And your response to EdwinWillers because he chose to share his belief why he finds gay marriage wrong and you have no tolerance for that? Just like you and many posting in this thread had no tolerance for the Christian couple who in religious conscience couldn't provide a cake for a lesbian couple? And you wonder why there are number of people concerned that their rights to conscience will be taken from them? And that their argument is a stupid one? I think you have just given proof to all that there is a real concern with a number of folks like you so willing to trample others rights in order to get what you seek.
That is not what I stated and stop putting words into my post that are not there.
The gay rights movement IS associated with NAMBLA through members of NAMBLA also advocates for gay rights.
The gay rights movement including NAMBLA support same sex marriage
People should be informed of the founding of the gay rights movement and until recently had a new makeover separating themselves from NAMBLA because of its unpopularity.
That would be more accurate.
As far as the rest of your gobbledygook
Most people don't call Hitler a Christian today, but during his reign he certainly had enough Germans convinced he was.
As far as interracial couples, that is still an issue of marriage between a man and a woman and has little to nothing to do with same sex marriage. If some still practice it in the South then let that be a lesson for the learning that you can not legislate every racist practice out of existence and it's time to stop trying.
As far as consequences for redefining marriage...what can currently be observed is....
Redefining marriage marginalizes those with traditional views and leads to the erosion of religious liberty. The laws that are being written to define discrimination while those who support same sex marriages are eradicating such views through economic, social, and legal pressure. The consequences for religious believers are becoming apparent. Recently in the news multiple federal justices have been willing to deny rights of conscience to those who deny services to gay couples in relation to gay marriage. They are forced to carry a burden of legal expenses that no person should have to encounter in this country in exercising their constitutional rights of conscience. But that is how the game is played on the left. They use Lawfare, a type of warfare where politically appointed justices can make asinine judgments to further a political agenda allow a false validation to stand. And those who don't know a Constitutional right from the hole in their arse are the dumb sheeple giving homage to such opinons.
Another current example of consequence is after Massachusetts redefined marriage to include same-sex relationships, Catholic Charities of Boston was forced to discontinue its adoption services rather than place children with same-sex couples against its principles.
Massachusetts public schools began teaching grade-school students about same-sex marriage, defending their decision because they are “committed to teaching about the world they live in, and in Massachusetts same-sex marriage is legal.” But it didn't stop there, Massachusetts appellate court ruled that parents have no right to exempt their children from these classes.
The denial of parental rights in public schools and the denial of Religious freedoms are two pretty big ones in my book.
Yea, the 3% is bending the 97% over and breaking it off in them.
Now you have resorted to quoting the Apostle Paul (out of context) from Galatians 3:28 to further your emotional stance . But the Apostle Paul preached against homosexuality in a message of love. Too bad you didn't read a little further in Galatians to chapter 5 you would have caught it.
Yea, the 3% is bending the 97% over and breaking it off in them.
Fair enough, but I hope you remember that when discriminating against those whose religious conscience is in conflict with yours. Peace.
Fair enough, but I hope you remember that when discriminating against those whose religious conscience is in conflict with yours. Peace.
Yeah, and so....?The only naturally endowed human rights, as I've pointed out before, is to breathe and go to the bathroom.. We are a nation of laws...We are governed by laws.. We vote for or against those making the laws. That is our system of government...Love it or leave it..
And that is the way it is...a 12 year old doesn't have the right to vote...hey, that's not equal right? Neither does a person that is not a citizen here...not equal either. You tell me, can I, a man, marry another man in most states? No, and neither can any other man, hetero or homosexual... that is not separate, that is exactly equal... we can eat at the same restaurant, use the same public toilets, drink out of the same fountains...Actually, it seems to me to be the same principle--everyone does not have the same rights..
What does gay rights have to do with the strength and integrity of our country?.. It is their country too and you don't have the right to be either tolerant nor intolerant of a citizen's right to their pursuit of happiness..
Like it or not NAMBLA is part of the gay rights movement and like it or not NAMBLA from the beginning have been "pushing" for same sex marriages.Let's assume you were right and every single founder of the gay rights movement had been a card carrying member of NAMBLA. What exactly would that mean for the current gay rights movement and the push for same sex marriage? What would that have to do with anything?
