“If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!” – Samuel Adams

Homosexual ‘Marriage’ and the New Black Panthers

Gina Miller

Listen to the author read Homosexual Marriage and the New Black Panthers Get Adobe Flash player

It was like a head feint in a boxing match.  In the past couple of weeks, we’ve been fixated on this sudden explosion of loathsome New Black Panther videos on the Internet.  Then, all of a sudden–BAM–out of left field here comes the ruling by U.S. District Judge Joseph Tauro in Boston shooting down the federal Defense of Marriage Act.  Well, ain’t that just swell?!

The Defense of Marriage Act was passed overwhelmingly in the House and Senate in 1996 during Bill Clinton’s administration. It defined marriage as being between one man and one woman for federal purposes.  This was to set the standard at the federal level in regard to benefits and such, but it still left the states free to determine their own laws on marriage (with the exception of polygamy, which was ruled unconstitutional before Utah could become a state).

It’s a terrible shame that such a common sense truth would have to be “defined” by the courts at all!  There are only a handful of states that have declared homosexual “marriage” to be valid, but that’s not because the people of those states voted on it.  No.  Those states have passed by judicial fiat the rulings which go against not just God’s design and the natural order of the entire history of the world, but also against the will of the vast majority of the people in our country and those various states.  Every state where homosexual “marriage” has been put up for a vote by the people, it has been soundly and rightly rejected.

On a positive note, the Family Research Council reports that this clearly bad ruling will likely be overturned on appeal.  Please Lord!

Black Panther voter intimidation in Philadelphia during the 2008 US presidential election. (Photo credit: Mike Roman)

So, what on earth does the radical, pro-homosexual, activist judiciary have to do with the despicable Black Panthers?  Plenty.  Both despise the truth of God’s Word.  Both are part of the enemy within America.  Both are focused on tearing down America’s Constitution, traditions and way of life, and in the case of the Black Panthers, our very life itself.  You have by now, no doubt, heard the detestable street rantings of the Black Panther whose alias is Shazam, or some such nonsense, when he so eloquently stated,

“You want freedom?  You gonna have to kill some crackers!  You gonna have to kill some of they babies!”

How ignorantly insane!  How is this goon any different than the Islamist goons who call for the murder of all infidels?  They’re not different, and both the Islamists and the Black Panthers are allowed to stand on American streets and shout their murderous trash with impunity.  How long do you suppose a white man could stand on a street with a megaphone and call for the murder of black people and their babies before he would be arrested by police and then hauled into court by the quislings of the ACLU?  Yeah.

This same guy is one of the Black Panthers who should be in prison for engaging in voter intimidation at a Philadelphia polling place during the 2008 presidential election.  But the “Justice” Department, under the contemptible Eric Holder, inexplicably dismissed the open-and-shut case.  This is an outrage, and it’s not something we should see in America–maybe in a third-world country’s court system, but not here.  I guess this is what the Black Panther meant when he was spouting his garbage at the polling place, telling white voters they would know what it’s like to be ruled by the black man.  Now, it’s payback time.  Now, the left-wing black and homosexual activists appointed by Obama are going to show the white man how it feels to be denied his basic rights, like the right to approach a polling place in America free from harassment and intimidation.

The current administration in Washington has set us way back in our race relations–or perhaps they’ve only exposed the hidden agenda of the left that was there all along, but unknown to us.  Maybe it’s not so much that they’ve set us back, but that they’re dragging us to a new place.  They’ve created a crawl space beneath the all-time low of American race relations.  This deep of a divide has surely not been seen since the Civil War.

And now we have the Black Panthers spoiling for a civil race war in America.  These hateful ingrates, who have all the opportunity the world has to offer here in America, rather than contributing something positive and uplifting to their families and country, instead choose to devote their lives to infecting other weak minds with the venom of their ignorant and bigoted hatred for white people.  I keep thinking back to the Islamists.  It’s the same vicious hatred–irrational, malevolent and mindless.  It’s also the same hatred we saw out of the militant homosexual activists who flew into fits of psychotic rage after California voters passed the Proposition 8 amendment to the state constitution defining marriage as being between a man and a woman.  We’re still waiting to see if the California Supreme Court will uphold the will of the people, or once again, spit in the people’s face and rule with the small minority of perverts in the state, who insist that the rest of the state’s residents validate and codify in law their twisted lifestyle choice.

