Homosexuals File Suit to Challenge Law Allowing Judges to Opt-Out of Officiating ‘Gay Weddings’

Court-GavelRALEIGH, N.C. — Several homosexuals in North Carolina have filed suit to challenge a law that was passed this year that allows judges to opt out of officiating “gay weddings” because of their religious convictions.

As previously reported, S.B. 2 was introduced earlier this year by Sen. Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, to allow magistrates to recuse themselves from officiating over the services, as well as to permit register of deeds workers to opt out of issuing licenses due to religious objections.

The bill comes with one condition: that the individual remove themselves from the marriage business altogether.

“Every magistrate has the right to recuse from performing all lawful marriages … based upon any sincerely held religious objection,” it reads in part. “Such recusal shall be upon notice to the chief district court judge and is in effect for at least six months from the time delivered to the chief district court judge.”

In February, the Senate voted 32-16 in favor of the bill, sending the matter on to the House, which likewise passed the measure 67-43.

Republican Gov. Pat McCrory vetoed the legislation after being urged by homosexual advocacy groups to do so, but his veto was subsequently overruled by a majority vote.

Only an estimated five percent of judges in the state—32 out of 670—have recused themselves since the enactment of the statute, and while reports state that no one has been denied a “marriage” license, three homosexuals and their partners filed suit against the law on Wednesday.

  • Connect with Christian News

“It sets a dangerous precedent,” Chris Sgro of Equality North Carolina told WTVD-TV. “Magistrates have to carry out these weddings, same-sex weddings. Magistrates can’t opt out of that.”

But some disagree that judges are obligated to officiate any wedding ceremonies at all.

“The whole lawsuit was based upon the assumption that there’s a duty of magistrates to perform marriages, and that’s an incorrect assumption,” Tami Fitzgerald with the North Carolina Values Coalition told the outlet. “It’s incorrect legally because the statute says it’s an additional authority. So it’s optional for magistrates and registers of deeds. It’s not a duty.”

“What Senate Bill 2 does [is], it balances the right of homosexual couples to get married against the rights of an employee, including a government employee, to follow their religious beliefs, even when they’re on the job,” she said. “And we have a First Amendment right to exercise religious belief.”

Sen. Berger made similar remarks.

“This is just the latest attempt by the far Left’s political correctness mob to force their beliefs on everyone else by trampling the First Amendment guarantee of religious freedom,” he said.

Attorney General Roy Cooper, a Democrat, says that he disagrees with the law, but is going to defend it in court.

Become a Christian News Network Supporter...

Dear Reader, has ChristianNews.net been of benefit and a blessing to you? For many years now, the Lord has seen fit to use this small news outlet as a strong influential resource in keeping Christians informed on current events from a Biblical worldview. Despite Facebook's recent algorithm changes, which has limited our readership, and, as a result, has affected operational revenue, we continue to strive to bring you the news without compromise and to keep Christ in focus. If you have benefited from our news coverage, would you please prayerfully consider becoming a Christian News supporter by clicking here to make a one-time or monthly donation to help keep the truth widely and freely published and distributed? May Christ continue to be exalted through this work!

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
  • Johnny

    “Since government has been involved in marriage, they have done what they always do – taxed it, regulated it, and now redefined it,” – Rand Paul


      so redefining it to include mixing races in the 60s was also a sin? So Gods a bigot?

      • afchief

        Nope! God made them male and female. It does not matter what race. He did not make them Adam and Steve. It was Adam and Eve!!!


          No, you dummy. Ever heard of science? A woman cannot be made from man-theres no “X” chromosome. So, if Eve was made form man, my fat friend, she would have been a male, hence “Steve”. Now go lose some weight-your fatness and sin of gluttony disgusts me.

          • afchief

            Nope! Homosexuality is sin! It is unhealthy! It is DEATH!!!

            Genesis 2:21-22 (NASB) So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man.

          • NORMAN DOSTAL

            Youre a liar and liars are punished in hell. “For those who lie and cast out their brothers by waving their fattened fingers of glutonnous disgusting vile putrescence shall surely be destroyed in fire”-Corinthians 7:9

          • afchief

            Nope!!! Does this sound like a normal lifestyle? No it does not!!!!

            Everyone Should Know

            These Statistics on Homosexuals

            Frank Joseph, M.D.

            What is being pawned off on our children and grandchildren in public schools is the story that to be homosexual or lesbian is just another normal alternative lifestyle.

            Any of you, who have children in public schools, it would behoove you to print out the following and mail it to the principal of your child’s school, with a little note stating:

            I don’t know if the students at (name of school) are being indoctrinated that homosexuality is just another normal alternative lifestyle. If you have been, then you should print out the following and have it passed out to your students, as the truth must be told in order to preserve their health and avoid cutting off about 15-20 years of their life span.

            If the authorities give you a hard time, I would take my child out of that school and put him/her in a private school, and if you cannot afford it, I would homeschool him/her. And you can tell that to the principal.

            Or, you can wait until one day, your child comes home and says, “Mom, I think I’m homosexual.”

            I just heard that in the Los Angeles school district that the enrollments are considerably down (20-30,000) and has caused much grief to the school hierarchy, as the amount of money received is based on the number of students. Probably because more parents are homeschooling.

            burbtn.gif – 43 Bytes

            The statistics on homosexuality and its effects

            Some statistics about the homosexual lifestyle:

            One study reports 70% of homosexuals admitting to having sex only one time with over 50% of their partners (3).

            One study reports that the average homosexual has between 20 and 106 partners per year (6). The average heterosexual has 8 partners in a lifetime.

            Many homosexual sexual encounters occur while drunk, high on drugs, or in an orgy setting (7).

            Many homosexuals don’t pay heed to warnings of their lifestyles: “Knowledge of health guidelines was quite high, but this knowledge had no relation to sexual behavior” (16).

            Homosexuals got homosexuality removed from the list of mental illnesses in the early 70s by storming the annual American Psychiatric Association (APA) conference on successive years. “Guerrilla theater tactics and more straight-forward shouting matches characterized their presence” (2). Since homosexuality has been removed from the APA list of mental illnesses, so has pedophilia (except when the adult feels “subjective distress”) (27).

            Homosexuals account for 3-4% of all gonorrhea cases, 60% of all syphilis cases, and 17% of all hospital admissions (other than for STDs) in the United States (5). They make up only 1-2% of the population.

            Homosexuals live unhealthy lifestyles, and have historically accounted for the bulk of syphilis, gonorrhea, Hepatitis B, the “gay bowel syndrome” (which attacks the intestinal tract), tuberculosis and cytomegalovirus (27).

            73% of psychiatrists say homosexuals are less happy than the average person, and of those psychiatrists, 70% say that the unhappiness is NOT due to social stigmatization (13).

            25-33% of homosexuals and lesbians are alcoholics (11).

            Of homosexuals questioned in one study reports that 43% admit to 500 or more partners in a lifetime, 28% admit to 1000 or more in a lifetime, and of these people, 79% say that half of those partners are total strangers, and 70% of those sexual contacts are one night stands (or, as one homosexual admits in the film “The Castro”, one minute stands) (3). Also, it is a favorite past-time of many homosexuals to go to “cruisy areas” and have anonymous sex.

            78% of homosexuals are affected by STDs (20).

            Judge John Martaugh, chief magistrate of the New York City Criminal Court has said, “Homosexuals account for half the murders in large cities” (10).

            Captain William Riddle of the Los Angeles Police says, “30,000 sexually abused children in Los Angeles were victims of homosexuals” (10).

            50% of suicides can be attributed to homosexuals (10).

            Dr. Daniel Capron, a practicing psychiatrist, says, “Homosexuality by definition is not healthy and wholesome. The homosexual person, at best, will be unhappier and more unfulfilled than the sexually normal person” (10). For other psychiatrists who believe that homosexuality is wrong, please see National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality.

            It takes approximately $300,000 to take care of each AIDS victim, so thanks to the promiscuous lifestyle of homosexuals, medical insurance rates have been skyrocketing for all of us(10).

            Gay parade in New York

            Close-up of one of the New York “Gay Parades”

            Homosexuals were responsible for spreading AIDS in the United States, and then raised up violent groups like Act Up and Ground Zero to complain about it. Even today, homosexuals account for well over 50% of the AIDS cases in the United States, which is quite a large number considering that they account for only 1-2% of the population.

            Homosexuals account for a disproportionate number of hepatitis cases: 70-80% in San Francisco, 29% in Denver, 66% in New York City, 56% in Toronto, 42% in Montreal, and 26% in Melbourne (8).

            37% of homosexuals engage in sadomasochism, which accounts for many accidental deaths. In San Francisco, classes were held to teach homosexuals how to not kill their partners during sadomasochism (8).

            41% of homosexuals say they have had sex with strangers in public restrooms, 60% say they have had sex with strangers in bathhouses, and 64% of these encounters have involved the use of illegal drugs (8).

            Depending on the city, 39-59% of homosexuals are infected with intestinal parasites like worms, flukes and amoebae, which is common in filthy third world countries (8).

            The median age of death of homosexuals is 42 (only 9% live past age 65). This drops to 39 if the cause of death is AIDS. The median age of death of a married heterosexual man is 75 (8).

            The median age of death of lesbians is 45 (only 24% live past age 65). The median age of death of a married heterosexual woman is 79 (8).

            Homosexuals are 100 times more likely to be murdered (usually by another homosexual) than the average person, 25 times more likely to commit suicide, and 19 times more likely to die in a traffic accident (8).

            21% of lesbians die of murder, suicide or traffic accident, which is at a rate of 534 times higher than the number of white heterosexual females aged 25-44 who die of these things(8).

            50% of the calls to a hotline to report “queer bashing” involved domestic violence (i.e., homosexuals beating up other homosexuals) (18).

            About 50% of the women on death row are lesbians (12). Homosexuals prey on children.

            33% of homosexuals ADMIT to minor/adult sex (7).

            There is a notable homosexual group, consisting of thousands of members, known as the North American Man and Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). This is a child molesting homosexual group whose cry is “SEX BEFORE 8 BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE.” This group can be seen marching in most major homosexual parades across the United States.

            Homosexuals commit more than 33% of all reported child molestations in the United States, which, assuming homosexuals make up 2% of the population, means that 1 in 20 homosexuals is a child molestor, while 1 in 490 heterosexuals is a child molestor (19).

            73% of all homosexuals have had sex with boys under 19 years of age (9).

            Many homosexuals admit that they are pedophiles: “The love between men and boys is at the foundation of homosexuality” (22).

            Because homosexuals can’t reproduce naturally, they resort to recruiting children. Homosexuals can be heard chanting “TEN PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH, RECRUIT, RECRUIT, RECRUIT” in their homosexual parades. A group called the “Lesbian Avengers” prides itself on trying to recruit young girls. They print “WE RECRUIT” on their literature. Some other homosexuals aren’t as overt about this, but rather try to infiltrate society and get into positions where they will have access to the malleable minds of young children (e.g., the clergy, teachers, Boy Scout leaders, etc.) (8). See the DC Lesbian Avengers web page, and DC Lesbian Avengers Press Release, where

          • Names_Stan

            There’s the one problem here that this doctor must have same sex attraction to believe something said at school can cause kids to be gay. And also the other dude who believes kids can be “recruited”…he likes fellas too, bank on it.

            I can assure you, they could have told me anything and everything, and I woulda still gone out at recess and chased the girls.