Once again you are wrong. I am not trying to equate all gays and gay rights supporters as somehow having something to do with pedophilia. I am connecting NAMBLA as part of the gay rights movement.It is still an illogical association fallacy. You are trying to equate all gays and gay rights supporters as somehow having something to do with pedophilia because of one or two members of the gay rights movement who were a member of NAMBLA like 30 or so years ago. It is ridiculous and irrational.
Once again you are mistaken. Though the Alliance Defense Fund has helped many in such cases, it isn't like the ADF rides into town on a white horse immediately. Some over unfair charges lose their jobs and livelihood , have already shelled out for an attorney, and there is no way to measure the mental stress and its adverse affects on these people being forced to endure such things. It is not the nature for a Christian to sue. Their teachings recommend every effort be exhausted before taking an issue to court to secure their constitutional rights. The lawfare that is being practiced by leftist judges who have been politically appointed are using law as a weapon of war to intimidate, terrorize, and silence dissent. By their skewed reading of the law they are trampling the rights of conscience and redefining it as discrimination.Alliance Defense Fund has picked up just about every one of those cases, so I'm not sure where are this "legal expenses" nonsense is coming from. As far as "lawfare" it is called using the legal system as intended. It works the other way around. Christian groups have used it to defend religious liberty in several cases. It is just when it is used by gay rights groups it is suddenly something evil and nefarious.
Forced? They chose to do so. And adoption is about what is in the best interest of children, not religious groups.
That simply is not true.
You need to check your facts.
Like it or not NAMBLA is part of the gay rights movement and like it or not NAMBLA from the beginning have been "pushing" for same sex marriages.
Now it's "constitutional" rights of conscience... How do you figure that our great constitution allows you to discriminate based on "your" religious views...How about "my" religious views or "their" religious views?
NAMBLA is NOT part of the "Gay Rights Movement." NAMBLA is a crackpot organization of mentally ill individuals who preach that their mental illness is comparable to homosexuality and should be accepted in the same way. No Gay Rights advocate supports the sexual abuse of children under the age of 14...NONE! Claiming a NAMBLA "gay rights activist" exists is based on your wholly incorrect assumption that male pedophiles who prey on pre-pubescent male children are also "homosexuals."
To make such a comparison and then assert they are part of the Gay Rights movement is a gross misstatement of the facts, and a fallacious attempt to undermine the whole by asserting (falsely) a part is so immoral the whole must also be. At best you are making a weak analogy, at worst a fallacy of composition or a straw man argument.
Try again!
I didn't write the history for the modern gay rights movement. Harry Hay, the founder of the first gay rights organization was an advocate to include NAMBLA. Today NAMBLA for them is like the relative that nobody in the family wants to talk about. They have certainly distance themselves recently and since 2000 or so barred them from gay parades.
Wow, he makes one speech referencing his own personal experience as a 14 yo actively seeking a sexual relationship with an older man, stating he KNEW what he was doing and didn't care; then saying that parent's of gay teens should be running interference for NAMBLA because oher kids that age may also feel that way. Ho hum...so he "supported" NAMBLA (although was never a member).
This is akin to pro-life advocates stating that since the founder of Planned Parenthood (Margaret Sanger) was a "racist," then anyone who currently supports Planned Parenthood is also a racist.
Like I stated, at best a weak analogy, and at worst a straw man or composition fallacy.
No sugar booger, Harry did more than make one speech. The support for NAMBLA can be found in his writings. There are photos of him attending a gay parade in California wearing a sign that states "NAMBLA WALKS WITH ME". I posted it earlier. It's a matter of fact. Do I think all gay activists are supportive of pedophilia and that Harry Hay speaks for them? Hell no. But the history of the movement is what it is.
Sugar booger? LOL
My point is that YOUR point has no value in this discussion. NAMBLA is not a "Gay Rights" organization, and has never actually been one, despite citing the actions of one gay activist.
I am not gay and I was not overly fond of that orientation when I was younger. However, even I misunderstood the position of NAMBLA back when it first got started. From what little I knew I thought that it was just a group supporting lowering teenage age of consent laws for same-sex relationships. I had no idea that they advocated pre-pubescent sexual activities. Once that was clearly discovered, they lost all credibility with everyone except their own twisted fellow-travelers.
Bringing up this "history" serves what purpose? It clearly has nothing to do with same-sex marriage. It is nothing but an attempt to denegrate the whole by the actions of a very very few.