I don’t see how any of this ends well.  I don’t mean to be a downer here, but the forces of evil are so deeply entrenched in our country that it will literally take an act of God to keep us from falling, and I’m surely praying for that very thing, even though that’s a scary prayer to pray.  Be careful what you pray for, you just may get it!

Those of us who are Christians know that these wicked things must be, as we pass through the last days of our world, but it’s really, really hard to watch your own country fall to the enemy within.  We’ve read our history, and we know that countless people before us have watched as their countries have fallen to enemies, usually from without, but sometimes from within.  It’s a whole different ballgame when it’s your own country and not some distant history printed on the pages of a book.

Of course, it ain’t over yet, and just because the current time is bleak, does not at all mean that we will give up fighting for what’s right in America.  No way!  The more hellish, unconstitutional, against the will of the people, un-American attacks these usurpers in Washington pull on us, the deeper my rage at them becomes, and the deeper my resolve to see them removed from their high places of power.

Gina Miller, a native of Texas, is a radio disc jockey. She also works with her husband installing and repairing residential irrigation systems and doing landscaping on the Mississippi Gulf Coast.


Try us out at the new location: American Clarion!


75 Responses to “Homosexual ‘Marriage’ and the New Black Panthers”

  1. I am glad to hear about you uncle and also the vocational program, but did you ever think that the reason those well-behaved mentally handicapped people were in the program was because they were the ones who could be taught proper behavior in the first place. Ask the thousands of parents with kids with severe mental impairment who have tried everything and still the child is behaviorally uncontrollable. Not sure you have been looking at all the places that would allow you to know such things as all mentally ill can at least proper behavior.

    Our bodies are all different as is the brain's chemical makeup that allows one person to have a higher intellect than anothers brain. Since it is a fallen world, kids are born with gross physical maladies. Why couldn't they be born with such severe mental impairment that even learning proper behavior is impossible.I assure you thousands of these children are out there andmany who have come from patient, loving Christian people who have exhausted all possiblities.

    Just look, they are out there.

  2. My friend, I'm so sorry to say, you are blind.

  3. Julien, we don't know anything about your life or your parenting abilities. But Bob and the “conservatives” here would love to tell you how wrong you are and how to live your life.

  4. Ah, the old line of “homosexuality rubs off on the child”! Yea, It's so plain, obvious, and simple. Like every child should have an ideal setting that includes: a puppy, nice upper-middle class upbringing, white-picket fenced yard, neighbor kids to play with, never going to bed hungry, college education in the future, etc…

    Is homosexual parents raising a child an ideal situation for the development of the child? Probably not. But then again, what is? How can you lay a blanket of assumption down on the parenting skills of the homosexual population? How many children today are raised in terrible circumstances by HETEROSEXUAL couples? Get real. As my girlfriend, who lost her father when she was 10, would say-two dads are better than none!

  5. Oh where to begin! It seems, that after scouring the boatload of comments, I get a consensus that the purpose of marriage; biologically, religiously, and socially, is procreation. And one of the (weak) pillars of argument you folks have against the concept of homosexual marriage is that it is impossible for procreation to occur. Correct? So, is a homosexual marriage is deemed quote, “an abomination”, “immoral”, “unhealthy”, “evil”, “useless”, and most importantly, “not beneficial to society”…then what is the stance on childless heterosexual couples? Surely they serve no purpose as well! Sinners.

  6. Other than not wanting to see a person risk their life and their soul in an immoral and unhealthy lifestyle, I don't really care how someone else lives their life.

    But when someone living said immoral and unhealthy lifestyle demands that society pretend it is something it isn't, they have gone from simply wanting to life their life however they want, to telling me I should render approval and applause for their immoral choices.

    Further, when one subjects children to this type of environment, then they have moved beyond even the fairly passive demands for immoral, destructive behavior to be lauded and into the territory of placing another human being's well-being in jeopardy.