            I’ve no problem with any person who admits they could have “chosen” sex with the same gender…supposedly if only someone back at school would’ve just “recruited” them. But it’s absolutely ridiculous to infer that straight people like me could have or would have ever chosen it.

            That’s why it’s never been a problem for me to love gay people. I don’t fear them due to my own insecurities, as it seems so many do. Same sex attraction simply isn’t one of my burdens.

          • afchief

            Is Homosexuality A Disorder?

            (Note: While in this section we make the case that homosexuality should never have been removed from the officially approved list of psychological disorders, we need to stress that we are NOT saying homosexuals should necessarily be in therapy. We are all born imperfect. We all have our little imperfections. We are basically sophisticated animals. We share about 95% of our genes with monkeys, baboons, apes, etc. We probably have genes which predispose us to violence, stealing, promiscuity, bullying, etc. These behaviors occur naturally in the animal kingdom. So, in a way, we are all born “disordered.” But that does NOT mean we all need therapy. Most of us function just fine, imperfections and all. Yes, we maintain homosexuals have an imperfection heterosexuals don’t have. But it’s a relatively minor one that shouldn’t need therapy. If, however, homosexuals let their orientations depress them, for example, then therapy is advisable.

            (Now, we need to control our animalistic natures and say NO to any immoral desires we have, natural or not, genetically based or not. If homosexual genes exist, if homosexual desire naturally exists, we should just say no to homosexuality. It may not be easy for some, but it should be done nonetheless.)

            For decades the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a disorder (until it was taken over by pro-homosexual ideologues who are now letting sexual politics trump science and logic). Just like a female mind in a male body is a sure sign that something went wrong somewhere (in nature and/or nurture), so a homosexual mind in a heterosexual body is likewise a disorder. Elementary logic leads us to the conclusion that in both cases, the mind is in conflict or disharmony with the body. And just like we view transsexuality as a problem-it-is-okay-to-try-to-fix (sex reassignment surgery is one controversial but legal treatment), so we should view homosexuality as a problem-or-disorder-it-is-okay-to-try-to-fix.

            To treat a disorder as if it’s not a disorder is flat-out malpractice. For example, if you went to a doctor because you weren’t feeling well, and the doctor did some tests, found you had heart disease, AND DIDN’T TELL YOU, rational people would say the doctor was malpracticing. That, basically, is what the APA is doing regarding homosexuality. It is not telling homosexuals they have a disorder.

            To help illustrate how illogical the APA’s reversal of its position on homosexuality was and is, all you have to do is consider how the APA violated or ignored one of its own criteria when it did so. One of its criteria for determining whether a condition is a disorder is whether the condition results in a significant impairment of social functioning. The fact that homosexuals do not have the desire to engage in perfectly natural phallic/vaginal, procreative sex; the fact that homosexuals have no desire to engage in that sex which animal species require for their very survival and existence—the fact that homosexuals are essentially impotent with the opposite gender—is clearly a significant impairment of social functioning and persuasive evidence of a disorder (which disorder, like so many other disorders, may have a genetic component). The APA has little credibility nowadays. It’s been compromised.

            Homosexual activity is so physiologically unnatural and disordered that homosexuals actually have to rely on heterosexuals (or artificial means) to create more homosexuals, since true homosexuals by definition do not engage in reproductive sex.

            A book written by Dr. Ronald Bayer, a pro-homosexual psychiatrist, titled Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis, explains how the decision to remove homosexuality from the officially approved list of psychological disorders was based on power politics and intimidation by homosexual groups, NOT science. In the book Bayer wrote about “confrontations organized by gay demonstrators at psychiatric conventions”1 and said that that decision “was not a conclusion based on an approximation of the scientific truth as dictated by reason.”2

            And there is evidence that the APA has been corrupted, not only by sexual politics, but by money. From “Who’s Behind the Bible of Mental Illness” by Kent Garber, which was in the Dec. 31, 2007/Jan. 7, 2008 issue of U.S. News & World Report (page 25): The “American Psychiatric Association will spend the next five years producing a new edition of…The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders….[It] is hugely influential because it determines what is and is not a mental disorder….The most recent edition of the DSM, published in 1994, drew controversy because it turned what had once been a thin guidebook into an 886-page tome that significantly expanded the definition of mental illness. Traits once associated with shyness, for example, became symptoms of ‘social anxiety disorder.’ And drug companies went on to spend millions promoting medicines for those problems. Eyebrows were further raised in 2006 when a study showed that more than half of the researchers who worked on the manual had at least one financial tie to the drug industry.”

            And regarding that new edition of the DSM, the fifth, which was released in May 2013: it’s so flawed that it “has been slammed by prominent psychiatrists—including Dr. Allen Frances, head of the task force that wrote the fourth edition, who warned doctors to use it ‘cautiously, if at all'” (Alice Park, “Head Case,” Time, June 3, 2013, p. 16).

            One of the biggest knocks of the latest DSM is that it labels things as disorders that are in fact NOT disorders. For example, according to Dr. Allen Frances: “We are turning childhood into a disease….Perfectly appropriate developmental immaturity is being mislabeled as a mental disorder and treated with unnecessary, expensive, and potentially harmful pills….[T]he field [of psychiatry] has lost its rationality” (from an article in Psychology Today titled “No Child Left Undiagnosed,” Sept./Oct. 2014, p. 50).

            We shouldn’t rely on the seriously compromised APA to tell us what is and is not a disorder. (And any psychiatrists who financially support the APA should have their heads examined.)

            To close this section, there is evidence provided by homosexuals themselves that many of them are heterophobic. For examples, from homosexual author Dennis Altman: “Undoubtedly for many homosexuals there is something threatening in the idea of intimacy with the other sex.”3 And one well-known homosexual, David Geffen, has admitted that he “was afraid of the opposite sex,” according to biographer Tom King, a fellow homosexual.4


            1. Dr. Ronald Bayer, Homosexuality and American Psychiatry: The Politics of Diagnosis (Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press, 1987), p. 3.

            2. Ibid., pp. 3-4.

            3. Dennis Altman, The Homosexualization of America, the Americanization of the Homosexual (NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1982), p. 222.

            4. Tom King, “I am in love with Cher,” Chicago Sun-Times, March 15, 2000, p. 50.

          • Names_Stan

            If I thought you authored that, I might read it.

            I can’t see in glancing that it denied your boys have same sex attraction if they could be talked into gay sex.

            As long as we’re clear about what’s going on in the “choice” camp that makes them feel that everyone must be isolated from any dastardly recruiting tactics.
            Fact is, it’s not everybody…its just the ones in the “choice” camp.

          • afchief

            The truth always offends!!! Does it not?

          • NGN

            when you start sharing any truths………

          • afchief

            The Case Against Homosexual Activity

            (Note: While this section is specifically about homosexuality, it was written in the knowledge that we are ALL imperfect beings who struggle, in our own individual ways, with immoral desires, whatever their causes.)

            Some of the most emotional and divisive issues in our society—specifically issues such as homosexual marriage, adoption by homosexuals, and other “gay rights” issues—revolve around two central and critical issues. Those issues are: is homosexual activity moral and “legalizeable” or immoral and “illegalizeable”?

            If we can rationally conclude that homosexual activity is moral and that it should be protected via legislation, then by logical extension we must also conclude that such things as homosexual marriage and adoption should likewise be legal.

            Conversely, if we can rationally conclude that homosexual activity is immoral and “illegalizeable,” then by logical extension we must also conclude that homosexual marriage and adoption should be illegal.

            Or, to frame it another way: We have laws against such things as consenting-adult polygamy, consenting-adult incest, consenting-adult prostitution, consenting-adult exhibitionism, etc. For around two hundred years we had laws against consenting-adult homosexual activity—and the country did just fine. Does the elimination of the laws against homosexual activity (and marriage and adoption) make any sense?

            In an effort to bring clarity to these issues and to help unify us around truth, rather than keep us divided by untruth and confusion, what follows is a rigorously logical analysis of those aforementioned central homosexual issues.

            To begin, a little history. For many many years in this country homosexual activity was deemed immoral and was not legal. It was only first decriminalized in Illinois in 1961. Other states eventually followed the precedent Illinois set. Also, for decades the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a disorder. The APA only removed homosexuality from its official list of psychological disorders in 1973. The APA’s controversial decision to do so was nowhere near a unanimous decision by its then members because—just as a female mind in a male body and a male mind in a female body are sure signs that something went wrong somewhere, in either nature and/or nurture—a homosexual mind in a heterosexual body was widely considered to be a disorder. The associated fact that homosexuals were basically impotent with the opposite gender also was part of the equation.

            Now, why was homosexual activity deemed immoral and why wasn’t it legal? And why do so many people still deem homosexual activity immoral?

            For centuries, the position of “traditional value” people re homosexual activity essentially boils down to this: homosexual activity is a negative deviation from the reasonable heterosexual norm; and if we condone homosexual deviations then we must fairly allow other aberrant people their own particular deviations.

            Members of our group have debated many homosexuals and their supporters over the years and we are stunned at how many of them hold this hypocritical and contradictory position: It is okay to “discriminate” against sexual deviants like exhibitionists (e.g., people who masturbate or have sex in public) and incestuous couples, even if these deviants are consenting adults and even if they aren’t hurting anybody; but it is NOT okay to “discriminate” against homosexual and bisexual deviants. They try to rationalize this absurd position by saying things like “Exhibitionists offend people.” We point out that tens of millions of Americans and several billion people around the world are offended by homosexual activity, such as public homosexual kissing and hand-holding. We don’t want to depress homosexuals and their supporters, but their position simply makes no sense. They ARE wrong. It is obvious to us and should be obvious to anyone NOT in denial about reality.

            Legal homosexual acts are bad legal and moral precedents. Let us explain in more detail.

            Can we justly discriminate in favor of some unreasonable deviations and against others? No. If we tolerate deviations from reasonable sexual standards, then we will fairly have to tolerate deviations from other reasonable standards because all of the different kinds of deviates will demand consistency from us and nondiscriminatory equal treatment.

            For example, many towns have ordinances restricting what people can do with their homes and yards. These towns want to prevent slums from forming and ruining their environments. Now, what if someone wants to move into a picturesque section of such a town and wants to have a yard of mud with paper littered around it and wants to have a house which has the exterior’s coating of paint badly chipped up? We should tolerate that if we tolerate homosexual acts.

            To those “freedom-loving” liberals who disagree with that last sentence, we can just ask them if they would outlaw any action that lowered someone’s property values. And if they would, we could point out that an openly homosexual person moving into a conservative area would likely lower property values in that area since many conservatives might decide to move out of that area, just like black people moving into certain predominantly white areas can unfortunately and wrongly cause “white flight” and lower property values. Does that mean liberals would agree to outlaw homosexual behavior in that geographic area? Or would they outlaw black people moving into certain white areas of the country? This gives the reader an idea of the kind of legal and moral swamp liberal extremists are wont to create. (Let us remember that trial lawyers, who are big contributors to liberal Democrat politicians, thrive when our laws are confusing and contradictory. Do liberal politicians intentionally create confusing laws which help keep trial lawyers busy as a payback for campaign contributions by those lawyers?)

            And if liberals would not outlaw actions that lower property values, then if they tolerate homosexual deviations they would fairly have to tolerate other deviations (as the aforementioned pig sties). In either case, whether “freedom-loving” liberals would choose to outlaw actions that lower property values or not outlaw, the consequences are very messy for them and their ideology. Once they’ve established the principle that negative deviations from reasonable norms are okay, to selectively apply that principle is discriminatory.

