the Earth’.

Man + Woman = Children. Period.