    That is what this issue is really about. If homosexuals want to have sex with each other, beyond the disappointment one human being feels in seeing another do harm to themselves, most people don't really care. But when you insist society pat you on the back for your behavior, and subject children to this dangerous world, you've gone considerably over the line from “just wanting to live your life the way you want.”

  7. So because some heterosexuals provide a poor atmosphere for their children, we should turn a blind eye or even applaud homosexuals for doing so?

    Sorry, that's extremely weak logic that deliberately shows casual disregard for children's welfare.

  8. Do you agree that it is impossible for procreation to occur by virtue of the sexual union of two men or two women? What is the only union that results in the procreation of children? This union is the model whether it is incidentally sterile or not.

  9. Well of course it is impossible, but my point is that is the sole purpose of marriage for procreation? If not, then I don't see any difference between a man and a woman who love each other and wish to spend the rest of their lives together, with a homosexual couple who wish to do the same.

  10. What is immoral about providing a loving atmosphere and loving parents for you child(ren) to grow up in? Is it immoral then if you are a single parent? Or some other guardian raising a child? Just as long as there is one man and one woman present at all times, then it counts? No matter how much of a shlub they may be.

  11. If they are great parents and provide a loving atmosphere in which to raise a child, then yes! Of course. Without question. Unequivocally. You show your disregard for a child's welfare when you deny others, who may be excellent at raising children, the opportunity to raise a child properly due to your outlandish archaic beliefs.
    Do you wish to dictate how heterosexual couples raise their children as well?

  12. Barring biological dysfunction or artificial barriers, procreation is what normally happens in marriage. Science and biology make this quite obvious. It is equally obvious that this can never–even with fully healthy biological function and no artificial barriers–happen with two men or two women.

    If two homosexuals want to spend their lives together, no one is stopping them. But they do not have the right to counterfeit marriage and devalue this critically important institution.

  13. What is immoral about providing a loving atmosphere and loving parents for you child(ren) to grow up in…where immoral and unhealthy behavior is modeled to the children?

    What is immoral about providing a loving atmosphere and loving parents for you child(ren) to grow up in…where unbalanced sexual and relational behavior which teaches that one or the other sex is unnecessary or undesirable is modeled to the children?

    To put it another way which might help remove some of the emotional clutter: What is immoral about providing a loving atmosphere and loving parents for you child(ren) to grow up in…where the parents teach the children it's okay to use recreational drugs/play in the street/go swimming in a river unattended/accept a ride from strangers/etc?

    Hopefully the answer now becomes obvious.

  14. “Archaic beliefs” such as that murder is wrong, theft is wrong, dishonesty is wrong, or that a husband and wife provide the best and only proper setting for the creation and rearing of children?

  15. “Science and biology make this quite obvious”

    Actually that is just wrong: many animal species harbor homosexual behaviors, especially among the most evolved ones living in society such as Bisons, Bighorn sheeps, Dolphins, Bonobos and other kinds of monkeys…
    If you really cared to dig biology and homosexuality you would find that homosexual behaviors can provide evolutive advantages, especially in social species.

    You can't use biology to condemn homosexuality, it just doesn't work…

  16. Please try to think here. If homosexual behavior was normal in any species, it would die out; the abnormal heterosexual activity would not be enough to perpetuate the species over and above disease, accidents, predators, etc.

    Yes, science and biology clearly and strongly illustrate that homosexual behavior is abnormal and unnatural.

  17. Please Bob, this is such a poor point…can't you do any better? With internet it is so easy to get access to simple scientific knowledge…

    First of all, I did not say all animals in a social species were homosexual (and you only need a handful of males to fertilize many females, so you see reproduction is not at risk), secondly, what makes you think that animals having homosexual behaviors are not also having heterosexual relations?
    Just a brief examples: Bonobo males and females regularly have homosexual interactions. This reinforce the bounds within the group, lower the aggresion level and is globally favourable to the individual survival. Yet Bonobos as a species have been around for a while…

    Science and Biology are never going to tell you whether something is right or wrong…they only tell you how it works…

  18. No, sorry, I'm not going to let you get away with this deception. You made the claim that the very clear and obvious facts of biology and science that heterosexual behavior is normal, natural, and what we are designed for was not accurate, based on the fact that there is some errant heterosexual behavior in various animal species.