            Incidentally, we should stress that we are NOT arguing that homosexual activity is a heinous crime, just as we would not say stealing a penny is a heinous crime. But just like legalizing the stealing of a penny is an absurd legal precedent (why not then legalize stealing two pennies? a nickel? a dollar? etc.), so legalizing homosexual deviations is an absurd legal precedent.

            Homosexuals like to say, as part of their defense of homosexual acts, that they are not hurting anybody when they engage in such acts (though, because they do tend to be more promiscuous than “normal,” they do spread more sexual diseases per capita than more sexually “normal” people). Well, people who live in an ugly pig sty like the one described above can say the same thing about that pig sty—it doesn’t hurt anybody. That does not carry much weight. Many actions are wrong that do not “hurt” anybody.

            If we tolerate such deviations we will wind up with an ugly, confused, and sick society. Let us learn from the decay and fall of the great Roman and Greek societies, which came to value debauchery. Once people depart from decent moral standards it is frequently all downhill after that because it is harder to be moral than immoral, generally speaking. This is because being moral requires some effort (self-restraint or self-denial), and people tend to take the “path of least resistance.”

            Indeed, over the last 40 years or so, as our society has become more accepting of immoral behavior, our divorce rate has soared, as has the out-of-wedlock birthrate and teen suicide rate, we have seen the rise of an epidemic of sexually transmitted diseases, etc., etc.

            Thus, we should ever try to see to it that morality is the path of least resistance by creating inhibitions to immorality, by at least attaching serious social stigmas to immorality and preferably by illegalizing immoral behavior. (To those who say that we cannot legislate morality, we can reply that outlawing murder, rape, theft, racist behaviors, sexist behaviors, indecent exposure, disturbing the peace, etc., etc., is legislating morality and is obviously proper.)

            Ultimately, all the rules or laws against homosexual activity, normal or deviant sex in public, indecent exposure, obscene literature and videos, the utterance of certain swearwords in public or using them in newspapers and magazines and on TV and radio—all the rules or laws against those things rest on the same basis as the laws or ordinances against the existence of such things as ugly, unkempt houses and yards. What is that basis? Nothing more than this: a large number of people find such things unpleasant or offensive or repugnant, etc., etc.

            It is a matter of maintaining high standards at the least, and at the most of slowly raising those standards as we make society better. Allowing people to lower our standards, to take us down toward a more animalistic state of being, is to allow people to slowly ruin our advanced and advancing society.

            Sure we can survive (after a fashion) if we allow (for examples) public heterosexual or homosexual sexual activity, but what kind of life would that be? Sure we can survive in a muddy, unkempt, littered, ugly neighborhood (as opposed to a grassy, flowered, neat neighborhood), but what kind of life is that?

            The fact is, in a democracy, if enough people find a certain behavior (not orientation or belief) disagreeable they can pass laws against that behavior. And behavior is the key word. Generally speaking, we cannot discriminate on the basis of natural characteristics as race, gender, or age. Generally speaking, we cannot discriminate on the basis of belief or speech. We cannot violate fundamental rights like freedom of speech or religious belief or political belief. But behavior, unpleasant, repugnant, degraded behavior, can be rightly illegalized.

            (We believe it is fairly clear that our Constitution does not even come close to granting a fundamental or inalienable right to aberrant sex like homosexual sex. And having mentioned “race” in the preceding paragraph—homosexuals love to compare their status with the status of racial minorities like black people. The comparison is absurd. Many blacks and other racial minority members are understandably offended when they are compared to people who voluntarily engage in sexually aberrant activity.)

            Homosexuals try to “naturalize” their behavior by saying that such behavior can be found in nature. Even if that is true, homosexual behavior is the exception rather than the rule. Too, nature makes mistakes all the time. There are mutations, genetic defects, etc. There are genes which predispose people to cancer, heart disease, etc., etc. Just because something can be found in nature does not make it good or right. If every person was homosexual the human race would die out because there would be no reproduction. That is just one of the drawbacks to homosexual behavior. Others will be discussed later.

            (There does exist quite a bit of seemingly homosexual behavior in the animal kingdom. For examples, in cattle and dogs and monkeys, a male will occasionally “mount” another male as he would mount a female for sex; except there is no sex between the males, the act being an asexual communication of dominance and submission. Also, some sexually deprived animals, e.g., pet dogs, will try to mate with practically anything that moves, like human arms or legs or same-sex animals. But that does not indicate homosexual desire, just orgasm desire.)

            As to whether homosexual desire is natural or instinctual or genetic in some people: in people with some natural physical abnormality in their brains that may be true for them, but it is irrelevant. We all, being imperfect creations, occasionally have immoral desires (as, for examples, to cheat, steal, be violent, etc.). Immoral desires obviously should not be acted upon, whether they are natural or instinctual or in a way man-made. (To go to extremes to clearly illustrate a point—what if some poor guy felt a “natural/instinctual” desire to have sex with a consenting sheep—are we supposed to allow a human-animal sexual relationship? Preposterous, though not so preposterous to a liberal Princeton University philosopher named Peter Singer who rationalized human-animal sex. And what if there is a necrophilia-gene? Having sex with dead people doesn’t “hurt” anyone. How ridiculous and bizarre are we supposed to allow the world to get?).

          • afchief

            Part II

            “There’s a big difference between engaging in homosexual acts, and engaging in exhibitionist deviations or consenting-adult brother/sister or parent/offspring sexual deviations,” we’ve heard multiple times from homosexuals, as if those differences are very relevant. There is a big difference between stealing five dollars and stealing a million dollars, yet they are both obviously wrong—stealing is stealing. Homosexual deviations are immoral; exhibitionist deviations are immoral; brother/sister and parent/offspring sexual deviations are immoral; all are wrong, differences or no differences.

            Also, if homosexuals are going to place much emphasis on such differences, then they ought to start with the most significant of such differences—the differences between man and woman, between heterosexual and homosexual sex. They want to point out the differences that are most “convenient” to them and their rationalizations; but they want to ignore, conveniently, the differences between man and woman. Hypocritical.

            “But it’s love,” homosexuals say. Irrelevant. If you love your parents or your sibling or your baby or your pet dog are you going to have sex with them? Different types of love-objects and different types of love warrant different behaviors. Love doesn’t justify immoral sexual activity.

            And in addition to homosexual partners being negative deviations from the norm and setting bad legal and moral precedents, homosexuals contract certain diseases fairly regularly (details on this point can be found in the section of our website called On The Unhealthy Homosexual Lifestyle). Some of the diseases are hepatitis B, genital herpes, chlamydia, gonorrhea, syphilis, anal cancer, and AIDS. These diseases are nature’s way of telling people that something is wrong with their behavior, that they are abusing or misusing their bodies. These diseases are other good reasons to not engage in homosexual acts.

            Homosexuals point out that many unnatural (i.e., man-invented or artificial) things are valued by human beings—from things like cars and airplanes to complex entertaining actions like contortionist feats to things like purple hair. They rightly say that just because homosexual acts may be unnatural does not necessarily mean they are immoral.

            The response to that is: allowing “unnatural” things like airplanes or physical acts like contortionist feats is fine because they are not bad legal precedents; they are either good legal precedents (e.g., despite occasional accidents airplanes can help a society run much more efficiently) or are essentially neutral legal precedents (e.g., while purple hair is not all that valuable to society, it does not have negative ramifications for society, generally speaking, and one can say the same for contortionist feats). On the other hand, homosexual acts are bad legal precedents because they can lead to social approval of other deviant sex acts. (As noted previously, a misguided Princeton University professor, one Peter Singer, has actually and explicitly defended consenting human-animal sex.) And let us not forget there is a group of homosexuals, the North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA), organized to push for the legalization of man-boy sex.

            “Who are you to judge others?” we have actually been seriously asked by homosexuals. If we stop judging others we have to legalize murder, rape, theft, etc.—obviously ludicrous things to do. One can feel perfectly free and right to rationally judge others. And if homosexuals do not believe in judging others, then they should not hypocritically judge people like yours truly and tell us we are wrong and “homophobic” for being against homosexual activity.

            Then there is the argument that homosexual acts are effective population-control measures and so are justified. That argument is so bad, so ridiculous it could even be used by pedophiles. Pedophiles can say that if adults were just having sex with 5-year-olds we wouldn’t have a population problem! Hey, murder is an effective population-control measure. So what. Too, any sex act that a man can do with another man and not make anyone pregnant (like oral sex), that man can do with a woman and still not make anyone pregnant. We do not need to go to ridiculous lengths, like homosexual acts (or, to get a little bizarre to make a point, necrophilia or bestiality) to control our population numbers.

            Then there is the “consenting adults” argument: that, generally speaking, anything that happens between consenting adults is fine, including homosexual acts. But first of all, it is obvious that nobody has the right to do wrong, even consenting adults (and homosexual acts are wrong). If two so-called consenting adults choose to rob a bank, we would not legalize bank-robbing.

            Secondly, society has better things to do with its people and resources than treat diseases that homosexuals bring on themselves by consentingly or voluntarily engaging in unsafe and/or physiologically unnatural sex acts. (Resources would be better spent finding cures for diseases people do not bring on themselves, do not “ask” for, as diseases associated with the involuntary aging process. We also could spend that money feeding the starving children of the world. In a very real sense, children are starving because some people, including some heterosexuals, think they have the right to engage in unsafe sex and spread disease. If that doesn’t outrage you you may have lost your humanity. Homosexuals should apologize for all the STDs they’ve spread, and all the money those STDs have cost, and especially for setting bad moral examples for our children.)

            And third, two people engaging in immoral sex acts in absolute privacy is one thing; coming out of the closet with one’s vices and demanding equal rights is quite another and should be frowned upon to say the least. When someone’s behavior becomes public knowledge, when it thereby affects the public, it becomes the public’s business, and the public acquires the right to legislate against that behavior should the public decide logically that it would be advisable to do so.

            Homosexuals like to especially point out that people of the same sex can understand each other better than they can understand the opposite sex, because people of the same sex are naturally more similar to each other.

            There is some truth to that, but when homosexuals conclude from it that homosexual relationships are therefore better and/or more moral than heterosexual ones they go too far. While men and women have their differences, they have many things in common. Let’s build on the things we have in common. Let’s unify the populace, not sexually segregate and disunify it as homosexuals apparently would prefer. Besides, people of the opposite sex can be much more attractive and exciting, naturally.

            By the way, the more lesbians there are in the population, the fewer potential mates for straight men. No red-blooded heterosexual male should want that. And the more male homosexuals there are in the population, the fewer potential mates for straight women. No red-blooded heterosexual female should want that. Plus, from an evolutionary standpoint regarding reproduction, the more homosexuals there are the narrower the available gene pool (due to fewer potential mates), which isn’t good.

            Some critics point out that, in the wide circle of people we at H.O.M.E. know and love and like, there are probably some closet homosexuals. They argue that since we already like them, what difference should their homosexuality make? The fact that this type of “argument” is even being used, like some of the other seriously flawed arguments discussed above, shows how badly our educational system is failing. In the wide circle of people you know and love and like, odds are there are one or two closet racists or sexists or “homophobes” or thieves or pedophiles (etc.). That isn’t much of an argument for anything.

            It should be stressed that numerous homosexuals and bisexuals have a large number of sexual partners, many of whom are essentially perfect strangers. These people just use others for sex and have a difficult time loving. They are contributing to making the world a colder and more exploitative place. (Incidentally, promiscuity says basically this: I do not think you are worth marrying but I’ll use you for sex. Promiscuous sex is actually somewhat of an insult to thinking people. It’s just sexual exploitation.)

