Will Cain weighs in on the same-sex marriage controversy during Pat & Stu

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Anyone voicing opposition to same sex marriage finds themselves in the unenviable position of public enemy #1. Will Cain is not afraid to look past the rhetoric and talking points to find the truth – he visited Pat & Stu today and explained what is really happening in the same sex marriage debate.

  • landofaahs

    America it seems is being given freedom to fill it’s cup of sin and judgment to it’s fullest measure and one day, God in his righteousness will pour that judgment back on us.

  • http://youtu.be/0iRCvDwF26Q Sam Fisher

    Government needs to get out of marriage no matter where you stand the need to leave us alone because one way or the other the first amendment right will be trampled for some of us no matter who side you on.

  • Anna Larson

    The Stupidest comments I’ve heard so far in Defense of Marriage have been the ones who claim Marriage should only be for a man and woman to “procreate”. That is as much discriminatory to people like me who don’t want kids. It makes it seem like straight couples shouldn’t be allowed to be married either if they don’t have kids to go with it. So all you older straight couples who want to get re-married and not have kids, you are being discriminated against just as much as young straight couples and any same sex couple is.

  • Anonymous

    Didn’t Stu marry Pat at restoring Love?

  • Anonymous

    My husband is a man. What makes him a man? Well, let’s see…..he has muscles, Hair on his face, All over actually. And oh yes, he has a penis and testicles. Anyone care to change the definition of the word male?
    Same goes for marriage: A union between a male and a female. Any questions..are we clear?

  • Anonymous

    Well Anna, that was and still is the intended purpose. Two males or two females can not procreate no matter how hard they try. Co- habituating in most cultures is unacceptable, in fact it’s considered immoral. But, since man (woman) is sinful, It happens; People have sex outside of marriage. Do you still wonder why this world we live in is compared to Sodom and Gomorrah of the Bible Scriptures?

  • Anonymous

    I know Beck fans like to bash Putin, but he doesn’t put up with all of this gay shit. He puts fags where they belong. In prison.

  • Anna Larson

     The point is that it doesn’ t matter if a “couple CAN or Can’t” procreate. What the religious nutcases are saying is that if we straight couples Don’t procreate, we shouldn’t be married any more than a same sex couple.  So Based on that I’m not allowed be married because I don’t want kids and then I’m still living in their imagined sin because I want to be with my boyfriend, but I don’t want kids.  All I’m saying is that it’s discrimination at it’s purest form to say that Marriage should ONLY be for those intending to procreate. Older couples who have lost their spouses and can’t have kids would then be banned from getting re married. Couples who don’t want kids would be banned from getting married.

    You are obviously to thick headed to get my point. by claiming that “procreation” is the reason for marriage you are effectively discriminating against quite a few straight marriages as well as any same sex marriage that might arise. 

  • Anonymous

    Marriage/civil union/partnership its all means the same.  Ironically this case is in the supreme court because of federal taxation issue, which is if you read it is undeniable unjust.

    My neighbor and his partner have been together for 20 years, longer than me and my wife, yet they’ve paid thousands more in taxes because they can file and claim the same way that me and my wife do.  That is wrong and un-American.  Arguing about the semantics of a word is it or isn’t it marriage.  Way more important things.

    Marriage is between two consenting humans. End of story. 

  • Anonymous

    I don’t believe they’re in the supreme court arguing about the term “husband”.  Just to humor you though technically if two men marry, they both have those requirements you mention to be called a husband.

    Marriage is a union between two consenting humans.  Let’s move on.

    Whats the quote from Jefferson that Glenn uses “It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg” are we clear.

  • Anonymous

    I clearly get your point. You are within your right to think as you do. You are a lady aren’t you? How would you feel if some group decided to change that definition as tart or cow instead, would that be acceptable to you?

  • Anonymous

    WW…you clearly are a confused individual. God Loves you too.

  • Anonymous

    God made his judgment on this thousands of years ago. HE is not gonna change his mind. HE is the same today yesterday and forever. HE DOES NOT EVOLVE

  • Anonymous

    Rush Limbaugh, yesterday: “I think the inertia is clearly moving in the direction that there is going to be gay marriage at some point nationwide.”

    Bill O Rielly, this week: ““The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals … ‘We’re Americans, we just want to be treated like everybody else. That’s a compelling argument…. and the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible.” 

    Even if the gays lose both cases at the Supreme Court, does anyone honestly believe they’re just going to give up? Of course not. They’ll just move the fight back to the ballot box.
    This last election saw them win five out of five victories: gay marriage passed in three states, an openly gay senator elected, and a bill to ban gay marriage in Minnesota shot down. 
    Up until this last election, they had seen gay marriage defeated 32 times by voters… THIRTY TWO TIMES!—yet they kept fighting, and were rewarded for it. My point being that if they’re willing to keep fighting after 32 defeats in a row, they’re certainly going to keep fighting after five victories! 
    They know they have time on their sides–their enemies are literally dying out. They know they have shifting cultural norms on their side, and they know they have money and power on their side: the Hollywood establishment and major companies like Apple and Microsoft have backed gay marriage, while the other side has… Rick Santorum and Chic Fil A. 
    So it’s not difficult to see how this is going to end. 

