My Roses and Thistles
May 13, 2009 10 Comments
I decided to mimic the Democrat………er Des Moines Register’s rose and thistle section.
A rose goes to Donald Trump in his decision to let Miss California retain her crown. While the photo fiasco was reason enough to evaluate her reign, we all know why Carrie Prejean was really targeted for a crown stripping. But Mr. Trump being the businessman that he is realizes the media bonanza this has caused and decided to side with Prejean while covering his butt by saying “President Obama believes marriage is between one man and one woman also.” OUCH!
A thistle to newly elected and soon to be past chairman of the Republican National Committee, Michael Steele. On a recent radio stent he decided to shoot himself in the foot once more by blabbering that Mitt Romney did not get the nomination because the base had issues with his Mormon faith. Whether this is correct or not is not the point. The point is that a man elected to raise money and ensure Republican victories should not be ripping the party in half.
A thistle to the National Council for a New America and its attempt to re-brand the GOP. All this council boils down to is a group of 2012 presidential hopefuls and one presidential loser posing for a photo-op while promising to mingle with the peasants and “listen” to them. First, they should have been listening all along and it doesn’t take a tour to do that. Second of all, maybe they should try touring outside of the Beltway radius to find out what they really need to know. Perhaps the establishment should finally realize that the problems in the party aren’t really between the ficons and the socons or in its platform, but the problem instead lies in that the establishment no longer represents its constituents. And a rose goes to those in the Republican party who understand all of this.
A thistle to those who believe the marriage issue will not be one of the defining issues of the 2010 Iowa elections. Gubernatorial candidate Bob Vander Plaats was a guest on WHO’s Mikelson in the Morning today and stated that no matter what issues he speaks about at events the question and answer time always reverts back to the marriage issue. We will remember in November.
And finally, a rose to the American Psychological Association for coming forward and changing their stance on the cause of homosexual behavior. Once again science is on our side (as it also is regarding the question of when life begins) because the APA has concluded that there are no findings pointing to a “gay gene.” OUCH! So much for comparing the marriage issue to the civil rights movement or women’s suffrage.
A rose to me: I will remember in November!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
“no findings pointing to a “gay gene.” OUCH!”
Firstly, why should that matter? Even if we found that all homosexuals merely choose to be homosexuals (which makes sense, because who wouldn’t want to be an attacked and persecuted minority?) there’s still no reason to deny them fair and equal treatment, including the right to marry each other.
Secondly, what does the American PSYCHOLOGICAL Association have to do with GENETICS?
Why do any of us make choices that are bad or harmful? That is a really good question, but the fact is that we do it everyday. Choosing the homosexualy life style is no different.
They shouldn’t get to marry each other because one cannot give rights to a behavior that is morally wrong. Plus, marriage is not a right given to us; it is an institution.
“Why do any of us make choices that are bad or harmful?”
Your side has yet to demonstrate how homosexuality is bad or harmful. (Any more than heterosexuality is, that is.)
“They shouldn’t get to marry each other because one cannot give rights to a behavior that is morally wrong.”
The government doesn’t make decisions on what is or isn’t morally wrong. If they did, lying and adultery would be illegal. They determine what causes harm and uses that to determine what is legal and what is illegal.
There have been many arguments as to why the homosexual life style is harmful. Your side just chooses to ignore them.
I never said homosexuality should be illegal, and it is also not the government’s job to grant privileges to certain behaviors or change a definition to accomodate a behavior.
“There have been many arguments as to why the homosexual life style is harmful. ”
Such as…?
And while you’re at it, feel free to define what you happen to think the word ‘harmful’ means.
“Harmful”!:
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/fischer/090313
In a truly remarkable development, homosexual activists in Canada have openly admitted the rather severe health risks associated with their non-normative sexual behavior.
A group of six Canadian “queers,” to use the gay media’s term, have filed a complaint with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, charging the nation’s entire healthcare system with homophobia.
In what may wind up in the “What were they thinking?” file, they have dug a deep hole for themselves by demanding that more attention be given to “the many health issues that are endemic to our community.”
What would those “endemic” issues be? Well, here is their list, not mine: lower life expectancy, higher rates of substance abuse, depression, HIV/AIDS, anal cancer, and suicide, and higher rates of breast cancer and cervical cancer among lesbians.
Astonishingly, these activists admit what we have been saying for years, that “gay/bisexual men have a life expectancy 20 years less than the average man” in Canada. Even the life expectancy of lesbians, though not as severely impacted, “is still lower than the life expectancy of the general population.”
Suicide rates, they admit, are anywhere from double to 13.9 times higher than the general population. By their own estimates, homosexuals comprise 30% of all suicides in Canada.
They admit that smoking rates among gays are up to three times higher, alcohol use up to seven times higher, and illicit drug use up to 19 times higher than the general population.
They themselves openly acknowledge that 76.1% of all AIDS cases since statistics were first kept occur in gay and bisexual men, and further acknowledge that the infection rate is up to 26 times higher than among the population as a whole.
When it comes to cancer of various types, they candidly admit that “gay men, lesbians and bisexual men and women are at higher risk for some cancers as a result of their sexual orientation (emphasis added).” Smoking and alcohol use puts them at elevated risk of lung and liver cancer, while their sexual activity increases their risk of anal cancer and cancers of the head, throat and neck through frequent exposure to HPV, the human papilloma virus.
If there was ever a clarion call for our entire society to say with one united voice that homosexual behavior is a danger to health and should be discouraged at all costs, this is it. We’ve found one voice as a society with regard to drug use and drunk driving; it’s time we find it with regard to homosexual behavior.
Thank you, NBTT.
My cousin was straight for many years I was shocked to find out he was gay. Where did his gay lifestyle get him? Buried at 40 he died of Aids. If you dont think this effects a society then you better read some history. What will we become when our nation has no morals? I dont know but its a country I dont think I want to live in. It will lead to further and further sick acts to be even allowed in public. I dont think you would want to have your children walking down the street and see these sick sex acts. Thanks to gay lobbyists and activists its just a matter of time before this will be allowed. I know I would not want my children to witness this sick things like that in public. I understand they should be treated with same rights every person gets but leave the sick whacky sex acts in your bedrooms it has no place out in public. And please dont try to teach my kids in school that this lifestyle is ok.
Q: What will our nation look like when it has no morals left?
A: We will start to say that torture is a good thing, has benefits and should be kept secret because if other people see we do it, it won’t be so good. Got that?