This is a video of Hillary Clinton speaking at the Human Rights Campaign, a pro-homosexual group.
Among her statements:
- Expressed her disdain for marriage and the Federal Marriage Amendment
- Tried to pass off special rights for homosexuals as "civil rights"
- Accused Republicans of "politicizing" "intimate issues"
- Lauded the Lawrence v. Texas Supreme Court decision legalizing sodomy
- Pledged to pass the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, granting the same benefits to homosexual couples that married couples have
- Spoke in favor of homosexuals being allowed to adopt children
- Applauded expanding "hate crime" legislation
- Spoke in favor of allowing homosexuals to serve openly in the U.S. military, actually claiming it was a "matter of national security"
Featured Article
Monday, November 12, 2007
Hillary Clinton Reveals Her Presidential Homosexual Agenda
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Guess what? Hillary Clinton is the only candidate that has these 4 attributes (there are more but I forget): integrity, honor, patriotism, and compassion. I double dog dare you to find another candidate with these attributes. I got $35 in the bank that says you won’t be able to find one.
Now that I've picked myself up off the floor from laughing so hard, I'll respond to your comment.
She probably does have more integrity than her husband, but I think the server would crash if I tried to list all the people who have more integrity, honor, patriotism and compassion than Hillary Clinton.
People of integrity and honor don't try to hide their beliefs and agenda the way she does; she wouldn't come out and say this kind of stuff in front of the national media cameras.
Patriots don't demean and work against everything that has made this country great, and they don't work to see this country defeated in Iraq just so she and her party can get a little political mileage from it.
And someone who was compassionate wouldn't pat a person with a disease on the back and tell them "Don't bother seeing a doctor; you'll be fine." Yet she does this with homosexuals who live an unhealthy, dangerous, and spiritually bankrupt life.
She also would hold down the rest of the country in the pit of dependence, leaving them at the mercy of a bunch of government bureaucrats to do for them what people should be doing for themselves.
You'd better hold on tight to that $35 in the bank; if Hillary gets into office, she'll tax most of it away from you because she think she can spend it better than you can.
Let me start by saying that I am far from a Hillary supporter. I do not understand why, regardless of moral belief, that a person would be opposed to equal rights for the members of the LGBT community. Or why we wouldn't want to encourage and support people to be honest about their identity in their workplace or in the military? I do understand why gay marriage is a question. With the changing dynamics of our families, why is it not reasonable to redefine the definition of family legally. I would erase "marriage" completely from the legal language and reserve that for church. It is a slippery slope for the government to move the line of marriage. Where would the stop? Everyone has a moral boundary. I don't think that most members of the LGBT community would find it acceptable for siblings to marry or first cousins or children. Everyone understands marriage within some moral parameter. Legal unions and expanding the definition of family could help so many people not just LGBT folks. As for having/adopting children it is ridiculous that anyone would think that the children of family- oriented members of the gay community (obviously there are many straight and gay people that you would not want to give kids to) could not love a child in the same way. I hope that people realize that without adoption there are many, many ways for gay parents to have a child. It's just silly- there are so many unsavory straight people raising kids . . . that have problems far more detrimental to a child's health than having parents of the same gender. I wish that someone would just stand up and stop the charade. All these politicians suggest that they have supportive feelings but indicate that the country can't handle their straight-forwardness (no pun intended) on the topic. They just show us how spineless and calculating they really are. It's insulting.
On the sodomy issue- you do know that many heterosexual people include such activities in their repertoire?
Anonymous, homosexuals already do have equal rights. They enjoy the same right to free speech, assembly, due process, etc. that everyone else does. They can also marry someone of the opposite sex, just as heterosexuals can. But they are not entitled to special rights, special rights that would silence those who disagree with the, and special rights to do things that go against nature and what God says is right.
God is the creator of all human life and he gets to set the rules. He's said that one man and one woman for life is how human sexuality is supposed to be expressed. Anything outside of that is unnatural and unacceptable to him; homosexuality turns God's design for human sexuality upside down.
Children deserve to have two sex role models: a male and a female. Placing them in the sphere of homosexual relationships robs them of this. Additionally, it exposes the child to a lifestyle that is not only unnatural and immoral, but is also characterized by drastically increased risk of disease, substance abuse, depression, suicide, and domestic abuse. Child abuse of male children is also more frequent from male homosexuals. It makes absolutely zero sense from a moral, safety and developmental sense to subject children to this kind of environment, especially when married couples are waiting in line to adopt children.
Post a Comment