  • Weed Perkins

    2liberate: Very good explanation. They can get a butch haircut, wear a ball cap, wear men’s trousers and flannel shirts, boots and spit tobacco but they are still a hell of a long way from being men. One man, one woman, children the old fashioned way. Not my two Daddies, not my two mommies, even though JC Penney’s thinks so. I think since Adam and Eve we have had an example to follow. The loud crowd will shout this down but even traditional men and women are allowed to express their opinion, at least for now.

  • Anna Larson

     You are comparing apples to oranges. Changing the Defination of “lady” to cow or tart is not where close to saying that marriage is for procreation. There are currently states that do NOT define marriage as only between a man and a woman. In fact This definition completely ignores the gender of the couple. The definition of marriage is widely varied as it’s currently defined. While the definition of “lady” is not wildly varied.

    “Marriage is contemplated by the law as a civil contract, for which
    the consent of the contracting parties, capable in law of contracting,
    is essential.”

  • Pamela Peltonen

    I have to agree with you Sam. If a same sex couple moved in next door, I’d treat them with the same dignity and respect as anyone else.  I wasn’t put here on earth to judge. As long as they are good, productive citizens of this country, I have no quarrel with them. As Glenn is always saying, “If it does not pick my pocket, nor break my leg, what difference is it to me? “

  • Pamela Peltonen

    What do you think of this issue, and please don’t be rude. I am really interested to hear your honest opinion.

  • Anonymous

    Many have said that legalizing same sex marriage will be the end of the institution of marriage as we know it. I couldn’t disagree more. Marriage is a term that is already so well defined and practiced throughout the world and through the ages that it will be here until the Lord returns. What is in danger of happening is a bunch of homosexuals being more deceived and confused than they already are in thinking they have entered into this sacred contract whereby two people “become one flesh”. This can only happen between the sexes, not amongst the same sex. It is physically impossible for the same sexes to marry and calling it marriage will not make it marriage.
    Marriage will always be what it is and families will only result from this type of union. That doesn’t mean that married couples who are not blessed with children are not married  as there are additional blessings and satisfactions for taking part in this sexual union as God has planned.
    The thing I most detest about this whole gay marriage fiasco is the perversion of language and the perversion of government. Marriage will always and forevermore be between men and women; call it whatever we will, it will not change this fact and only prove us to be liars if we seek to redefine a word that has always throughout time had one and only one basic definition.
    Civil unions are another matter entirely. If two people of the same sex want to enter into a contractual agreement were they share property and other benefits enjoyed formerly only by married people so be it; let them have what they want. Just don’t have the audacity to call it marriage or the arrogance to think that we can define anything however we so choose. Will the ceremony of a fake marriage legalise the corruption of the homosexual act? Not in the least ; except now instead of one offense they have made it two by corrupting the Godly definition of a Godly word. Obviously the bible speaks against homosexuality but on the other Jesus said        Moses permitted divorce because the peoples hearts were hard; although he acknowledged it was not that way from the beginning. In other words just because the law allowed it, the people are still guilty before God of sin if they did divorce. When society becomes so dull of hearing and hard of heart sometimes the law of man will have to follow suit so that we may live in piece. This is sadly only the lesser of two evils.
    What we are most in danger of losing is our language and a just government. 

  • Anonymous

    Children are definitely a primary purpose of marriage but not the only purpose. People who are married have received God’s blessing with or without children. Those with children have received additional blessings along with addition burdens and responsibilities.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Perry-Wall/100002811879244 Perry Wall

    just got to a fair tax or flat tax .end of story

  • http://youtu.be/0iRCvDwF26Q Sam Fisher

    I feel the same way but will this be something that can be stopped? God puts a fair warning to us that no the world is rotting from the inside out once they get gay marriage someone will push for other things. Like they did when they took out of law don’t ask don’t tell when one dim wit decided to try to push for bestiality in the military the day after even. It will get worse when I am in my sixties if good people don’t decide to do anything. I know a few gay people most of them are good people and I can understand why they want equal rights even tho I think it is a sin but we good people have to prevent the slippery slope so that women’s rights to be treated with respect and not cattle and cattle can be safe from some pervert that wants to rape them.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe you ought to be worried about God’s judgement, seeing how you cheered on George Bush and his mass murder based on lies in Iraq.  If anyone needs to be worried about God’s judgement, it’s you unrepentent supporters of murdering innocent women and children over WMD lies.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, I got one. How come you get the right to pursue happiness by spending your life with the person you love under a legal contract, but you wish to deny it to other people because you are like, all obsessed with penises and where people stick them when it’s none of your fucking business?

  • Anonymous

    ^ Oh look, it’s another fascist that wants to dictate to others how to live their lives. Last time I looked, the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence never mentions Adam and Eve, but they do mention that all of us have an inate right to pursuit of happiness, something you, you fucking Nazi, wish to deny them because of your belief in religious fables.  I got news for you, thanks to the US electorate, your days of you goose stepping relgious fasctists imposing your bigotry is over.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, so does the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy, thanks.

  • Anonymous

    God is never mentioned in the US Constitution, and religion is only mentioned in clauses that prohibit the government from being involved in it.  Whatever his opinion on things are counts nothing to the Supreme Court, our Founders saw to that to keep bigots like you with your fairy tales from imposing your fables on the rest of us.

  • Anonymous

    Do you still wonder why I don’t give a shit? Keep your religious fables out of my government.