The reason for bringing up NAMBLA in the first place was its one of several sexual orientations that most would never support. But we are finding out that the majority doesn't matter anymore. Take Prop 8 for example, the majority of the people voted against gay marriage but because the Democrat Governor and Democrat State Attorney along with gay activists on the 9th Circus Court of Appeals the majority didn't matter. Take abortion law as another example. The majority of the people at the time of Roe v Wade were strongly against abortion but the majority had no say and 9 political appointed justices over-ruled the wishes of the majority. The laws and opinions being written today on defining discrimination and redefining marriage will be tomorrow's nightmare. When you add to the new laws/opinions with the change in culture, lacking a moral compass, it is going to set it up for "other" sexual orientation advocacy groups under the guise of "civil rights" to have them granted. And it won't matter a damn if the people by the majority are against it. All it takes is for a judge or judges to read the laws and determine they have that right.
Like it or not NAMBLA is part of the gay rights movement and like it or not NAMBLA from the beginning have been "pushing" for same sex marriages.
It is a false analogy!! It's like me saying since certain pro-life members bomb abortion clinics killing workers there under the justification they are stopping murderers, therefore ALL pro-life members are murderous psycho-bombers. It's like me saying since some fundamentalist Christians think every single word in their particular version of the Bible is direct from God, therefore ALL Christians believe the world was created 6,000 years ago.
Your point is not validated by using NAMBLA as the basis for any argument.
History
Events such as Anita Bryant's "Save Our Children" campaign in 1977, and a police raid of Toronto-area gay newspaper The Body Politic for publishing "Men Loving Boys Loving Men" set the stage for the founding of NAMBLA.[5]
In December 1977, police raided a house in the Boston suburb of Revere. Twenty-four men were arrested and indicted on over 100 felony counts of the statutory rape of boys aged eight to fifteen. Suffolk County District Attorney Garrett Byrne found that the men used drugs and video games to lure the boys into a house, where they photographed them as they engaged in sexual activity. The men were members of a "sex ring", and said that the arrest was only "the tip of the iceberg."[5] The arrests sparked intense media coverage, and local newspapers published the photographs and personal information of the accused men. The "Boston-Boise Committee", a gay rights organization, formed in response to these events and to protect the "rights of gay men" and promote "gay solidarity." NAMBLA's founding was inspired by this gay rights organization.[11] It was co-founded by the gay historian David Thorstad.[12]
In 1982 a NAMBLA member was falsely linked to the disappearance of Etan Patz. Although the accusation was groundless, the negative publicity was disastrous to the organization.[13] NAMBLA published a book documenting the events, A Witchhunt Foiled: The FBI vs. NAMBLA.[14]
In testimony before the United States Senate, NAMBLA was exonerated from any criminal activities and it concluded "It is the pedophile with no organized affiliations who is the real threat to children,"[15]
Mike Echols, the author of I Know My First Name is Steven, infiltrated NAMBLA and his observations are recorded in his book, published in 1991. At one point he published the names, addresses and phone numbers of 80 suspected NAMBLA members on his website, which lead to death threats towards people who were not members.[5]
In 1994 NAMBLA was expelled from the International Lesbian and Gay Association, having been the first US based organization to be a member.[12] Chicken Hawk: Men Who Love Boys was produced and directed by Adi Sideman in 1994. Members of NAMBLA were interviewed and presented defenses of the organization. Allen Ginsberg appeared in the film.[16]
In 2000, Robert and Barbara Curley sued NAMBLA for the wrongful death of their son. A NAMBLA founder speculated that the case would "break our backs, even if we win, which we will."[5] The suit was eventually dismissed. Media reports from 2006 have suggested that for practical purposes the group no longer exists and that it consists only of a web site maintained by a few enthusiasts.[17]
Relations with LGBT organizations
The first documented opposition from LGBT organizations to NAMBLA occurred in the conference that organized the first gay march on Washington in 1979.[18]
In 1980 a group called the "Lesbian Caucus – Lesbian & Gay Pride March Committee" distributed a hand-out urging women to split from the annual New York City Gay Pride March because the organizing committee had supposedly been dominated by NAMBLA and its supporters.[18] The next year, after some lesbians threatened to picket, the Cornell University gay group Gay PAC (Gay People at Cornell) rescinded its invitation to NAMBLA founder David Thorstad to be the keynote speaker at the annual May Gay Festival.[18] In the following years, gay rights groups attempted to block NAMBLA’s participation in gay pride parades, prompting leading gay rights figure Harry Hay to wear a sign proclaiming "NAMBLA walks with me" as he participated in a 1986 gay pride march in Los Angeles.[19]
By the mid-1980s, NAMBLA was virtually alone in its positions and found itself politically isolated. Gay rights organizations, burdened by accusations of child recruitment and child abuse, had abandoned the radicalism of their early years and had "retreat[ed] from the idea of a more inclusive politics,"[20] opting instead to appeal more to the mainstream. Support for "groups perceived as being on the fringe of the gay community," such as NAMBLA, vanished in the process.[20]
In 1994 the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) adopted a "Position Statement Regarding NAMBLA" saying GLAAD "deplores the North American Man Boy Love Association's (NAMBLA) goals, which include advocacy for sex between adult men and boys and the removal of legal protections for children. These goals constitute a form of child abuse and are repugnant to GLAAD." Also in 1994 the Board of Directors of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force (NGLTF) adopted a resolution on NAMBLA that said: "NGLTF condemns all abuse of minors, both sexual and any other kind, perpetrated by adults. Accordingly, NGLTF condemns the organizational goals of NAMBLA and any other such organization."
