|
|
Last Web Site Update: Thursday, March 11, 2010 6:00 PM EST
|
 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
The
news articles and features presented below are simply an indication of
how topical, controversial, and all-encompassing the issues surrounding
marriage are throughout our society—and the world—today. Some of the
views and opinions expressed, and their respective web sites, do NOT
reflect the views or opinions of The Real Proposal™
magazine. Many are highlighted largely to reiterate that the alarming
statistical trends on the chaotic state of "Marriage" and
"Family"—outlined in "A Mere Glimpse"—will continue unabated without a fundamental grasp and purposeful dissemination of TRUTH on the issues. |
|
|
 |
- Parenting Issues: Sarah's mother thought she'd done everything to keep her 12-year-old safe online. She couldn't have been more wrong The Daily Mail- UK, By Laura Topham, March 11, 2010
On first impression, the pretty, porcelain-skinned teenager seems incredibly impolite. She won't say hello when she meets you, doesn't make eye contact and just scribbles ferociously on a piece of paper in front of her. At times during our - interview, she stands up and starts - talking into her mobile phone. The truth is, however, that Sarah isn't rude - she simply has a problem with strangers, as you might expect from a girl who was groomed online from the age of 12. 'It's a barrier,' explains her mother Janet, 48, whose name has also been changed to protect her daughter's identity. 'She writes notes or talks on the phone, so she doesn't have to look at people.' But little wonder Sarah admits to being 'uptight' around new people. The last time she trusted someone she didn't know - a 26-year-old man who befriended her on a social networking website - she was persuaded to perform sexual acts on a webcam, and ruthlessly pursued when she attempted to evade him. And although the predator is now in prison, serving a lengthy sentence for the abuse he inflicted on more than 30 girls and boys, Sarah's distress is increasing. It's not just that she's terrified he will find her and seek revenge because of her part in sending him to jail, but also because it is only as she grows older (she is now 17) that she appreciates just how sexually depraved his behaviour was. Only as she learns about other girls groomed online - particularly Ashleigh Hall, whose Facebook killer was jailed for life earlier this week - have the - dangers really hit home. Ashleigh, a shy 17-year-old who was desperate for a boyfriend, was murdered by serial rapist Peter Chapman, 33, who posed as a teenager online before luring Ashleigh to her death and dumping her body in a ditch. But five years ago the man Sarah met was no more than a friend making strange requests she didn't understand. . . . . .For the first few months I only talked to my friends online because Mum had asked me to stay safe,' she says. 'But then I accepted the request from a guy I didn't know to become his "friend" online because I could see we had mutual friends on the website. They hadn't mentioned anything bad about him, so I thought it would be all right to talk to him, and we started chatting online every evening. Whenever I was on the internet he would be there, asking about my day and what I'd done at school.' What Sarah didn't realise was that her friends did not know him, either. . .
|
- How to train your husband like a dog! Hilarious book reveals that you can keep him on a tight leash The Daily Mail- UK, By Amy Sutherland, March 11, 2010
My husband Scott is well read, adventurous and makes me laugh: I love him. But he's also forgetful, untidy and a terrible time keeper. He suffers from serious bouts of spousal deafness, but never fails to hear me when I curse him under my breath from afar. Some years ago we took possession of Dixie, an eight-week-old excitable puppy that I took to obedience class. Over six weeks, I watched her transform and marvelled at how I had managed to change and control another species. I wrote in my diary: 'Try on husband.' I did - and it worked. Here's how:
1) STOP NAGGING, STOP SHOUTING:
I was a nag. About the screwed up tissues, the towels on the floor, taking too long in the bathroom. You name it, I was there nagging. I felt Scott's behaviour had forced me to whinge and complain. But, animal trainers don't nag and, most of the time, they don't even correct bad behaviour - they have an approach called 'gentling' or 'affection training' which means rewarding the behaviour they like and disregarding what they don't like. Nagging and shouting doesn't work. I'd done it for years and Scott was still messy, forgetful and always late. We humans assume that pointing out what we don't want makes clear what we do desire. Punishment tends to have nasty side-effects such as apathy, fear and aggression. None of these are conducive to learning. A scared or raging animal does not make a good student.
