More of the intolerance of the tolerant.
You know how homosexual activists and others on the Left preach the gospel of tolerance? Apparently tolerance is good for thee but not for me, in their eyes.
This older lady brought a cross to a protest at the Palm Springs City Hall against California's marriage protection amendment, Proposition 8. It was quickly knocked out of her hand and stomped on.
Also notice how the homosexual activists where shouting and crowding and interfering with the reporter's attempt even to interview this woman.
Make no mistake: homosexual activists don't want "tolerance" from you. They want your full acceptance and celebration of their sexual practices, and they refuse to accept anything less.
As for what you believe as a Christian or other person who acknowledges sexual normality...well, you see how "tolerant" they are of your views.
The tolerance kings look like hypocrisy kings to me. That, and petty thugs intent on turning society upside down for their personal gratification.
Featured Article
Monday, November 10, 2008
The Intolerance of the Tolerant: The Sequel
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Yes, belonging to "the club" seems more important to them than democratic vote. I hope that Proposition 8 will be a turning point for the ordinary citizens in preserving their meaning of marriage.
One could argue that the violent protests of the homosexuals are merely their right of free speech. But when they begin to encroach on the freedom of others, it becomes an offense against the spirit of America. This is nothing new though, liberals have been encroaching on the rights of Christians for years now.
One could argue that the violent protests of the homosexuals are merely their right of free speech. But when they begin to encroach on the freedom of others, it becomes an offense against the spirit of America. This is nothing new though, liberals have been encroaching on the rights of Christians for years now.
The news anchor closed with the following comment: "Obviously, there is a lot of anger and a lot of hate on both sides."
I saw hate and anger expressed by only one side. The counter-protesting lady was smiling and behaving very civily. She even mouthed "I love you" to someone, presumably one of her attackers.
I don't think most of us are hateful or angry with homosexuals, but we do resent their efforts to normalize a perverse sexuality that is demonstrably dangerous to society as well as individuals.
The only people I know who claim that the "liberals preach tolerance" are those who claim to be conservative. I would likely be classified by most conservatives as a "liberal." Let me make this clear: I do NOT teach tolerance.
The notion floating around conservative circles that "every idea is a good idea and ought to be respected" sounds more like a quote from Chairman Mao's Red Book. In reality, certain ideas are inherently better than others, and to give stupid ideas the same respect as good or great ideas is nonsense.
That said, even those who preach stupidity ought to be protected from assault, violence, and vandalism. While we do not have to be tolerant of the foolish, we ought to respect our American ideals of fighting bad concepts with great ones rather than with physical force.
There's anger, hate, and violence on both sides of this issue. Let's be real; a quick search confirms this.
Not even half of the 80% of Americans that call themselves Christians vehemently oppose same-sex marriage. Not even 2/5s of Republicans even think it's a key issue. [http://pewresearch.org/pubs/868/gay-marriage]
Extremism and fear-mongering are for those at the margin.
"They want your full acceptance and celebration of their sexual practices." I don't know. Maybe they just want an amelioration of hate masquerading as love. Maybe gays just don't want to be marginalized. Maybe one holocaust and 100s dead as victims of hate crimes is enough.
Maybe if the rhetoric were toned down on the right, there wouldn't be such anger in response. It's sites like this, born of misguided "love" that incite hate. When the goal is to rally the masses in order to marginalize the minority, red flags SHOULD go up.
That's where our outrage comes from. At least it's based in reality, in something provable.
Colin said:
Not even half of the 80% of Americans that call themselves Christians vehemently oppose same-sex marriage. Not even 2/5s of Republicans even think it's a key issue.
How is vehemently defined in the Pew Research, Colin? You know, don't you, that Prop 8 passed? In California, no less. That's the fact, my friend.
"They want your full acceptance and celebration of their sexual practices." I don't know. Maybe they just want an amelioration of hate masquerading as love. Maybe gays just don't want to be marginalized. Maybe one holocaust and 100s dead as victims of hate crimes is enough.
What are you talking about? Have Christians or Americans in general committed a 'holocaust' on homosexuals? 100s dead?
Maybe if the rhetoric were toned down on the right, there wouldn't be such anger in response. It's sites like this, born of misguided "love" that incite hate. That's where our outrage comes from.