            Homosexuals have told straight people that straights must have sexual hang-ups and inhibitions because they do not sexually desire people of their own gender. Well, it is evident that anyone (like a homosexual) who cannot or will not desire/love/marry/enjoy the opposite sex must also have some big hang-ups and inhibitions. Too, since many bisexuals tend to prefer their own sex when it comes to sexual partners, those bisexuals must have the same hang-ups and inhibitions afflicting homosexuals, though to a lesser degree. (If bisexuals fully enjoyed the opposite gender sexually, they wouldn’t waste their time on same-sex partners. Something, some sexual inhibitions and hang-ups, must be interfering with bisexuals’ enjoyment of the opposite sex.)

            Also, as a review of the numerous studies done through the years on homosexuals bears out, it is a fact that many many homosexuals were sexually abused when young (for more info on this fact see the section of our website called Sexual Abuse: A Major Cause Of Homosexuality?). That abuse is what has so disoriented the sexual desires of many homosexuals. In other words, many homosexuals were not born homosexual and so can choose to be what they were born to be—heterosexual. Such a choice may not be easy and may require therapy, but for many disoriented people it is a viable option. And for these people to choose to remain homosexual just lets the degenerates who abused them have too much power over them—the power to determine their sexual orientations.

            Modern psychology knows that people can be conditioned to be practically anything. The environments we grow up in can make us tyrannical or meek, generous or selfish, loving or hateful, etc., etc. Human beings seem to be almost infinitely malleable—capable of becoming pedophiles, necrophiliacs, torturers, whatever. Identical twins can grow up to be very different people, with one even being heterosexual and the other homosexual. Homosexuals are not trapped in their homosexuality any more than identical twins are trapped in their sexuality by their genes. Homosexuals should be able to become enjoyably heterosexual if they concentrate and “train” themselves to. They cannot justify not doing so. Let’s go forward, not back thousands of years to the ancient Greek and Roman debauched societies. Let’s progress not regress. Homosexuals should not be afraid of change, should not be afraid of becoming heterosexual.

            Males are attracted to females by chemical substances (pheromones), just like dogs in heat, and are attracted by flirtatious behavior and perhaps by physical traits like breasts. This is how nature works. Even lower animals flirt. This natural “programming” is why normal men are attracted to women and vice versa.

            Being what we are, i.e., fulfilling our natures, within reason, makes us happiest. Being heterosexual is within reason, engaging in homosexual activity is not within reason. That is just the way it is. Just like we should not eat poison ivy or bask in the sun to excess (getting sunstroke and/or severe sunburn) or lay naked in the snow too long (getting hypothermia). That is just the way it is. Our natures entail limits.

            It would be wrong for society to allow homosexuals to impose their “morality,” their be-tolerant-of-aberrant-sexualities “morality,” on us. It would be wrong for us to allow homosexuals to dictate to us what we will and will not tolerate. It would be wrong for us to yield to their unreasonable demands for toleration and legalization of homosexual acts. Like it or not, that is reality. That is just the way it is. Most people can easily accept that. If homosexuals do not want to appear irrational or prejudiced they also ought to accept that.

            Indeed, any honest and logical homosexual has to admit that the decisive argument against homosexual acts, the argument that legal homosexual activity is a bad legal and moral precedent, is a perfectly valid argument. This is because homosexuals and their liberal supporters use the same type of argument to try to defend their values. Liberals like to ask those who want to censor some book or some smutty rock and roll lyrics: “Where will the censorship stop? What’s next on your list?”

            If homosexuals and their supporters recognize the validity of the bad-legal-precedent argument, the “slippery slope” argument, and they do, then they have to admit that such an argument helps demonstrate that homosexual acts are immoral and illegalizeable.

            Also, as noted previously, for decades the American Psychiatric Association considered homosexuality a disorder (until it was taken over by pro-homosexual ideologues who are now letting sexual politics trump science and logic). In the section of our website titled “Is Homosexuality A Disorder?” we make the case that it is, though we view it as a comparatively minor one. (And, again, we are all born imperfect.) Still, it makes no sense to treat a disorder as if it were not a disorder.

            On another matter, those adults who mislead young sexually confused people into thinking homosexual activity is okay are just instilling a false hope. They are taking advantage of the young and confused. They are doing a disservice to everyone, and they are heartlessly setting young homosexuals up for a big fall. When young homosexuals debate conservative intellectuals and find out they cannot justify homosexual activity, when young homosexuals find out all their arguments are flawed, they can become seriously depressed. We should not be instilling the false hope—we should not be fooling young people into believing—that homosexual activity is okay when thinking people have known for centuries it is not.

            The biggest reason that the so-called “gay rights” (sad wrongs) movement has gotten as far as it has is that the major media, which for decades have been dominated by pro-homosexual liberals, have conducted a massive, sophisticated propaganda campaign in favor of homosexuality. They have willfully disseminated exaggerations and falsehoods, plus have engaged in widespread censorship of inconvenient facts concerning homosexuality.

            We wish more Americans knew just how much their values and emotions have been insidiously manipulated by media “malpractitioners.” Someday in the future people are going to look back at this era and wonder how so many pro-homosexual people let themselves be taken in by fallacious propaganda.

            (For those who want to know more about media manipulation—and about all the in-depth psychological research done on people with the goal of learning how to push our buttons, how to get us to respond in certain ways to various stimuli—a good and important read is the classic book Hidden Persuaders by Vance Packard.)

            Before we close this section, some words on the mean-spirited use of the term “homophobic” by those who love to call people like this writer pejorative and inflammatory names. Homophobia doesn’t really exist. Are people who are morally opposed to theft or rape or whatever, theftphobes, or rapephobes, or whateverphobes? Obviously not. Principled opposition to homosexual activity is clearly not a phobia, is clearly not a pathological fear. People who label others “homophobic” are just revealing their ignorance and naivety.

            To conclude: penalizing people for engaging in homosexual behavior is clearly not discrimination, just like penalizing people for exhibitionism or incest is not discrimination. Penalizing people for immoral or illegal behavior is simply the right thing to do. That is a truth homosexuals (and bisexuals) should be able to understand. And with all the genuinely serious problems in the world that need our attention, don’t homosexuals and their supporters have anything better to do with their time than struggle to legalize immoral sexual activity? These extremists should get a life.

          • NGN

            just more of your cut and paste drivel ….too funny!

          • afchief

            Homosexuality: The Mental Illness That Went Away

            by PHIL HICKEY on OCTOBER 8, 2011

            According to the American Psychiatric Association, until 1974 homosexuality was a mental illness. Freud had alluded to homosexuality numerous times in his writings, and had concluded that paranoia and homosexuality were inseparable. Other psychiatrists wrote copiously on the subject, and homosexuality was “treated” on a wide basis. There was little or no suggestion within the psychiatric community that homosexuality might be conceptualized as anything other than a mental illness that needed to be treated. And, of course, homosexuality was listed as a mental illness in DSM-II. (The DSM – Diagnostic and Statistical Manual – is the APA’s standard classification of their so-called mental disorders, and is used by many mental health workers in the USA and other countries.)

            Then in 1970 gay activists protested against the APA convention in San Francisco. These scenes were repeated in 1971, and as people came out of the “closet” and felt empowered politically and socially, the APA directorate became increasingly uncomfortable with their stance. In 1973 the APA’s nomenclature task force recommended that homosexuality be declared normal. The trustees were not prepared to go that far, but they did vote to remove homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses by a vote of 13 to 0, with 2 abstentions. This decision was confirmed by a vote of the APA membership, and homosexuality was no longer listed in the seventh edition of DSM-II, which was issued in 1974.

            What’s noteworthy about this is that the removal of homosexuality from the list of mental illnesses was not triggered by some scientific breakthrough. There was no new fact or set of facts that stimulated this major change. Rather, it was the simple reality that gay people started to kick up a fuss. They gained a voice and began to make themselves heard. And the APA reacted with truly astonishing speed. And with good reason. They realized intuitively that a protracted battle would have drawn increasing attention to the spurious nature of their entire taxonomy. So they quickly “cut loose” the gay community and forestalled any radical scrutiny of the DSM system generally.

            The APA claimed that they made the change because new research showed that most homosexual people were content with their sexual orientation, and that as a group, they appeared to be as well-adjusted as heterosexual people. I suggest, however, that these research findings were simply the APA’s face-saver. For centuries, perhaps millennia, homosexual people had clung to their sexual orientation despite the most severe persecution and vilification, including imprisonment and death. Wouldn’t this suggest that they were happy with their orientation? Do we need research to confirm this? And if we do, shouldn’t we also need research to confirm that heterosexual people are happy with their orientation? And if poor adjustment is critical to a diagnosis of mental illness, where was the evidence of this that justified making homosexuality a mental illness in the first place?

            Also noteworthy is the fact that the vote of the membership was by no means unanimous. Only about 55% of the members who voted favored the change.

            Of course, the APA put the best spin they could on these events. The fact is that they altered their taxonomy because of intense pressure from the gay community, but they claimed that the change was prompted by research findings.

            So all the people who had this terrible “illness” were “cured” overnight – by a vote! I remember as a boy reading of the United Nations World Health Organization’s decision to eradicate smallpox. This was in 1967, and by 1977, after a truly staggering amount of work, the disease was a thing of the past. Why didn’t they just take a vote? Because smallpox is a real illness. The human problems listed in DSM are not. It’s that simple. You can say that geese are swans – but in reality they’re still geese.

            The overall point being that the APA’s taxonomy is nothing more than self-serving nonsense. Real illnesses are not banished by voting or by fiat, but by valid science and hard work. There are no mental illnesses. Rather, there are people. We have problems; we have orientations; we have habits; we have perspectives. Sometimes we do well, other times we make a mess of things. We are complicated. Our feelings fluctuate with our circumstances, from the depths of despondency to the pinnacles of bliss. And perhaps, most of all, we are individuals. DSM’s facile and self-serving attempt to medicalize human problems is an institutionalized insult to human dignity. The homosexual community has managed to liberate themselves from psychiatric oppression. But there are millions of people worldwide who are still being damaged, stigmatized, and disempowered by this pernicious system to this day.

          • NGN


          • afchief

            We Christians know the truth about homosexuality. You and other homos suppress the truth in unrighteousness.

            Romans 1:18-28 (NASB) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.

          • NGN

            sir, you are even close to being a real xtian…..not even close

          • afchief

            Sorry, but Jesus lives in and I speak for Him. What I say is TRUTH!!!!

            Hebrews 4:12 (NASB) For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

          • NGN

            not for the true Christians I know and care for. you have nothing but emptiness inside…..you are an apostate

          • afchief

            Nope! You are a liar and serve the father of lies…..satan! There is NO truth in you.

            John 8:44 (NASB) You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies.

          • NGN

            Facebook page has created a furious debate about the accuracy of the claims made by the essay’s author,“Frank Joseph, M.D.”

            But now it’s time to scrutinize the source of those claims. In one case, it looks quite ugly.

            Consider this dubious bullet-point from the essay: “The median age of death of lesbians is 45 (only 24% live past age 65). The median age of death of a married heterosexual woman is 79 (8).”

            That “(8)” is footnote #8. It refers to a pamphlet entitled “Is Homosexual Activity Normal?” by Dr. Edward R. Fields of Marietta, Ga. Fields is cited as the source for eight bullet points in the essay that Agema circulated.

