The Rest of The Story

Where Are We Going To End Up?

Published on March 25, 2008 By KFC Kickin For Christ In Current Events

Much has been written here and elsewhere about OKlahoma State Rep Sally Kern and her blatent honesty of her belief on the Homosexual lifestyle. She dared speak out. Shame on her. But did you know the rest of the story?

Many know and are angry (especially you know who) about her comments on how the "Homosexuality Agenda is destroying the nation" and is a bigger threat to our country than the Islamic Terrorists.

How many know her speech was not only secretly recorded but also very carefully edited before given out to the public?

They left out the part where she says, 'The book that I base my life upon is God's Word, and it says to love everybody -- and I try to love everybody, but not everybody's lifestyle is equal.' They just started with the part where it says 'not everybody's lifestyle is equal.' They didn't include the part that has Sally on tape saying that she loves everybody."

Of course not. That's not as much fun to mock and lash out at. All this is about, plain and simple, is "The Agenda" trying to warn anyone in opposition to their militant stance to back off. Don't even think about speaking out. If you dare, you will be put through hell as they demonize you taking away any unwanted attention to their unnatural behavior.

Some have been warning us that once we let this behavior in as normal be prepared for other behaviors called "alternative lifestyles" to want their day in the sun. And I think I saw the door opening on Oprah last week. And you know how that goes. I immediately picked up on it.

She had on her show a beautiful Mormon, one of three wives wedded to one husband. This woman did not fit the usual stereotype we think of when we think plural wives. Even Oprah kept saying you don't look like the type. She was floored. This lady was very modern in appearance (no 18th century dress) beautiful and very intelligent. She could be, and seems to be, a great spokeswomen for this lifestyle.

Anyhow she said something to the effect that "in today's day of alternative lifestyles" she would like to see polygamy made legal. She kept on speaking but I knew........deep down that Oprah would pick up on the "day of alternative lifestyle." There was no way that statement was making it past Oprah. Sure enough.

By golly she did grab right onto it. Immediately. She even said, she never thought of it like that and seemed very receptive to this woman as she presented her case. I mean really, this Mormon woman did have a point. If we accept this alternative lifestyle how can we say no to others who feel they have a right to marry whom they want even if it involves more than one wife?

What's next on the agenda? I do know that those interested in beastiality and pedophilia are watching all this. How far will we go?

Comments (Page 2)

lulapilgrim

on Mar 27, 2008

There are a number of animal species that have homosexual relationships - a few kinds of birds, some mammals, etc.

Ya, I heard about the "gay" penguins! According to the NY Times, we are supposed to learn about human sexuality from the animals...ya, right....like animals have alot to teach about sex.

And evidently, some in the APA, American Psychiatric Assoc., are going along with it.

But relying upon animals to teach humans anything and transform those into generalities aobut the naturalness and normalcy of homosexuality is preposterous. It betrays common sense as well. Animals have nothing to teach us about how to run our sexual lives. Animals regularly do all sorts of things that we humans would never consider normal or natural for us to do. The parallels between them and us are tenuous at best.

And again as opposed to animals, where homosexuality appears to be irrelevant, we know that homosexuality in humans is harmful.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

Not only that, but homosexual attraction exists without need for unnatural aid,

Just so we have a clear understanding, I'm not talking about homosexual attraction or tendency...just homosexuality...the sexual practice or behavior which I consider is an objective disorder.

It may well be that homosexuality is intelligently designed into human nature in an attempt to keep the population down. This would explain why it's less prevalent in small villages and towns and more common in big cities (there's some newthink for you!).

Homosexuality is more prevelant in big cities becaseu there are more people and thus more opportunity.

As to your idea that homosexuality is intelligently designed.....nah, sorry about that Cacto, no sale.

God doesn't want to keep the population down...He loves making babies...all the more to be happy with Him in His eternal kingdom. He created us as heterosexual beings and commanded us to increase and multiply. We are commanded by Him to shun all other sexual relationships under pain of His Divine Judgment...so this would be contradictory to your idea as put forth here. God wouldn't have created a genetic condition which would have sabotaged His design and He certainly wouldn't have created people with no choice but to engage in a sexual behavior He condemns.

Besides, the science of genetics has shown that there aren't any homosexual genes. And beyond that, if there were any genes associated with homosexuality, they would tend to disappear from the gene pool in a relatively few generations. Homosexuality would make the person less likely to reproduce tending ultimately to the extinction of the gene. Besides that, you've got the shorter lifespan of practicing homosexuals making them less able to contribute his genes to the next generation in comparison to those who live longer and reproductive active life.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

Lula posts:

On the basis of our nature, heterosexuality and homosexuality can't possibly be equivalent.

Okay, but you're redefining the debate here.