  • Anonymous

    Yeah, maybe at your church, but down at the courthouse marriage is simply a legal contract two people enter into to form a household that the government gives tax and survivor benefits to for the purpose of encouraging stable families, and God has nothing to do with it, on fact, God has so littel to do with it, you don’t even need to go to a church to get married. And whether my children are “blessed” or not is none of your god damned business.

  • Anonymous

    Everyone in the US deserves equality in this regard, and committed gay couples are just as a legitimate as heterosexual couples. I see it more as a civil union issue than a flowery “definition of marriage,” because so many churches and cultural traditions go outside of governmental interpretations.

    Its amazing that its 2013 and people are saying, “What’s next??? People can marry 6 guys and a duck???” But then again, it wasn’t that long ago that black people could not vote, or sit in the front of a bus, and before that changed, people were asking the same questions.The only reason this is such a hassle for some people is due to long time hangups of Marcus Bachmann types, gay people who can’t deal with reality and respond in perverse and oppressive ways.

  • Pamela Peltonen

    I worry about polygamists waiting in the wings for equality under the law. I want gay couples to have civil unions. I have no opposition to it at all. But, what will happen when other forms of civil unions press for equality?

  • Anonymous

    Honestly, I would not worry about it. The only people who want polygamy are some fringes of the Mormon church and maybe some other cultists; but its not going to make even a ripple of slippery slope effect if gay couples can be married.

  • Anonymous

    Well said, Well written and so clear that anyone with the IQ of a finch can understand.

  • Anonymous

    What ever happened to the pair in Paris last year? Did the Eiffel Tower become the wife or the husband…maybe you would know?

  • Anonymous

    That’s quite a cigar you got there…makes up for deficiency somewhere else, eh?

  • Anonymous

    …and the intellectual speaks once again about nothing important.

  • Anonymous

    You can stick it in a weed-wacker for all I care……stay away from redefining institutions to fit
    Your perversions! Go and unite with a goat, I hear they don’t complain.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Schaffran/1304873821 John Schaffran

     Hey critten what will happen when those that believe in the father,  the son and holy spirit who own businesses and refuse gay couples?  I will tell you what.  These people are being sued.  Let gays have a civil union with benefits and call it a day.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Schaffran/1304873821 John Schaffran

     Would a civil union with the benefits suffice for gay couples?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Schaffran/1304873821 John Schaffran

     Who protects christians when they are being sued for refusing service to gay couples?  Civil Unions to gay couples with the same benefits as traditional marriage.  End of story.

  • Anonymous

     

    This isn’t
    about making laws so that God will accept gay marriage. This is about equality
    in the tax code (i.e. married filing jointly, estate taxes, etc.). This is
    about survivor benefits (i.e. Soc Sec). This is about legal rights that
    otherwise default to a spouse (i.e. medical power of attorney). It’s about
    being married in one US state, and having it recognized in another US state
    while vacationing and/or in having a medical emergency in that other state.
    That having been said, we can still support the Constitution of the
    US—including the right of ANY religion or person NOT to perform a marriage
    ceremony or to embrace gay persons in your congregation. But gays and lesbians
    have the right to live, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, too. So if you’re
    not into gay marriage, push for a complete overhaul of the tax code—everyone
    files singly regardless of marital status. Seriously—what business is it of
    the government how we arrange our lives, anyway?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Schaffran/1304873821 John Schaffran

     Give gay couples the benefits through a civil union.  You give gays the ability to marry then who will protect the churches, pastors, priests, and others who have businesses attached to marriage (jewelers, caterers, golf courses, etc.) and they believe in one man and one woman.  Who will protect these people?  If that freedom when one group wants to redefine another?  What is going to happen to these people if marriage goes against those people?  There lives, based on their beliefs alone, could be destroyed.

  • Anonymous

    Marriage between two similar people is an oxymoron. Only opposites need marriage when they want to use each others differences for a common beneficial purpose. Most people know and respect what their body cavities are designed for.

  • Anonymous

    What happens to a society when they don’t know their a—-s from a hole in the ground? 
    No adult with common sense needs any religion to tell them what their body cavities and sex organs are designed for.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z7vddTgeS6Q&bpctr=1363058180 Vae Victis

     God is not mentioned directly in the US Constitution but in the Preamble it states:

    ” and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity”

    Whose Blessings of Liberty do you suppose they are referring to?

    Now if you go back to the Declaration Of Independence (of which this Country was founded on) you will find a few references to God:

    “Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God”, “endowed by their Creator”, “appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world”, and “with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence”.

    While you may not believe in God or wish to subjugate him as a inconsequential figure, he most certainly does not have “opinions”. There is a term called “God’s truths” which means absolute truth or facts, quite the contrary to “opinions”. Perhaps this is why the all Federal Judges are required to swear an oath to the Constitution and God before their affirmation?

  • Anonymous

    Did I say marriage has anything to do with church going to church or even the Church? Before there was the Church there was marriage. Since humankind was created there was marriage. Marriage is part of the created order just as “male and female” is. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know this. Men and women have been united in marriage from the beginning and the proof of this is that we are here to discuss it thousands of years later. Marriage existed before it was recognised by governments, or contracts signed. The only thing separating marital sexual union from non-marital sexual union was vows or promises. For God’s people this being done in the sight of God and before other believers is binding and satisfactory. Others outside of the Church still partake of marriage whether they acknowledge God in a ceremony or not. Even honest non-believers have to concede that throughout the history of mankind it is the union of man and women that has “DEFINED” marriage, not the other way around.

