Expert Testimony: Ignorance Can Kill You

David

David

I saw this at the Gay Christian Movement Watch yesterday.  It’s very disturbing…and very important for people to know about it.

The goals of homosexual activism have seen some critical defeats in the last year…but they have also seen some important successes.  In Iowa, yet another case of blatant judicial activism has “legalized” the practice of allowing homosexuals to call their unions “marriage,” and Vermont has even accomplished this according to the proper principles of a republic.

Yet this hijacking of what is probably the single most important institution in human experience remains deadly to any civilization that wants to prosper…and lends a deadly air of legitimacy to an immoral sexual practice that wreaks untold health damage as well.

Sex is meant to be more than just finding a place or method to stimulate the sex organs, and in the proper male-female sexual relationship, those sex organs quite obviously work together in complimentary purpose.

Marriage is also more than just two people who like each other having sex.  Like the proper male-female sexual union, marriage is comprised of, means more, and has a higher purpose than sexual gratification. 

Marriage was created by God to form the most basic and fundamental building block of any society: the family.

Without the family, there is no “next generation.”  Oh, a man and a woman can randomly come together and produce offspring, but that brings us to another vital function of marriage and family: to provide a safe, nurturing and stable environment in which to raise children.  

Having two committed (demonstrated by marital bond) parents in the home to provide unconditional love, financial and environmental resources, and to teach the child is absolutely essential in producing the next generation of well-adjusted adults.

Single-parent homes are around 7-8 times more likely to experience poverty than 2-parent homes.  Family stability also contributes to their mental and emotional health; children suffer mentally and emotionally when they don’t know whether the family is going to remain intact, and whether those necessities are going to be provided because the family is split, and they wonder if mom and dad still love them. Children from stable home environments also do much better academically; children in 2-parent homes perform much better in school…which enables them to get better jobs and avoid poverty and stay out of trouble with the law–all benefits to society.

So the legitimacy and value of marriage to family and child-raising simply cannot be over-estimated.  That legitimacy carries considerable weight in our society, and it should

And homosexual activists want to steal some of that legitimacy rightfully assigned to marriage and transfer it to their unions.

In stealing legitimacy from marriage and being allowed to call their own illegitimate unions “marriage,” they hope to fool themselves and fool others in society.  This cloud of deception will–they hope–allow them to finally assuage their consciences over behavior they know deep down is fundamentally wrong.  They also hope it will silence those in society who refuse to go along with their self-deception, and that it will finally bring the public affirmation for their sexual behavior which in turn also helps silence that troublesome conscience.

In an important sense, lending credibility to a sexual behavior which is obviously unnatural, immoral according to the doctrine of every major religion, and associated with incredible health risks acknowledged by multiple government health agencies is immeasurably dangerous to individuals caught up in this behavior.  Lending legitimacy to this dangerous behavior would be akin to applying an anesthetic to an area of the body infected by cancer: it removes the painful reminder that the body is being eaten alive and destroyed.

These videos were posted by the Gay Christian Movement Watch, and I will also post them.  The lie that homosexual behavior is harmless should be dispelled at every opportunity.

The first video features testimony from David, a man suffering from horrible tumors on his face due to AIDS complications. Whatever you believe about homosexual behavior, please listen to what David has to say.

The second video features Karl and Judy Schowengerdt sharing the story of how their son’s homosexual activity led to a diagnosis of HIV, and his early death as the result of AIDS.

The Schowengerdts live in Iowa where the Iowa Supreme Court disregarded it’s obligations to the republican form of government, the Constitution, morality and public safety.  Regardless of what you think of homosexual behavior or the concept of homosexual “marriage,” please listen to the Schowengerdts and consider the pain homosexual behavior can bring not only to the one practicing it, but to people who love them.

If you engage in homosexual behavior, you’re just hurting yourself? Think again…

8 Responses to “Expert Testimony: Ignorance Can Kill You”

  1. And so rather than promoting monogamy and commitment among Gay couples, you think it would be better to simply pushing them to the fringes of society, relegating them to lives of loneliness, depression, and/or promiscuity? Doesn't sound like very good logic to me.

  2. Somehow I rather doubt you're very interested in logic, Chuck; otherwise, why would you defend and promote two men or two women having sex together?