            What appears to be a reprint of the original Fields essay can be found here.

            The Fields facts used in the essay reposted by Agema (and written by Joseph) are all similarly outrageous: “37% of homosexuals engage in sadomasochism,” “60% say they have had sex with strangers in bathhouses,” “Homosexuals are 100 times more likely to be murdered,” etc…

            The Jewish Anti-Defamation League informs us that an Edward R. Fields of Marietta, GA, is a “non-practicing chiropractor.”

            That’s the good part.

            The bad parts:

            “Edward Fields has been active in white supremacist and anti-Semitic groups since he was a teenager in the late 1940s … Fields was a significant force in the racist world …”

            “In 1991 he organized a Klan rally in Montgomery, Alabama, along with Thom Robb of the Knights of the KKK.”

            “In February 2001 he attended the funeral of Byron de la Beckwith, murderer of civil rights activist Medgar Evers …”

          • TheKingOfRhye

            It’s interesting to see where afchief is getting his stuff from….

          • afchief

            Do Homosexuals Have A Hidden Agenda?

            A homosexual author named Michael Swift has stated: “Our [gay] writers and artists will make love between men fashionable and de rigeur….We will eliminate heterosexual liaisons….The family unit will be abolished.”1 That is one indication of the pathological attitude some homosexuals have towards the opposite gender.

            While Swift’s assertion—that homosexuals want to eliminate the family unit—sounds unbelievable, homosexual authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen had this to say about it: “Luridly overstated as it is, it’s fairly representative of the line taken by gay media radicals.”2

            Here is another indication of that pathological attitude. A homosexual named Mark Dennis has admitted in the Wall Street Journal that “the gay agenda…plans the end of ‘breeders’ (heterosexuals) through a takeover of public education.”3 In other words, some homosexual activists want the public schools to eventually teach that normal man/woman sexual relations are wrong!

            Another indication of the pathological attitude some homosexuals have towards the opposite gender is this quote from a lesbian named Geri Cox: “The older I get…the angrier I get. Especially with men. I’ve gotten to the point where I hate men.”4 That anti-male attitude is common among lesbians, as this next quote shows.

            “Because a general disenchantment with and suspicion of all males was central to lesbian-feminist doctrine, the gay man was naturally seen as being no less an enemy than any other human with a penis, and lesbian-feminists could make no lasting coalition with gay men in a gay revolution.”5 That from lesbian author Lillian Faderman. Sexist attitudes are so common and strong among homosexuals that even “natural” allies, homosexual men and lesbians, find working together difficult if not impossible.

            Here is a similar quote from a homosexual man, Dennis Altman: There is “disinterest of gay men in women’s issues and…hostility of gay women to much of the gay male movement.”6

            From homosexual authors Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen: “gay men and lesbians are apples and oranges; they happen to find themselves in the same barrel only because their society treats all fruits alike. Were it otherwise, these two probably would not socialize with each other, much less unite in organizations.”7

            Simon LeVay, another homosexual author, disclosed that: “Gays and lesbians fought their own private battle of the sexes [in the 1970s]. Gay men were generally made to feel unwelcome in lesbian bars, and vice versa.”8

            Similarly, a homosexual man named Eric Marcus admits: “Sexism between men and women was just rampant in the early 1970s in the gay community in the larger cities.”9

            Professor Martin Duberman, a homosexual, acknowledged that “sexism…is rampant in the gay male.”10

            A reporter for the pro-homosexual Chicago Tribune, Grant Pick, noted in 1993: “Sexism persists among homosexuals…and lesbians, in particular, cite instances of discrimination from male homosexuals.”11

            A reporter for the pro-homosexual Chicago Sun-Times, Ernest Tucker, in an article titled “Girlcott hits sexism at gay parade,” related that two lesbian groups planned to boycott the 1997 North Side Gay and Lesbian Pride Parade in Chicago “because they say gay men among the spectators harassed them verbally and physically in the past.”12

            A big clue which helps explain all that sexism found among homosexuals is contained in these words from the homosexual Dennis Altman: “Undoubtedly for many homosexuals there is something threatening in the idea of intimacy with the other sex.”13 One well-known homosexual, David Geffen, has admitted that he “was afraid of the opposite sex,” according to biographer Tom King, a fellow homosexual.14

            If homosexuals allow themselves to have warm feelings for the opposite gender, they might begin to doubt their homosexual identities. So, many homosexuals develop negative feelings for the opposite gender. This homosexual fear of intimacy with the opposite gender, this heterophobia, helps account for all that sexism found among homosexuals. (It looks like those homosexuals who are fond of labeling certain people “homophobes” are just projecting a variation of their own phobia onto others.)

            Another kind of discrimination practiced by some homosexuals besides the abovementioned kind is discrimination against normal heterosexuals. As Jon Margolis, a one-time (liberal) columnist for the Chicago Tribune, noted: In “the theater, fashion, much of the cultural and intellectual world, it actually helps to be a homosexual, with the discrimination going the other way [against heterosexuals].”15

            This homosexual prejudice against heterosexuals is due in part to many homosexuals believing they are superior to heterosexuals. Professor Martin Duberman admits that “classism” (elitism, a sense of superiority) is a prevalent feeling among homosexuals.16

            Besides the aforesaid homosexual prejudices, Altman says there is also a “quite considerable presence of racism in the gay world.”17 Professor Duberman agrees. He mentions “the endemic racism in our [homosexual] community”18 and states that “racism…is rampant in the gay male.”19

            LeVay also referred to the “racism within the gay and lesbian community.”20 Author Frank Browning, a homosexual, similarly noted “the racial divisions in San Francisco gay life.”21

            A black lesbian named Deborah Johnson “found that the gay and lesbian community was much further behind than the straight community when it came to basic civil rights [for blacks]….[W]hen black people showed up at [gay] meetings or social gatherings, they would get the cold shoulder. Nobody would ever talk to them. The insensitivities were really bad. And there were racial comments all the time.”22

            A black homosexual named Keith Boykin devoted a whole chapter of a book he wrote to this particular prejudice. He titled that chapter “Gay Racism.”23

            And a columnist for the homosexual newspaper Windy City Times, Dan Perreten, admits: “Racism is evil, and it’s alive and well in the gay community.”24

            To sum up all these quotes, of which the vast majority are from homosexuals themselves: there is a strong tendency for homosexuals to be prejudiced, heterophobic people who discriminate against the opposite sex and heterosexuals.

            Many homosexuals like to “bad mouth” the opposite sex because they want to create ill will between the sexes. (To learn some of the sexist jokes homosexuals like to tell, and some of their racist jokes, see the book More Man Than You’ll Ever Be by Joseph Goodwin, Indiana U Press, 1989.) For example, homosexuals might say something like “Women are just nags who marry for money.” Many homosexuals would love to keep men and women apart. Let’s not let them.

            Here are a couple of interesting quotes from a homosexual writer named Paul Varnell out of a homosexual newspaper, the Chicago Free Press: “Lesbians and gay men have nothing in common except mutual incomprehension” and “Almost all gay men say that they experience their desire for other men as a given, as if it were an inherent part of them. By contrast, many (but not all) lesbians say they regard their sexual desire for women as a choice.”25 (That item about lesbians can be explained thusly: if many lesbians know they were sexually abused by men when they were young, then they should be able to understand how they were probably not born lesbian but have “chosen” to be with women due to a fear of men.)

            One last intriguing item: “Girl Scout staffers writing in the book [On My Honor: Lesbians Reflect on Their Scouting Experience] claim that roughly one in three of the Girl Scouts’ paid professional staff is lesbian.”26. What are all those lesbians doing there? Are they trying to take over the organization? To recruit young girls? (For those who would be interested in an alternative to the Girl Scouts, an alternative dedicated to upholding traditional values, you may want to check out American Heritage Girls. This group was started by those who believe the Girl Scouts have lost their way.)


            1. Michael Swift, “For the homoerotic order,” Gay Community News (Boston), Feb. 15-21, 1987.

            2. Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, After the Ball (NY: Doubleday, 1989), p. 361.

            3. Mark Dennis, “AIDS and deep denial,” Wall Street Journal, May 26, 1993, p. A19.

            4. Martha Barron Barrett, Invisible Lives (NY: William Morrow Co., 1989), p. 248.

            5. Lillian Faderman, Odd Girls and Twilight Lovers (NY: Columbia U Press, 1991), p. 212.

            6. Dennis Altman, The Homosexualization of America, the Americanization of the Homosexual (NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1982), p. 222.

            7. Kirk and Madsen, p. 258.

            8. Simon LeVay and Elisabeth Nonas, City of Friends (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995), p. 61.

            9. Eric Marcus, Making History (NY: Harper Collins Publishers, 1992), p. 265.

            10. Martin Duberman, About Time (NY: Gay Presses of New York, 1986), p. 336.

            11. Grant Pick, “Outward Mobility,” Chicago Tribune, Feb. 7, 1993, section 10, p. 16.

            12. Ernest Tucker, “Girlcott hits sexism at gay parade,” Chicago Sun-Times, June 14, 1997, p. 11.

            13. Altman, p. 222.

            14. Tom King, “I am in love with Cher,” Chicago Sun-Times, March 15, 2000, p. 50.

            15. Jon Margolis, “Politics, fashion, parents’ dreams,” Chicago Tribune, Jan. 13, 1986, sec. 1, p. 13.

            16. Duberman, p. 336.

            17. Altman, p. 221.

            18. Duberman, p. 337.

            19. Duberman, p. 336.

            20. LeVay, p. 158.

            21. Frank Browning, A Queer Geography (NY: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1996), p. 167.

            22. Marcus, pp. 442-43.

            23. Keith Boykin, One More River to Cross (NY: Doubleday, 1996), p. 212.

            24. Dan Perreten, “Moral Minority,” Windy City Times, May 28, 1998, p. 15.

            25. Paul Varnell, “Gay wisdom,” Chicago Free Press, Nov. 30, 2005, p. 6.

            26. Kathryn Jean Lopez, “The Cookie Crumbles,” National Review, Oct. 23, 2000, p. 32.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            You can sure copy-and-paste with the best of em, I’m give you that…….holy teal deer, batman…..

          • afchief

            I just LOVE the truth!!!! That’s why I love posted it!!!!

          • TheKingOfRhye

            The “truth” you get from a prominent white supremacist, among others…..oooookay then…..

          • I Kings 14:21-24 (first mention of “sodomite”, outside Mosaic Law)
            …(21)And Rehoboam the son of Solomon reigned in Judah. Rehoboam was forty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned seventeen years in Jerusalem, the city which the LORD did choose out of all the tribes of Israel, to put his name there. And his mother’s name was Naamah an Ammonitess.

            (22)And Judah did evil in the sight of the LORD, and they provoked him to jealousy with their sins which they had committed, above all that their fathers had done. (23)For they also built them high places, and images, and groves, on every high hill, and under every green tree. (24)And there were also sodomites in the land: and they did according to all the abominations of the nations which the LORD cast out before the children of Israel…


            When “sodomites” (homosexuality) start to become an influence within a land, there is always a neighboring influence proceeding it; a kind of cause-and-effect nature.

            Notice two things in verse 23: 1) Great idolatry and graven images. 2) Great sexual promiscuity (the “groves”).