    Given the fact that homosexuals, atheists and all variety of unbelievers don’t care about the institutions of God nor believe in Him, why then do they now care about marriage? It certainly can’t be because they respect the sanctity of it for this would deny their own creed.
    I say give homosexuals equal rights under the law but do so honestly. Civil union is the language to be used here.

    All people have benefited from marriage; whether believers or non-believers. All people do not benefit from same sex unions. If people wish to have same sex unions honored in a contractual way regarding taxes and properties, I say fine.

    Did I mention your children? I said what I did to clear up a misunderstanding on the position of procreation being the only benefit of the marriage, which it is not. I wasn’t speaking to you in particular anyway as you are not my business nor do I wish you to be. I’m sure that you want my religion to have no influence on our government but that is impossible, just as it’s impossible for your religion of atheism to have no effect. The art and science of good government is to reconcile things so that we may live in peace with our conflicting worldviews. This may or may not be possible. We’ll see.

  • Anonymous

    Did I say marriage has anything to do with church going to church or even the Church? Before there was the Church there was marriage. Since humankind was created there was marriage. Marriage is part of the created order just as “male and female” is. You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to know this. Men and women have been united in marriage from the beginning and the proof of this is that we are here to discuss it thousands of years later. Marriage existed before it was recognised by governments, or contracts signed. The only thing separating marital sexual union from non-marital sexual union was vows or promises. For God’s people this being done in the sight of God and before other believers is binding and satisfactory. Others outside of the Church still partake of marriage whether they acknowledge God in a ceremony or not. Even honest non-believers have to concede that throughout the history of mankind it is the union of man and women that has “DEFINED” marriage, not the other way around.

    Given the fact that homosexuals, atheists and all variety of unbelievers don’t care about the institutions of God nor believe in Him, why then do they now care about marriage? It certainly can’t be because they respect the sanctity of it for this would deny their own creed.
    I say give homosexuals equal rights under the law but do so honestly. Civil union is the language to be used here.

    All people have benefited from marriage; whether believers or non-believers. All people do not benefit from same sex unions. If people wish to have same sex unions honored in a contractual way regarding taxes and properties, I say fine.

    Did I mention your children? I said what I did to clear up a misunderstanding on the position of procreation being the only benefit of the marriage, which it is not. I wasn’t speaking to you in particular anyway as you are not my business nor do I wish you to be. I’m sure that you want my religion to have no influence on our government but that is impossible, just as it’s impossible for your religion of atheism to have no effect. The art and science of good government is to reconcile things so that we may live in peace with our conflicting worldviews. This may or may not be possible. We’ll see.
    show less

  • Anonymous

    it essentially saying the same thing.

    The government can’t tell the churches what they want to do. Why would you want to belong or get married in an establishment that doesn’t respect you.

  • Anonymous

    Its not about genital or procreation. It’s about the union of two people to create a life together that is recognized in our society. It neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg.

  • Anonymous

    Thank you. My pleasure.

  • http://twitter.com/DenEstr den estr

    I am so sick of you Liberal idiots involving Bush in every argument which shows you have no argument. I wasn’t a Bush supporter but rather have him in office again than Obama who is the one that kills innocent women and children daily with his drone program. Which if he had the chance, he would use drones on US citizens too, for any reason like made up terrorist activity which he deems are terrorist…for example, being involved with the Tea Party. Obama is the one who thinks he is God and praises himself as if he were God.

  • http://twitter.com/DenEstr den estr

    You need to get educated and stop using illiterate nasty name calling which proves you have a jr. high school mind set.  

  • http://twitter.com/DenEstr den estr

    Listen idiots on the left, we all are for civil union with benefits and for it to be recognized as that in our courts but “marriage” is a sacred religious institution that the govt took upon its self to control for profit. Marriage should stay within the church and not dictated by our govt. I am not a religious person nor am I for marriage unless children were produced or will be by a man and a woman.

  • Anonymous

    Equivocation is an attempt to use equivocal language with intent to deceive. You say it is not about genitals; it’s about civil rights of sexually disoriented people to marry and be socially respected.

    We say the misuse of ones genitals and body cavities are hazardous to your health and have become a compelling public health issue for you and any new converts willing to try sodomy; and we don’t want sexual disorientation codified in law and made equally respected as the civil rights of people of different colors.

    Equivocation is an attempt to use equivocal language with
    intent to deceive. You say it is not about genitals; it’s about civil rights of
    sexually disoriented people to marry and be socially respected.  

     

    We say the misuse of ones genitals and body cavities are hazardous
    to your health and have become a compelling public health issue for you and any
    new converts willing to try sodomy; and we don’t want sexual disorientation
    codified in law and made equally respected as the civil rights of people of
    different colors.

  • Anonymous

    If it’s only about the tax code we might agree. Married couples without minor children below the age of 80 no longer need a tax break in this modern society. Let’s work to change that portion of the tax code.

  • Anonymous

    I’m not sure where the deception is… The misuse of ones genital, well surely thats up to the owner of those genitals, including which consenting cavity they wish to put it or receive it in.

    As for the public health issue, it’s irrelevant. That doesn’t change, what ever legal classification you want to put on it, its still going to happen. It’s part of human nature, that right I said it.

    There is no conversion happening to anyone, you are what you are. It’s actually a human right, put whatever label you want to put on it marriage, partnership or union. we all know it essentially means the same thing.