    I'll say it again, since your affection for homosexual behavior is making it difficult for you to see the obvious. Homosexual behavior in either humans or animals is unnatural; it is contrary to their natural function. Homosexual behavior in either humans or animals is abnormal; they were obviously designed to function in a heterosexual fashion and would die out if homosexual behavior were the norm. These facts make no direct statement to the “right or wrong” morality of the behavior, but it does point out that it isn't normal; it isn't natural; it is an aberration.

    The immorality of it is addressed in the moral code of every major religion. The dangerous and unhealthy aspect of it is addressed by every major health journal and health group like the CDC.

    It's sad that you either can't or won't accept what is quite obvious. From a moral perspective, the Bible's Romans chapter 1 addresses it, and I'm afraid no amount of facts or logic will help someone in your condition; only a genuine heart-change will enable you to see the truth.

  19. It seems you don't want to understand: I said that for a proportion of animals, within certain species, homosexuality happens, and has a function. Contrary to what you seem to believe, even for animals, sex isn't only aimed at reproduction, but may serve other purposes (such as the ones I described earlier).
    So you can say that homosexuality is a “natural” behavior, even if it is not a major trend: it has been described in animals, and it has a positive function. These are just plain facts, I am sorry if they bother you.

    By the way, if homosexuality was such an aberration and so detrimental to an individual survival it would have been strongly selected against during the evolutive process: yet we can commonly observe it in many species.

    But observing (or not) a behavior in animal is never going to give you any clue about its degree of “aberration” for human: in mice and many rodents, reproductive sex is common between brothers and sisters, thus making it a “natural” common behavior. Yet it is a strong taboo in many human societies…

  20. It is entirely relevant to the discussion… not every child born is a blond haired, blue eyed, ten fingered, ten toed, single sexed human with heterosexual tendencies.

    But, ok… so you don't want to include hermaphroditism in the discussion.

    What about chimerism…? Humans who are born with both male and female genes. The male genes can be responsible for the formation of the genitalia and reproductive organs, while the female genes can be responsible for the formation of the brain.

    Long story short, when it comes to biology and sex, you can't always judge a book by its cover.

  21. To try to make my point completely clear I am going to give you another example: you seem to strongly support monogamy, within couples. That is to say life lasting, exclusive sexual interactions between a man and a woman.
    In animal species, monogamous relations are actually pretty rare: in most species, males and females have many different sexual partners over time. Therefore, monogamy, since it is so rare in animals should be considered as an “aberration”.
    According to your logicn we, human, should therefore not follow such an “abnormal” behavior.
    Following your line of thought Biology clearly shows that monogamy is completely abnormal.

  22. Do you really think we should model our behavior after animals and emulate other species? Cannibalism, infanticide, abandonment of young, and other barbaric practices are rampant in many species. Just watch a few of the wildlife documentaries on scientific cable stations if you have forgotten how brutal the animal kingdom can be. And you want to pick one deviant behavior found in the animal kingdom to prove that we should be like them in just this, when honest science tells us repeatedly that the practice of homosexual behavior is highly dangerous and destructive? Well, maybe YOU haven't evolved yet past the mentality of an animal (if you believe in evolution) but don't expect normal men to be sucked into accepting that it's normal.

  23. Thanks for making my point: you can't indeed cherry pick which behaviors present in animals is aberrant and which one is normal and should be applied to human…Therefore animal biology is not going to tell you whether a particular behavior is moral or not for human.
    That is all I had to say.

  24. Julien, it seems apparent that either you just can't understand elementary concepts (which I don't think is the case) or you adamantly refuse to understand because on some level you know the truth threatens the relatively peaceful relationship you have with bad behavior.

    Even school children can see what is normal and natural behavior for a cat, a dog, a chicken…or a human being. Science and biology make it obvious that humans (and animals, for that matter) were created to function heterosexually; to do any differently is abnormal and contrary to their natural behavior and function.

    This horse has been beaten sufficiently to death, so we'll leave things here and hope that the light may someday dawn for you.