In 1994 NAMBLA, along with many members of the Gay Liberation Front participated in the "The Spirit of Stonewall" march which commenorated the 1969 Stonewall Riots.[21]
In 1994, Pat Califia[22] argued that politics played an important role in the gay community's rejection of NAMBLA, however, Califia has since completely repudiated his earlier support for NAMBLA.[23]
The International Lesbian and Gay Association controversy
In 1993, the International Lesbian and Gay Association achieved United Nations consultative status. NAMBLA's membership in ILGA drew heavy criticism and caused the suspension of ILGA. Many gay organizations called for the ILGA to dissolve ties with NAMBLA. Republican Senator Jesse Helms proposed a bill to withhold $119 million in U.N. contributions until U.S. President Bill Clinton could certify that "no UN agency grants any official status, accreditation, or recognition to any organization which promotes, condones, or seeks the legalization of pedophilia, that is, the sexual abuse of children". The bill was unanimously approved by Congress and signed into law by Clinton in April 1994.
IN 1994, ILGA expelled NAMBLA and two other groups (MARTIJN and Project Truth) because they were judged to be "groups whose predominant aim is to support or promote pedophilia." Although ILGA removed NAMBLA, the U.N. reversed its decision to grant ILGA special consultative status. Repeated attempts by ILGA to reacquire special status with the U.N. were eventually successful in 2006.[24]
Gregory King of the Human Rights Campaign later said that "NAMBLA is not a gay organization ... They are not part of our community and we thoroughly reject their efforts to insinuate that pedophilia is an issue related to gay and lesbian civil rights."[25] NAMBLA responded by claiming that "man/boy love is by definition homosexual," that "man/boy lovers are part of the gay movement and central to gay history and culture," and that "homosexuals denying that it is 'not gay' to be attracted to adolescent boys are just as ludicrous as heterosexuals saying it's 'not heterosexual' to be attracted to adolescent girls."[25]
Sugar booger? LOL
My point is that YOUR point has no value in this discussion. NAMBLA is not a "Gay Rights" organization, and has never actually been one, despite citing the actions of one gay activist.
I am not gay and I was not overly fond of that orientation when I was younger. However, even I misunderstood the position of NAMBLA back when it first got started. From what little I knew I thought that it was just a group supporting lowering teenage age of consent laws for same-sex relationships. I had no idea that they advocated pre-pubescent sexual activities. Once that was clearly discovered, they lost all credibility with everyone except their own twisted fellow-travelers.
Bringing up this "history" serves what purpose? It clearly has nothing to do with same-sex marriage. It is nothing but an attempt to denegrate the whole by the actions of a very very few.
How could these people be "twisted" if everyone should be allowed to "marry who they love" as those who push gay marriage keep saying? Myself, I don't buy into that nonsense but the gay right special rights activists keep saying it.
Do you understand legal consent? I'm guessing not.
How long have you been a member of NAMBLA? Myself, I think it's sick and disgusting for 10 or 12 year old to be able to legally consent to marriage to say a 30 year old even though that's "who they love". Why don't you?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?