    The government isn’t going to make the catholic church or the baptist church suddenly start marrying people. Changing the definition of marriage to be gender less is more for legal and financial reason than social or culturally ones.

    Again to quote jefferson “It neither picks your pocket nor breaks your leg.”

  • Anonymous

    Don’t you think obesity, smoking, and sodomy health costs pick someone else’s pocket?

    I know its going to happen and also know its a harmful part of human nature as are a few other nasty behaviors.

    I hope you have a safe journey home after going through this field we are all required to navigate.

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts.

  • Anonymous

    Your comparison makes no sense, I just don’t see how giving same sex couples the same right of marriage, will affect public health or cost me anymore money.

  • Anonymous

    …”an inate [sic] right to pursuit of happiness,…”

    It’s pretty da*ned sure that the framers of the Declaration of Independence were not thinking in terms of “HAPPY GAY COUPLES” when they came up with that unalienable right (to pursue happiness)… –And for that matter, most “gay” couples are hardly “happy…”  Most are neurotic cases of arrested emotional development.  If that were not the case, we wouldn’t see juvenile, in-your-face “ACT UP” b.s. and “GAY” Parades with all kinds of abominable displays or “Gays” crashing and defiling Christian churches/Mass, etc. ad nauseum.

    You can take your “Pursuit of happiness” and SHOVE IT (PUN INTENDED, since that seems to be what makes you HAPPY).

  • Anonymous

    Marriage is a union between two consenting humans… of opposite gender.

  • Anonymous

    LOL.  Way to go. 

    –A PRICELESS mental image, Critten + meat grinder…

  • Anonymous

    Quote: “…it’s not difficult to see how this is going to end.”

    No, it’s not difficult to see:
    If so-called “gay” marriage is legalized, our whole social structure is screwed (no pun intended). The “offspring” (manufactured, begged, borrowed, stolen or otherwise) of “gay” “marriages” will be more disturbed/twisted than ever… and what makes ANYONE think that these Reality-Benders will be “satisfied” with redefining “marriage” and winning “legal status”? That is what Dr. Ben Carson was driving at: Once you begin to REDEFINE REALITY, there is no end to the perversions and distortions that can emerge.

  • Anonymous

    YOU are the only BIGOT here. The ones who oppose so-called “gay” marriage are merely REALISTS who recognize that marriage is between a MALE and a FEMALE. Period.

  • Anonymous

    Exactly! 

  • Anonymous

    Thanks….vulgarity is not normally my venue but he left me no choice. Sometimes, some have to be put in their rightful place. Garbage in; garbage out!

  • Anonymous

    “…we don’t want sexual disorientation codified in law and made equally
    respected as the civil rights of people of different colors.”

    Good point. And “sexual disorientation” is a great term to describe the dysfunction that nobody seems to want to admit or discuss (ever since activists in the A.P.A. decided to redefine the dysfunction as “normal”).

  • Anonymous

    LOL! And that GIGO thing is one of the primary arguments AGAINST that whole ‘gay’ lifestyle! (if you get the drift)…

  • Anonymous

    It’s a sad commentary and it shouldn’t even be spoken about but it keeps being brought up. The political hacks keep it alive and why they don’t just accept it being called a civil union instead of a marriage is beyond me; Rightly so, I can understand the equal rights thing but they aren’t happy with that. Which leads me to believe it’s a bogus argument and discord is their preference instead.

  • Anonymous

    It isn’t that hard to grasp: They want HOMOSEXUALITY to be LEGALLY RECOGNIZED and ACCEPTED AS GOOD AS HETEROSEXUAL REALITY. So they “have to” have EVERYTHING that heteros have, including “marriage” and the “right to parent.” –Even though the whole world for eons has recognized that homosexuality is an unhealthy, abnormal aberration and should be discouraged, not glorified. When they started having their sick parades and calling them “GAY PRIDE” is when society SHOULD HAVE STOOD UP and declared that old line about “the Emperor has no clothes.” Instead, like with so many Politically Correct MISTAKES America has made, these deviants were “tolerated” and “coddled”–and we now find ourselves in “quite a pickle.” UGH!

  • Anonymous

    If you are “gay” and have CHILDREN, it’s a safe bet they are NOT Blessed–especially if YOU, the foul-mouthed Critten that people have come to love to hate–are their “parent”! Those unfortunate offspring would more likely be not blessed but CURSED–confused, troubled, depressed, dysfunctional, malajusted–and need a LOT of therapy, probably at taxpayer expense.

  • Anonymous

     Keep your perversions and pseudo-acceptable lifestyle out of OUR government.

  • Anonymous

    Why aren’t more people concerned (worried) about the unhealthy aspects of homosexuals/pedophiles raising children? THAT (getting hold of kids) is one of the primary goals of this whole “gay marriage” thing, and regardless of what anybody claims, it is NOT HEALTHY for children to be raised by “two mommies” or “two daddies” or “one daddy who likes little boys,” ad nauseum. Talk about SLIPPERY SLOPES! And once again, it will be the children who suffer. But nobody ever talks about this aspect of this “gay marriage” thing.

    Bill O’Reilly is constantly championing the rights of children and trying to get laws passed to protect them, and yet in discussing gay marriage, he never brings up this aspect. WHO ARE WE KIDDING AS A SOCIETY when we pretend that this would not be (is not) HARMFUL to kids? Life is hard enough without confusing children about gender-issues because the adults in their lives have THEIR gender confused!