No, I'm not. I asked your definition and you said:

Depends what you mean by equivalent, but if you mean that they're acceptable ways of expressing yourself sexually then yes, I think they are equivalent.

I accepted your definition of homosexuality and heterosexuality....they are both ways of expressing yourself sexually....and then I went on to clarify

So, just to be clear your saying that same gender-sexual conduct is equivalent to opposite gender sexual conduct, right?

Cacto posts:

On the basis of our nature, the two can't possibly be equivalent because they don't appear in equal numbers.

Homosexuality isn't equivalent to heterosexuality becasue the latter is natural and the former isn't. Heterosexuality, male/female sexual conduct has an undeniable, exclusive place in nature and homosexuality is unnatural and will never be equivalent to that. Equivalency has nothing to do with the numbers or lack numbers of people who engage in the sex act.

SilentPoet

on Mar 28, 2008

Looking at things with a sour dispositin tonight...The world would be a far better place if people just learned to shut up and deal with their own life. Religious, science minded, or otherwise.

SilentPoet

on Mar 28, 2008

Natural according to what? Your god? Bottle nose dolphins, some Manatee's, Blue whales (i believe), and some other animals actually are known to mate/have attraction towards the same sex.

So, how does nature deem homosexuality unnatural?

cactoblasta

on Mar 28, 2008

Heterosexuality, male/female sexual conduct has an undeniable, exclusive place in nature and homosexuality is unnatural and will never be equivalent to that.

I suggest we leave it here. I've tried to demonstrate that heterosexuality isn't exclusively natural and that there's no point in knocking being unnatural, but you're obviously not interested. Thanks for your time.

My advice to you would be to try and live a thoroughly natural life for one week, and then say that unnatural necessarily equals bad. Bad for you, maybe, but it may be good for another.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

...The world would be a far better place if people just learned to shut up and deal with their own life. Religious, science minded, or otherwise.

Well, there wouldn't be much of a discussion board here on JU if we all just learned to shut up....that's silly SilentPoet.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

Lula posts:

Homosexuality years ago wasn't enshrined on the same level as heterosexuality. Now it is...what's going on? What happened from then to now and why should we be concerned that this will lead to acceptance of such practices as polygamy, pedophilia and beastility?

Lula posts:

Heterosexuality, male/female sexual conduct has an undeniable, exclusive place in nature and homosexuality is unnatural and will never be equivalent to that.

Cactoblasta posts:

I suggest we leave it here.

Fair enough...I've enjoyed the discussion.

Hopefully, it's helped show that homosexuality once equated with heterosexuality will inevitably lead to equivalency of such practices as polygamy, pedophilia and beastility. This will happen unless and until academia stops indoctrinating it, the media stops promoting it, the churches stop tolerating and protecting it by remaining silent, and politicos stop sanctioning into laws.

My advice to you would be to try and live a thoroughly natural life for one week, and then say that unnatural necessarily equals bad. Bad for you, maybe, but it may be good for another.

Again, sticking strictly to the topic of human sexuality, this is opening up a whole other can of worms....as it gets into the moral issue.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

SilentPoet posts:

So, how does nature deem homosexuality unnatural?

Did you read my post #15? Here's the part of it that most answers your question.

the natural anatomy of the human body including organ function and reproduction rejects the naturalness of homosexual acts. Homosexuality is contrary to the facts of life. The natural design of the body affirms the sexual union of a man and a woman. Their parts fit perfectly whereas the body parts don't fit in the case of same-gender sex.

The natural design of the body rejects homo-sex, especially male homo-sex. The rectum wall easily ruptures during the sex act which is why disease is so easily transmitted. Be honest...do you really believe this is a natural act when it destroys the biological function of the rectum? Using the rectum for sex is harmful. Empirical evidence shows that females engaging in unnatural sexual practices are nearly as damaging and their lifespan is shortened as well.

cactoblasta

on Mar 28, 2008

Hopefully, it's helped show that homosexuality once equated with heterosexuality will inevitably lead to equivalency of such practices as polygamy, pedophilia and beastility. This will happen unless and until academia stops indoctrinating it, the media stops promoting it, the churches stop tolerating and protecting it by remaining silent, and politicos stop sanctioning into laws.

You haven't shown that at all. While you've made it clear you think homosexuality is bad, unnatural and unhealthy, you haven't shown the steps taken from it to legalising polygamy, paedophilia and bestiality. If you can't show those steps, you have no case. You need to make an argument before you can claim it's made. But don't worry about it here - I'm sure it will come up some other time.

lulapilgrim

on Mar 28, 2008

While you've made it clear you think homosexuality is bad, unnatural and unhealthy, you haven't shown the steps taken from it to legalising polygamy, paedophilia and bestiality. If you can't show those steps, you have no case. You need to make an argument before you can claim it's made.