            What have we had in America? Hollywood and entertainment has taken priority over the lives of many. The TV and movie screen have become the “high places” of worship. And what about the shamefully high adultery/fornication rate, inside and outside of the Church? Before the recent legalization of same-sex marriage, another abomination had occurred just a few decades prior: legalized abortion (child sacrifice).

            Like King Josiah, we’ll have a lot of work to do, in terms of prayerful repentance, before this land will be healed. It also took the reigns of two righteous kings (Asa and Jehoshaphat) before the remnant of the sodomites were taken away.

          • NGN

            So you want the gays taken away? are you willing to start the process? you people seem to be pushing for another civil war……..

          • NGN

            they post know falsehoods over and over yet claim to be xtians. I find them to be nothing more than racists at heart. As well as abject hypocrites

          • acontraryview

            “It is unhealthy! It is DEATH!!!”

            If that were true, then there would be no homosexuals, as they would all be dead. Therefore, your statement is false.

          • afchief

            It is spiritual death! And yes your physical life span is shorter then hetros.

          • NGN

            Liar!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The statement regarding shorter lifespan has been proven false so many times. It was originated by Paul Cameron , a discredited psychologist. Perpetuating lies…Hmmmm

          • afchief

            NOPE! It is truth and the truth always hurts!!! Does it not?

            Yet Another Study Confirms Gay Life Expectancy 20 Years Shorter

            WASHINGTON, DC, June 6, 2005 (LifeSiteNews. com) – A new study which analyzed tens of thousands of gay obituaries and compared them with AIDS deaths data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), has shown that the life expectancy for homosexuals is about twenty years shorter than that of the general public. The study, entitled “Gay obituaries closely track officially reported deaths from AIDS”, has been published in Psychological Reports (2005;96:693-697).

          • acontraryview

            “It is spiritual death!”

            You are certainly entitled to your opinion on that, but you have no proof. It is a matter of belief.

            “And yes your physical life span is shorter then hetros.”

            You are mistaken. At the current time, lifespans for homosexuals are no different than lifespans for heterosexuals. Perhaps you are relying on dated data for your assertion.

          • afchief

            You are on a Christian website and that is what we believe! We KNOW that homosexuality = death!

            Yet Another Study Confirms Gay Life Expectancy 20 Years Shorter

            WASHINGTON, DC, June 6, 2005 (LifeSiteNews. com) – A new study which analyzed tens of thousands of gay obituaries and compared them with AIDS deaths data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), has shown that the life expectancy for homosexuals is about twenty years shorter than that of the general public. The study, entitled “Gay obituaries closely track officially reported deaths from AIDS”, has been published in Psychological Reports (2005;96:693-697).

          • acontraryview

            You really should consider citing research that isn’t over a decade old.

          • afchief

            The truth never dies! We all know how dangerous this lifestyle is. There is nothing safe, normal or moral about this lifestyle. That is WHY the Word of God is so true concerning people like you!!

            Romans 1:18 (NASB) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,

            This is exactly what the homosexual community does…….they (you) “suppress the truth in unrighteousness”.

          • acontraryview

            You are certainly entitled to your opinion.

          • afchief

            Why Homosexuals Tend To Be Sexually Exploitative

            For way too many homosexuals, even in these AIDS-ridden times, impersonal or casual sex with numerous partners is popular. Indeed, a couple of recent studies support the contention that unsafe sex by homosexuals has significantly increased over the last few years.1

            Extreme promiscuity has in fact been a common occurrence among homosexuals for a long time. Back in 1982, homosexual Dennis Altman even admitted: “now there is a move toward claiming that this [i.e., promiscuity] is part of a different, perhaps even superior, way of managing sexual relationships….[T]he assumption that it is desirable to have frequent and varied sex partners is increasingly seen as a positive part of the gay life style.”2

            A couple of homosexual authors, Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, noted that “gay men aren’t very good at having and holding lovers.”3 This is because, they say, “gay men tire of their partners (sexually, at any rate) more rapidly than straight men.”4

            According to Kirk and Madsen, the average homosexual first “seeks [sexual] novelty in partners, rather than practices, and becomes massively promiscuous; [but] eventually, all bodies become boring, and only new practices will thrill.”5

            If loving relationships sound rare among homosexuals it is because they are. Jean Genet, a homosexual, observed: “What is a homosexual? A man for whom, first of all, the entire female sex, half of humanity, doesn’t exist….For him romance is only a kind of stupidity or deception–for him only pleasure exists.”6

            Homosexual author Seymour Kleinberg: “The prodigiousness of sex really depends deeply on change, and promiscuity is the easiest kind of change for gay men.”7

            Homosexual author Simon LeVay: “In a study in the San Francisco Bay area in the 1970s…almost one-half of the white gay men and one-third of the black gay men claimed to have had at least five hundred different male sex partners.”8

            For many homosexuals the world seems to intentionally be a cold, loveless place where people just use other people’s bodies for their own selfish, sexual purposes. Is that the kind of world we want? Is that the kind of world psychologically healthy people want?

            (Hollywood, incidentally, is materially contributing to that sexually exploitative world. Actor Woody Harrelson, for example, admits: “Every [acting] business I ever entered into in New York seemed to have a casting couch….I’ve seen so many people sleep with people they loathe in order to further their ambition.”9

            (Jenny McCarthy similarly noted: “[In Los Angeles you] hear about casting couches–which I thought were just big fluffy couches–but you don’t know till you experience it how corrupt it is. I was the only girl in my clique who wasn’t sleeping with someone to get a job.”10

            (Chris Hanley, producer of over 20 movies [“American Psycho,” “The Virgin Suicides,” etc.] “told his class reunion at Amherst College in Massachusetts about the Hollywood casting process: ‘Almost every leading actress in all of my 24 films has slept with a director or producer or a leading actor to get the part that launched her career.'”11

            (And Peter Keough, a writer for the Chicago Tribune, sounded a kindred tune. He described Hollywood as “a town where everyone is selling body and soul for fame and fortune, and all–especially women–are considered commodities.”12

            (We probably should boycott Hollywood until they clean up the place. If we allow Hollywood to impose its cold-blooded, money-grubber values on us we’ll all be reduced to heartless bodily things to be used as sex objects and for money or to be discarded when convenient [e.g., abortion].

            (While on the subject of Hollywood, here are a couple of revealing quotes. First, from Teller [of Penn and Teller fame]: “It shouldn’t be true, but I’m afraid it’s more true than I’d like to admit. People in the entertainment business actually celebrate the fact they are working for the lowest common denominator, that no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public.”13

            (And second, from film director Joel Schumaker [of “Batman Forever” and “The Client” fame]: “I think [the studios] have a tendency to think the audience is stupid and unsophisticated. I think there’s a notion in a lot of people’s minds in Hollywood that…everybody’s like the people in [the movie] ‘Deliverance.'”14 The public is enriching people who think the public is stupid.)

            People who are promiscuous are basically saying: “I don’t think you’re worth marrying but I’ll use you for sex.” Promiscuity, sleeping together, pre-marital sex, living together–they are all just euphemisms for sexual exploitation.

            We can have a warm, loving world where people are treated with respect; or, we can have a cold, impersonal, exploitative world where people are treated as things, as commodities. Which would you prefer?


            1. See, for example, a September 2010 report from the Centers for Disease Control titled “HIV among Gay, Bisexual and Other Men Who Have Sex with Men (MSM)” http://www.cdc. gov/hiv/topics/msm/index.htm. According to this report: “Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men (MSM) represent approximately 2% of the US population, yet are the population most severely affected by HIV and are the only risk group in which new HIV infections have been increasing steadily since the early 1990s….At the end of 2006, more than half (53%) of all people living with HIV in the United States were MSM or MSM-IDU.” And for another example, in February 2005 the Chicago Department of Public Health reported that “HIV cases linked to gay and bisexual men rose 10 percent from 2000-2003 [the last year for which there were available stats at the time this was released] in Chicago,” mirroring the national trend (“Study charts rise in HIV among gays” by Gary Barlow, Chicago Free Press [a homosexual newspaper], Feb. 9, 2005, p. 11).

            2. Dennis Altman, The Homosexualization of America, the Americanization of the Homosexual (NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1982), pp. 16-7.

            3. Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen, After the Ball (NY: Doubleday, 1989), p. 320.

            4. Ibid., p. 319.

            5. Ibid., p. 304.

            6. Thomas McGonigle, “By his nature, out of step,” Chicago Tribune, Oct. 24, 1993, section 14, p. 3.

            7. Seymour Kleinberg, Alienated Affections (NY: St. Martin’s Press, 1980), p. 171.

            8. Simon LeVay, Queer Science (Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1996), p. 159.

            9. Stephanie Mansfield, “Wild and Woody,” Chicago Sun-Times, USA Weekend sec, July 5-7, 1996, p. 5.

            10. Cheryl Lavin, “Dumb like a fox,” Chicago Tribune, Aug. 24, 1997, sec. 10, p. 16.

            11. “News from the casting couch,” Chicago Sun-Times, June 10, 2005, p. 52.

            12. Peter Keough, “Taking it off takes off,” Chicago Tribune, April 30, 1995, sec. 13, p. 3.

            13. Bill Zwecker, “Penn & Teller find magic in full disclosure,” Chicago Sun-Times, May 31, 1998, “Showcase” section, p. 3E.

            14. Mark Caro, “The ‘science’ of who sits in the movie seats,” Chicago Tribune, Oct. 15, 2000, sec. 7, p. 7.

          • Good, sourced research, chief. It’s really sad how promiscuity ravages the homosexual community (and Hollywood), creating an endless stronghold of lust and shame.

            All of that rabid sexual sin creates an open highway for demonization; something that one can be readily delivered from by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ (1/3rd of His earthly ministry was deliverance).

          • NGN

            It’s even more amazing that faux xtians continually post things that have been found untrue over and over. perpetuating lies for your holy man

          • afchief

            Thanks Adam!

          • NGN

            they cant help themselves as they have nothing to fight back with other than old debunked studies. This was a Paul Cameron study of obituaries…..highly scientific..LOL! Part of the reason he was drummed out of his own profession

          • TheKingOfRhye

            That Bible passage has what exactly to do with homosexuality?

          • afchief

            It shows that God made marriage for ONE MAN and ONE WOMAN, period!. Homosexuality is deviant, perverted and dangerous!!!

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Oh…..you should have kept going a little bit, then. Then it would have made a little bit of sense.

          • afchief

            Genesis 2:23-24 (NASB)
            The man said,
            “This is now bone of my bones,
            And flesh of my flesh;
            She shall be called Woman,
            Because she was taken out of Man.”

            24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh.

          • TheKingOfRhye

            Anyway, you could quote a million bible passages, and it wouldn’t make any difference to me…..just so you realize that…..

          • afchief

            It may not now. But it WILL when you leave this earth. I guarantee it!

            Hebrews 9:27 (NASB) And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment,

        • acontraryview

          Adam and Steve. Oh gosh, that’s hilarious. Did you come up with that on your own?

  • 201821208 :)

    “For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” Rom. 1:26-27


      good quote-that shows that the bible does NOT outlaw homosexuality. Remember, gays are born gay so the word “natural” is key-the quote means that if a straight women had sex with a woman (against her natural attraction) or if a gay man had sex with a woman (against his natural attraction), that is the sin. You must be true to yourself. Thanks for the quote!

      • 201821208 :)

        “…committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.” Rom. 1:27


          That’s not about gays. Try again please

          • afchief

            1 Corinthians 6:9-11 (NASB) Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor homosexuals, 10 nor thieves, nor the covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers, will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 Such were some of you; but you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and in the Spirit of our God.