  • Anonymous

    God created Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve or Eve and Evelyn. There is a reason why homosexuals and lesbians can’t reproduce! They must recruite teenagers(especially at a time in their lives when they are questioning everything including who they are)  or adopt a child who is raised in a homosexual/lesbian household and used to continue to promote their agenda. They want to appear “normal” by having a child in their family. An alternative life style? Alternative to what– Normal! There has never been “any” scientific proof of any kind that Homosexuals or lesbians are “born” due to some kind of gene. It is a choice. A conscious choice to live a preveted and abnormal sexual life style. It is also amazing that whether or not it is a homsexual or lesbian realtionship that they always have one person who acts as the male and one who assumes the female role. They must also include a variety of sexual gadgets and vibrators, devices,etc to assist in creating these roles to make them appear —normal.
    They have even tried over the years to use nature as an example of what they consider acceptable behavior. and as proof of the homsexual agenda. Of course, comparing animales to man or inverterbrates to man in the way they behave sexually is rediculous and absurd. In addition, it should be noted that using mutations in nature to prove their point is certaintly not scientific. Mutations are not the norm. Most of their arguments for acceptance has to dismiss the Bible and what God says about homosexuls and lesbians because He calls it an abomination.
    They can’t claim to be Christians and follow Christ when they deny the word of God or try to take scripture out of context to agree with their agenda. Of course, there are false godless denominations/religions that support the homosexual/lesbian agenda and have even  made them priests or pastors in that church. Several people belonging to that church that totally disagree with the individuals who operate it have left that church and stated their opposition against the homomsexual/lesbian agenda. Homosexuals/lesbians can’t claim to be Christian and love God when they refuse to obey Him. (But they do anyway.)
    Over and over again they have to lie to continue to promote their agenda. They inflate their numbers to make it appear that have more of a voice in politics. The total numbers of homosexuals and lesbians is less than 2% ot the total poulation in America. Not 7 or 8 %. Most of the information they forward to the public has been found to contain falsehoods and out right lies. The separation of gay partners,breakups of live ins,divorces,etc is slightly higher  than the “straight community” Valid  statistics are hard to accumullate on Gays because of the Gay community itself. Also ask yourself –How did Aids infect the (entire) population? Was it transmiited sexually? Through anal sex or oral sex. Where did it come from originally? The GAY community! In the 1980′s.  Ask your self when did the homosexuals and lesbians start pushing their agenda and coming out of the closet was becoming “socially” acceptable. Was it in the 80′s or in the 60′s? Did Hollywood promote it? Did the Democratic Party promote it? Did television promote it? Did magazines like AARP,the Times and others promote it?  When did reading the Bible scriptures in church about Homsexuality become “a hate crime” ?
    Why is it so important that the President supports same sex marriage?

  • Anonymous

     I KNOW IT’S HARD FOR YOU BUT TRY NOT USE CRUDE AND VULGAR LANGUAGE. thanks!

  • Anonymous

    Critter I didn’t know you read the Bible?

  • Anonymous

    Critter, Please try not to use crude, vulgar or insulting language. You are only demeaning yourself. Thanks

  • Anonymous

    I agree with  the “being sued ” statement,but who do you think will pay for the benefits? Same sex marriage will cause a whole host of finacical problems–mostly costing more money,

  • Anonymous

    You hit the nail on the head. Not only that,but He really really has a problem. If we don’t respond to anything he writes–he is just talking to himself.

  • Anonymous

    Marriage equity is not complicated. Here’s my
    recommendation. Government must not interfere or intervene in the names people
    call their adult joint sexual relationship statuses and treat them all the same
    in the tax codes. Names are not limited to include Consensual, Social Union,
    Same Sex, Hook-up, Straight Marriage, Holy Matrimony, Joint Agreement,
    Sacramental, Shotgun, etc.  And the tax
    code advantages for joint filers without children should be changed to zero for
    couples under the age of 80, regardless!

     

    What do you think?

  • Anonymous

    Wow. Even the latest Fox News poll shows more Americans supporting gay marriage than opposing it!
    And in the same segment they talk about a study that shows kids raised by same sex partners are as well adjusted as kids raised by opposite sex partners. That in itself isn’t shocking—it’s just shocking that FOX NEWS reported it!

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2264299832001/fox-news-poll-finds-higher-support-for-gay-marriage/

    Maybe they’re trying to brace their viewers for the inevitable.

    Then again, the segment was on Shepard Smith’s show….and he’s twice been ripped by Roger Aisles for not following the agenda. 
    They better Shep quick! He’s out of control! LOL! Can’t have Fox News viewers being exposed to the real world!

  • Anonymous

    Fox News just had a segment in which they discussed a study that showed kids raised by same sex parents are as normal and as well adjusted as those raised by opposite sex partners. 
    http://video.foxnews.com/v/2264299832001/fox-news-poll-finds-higher-support-for-gay-marriage/

    That can’t be good for you guys…when your primary propaganda arm is undermining your arguments.

  • Anonymous

    Wow, so much silliness in that long, long, long, rambling post. 
    I’ll just hit one main point: You claim that AIDS came from the gay community originally…
    That is breathtakingly ignorant. And it’s distressing that someone would think that in the year 2013. AIDS has been traced all the way back to the 1950′s…in Africa. And even today Africa has ten times as many AIDS victims as North Amercia, with the biggest victims being women and children…who I assume aren’t getting it from trips to the local gay bathhouse.
    And then your claim that homosexuality is a “choice”….Dear me!