I was working on it and in order to make my case I had to first show that homosexuality is not equivalent to heterosexuality.

real quickly...as perhaps others may want to discuss.....

I started to pull the steps together in my #8 post.

Also, Dr Guy mentioned checking out Holland. They are one step further down the "equal" slippery slope than the U.S. is.

Same sex "marriage" based on "equal rights" is another slope...Next, a person who claim to love his dog and wants to marry it is going to sue in some liberal court...Then two guys and one woman or some other arrangement will be in love and want to marry....

In #12, you asked about lowering the age of consent...

and I've been researching more on that...if I'm not mistaken, Canada has legitimized same sex "marriage" and lowered the age of consent..and England has as well...

At for the US, right now the age varies by state, ranging from 16-18.

Have you ever heard the chant "We're here, we're queer, and we want your children"?

So, yes, children are in the crosshairs of the homosexual agenda. They are activley seeking to have sex with children legalized. And the focus on children as sexual targets is not at the fringe of the homosexual movement. I've already stated their goals as per their platform in 1992. Then a year later, 7 demands were made at the "Gay" march on Washington that today have pretty much been met. So, the link is there...their agenda is moving right along....homosexualists have demanded open contact with children and we are seeing this in scouting organizations, boys and girls clubs and in schools...their #4 demand.

SilentPoet

on Mar 29, 2008

Well, there wouldn't be much of a discussion board here on JU if we all just learned to shut up....that's silly SilentPoet.

True, but it saves hearing some of the crazy stuff said here, like you're claims.

Did you read my post #15? Here's the part of it that most answers your question.

That's not fact,that's you're opinion. Give me facts, verified by science. Until you do, I will just call you're claim BS. Religious, illogical, blind BS.

SilentPoet

on Mar 29, 2008

Have you ever heard the chant "We're here, we're queer, and we want your children"?

So, yes, children are in the crosshairs of the homosexual agenda. They are activley seeking to have sex with children legalized. And the focus on children as sexual targets is not at the fringe of the homosexual movement. I've already stated their goals as per their platform in 1992. Then a year later, 7 demands were made at the "Gay" march on Washington that today have pretty much been met. So, the link is there...their agenda is moving right along....homosexualists have demanded open contact with children and we are seeing this in scouting organizations, boys and girls clubs and in schools...their #4 demand.

Question: Do you live in fear? Do you like perpetuating fear?

You're comments here show nothing more than a paranoia, why not try and get to know some gay people, try to talk to them, and quit lumping together. You're God I'm sure wouldn't like you judging, and assuming.

KFC Kickin For Christ

on Mar 29, 2008

SP...her God and my God are one and the same and we both know that God says that men having sex with men and women having sex with other women is an abomination to him.

But that doesn't mean we are not to treat them with respect. They are people for heaven's sake. No different than anyone else other than how they manifest their sex lives.

Our problem isn't so much with these homosexuals (they've been around since like forever) as it is with the fact they are cramming it down our throats and legislating it as if normal behavior. It's the militancy we're against. Not the people themselves.

SilentPoet

on Mar 29, 2008

SP...her God and my God are one and the same and we both know that God says that men having sex with men and women having sex with other women is an abomination to him.

Please post the scripture.

Our problem isn't so much with these homosexuals (they've been around since like forever) as it is with the fact they are cramming it down our throats and legislating it as if normal behavior. It's the militancy we're against. Not the people themselves.

But if your God says to love thy neighbor, to treat them kindly, to live your life and let them live theirs, then why not allow legislation so that they can. You cannot, with a straight face, say that gays and lesbians are treated equally and fairly in the US.

I mean you may say you like the person but dislike the deed, but you (if you haven't) should put yourself in their shoes, and maybe realize that they go through a lot, just because of them being gay/lesbian. I honestly wish those evangalists (and others) who hammer home their rhetoric on anti-gay rights need to simmer down a bit, and step outside their pulpit and look at a gay man, and lesbian woman's reality.

But that doesn't mean we are not to treat them with respect.

the fact they are cramming it down our throats and legislating it as if normal behavior.

How are you respect them, when you're not willing to respect them as a whole. You can't nit pick what to respect. I may not agree with your faith, your God, and your views, but I respect them and would fight for your right to be treated fairly, and not to be judged becase of any of it. Exactly the same thing with gays and lesbians. They're being prejudiced against because they are not of "normal behavior."

Indulge me if you would. Set aside your religion and all for a second. I ask you to only look at your emotions.

What if you were gay? What if you couldn't marry someone that you loved, just because you happened to be different?

***

I apologize if I seem akin to a snarling beast, heh. This is an important issue for me, and I view it as common sense that every one should be treated equal. Otherwise, our nation cannot be called a nation of equality, or land of the free.

Sad, but true, imho.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!