          • NORMAN DOSTAL

            homosexual as a word didn’t exist until the past century you vile ignoramus-what book are you quoting? You do know that your fatness is a sin of gluttony, yes? “So be warned, thou gluttonous bigots of wide posterity and fat mantits. Thou shall surely burn in hellfire for thy transgressions of eating too much food of bad quality and shall sorely be punished” Galatians 15:9


          “for the unrighteous will use books of mythos and fables to justify their vile hatred and bigotry. They will be cast out into fire and writhe in agony all the days or eternity plus one” – Corinthians 14:6

          • 201821208 :)

            “Lying lips are abomination to the Lord” Proverbs 12:22
            “a false witness will utter lies” Proverbs 14:5
            ​”​Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44

          • afchief

            That is a boldface LIE!!!

          • NORMAN DOSTAL

            No its the truth. I have an older copy of the bible. Predates King James (you know King James was a homosexual right?)

          • afchief

            Wrong! And you are a liar. You are living in sin and playing with fire.

            Jesus can set you free from homosexuality.

            Open your heart and let Him!!!

          • NORMAN DOSTAL

            Im afraid youre a liar and Jesus will make you pay for your untruths. “For those who mock and cats out my chosen children-the homosexuals-they shall surely die in fire. They will be cast out-afchief and his homely fat wife-they both shall be cast out-as well as their double wide trailer”-Psalms 7: 9-16

          • afchief

            Homosexuality is SIN!!! It is Death!!! It is deviant and perverted. It is a mental disorder!!!

            There Is No Such Thing As a “Gay” Christian

            By Greg May


            In a previous article (“Information Highway: Avenue of False Doctrine”) I voiced my concern over the growing number of websites on the Internet promoting false doctrine. Also increasing in number are gay “Christian” websites.

            There is no such thing as a “gay” Christian.

            Homosexuality is a sin according to God’s Word. It is condemned in both Old and New Testaments. In Old Testament times, people who practiced homosexuality were to be taken outside the walls of the city and stoned to death. It was the rampant promiscuity of this lifestyle that caused God to destroy Sodom and Gomorrah:

            And the Lord said, “Because the outcry against Sodom and Gomorrah is Great, and because their sin is very grave…” (Genesis 18:20).

            The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah and the Flood in the time of Noah are examples of the coming judgment upon the world as recorded in the book of Revelation. Just as Noah and his family were put inside the Ark before the Flood, and Lot’s family were sent away before burning sulphur fell on Sodom and Gomorrah, so will God’s people be removed from earth when Jesus appears in the clouds during the Rapture.

            There is a striking similarity between the days of Noah and Lot and the conditions of the world today: The economy was prospering, business was good and the construction industry was flourishing. Violence was widespread and the pursuit of pleasure was the main objective: “If it feels good do it!”

            Homosexuality and immorality were proliferating as well.

            Paul wrote in the New Testament:

            “For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet” (Romans 1:26, 27)

            “…and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversions”: Could Paul have been prophesying about AIDS?

            Today our society glamorizes the lifestyle; celebrities are applauded when they “come out of the closet” and others are persecuted when they speak out against the gay lifestyle.

            The late Patrick Heron once wrote, “I would hope that people with opposing views would be tolerant of the Christian position. After all, we are constantly being asked to be tolerant of the gay community.”

            I remember watching on TV news back in the 70s when a member of the gay community pushed a pie in Anita Bryant’s face when she spoke out against gay rights issues in Florida. Today the gay community is bringing lawsuits against people who don’t go along with their agenda.

            Satan is the master of deceit and the father of lies. He has a talent for presenting something that goes against God’s will in a nice gift-wrapped package for people to sample.

            The disco 70s did more to make “being gay okay”’ than anything else. The disco movement which was widely supported by the gay community burst upon the American pop culture scene like an atomic bomb. Now it was the “in thing” to dance at gay clubs because, “They always have the best music” and gay people know how to “party” better than anyone else.

            Two of the most prominent “Disco Queens” – Gloria Gaynor and the late Donna Summer became born-again Christians. In fact, Summer’s career took a nosedive when she confronted her gay audience during a concert telling them, “AIDS is your sin.” But Grace Jones continues to exploit her androgynous look and popularity with the gay community to promote her career; and her father and brother are both ministers.

            Female impersonators are being paraded everywhere and are now featured in mainstream entertainment. Recently, a female impersonator was quoted in the media as being a “drag queen for Jesus” and ABC TV’s Diane Sawyer presented a full-length interview with former Olympic star Bruce Jenner who is changing his sex.

            God loves the sinner but He hates the sin.

            Jesus went to the cross and died for all; anyone can be saved if they call upon the name of the Lord. Mary Magdalene was caught in adultery in which the penalty was death. But Jesus didn’t condemn her – in fact, He pardoned her. It was Mary Magdalene who stayed at the foot of the cross after Jesus’ disciples left.

            In the past, churches shied away from reaching out to the gay community. Today there are ministries that are being offered at many churches to bring men and women out of the lifestyle of sin and darkness and into the light and joy of God’s Word.

            Those who claim homosexuality is not a sin in God’s eyes are blinded by Satan.

            The love that David and Jonathan had for each other in the Bible is often misconstrued by the gay community to suggest they were lovers.

            “I am distressed for thee, my brother Jonathan: very pleasant hast thou been

            unto me: thy love to me was wonderful, passing the love of women”

            (2 Samuel 1:26)

            The love that David and Jonathan had was a supernatural and pure love in the form of a godly covenant between them – they were not homosexuals.

            “And they two made a covenant before the Lord” (1 Samuel 23: 18).

            Jonathan loved David beyond the love he had for women and also beyond the love for his father and his own life, just as Christ commanded us to love Him:

            “If any man comes to Me, and does not hate his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple.” (Luke 14:26)

            God’s Word makes it unmistakably clear that homosexuals will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven:

            “. . . for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave

            traders and liars and perjurers – and for whatever else is contrary to the

            sound doctrine . . .” (1 Timothy 1:10).

            In these last days we need to be about the Father’s business which is winning souls for Christ. Although the Bible makes it clear homosexuals will have no place in God’s Kingdom, He makes a way for the sinner to be cleansed and washed white as snow by the redemptive Blood of the Lamb that was shed when Jesus was crucified at Calvary.

      • afchief

        Homosexuals are not born homos. That is a lie. Homosexuality is sin! It is death!

        Romans 1:18-28 (NASB) For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.

        24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

        26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural, 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing [h]indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.

        28 And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper,


          and I suppose you and your wife “chose” to be fat? That is sin mentioned twelve times in the bible (gays are supposedly only mentioned 6 times)-so your fatness is twice as bad as my gayness. GOT ya!!!

          • afchief

            I’m not fat! I’m 6;2 250 lb weight lifter.

            Repent of homosexuality and live. Homosexuality is death. It is deviant and perverted. There is nothing wholesome, normal or right about this lifestyle.

            Repent and give you life to Jesus Christ.

          • NORMAN DOSTAL

            250lbs at 6’2″? dude-youre 40lbs overweight. Im 6′ and 190lbs. Im married-been with my husband for 8 years. It is holy and scared and I have an amazing life. Jesus and I are cool. Now stop saying that crazy crap before you get hauled off to the looney bin. and try some salad some time…

          • afchief

            You are living in sin! All it takes is a reasonable and logical mind to know the homosexual lifestyle is dangerous to one’s health. Let me tell you what is being covered up by your homo friendly websites, all the media and our government. The only way two people having sex can catch or create it who don’t have aids already are by 2 males having anal intercourse. It is caused by the intermingling of male sperm, blood, and male feces. If you are a male and have ever had sex even just once in your life with another male you are disqualified as a blood donor. The reason is simple. Some people have aids but test negative and some test positive with no symptoms. You could be spreading the disease and not know it. The virus mutates against the medicines as fast as they are created, just like the common cold. More and more drug resistant viruses are popping up every day. I wonder why. The CDC reported 19000 drug resistant HIV related deaths in addition to the 15000 HIV deaths in a single year in this country alone. The CDC also reported that the last known cure for gonorrhea is no longer effective and the highest rate of incidence is among males in the western part of our country. These facts are covered up and lied about and soon it will probably be illegal to quote them. This cover up should be criminal. Much worse than what these same people crucified the tobacco companies for covering up the dangers of smoking.

          • acontraryview

            “The only way two people having sex can catch or create it who don’t have aids already are by 2 males having anal intercourse.”

            If neither party is infected with HIV, it can’t be caught or “created” by anal intercourse.

            “It is caused by the intermingling of male sperm, blood, and male feces.”

            No, it is not.

            “The virus mutates against the medicines as fast as they are created”

            No, it does not.

            “More and more drug resistant viruses are popping up every day.”


            “These facts are covered up”

            Then how is it you know them?

        • Becky

          You’re absolutely right. There have been numerous studies done and there’s still no biological/genetical evidence to support that homosexuality is innate…it’s unnatural.

          • gizmo23

            So what if it is genetic or not

          • acontraryview

            “There have been numerous studies done and there’s still no biological/genetical evidence to support that homosexuality is innate”

            That is false. Every study done shows that there is evidence that sexuality – either homo or hetero – is innate. There is no proof as to the basis of sexuality – either homo or hetero – but there is certainly substantial evidence.

          • Becky

            Present the facts.

          • acontraryview

            That is simply not true, Becky. If you Google: “studies on the biological basis of sexuality” you will see that there is a significant amount of evidence – not definitive proof – but evidence, for a biological basis for sexuality.

          • Becky

            The word of God is sufficient for me. I see that it’s not for you, so perhaps their words might convince you (this is just one of many secular sources, btw)…

            “There is no consensus among scientists about the exact reasons that an individual develops a heterosexual, bisexual, gay or lesbian orientation. Although much research has examined the possible genetic, hormonal, developmental, social and cultural influences on sexual orientation, no findings have emerged that permit scientists to conclude that sexual orientation is determined by any particular factor or factors.” Source: American Psychological Association 2015

            There’s no evidence that it’s innate.

          • acontraryview

            “The word of God is sufficient for me.”

            Where does God say that sexuality is no innate?

            As to your quote, it is consistent with what I said. The exact basis for sexuality is not known. That does not mean, however, that there is not evidence that sexuality is innate. On the contrary, there is substantial evidence that sexuality is innate and immutable. In the same way that science has not definitively proven the cause of people being left or right handed, there is substantial evidence that handedness is innate.

            Evidence and definitive proof are two different things, Becky.

        • gizmo23

          What does it matter if they were born that way or not?

          • Names_Stan

            It’s an interesting question, one I’ve asked people before.

            What I’ve gotten is, “It can’t be how someone is born, because God wouldn’t make someone who goes against His word”.

            Obviously they aren’t thinking this one through. They already believe that:
            A) God foresaw everything before He created it
            B) God created eternal hell
            C) Thus God created man knowing the vast majority (how vast depends on denomination I suppose) would go to this eternal hell that He made

            So why exactly would that same person have trouble believing that God would create a homosexual?

            Yet another contradiction of the fundamentalist theology.

          • gizmo23

            I truly agree. It would seem truly perverse to create someone with the sole purpose of having them suffer forever

          • afchief

            Heaven or hell? The choice is yours!!!

          • gizmo23

            So there is no such thing as redemption?

          • afchief

            Heaven or hell? Accept Jesus as you Lord and Savior and live. Reject Him and die

        • acontraryview

          “Homosexuals are not born homos.”