    You’re one of the Bible-thumpers, an adult who believes in fairy tales, and I won’t expect much from someone who believes in talking snakes and men walking on water…
    But please at least educated yourself on AIDS, because diseases that kill millions warrant everyones attention and knowledge.

  • Anonymous

    BULL.

  • Anonymous

    And on what planet do you live?

  • Anonymous

    no!

  • Anonymous

    I didn’t know you had started reading the bible? Or the Constitution– please cite where in the Constitution it says that. Please quote the exact statement.

  • Anonymous

    It is amazing how 50 plus years ago segregation was socially acceptable, but is not today.So was the 13 amendment wrong? How the illegal use of drugs of any kind were not acceptable ,but are today. The Prohibition Act was legal, then it wasn’t. How marriage for hundreds of years was always considered as being between a man and a woman and was the accepted norm. Now today it isn’t–what has changed. We like the Roman Empire  in the last days of its existance have become rotten from within.

  • Anonymous

    In reply to EDhooey, Like I said “lies and falsehoods” if it works for you keep using it,but it won’t change the ‘Truth’. The HIV virus came originally from Africa which may have been carried by Chimps and possibly one type of monkey. There are three theories on how humans became infected in Africa. I wasn’t talking about Africa,but here in America. You can go to any scientific study,research and find that the HIV virus first appeared in the GAY community in the 1980′s and was spread from there to the rest of the population. In Africa,Yes, Including women and children because of women having sex outside of marriage with infected individuals,having children who are born with the virus and of course the lesbian community. Condoms do not protect anyone from the virus. It is a well established fact that there are homosexual communities in Africa,that sex outside of marriage is common, that children born of mothers with HIV is commonplace.Chech with the World Health Organizations. Oh in case you didn’t know women don’t get pregnant from sitting on toilet seats used by men. That’s a myth–like most of the propaganda the Gay community uses to justify their agenda.
    From your remark about the bible it is apparent that you are not a Christian  and like I said “must dismiss the bible because they…” Please show  the chapter and verse where the talking snakes are  in the bible–Oh I forgot you don’t read it. Or MEN walking on water–there were Jesus and Peter,but since you don’t beleive in God’s word, the bible, because then you would have to be responsible to God for your deed,actions,and preversions. It’s much easier to deny God and make yourself the king and Lord of your life and only be responsible to you.I would also suggest that you take your own medicine and educate yourself on the truth about AIDS–apparently just making it up as you go works for you,but for the other 98% of the population it is just another lie.Aids does indeed kill  people in America and everyone should know how  it was spread by Gays to infect the rest of the population. Just call me silly!!!!

  • Anonymous

    “because of women having sex outside of marriage with infected individuals,having children who are born with the virus and of course the lesbian community.”

    LOL! You can’t be serious…
    Well, you probably are, but dear, dear me! 

    In Africa, most of the women get it because they are infected by their husbands. It’s the husbands cheating… and bringing the virus home! 
     And lesbians almost never contract it. Lesbians have a far less chance of getting HIV than heterosexual women! 

    There’s much you could stand to learn, but I have neither the time nor patience to be the one to teach you. And truthfully, you’re probably at an age where it no longer matters. So just carry on, my little brave christian soldier!

  • Anonymous

    Oh, and the talking snakes part was referring to the story of Eve. You know the nonsense about her eating an apple because a snake told her to and thus dooming the whole human race…
    bah, blah, blah…

  • Anonymous

    In response to edhooey. Many uneducated individuals who lack the training or education regarding scripture assume that the word in Gensis refers to a “snake”. The Hebrew word for snake used in many places throughout  the bible differs depending on what it is in reference to. The Hebrew word tanniyn, the Hebrew word nachash and the Hebrew word ha-nachash are different. The Hebrew word used in Genisis refers to a bright shinny upright being with a serpentine appearance.The fact that it could speak did not surprise Eve. But it really doesn’t matter to you what it was because you are not a Christian anyway. Why deny the fact– just admit that you do not believe in God or the Bible. Just admit that you don’t want to be answerable to anyone for the lifestyle you want to live–no matter how depraved ,disgusting and preverted it is. You enjoy it.
    So let’s review— you don’t disagree that Aids started in “America” in the 1980′s in the Gay community, you don’t disagree that Homsexulas and lesbians can’t reproduce— unless they adopt or recruirt individuals.You don’t disagree that homosexuals and lesbians dismiss the Bible.You don’t disagree that a male/female role playing exists in the gay community.
    You don’t disagree that  Africa has a homosexual comunity.You don’t disagree that children are born of mothers infected with AIDS. You don’t disagree that women in Africa do indeed get infected with the HIV virus. You say by their husbands(how do the husbands get infected –from those gay bath houses?) They get it from other infected women or men. You don’t disagree that lesbians do exist in Africa. Only that they— according to your opinion don’t get infected as much as hetrosexual women. So according to you— hetrosexual women get more infected than lesbians because of their infected husbands who are having sex with other infected (single) women or single Gay men. Of course “oral sex” in the lesbian African community doesn’t exist because the HIV virus is passed by bodily fluids. That must be why lesbains have a far less chance of getting infected or do they sterilize all their penis like devices and vibrators each time they use them. You should inform the World Health Organization of your current scientific research and provide them with all your up to date data.
    Apparently, you believe that you have nothing left to learn and know everything! I’m sure that you must be quite elderly considering all your wisdom.,many college degrees and  your vast world wide experiences having traveled around the globe. It is truly amazing that someone who is so knowledgeable has such trouble recognizing the truth. Like I said before ” they use lies and falshoods and propaganda to continue their agenda. You only serve to prove my point. Keep it up!Thanks OH, LOL!