    Their sex organs were quite obviously meant to be used male-to-female and vice versa. You don't put two male or two female parts together in a plumbing project do you? You can try, I suppose, but it isn't going to work very well, obviously isn't a natural joining of the parts, and looks pretty silly if you try. How logical is that.

    Homosexual behavior has never and will never be normal; even if morally lazy people turn a blind eye to it, it will always be an abnormal subset of culture as it always has been. A Human Rights Campaign survey about a year ago found that only 2.9% of the population is homosexual; that's “fringe” if I've ever seen it.

    Besides, if homosexuals wanted to be monogamous, there's nothing stopping them from that. Yet monogamy is frighteningly and pathetically miniscule in the homosexual community.

    A study in San Francisco by Bell and Weinberg found that 75% of the male homosexuals they surveyed had over 100 lifetime sex partners, and 28% had over 1,000.

    A study by McWhierter and Mattison found that 100% of 156 homosexual couples they surveyed experienced infideltiy within 5 years.

    Even in the Netherlands where there have been registered partnerships since 1998 and homosexual “marriage” since 2001, the average length of homosexual relationships is still only 17 months.

    And even “monogamy” in homosexual relationships seems to have little meaning (apparently demeaning and devaluing the word the way they want to demean and devalue “marriage”) because researcher Joe Kort reported in Psychology Today last year that homosexual couples frequently define “monogamy” as “I always tell my partner when I have sex with someone else” or “we only have three-ways when both of us are present.”

    By the way, did you read anything here, beyond just enough to make some pretty illogical comments? Did you bother to watch the testimony of these people?

    If you had, then you might wonder, like I do, how anyone could defend this practice and talk condescendingly about “logic.”

    That kind of willful blindness is getting people sick and killed.

  3. The two comments above say it all. One side makes arguments that are based on simplistic, flawed logic; the other side (Bob's) gets down to the facts that the other side keeps brushing off.

    No one denies that the truth can be hard to handle. That doesn't give anyone an excuse to ignore it.

  4. And so rather than promoting monogamy and commitment among Gay couples, you think it would be better to simply pushing them to the fringes of society, relegating them to lives of loneliness, depression, and/or promiscuity? Doesn't sound like very good logic to me.

  5. Somehow I rather doubt you're very interested in logic, Chuck; otherwise, why would you defend and promote two men or two women having sex together?

    Their sex organs were quite obviously meant to be used male-to-female and vice versa. You don't put two male or two female parts together in a plumbing project do you? You can try, I suppose, but it isn't going to work very well, obviously isn't a natural joining of the parts, and looks pretty silly if you try. How logical is that.

    Homosexual behavior has never and will never be normal; even if morally lazy people turn a blind eye to it, it will always be an abnormal subset of culture as it always has been. A Human Rights Campaign survey about a year ago found that only 2.9% of the population is homosexual; that's “fringe” if I've ever seen it.

    Besides, if homosexuals wanted to be monogamous, there's nothing stopping them from that. Yet monogamy is frighteningly and pathetically miniscule in the homosexual community.

    A study in San Francisco by Bell and Weinberg found that 75% of the male homosexuals they surveyed had over 100 lifetime sex partners, and 28% had over 1,000.

    A study by McWhierter and Mattison found that 100% of 156 homosexual couples they surveyed experienced infideltiy within 5 years.

    Even in the Netherlands where there have been registered partnerships since 1998 and homosexual “marriage” since 2001, the average length of homosexual relationships is still only 17 months.

    And even “monogamy” in homosexual relationships seems to have little meaning (apparently demeaning and devaluing the word the way they want to demean and devalue “marriage”) because researcher Joe Kort reported in Psychology Today last year that homosexual couples frequently define “monogamy” as “I always tell my partner when I have sex with someone else” or “we only have three-ways when both of us are present.”

    By the way, did you read anything here, beyond just enough to make some pretty illogical comments? Did you bother to watch the testimony of these people?

    If you had, then you might wonder, like I do, how anyone could defend this practice and talk condescendingly about “logic.”

    That kind of willful blindness is getting people sick and killed.

  6. The two comments above say it all. One side makes arguments that are based on simplistic, flawed logic; the other side (Bob's) gets down to the facts that the other side keeps brushing off.

    No one denies that the truth can be hard to handle. That doesn't give anyone an excuse to ignore it.

  7. Hey Bob – I just had an email that said it was from you (apparently on the gay marriage issue) but I accidentally deleted it before reading & couldn’t get it back. Can you send again?