          • afchief

            God!!! The author of life!!!

            Genesis 2:21 So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then He took one of his ribs and closed up the flesh at that place. 22 The Lord God fashioned into a woman the rib which He had taken from the man, and brought her to the man. 23 The man said,

            “This is now bone of my bones,

            And flesh of my flesh;

            She shall be called Woman,

            Because she was taken out of Man.”

            24 For this reason a man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh. 25 And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

          • acontraryview

            So your basis for stating that homosexuality is not innate is the Bible?


          • afchief

            Yep! Because it is LIFE!!!

            Hebrews 4:12 (NASB) For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

          • acontraryview

            Very scientific!

          • afchief

            You will not be using science when you stand before Him.

          • acontraryview


    • acontraryview

      How is that relevant to our legal code?


    what an ignorant article-it was two gay couples and one straight interracial couple that filed suit

  • legaliis

    Well if they don’t agree with it…..man (pardon the pun)date it.

  • Becky

    “It sets a dangerous precedent,” Chris Sgro of Equality North Carolina told WTVD-TV. “Magistrates have to carry out these weddings, same-sex weddings. Magistrates can’t opt out of that.”

    A so-called “political strategist” that doesn’t know the law.

    The homosexual activist groups have an agenda…no one is to even think that homosexuality is an abomination. These groups will not be satisfied until the first amendment is abolished. They don’t want a single citizen to oppose homosexuality in any manner and it doesn’t matter if you’re a judge…you will marry them and you will love it! Bunch of crazed, vile loons.

    • NGN

      the only vile loons here are the faux xtians trying to push their evil agenda on the rest of society, much like yourself

  • John_33

    It’s not enough for LGBT activists that there are judges who are willing to conduct “marriages” for homosexual couples. It bothers them that there are those who wish to opt out. Remember folks, if they will try to force judges to capitulate, then they will go after anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle.

    • acontraryview

      “if they will try to force judges to capitulate, then they will go after anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle.”

      To suggest that requiring a government employee to perform the duties of their job means that “they will go after anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle” is simply without merit.

      • Ethan Anderson

        “The whole lawsuit was based upon the assumption that there’s a duty of magistrates to perform marriages, and that’s an incorrect assumption,” Tami Fitzgerald with the North Carolina Values Coalition told the outlet. “It’s incorrect legally because the statute says it’s an additional authority. So it’s optional for magistrates and registers of deeds. It’s not a duty.”

        Thought maybe you missed that part.

        • acontraryview

          No, I didn’t miss that part, but thanks for your concern.

          What I did do, however, was research the laws of NC. While performing marriage ceremonies is not part of the required duties of a Magistrate, the issuance of a marriage license by Registrars is a required duty.

      • John_33

        It’s not their duty.

  • acontraryview

    It will be interesting to see how this lawsuit plays out. Regarding the Registrars, NC law is clear that they are required to issue marriage licenses to any couple who is legally allowed to marry. Doubtful, then, that the will be ruled constitutional regarding the duties of a Registrar. Regarding Magistrates, the law is less clear. It states that Magistrates are authorized to perform marriages, but not that they are required to do so. Based on that, it may be that the law will be found constitutional regarding the Magistrates.

  • Reason2012

    “How would same gender marriage affect you?” they lied.

    Adults continue to permanently turn away from homosexuality, even after decades of believing the lie they were “born that way”, proving it’s not genetic, but the product of indoctrination, confusion, mental instability and/or abuse.

    Homosexual behavior is most literally pointed out as a sin, and God has not changed on that regard. But if a person has those inclinations but does not act upon them, does not dwell in lust upon others, but is instead struggling against them to avoid them, then it’s not a sin. It’s just like sinful inclinations of any kind: it’s acting upon it when it becomes a sin.

    And this is what God says about sin and specifically the behavior of homosexuality:

    Romans 1:26-27 ”For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: (27) And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their_lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.”

    1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ”Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate [men who willingly take on the part of a “woman” with another man], nor abusers of themselves with mankind [s odomites], (10) Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.”

    1 Timothy 1:9-10 ”Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, (10) For_whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind [s odomites], for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;”

    Jude 1:7 ”Even as_Sodom and Gomorrha, and the cities about them in like manner, giving themselves over to fornication, and going after strange flesh, are set forth for an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.”

    Luke 17:29 ”[Jesus said] But the same day that Lot went out of_Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all.”

    Matthew 19:4-6 ”And he [Jesus] answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, (5) And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? (6) Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.”

    Jesus made it quite clear God made us male and female so that a man will leave his father and mother (not two fathers, not three mothers and so on) and cleave onto his wife (not his husband and so on).

    The Word of God rebukes us all – even if we all try to say we don’t believe the Bible, the very Word of God will be our judge when we face Him. And God is a righteous judge and will judge us all – not turn a blind eye to our sin. Do not be deceived by the world: it’s God we will have to convince that His word was a lie, not men. What happened in Noah’s day when the entire world rejected God? Did God spare them because there were so many? No – they all perished except for Noah and his family!

    Proverbs 9:10 ”The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.”

    God spared not His chosen people – we are kidding ourselves if we think He will spare the United States of America if we choose to blatantly turn away from Him.

    Jeremiah 12:17 ”But if they will not obey, I will utterly pluck up and destroy that nation, saith the LORD.”

    Luke 17:28-30 “So also as it was in the days of Lot: they ate, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they built; (29) but the day Lot went out of Sodom, it rained fire and brimstone from the heaven and destroyed them all. (30) Even so it shall be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed.”

    Romans 1:18-32 “For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold [suppress] the truth in unrighteousness; Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them.

    For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

    Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

    For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

    And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, m urder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them.”

    The entire Bible points out men having_sex with men is an abomination. Likewise woman having_sex with women. It’s not just Paul that pointed it out.

    Genesis 19:4-13 “But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of S odom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the people from every quarter: And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that we may know them [men wanting to have_sex with men].

    And Lot went out at the door unto them, and shut the door after him, And said, I pray you, brethren, do not so wickedly. Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing [he offers his daughters to be_raped to keep them from having_sex with another man – shows_rape is not the issue but male on male_sex]; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

    And they said, Stand back. And they said again, This one fellow came in to sojourn, and he will needs be a judge: now will we deal worse with thee, than with them. And they pressed sore upon the man, even Lot, and came near to break the door. But the men put forth their hand, and pulled Lot into the house to them, and shut to the door. And they smote the men that were at the door of the house with blindness, both small and great: so that they wearied themselves to find the door.

    And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son in law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in the city, bring them out of this place: For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the LORD; and the LORD hath sent us to destroy it.”

    These two messengers were sent to destroy that place before the event where they tried to_rape these messengers.

    Leviticus 18:22 “Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.”

    Leviticus 20:13 “If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.”

    Even cross-dressing is an abomination:

    Deuteronomy 22:5 “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

    Deuteronomy 23:17 “There shall be no_whore of the daughters of Israel, nor a s odomite of the sons of Israel.”

    1 Kings 22:46 “And the remnant of the s odomites, which remained in the days of his father Asa, he took out of the land.”

    1 Kings 15:11-12 “And Asa did that which was right in the eyes of the LORD, as did David his father. And he took away the s odomites out of the land, and removed all the idols that his fathers had made.”

    2 Kings 23:7 “And he brake down the houses of the s odomites, that were by the house of the LORD, where the women wove hangings for the grove.”

    Ezekiel 16:49-50 “Behold, this was the iniquity of thy sister S odom, pride, fulness of bread, and abundance of idleness was in her and in her daughters, neither did she strengthen the hand of the poor and needy. And they were haughty, and committed abomination before me: therefore I took them away as I saw good.”

    And the “pride” parades about homosexuality are more of the same.

    Matthew 19:4-5 “And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?”

    Not father and father. Not mother and mother. Not his husband.

    And only two people of opposite gender can become “one flesh”.

    Live forever, people – not temporarily only to be cast out for living for the things of this world.

    May God/Jesus Christ be glorified!

    • TheKingOfRhye

      How does same sex marriage affect you exactly? Even if every gay person is going straight to hell, how does that affect you yourself?

      So-called “conversion therapy” has been found to not be effective.

      “A 2009 APA task force found that conversion therapies, despite being
      touted by religious organizations, have little evidence to back them up.
      A review of studies from 1960 to 2007 found only 83 on the topic, the
      vast majority of which did not have the experimental muscle to show
      whether the therapies achieved their stated goals. (Many of the people
      studied in the early years were court-mandated to take the therapies,
      adding a coercive element to those outcomes.)” (livescience com article)

      As for all your Bible quotes, I’m an atheist anyway, so that’s like trying to convince you of something by quoting passages in the Koran or something. (really though, you can’t even bring yourself to type “sodomites” as one word?)

      • Reason2012

        How does it affect others, exactly?

        – Don’t violate your beliefs and make same gender wedding cakes, even though you have no problem serving those who proclaim they’re into homosexuality? Be fined, sued and charge as a criminal.

        – Don’t violate your beliefs and photograph same gender wedding even though you have no problem serving those who proclaim they’re into homosexuality? Be fined, sued and charge as a criminal.

        – Don’t violate your beliefs and make same gender messages on a t-shirt even though you have no problem serving those who proclaim they’re into homosexuality? Be fined, sued and charge as a criminal.

        – Point out you’re still against same-gender marriage? Be attacked as a bigot and a homophobe

        – Preach a sermon against homosexual behavior? Be charged with a hate crime.

        How does it affect you when others point out they’re against such behavior?

        I never said “conversion therapy” – I said people on their own have turned away from homosexuality – and the number of testimonies is growing.

        • TheKingOfRhye

          If you won’t bake a wedding cake, photograph a wedding, and/or put “same gender messages” on a t shirt, then how can you say you “have no problem serving those who proclaim they’re into homosexuality”? That just doesn’t make any sense to me. (and why wouldn’t you just say “have no problem serving gay people” anyway? I’ve known gay people throughout my life, I’ve never heard one of them describe themselves as being “into homosexuality”.)

          The fact is that there are laws that say you can’t discriminate if you own a business like that. You don’t want to serve gay people, don’t own a business. No one has an inalienable right to own a business, or be a county clerk for that matter.

          And you might “be attacked as a bigot and homophobe”? Oh, grow up. People do have freedom of speech, you know. If you have the right to say things seen as bigoted and homophobic, then others have the right to say that they are.

          And someone being charged with a hate crime for preaching an anti-gay sermon? Has that actually happened? That I do agree with you on, that should not happen. That’s freedom of religion, right there. If someone doesn’t like that, go to a different church, or find a different religion.

        • NGN

          Your first three examples are business owners who cant seem to follow the CRA of 1964 or public accommodation laws…too funny. Where has a pastor been charged with a hate crime for a sermon in the USA? You have zero right to not be called out for your irrational beliefs. More reasons why you all are on the losing end in every court and the court of public opinion

          • Reason2012

            So if a black baker who has no problem serving white people refuses to support the ACT of “the beliefs of black people are meaningless” meeting, it’s violating the CRA of 1964? How so? If anything, it’s the bigots demanding he do this that are being discriminatory.

  • FoJC_Forever

    Marriage is only honored by God as between man and woman, male and female. No law, in America or otherwise, will ever change this Truth. People are continuing their journey to the revealing and acceptance of the Antichrist. This deception is one of many being propagated on the earth. Don’t get overly focused on one sin, because many are the deceptions of the Evil One.

    Follow Jesus, find Truth.