  • Anonymous

    AND WHAT PLANET DO YOU LIVE ON? Priests,pastors, clergy can be arreseted now for preaching against Gay marriage and charged with a hate crime, Gays can sue individual clergy men for even reading scripture from the bible that says homsexuality is an abonomination. Why? Because they want to make homomsexuality and lesbianism appear to be normal, because they CAN make churches marry them once the Federal government and the Supreme Court says they have to marry them or go to jail. It is about power and control.

  • Anonymous

    Yep I agree with you about being blessed or not– that’s exactly what  we need more godless little bastards in the world. More peole that are damned by GOD and who He has nothing to do with. OOps we already do–I think they are called liberals or maybe progressives. I know they are called Democrats most of the time.

  • Anonymous

    He also yearns to suck on another man’s ballsack while the other man bloviates about “freedom and liberty.” Anyone want to change the definition of Tea Partier?

  • Anonymous

    You seem truly unhappy, because you obsess about gayness and gay sex. You should get it overwith and cruise the bathroom stalls of a Tea Party or 9/12 gathering. You will find what you yearn for.

  • landofaahs

    I did not cheer on the war in Iraq but once you go you go in and get it over with fast. I would have given everyone a month or 2 before total destruction. Anyone staying would be considered a suicide. It is sad that at times, we must use war for the good of the country. I’m sure you support Obama’s incursions and arms deals around the world. He is engaging in spreading war even as we speak. Enjoy your socialist murder shop. You liberals are experts at it.

  • Anonymous

    Well the jim crow law weren’t nationwide, but interestingly the state that support jim crow law are also among the ones that made a constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriages.

    We also use to think women were not intelligent enough to vote and the world was flat. The point is that we as species socially and cultural evolve.

    I don’t really understand why its such a big deal. It won’t affect your church, unless they decide they want to do it. More importantly unless your gay it have zero impact to you or your family.

    I agree that we as a country are at a crossroads, and we are in great risk of fracturing this country in half, not for the reason you suggest, but because there is no respect for differences whether they are politically, religious, cultural, social or biological. There is way too much hatred.

  • Anonymous

    In response to WW .Man is not basicly good and left alone to his own desires will revert back to his animal nature that you infer to with evolution. History proves that point. We as a nation are indeed apparently evolving into: mindless kool aid drinking zombies that  go along to get along ,that agree with the masses simply because someone says that the “majority” is suppose to be right and agree with the populace that are swayed by  liberal televison and liberal news media that support and agree with the propaganda of the left. I personally could care less what O’reily and Rush think . As for understanding that is my point exactly–you either don’t want to understand because of your  preconceived viewpoint or have been indoctrinated into the ” can’t understand” group. In reference to Jim Crow—- that same attitude that created those laws is now being used by the Federal government –against Christians. As you noted numerous states according to their belief that marriage is between a man and a woman have enacted that definiton for the people living in that state. As you also know some states have endorsed marriage(civil union) between gays. Now according to you the Supreme Court will decide to over ride “State Rights” in those states that want to maintain marriage as it has been defined for hundreds of years.and demand that everyone agree with “The LAW” or suffer penalties. Does that sound constitutional? Oh, we already went through that with Obama care didn’t we. No body wanted it,but it passed anyway and the Supreme Court over ruled everyone. Respect doesn’t mean agreement. I can respect you without agreeing with you. Or are you saying I don’t have a choice and have to agree with you? Because everyone else is suppose to be right. Differences don’t mean whether they are political,religious, cultural, social or biological that they(differences) must be accepted simply  because something is different from the norm. Change for ” the sake of change”  because it is different is not healthy. It is not progress and it certiantly doesn’t mean we have evolved.
    I agree 100% about the hatred. There is indeed too much hatred directed at Christians by the liberals, the Democrats, the federal government and the Gays to name few.

  • Anonymous

    Disgusting scum! NORMAL people are indeed unhappy with the cr*p going on in America, especially as it pertains to contaminating innocent children. You are SICK and YOU know it as well as the world recognizes it.

  • Anonymous

     Well I see another idiot spouting idiocy which is what IDIOTS do best!  Yes, the Constitution does state that we can pursue happiness even an idiot like you should be able to understand that your definition of “pursuit of happiness” does not wipe out their definition.  Also any idiot should also be able to understand that along with “pursuit of happiness”  the laws that they made are not wiped out just because you want to change them.  Also, we believe in a man and a woman only, we have not told you one time that you cannot live with someone the same sex as you!  You know there is an old saying that thieves believe that everyone is a thief also because they think that everyone is the same way as they are.  A bigot also thinks everyone else is a bigot because they think that everyone else is like them!  You know, I just realized that unintentionally insulted idiots by calling you one.  Idiots would consider you an idiot!   Cheeeeez, what an idiot’s idiot.  Call back  later when you get even one molecule of a brain.