Here is a video of a group called Repent America being attacked, ridiculed, mocked and threatened by homosexual activists. These Christians did nothing more to excite this rage than simply existing and preaching God's Word.
Wow, California Liberal, you've managed to demonstrate glowingly another liberal predeliction while trying to deny another. In denying that liberals preach tolerance like born-again Christians preach the gospel, you've illustrated wonderfully the liberal characteristic of revising inconvenient historical facts.
The notion that "every idea is a good idea and ought to be respected" doesn't float around conservative circles; rather, its hypocritical assertion is foremost in the arsenal of defense for liberal ideas. No wonder liberals are so enamored with Marx and Mao; their ideas are quite similar and harmonious.
Just to give you an idea of how prevalent the religion of "tolerance" is on the Left, here are a few examples. There's this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this and this...well, I could quite literally go on all day, but don't have time.
Suffice to say (again) that homosexual activists and other liberals are good at preaching "tolerance" and lousy at living it.
Colin, if "not even half of the 80% of Americans that call themselves Christians vehemently oppose same-sex marriage," then they aren't very good Christians because their holy book very clearly condemns homosexual behavior as immoral and a violation of God's design for the expression of human sexuality, and makes it very clear that marriage is between a man and a woman. The qualifier "vehemently" in "vehemently oppose" may shed some light on the issue (maybe they are timid Christians?), but Christian doctrine very clearly teaches that homosexual behavior is immoral.
Your excuses on the demands of homosexual activists for full acceptance and celebration of their sexual practices don't hold water. This and other behavior on the part of homosexual activists demonstrates that these excuses don't hold water. By their very nature, homosexuals are "marginal;" according to a survey taken by HRC a few months ago, they only make up 2.9% of the population. And if they chose to end their immoral behavior and join the rest of heterosexuals in normal sexual behavior, even that 2.9% would no longer be marginal--so marginality is a choice for those who are marginal.
Homosexuals picked this fight when they demanded the rest of society accept and celebrate their sexual practices--practices that are both immoral and unhealthy. They don't want "toned down rhetoric" from the Right--they want silence and acquiescence from the Right.
And it isn't going to happen.
People who know the truth and are unwilling to accept a lie for the sake of "peace" are not going to surrender so a vocal minority of very mixed-up and self-centered people can feel a little better about themselves.
Marriage and family are far too important.
"homosexual activists" do not demand their sexual practices be celebrated, they want to have the same rights as everyone else.
Of course the protesters should not have pushed the elderly woman while crushing her cross, but what about all the unjust acts done towards people of the gay community? What about Lawrence King, an eighth grader who was murdered for liking other boys? Is that not also severely unjust?
I am sure we all have been severely upset when something unjust has happened to us that may have led us to act out, this doesn't justify the crushing of Phyllis' cross, but people got one of their rights stripped away solely because of other people's hate. What if you had one of your rights stripped away because other people don't agree with your lifestyle? What if you couldn't marry who you wanted to? Would you be completely calm and collected?
Last time I checked, if you don't like "same-sex marriages," you don't have to have one! So what is the point in stripping certain peoples' right to marry? Because the Bible says it's wrong? Doesn't Jesus preach love and and love thy neighbor as thy self?
If everyone had equal rights, like everyone DESERVE, and everyone showed everyone else the RESPECT they deserve, we wouldn't be in this mess.
Anonymous, homosexuals already have the same rights as everyone else. They can marry someone of the opposite sex just as anyone else can. However, they want the right to call a relationship which clearly CANNOT meet the definition of a marriage a "marriage;" marriage requires a man and a woman...without one or the other, you cannot have a marriage.
Homosexual behavior is immoral and unhealthy (homosexuals have much higher rates of AIDS, other STDs, hepatitis, anal cancer, depression, substance abuse, suicide and domestic violence).
Turning a blind eye while someone engages in such a devastating practice is most certainly NOT an example of "loving your neighbor as yourself."
Allowing people to counterfeit the institution of marriage--a fundamental institution in any society upon which children and everyone else depends for stability and well being--is also not under any circumstances "loving your neighbor as yourself."
Post a Comment