2) IDENTIFY YOUR SPECIES: . . . . 3) IGNORE BAD BEHAVIOUR . . . .4) GOOD BOY!. . . .5) LURING AND BAITING. . . .6) ONE SMALL STEP FOR MAN. . . . 7) DON'T TAKE THINGS PERSONALLY. . . .8) DON'T DOMINATE . . . .9) PICK YOUR MOMENT. . . .10) READ THE CUES. . . . . . .COMMENTS: Great advice if you want to destroy any chance of a decent sex life.- tj, preston, 11/3/2010 10:00. . . .This article is really crass, and I'm a woman. I completely agree that had this been written by a man about 'training women' there'd be uproar. Learn to love our differences, openly discuss your issues with your partner, love and respect each other and try not to pee anywhere other than in the bowl... then we should all get along just fine...- Mikala, Coventry, UK, 11/3/2010 09:53. . . .
|
 |
|
|
RELATED ARTICLE: 'Shamu' Teaches Humans a Thing or Two National Public Radio- Talk of the Nation, March 04,
2008
In 2006, the most e-mailed story in The New York Times
was an op-ed about one woman's attempt to get her husband to pick up
his dirty laundry using the same techniques employed by animal trainers.
Now, author Amy Sutherland has turned the op-ed into a book: What Shamu
Taught Me About Life, Love, and Marriage: Lessons for People from
Animals and Their Trainers. In what Sutherland calls a kind of "reverse
anthropomorphism," she says that she couldn't help but see parallels
between animal and human behavior. "True, people are more complicated
than animals," she writes, "but maybe not as much as we assume ...
Animal trainers showed me that there are universal rules of behavior
that cut across all species. Why should we be any different?". . .
RELATED RADIO INTERVIEW & EXCERPT: Amy Sutherland: 'Shamu' Teaches Humans a Thing or Two
National Public Radio- Talk of the Nation, March 04, 2008
RELATED ARTICLE: What Shamu Taught Me About a Happy Marriage New York Times, By Amy Sutherland, June 26, 2006
AS I wash dishes at the kitchen sink, my husband paces behind me, irritated. "Have you seen my keys?" he snarls, then huffs out a loud sigh and stomps from the room with our dog, Dixie, at his heels, anxious over her favorite human's upset. In the past I would have been right behind Dixie. I would have turned off the faucet and joined the hunt while trying to soothe my husband with bromides like, "Don't worry, they'll turn up." But that only made him angrier, and a simple case of missing keys soon would become a full-blown angst-ridden drama starring the two of us and our poor nervous dog. Now, I focus on the wet dish in my hands. I don't turn around. I don't say a word. I'm using a technique I learned from a dolphin trainer. I love my husband. He's well read, adventurous and does a hysterical rendition of a northern Vermont accent that still cracks me up after 12 years of marriage. But he also tends to be forgetful, and is often tardy and mercurial. He hovers around me in the kitchen asking if I read this or that piece in The New Yorker when I'm trying to concentrate on the simmering pans. He leaves wadded tissues in his wake. He suffers from serious bouts of spousal deafness but never fails to hear me when I mutter to myself on the other side of the house. "What did you say?" he'll shout. These minor annoyances are not the stuff of separation and divorce, but in sum they began to dull my love for Scott. I wanted — needed — to nudge him a little closer to perfect, to make him into a mate who might annoy me a little less, who wouldn't keep me waiting at restaurants, a mate who would be easier to love. So, like many wives before me, I ignored a library of advice books and set about improving him. By nagging, of course, which only made his behavior worse: he'd drive faster instead of slower; shave less frequently, not more; and leave his reeking bike garb on the bedroom floor longer than ever. We went to a counselor to smooth the edges off our marriage. She didn't understand what we were doing there and complimented us repeatedly on how well we communicated. I gave up. I guessed she was right — our union was better than most — and resigned myself to stretches of slow-boil resentment and occasional sarcasm. Then something magical happened. . .
|
 Joke of the Day: The Lighter Side
Three friends married women from different parts of the country. The first man married a woman from Utah. He told her that she was to do the dishes and house cleaning. It took a couple of days, but on the third day, he came home to see a clean house and dishes washed and put away.
The second man married a woman from North Carolina. He gave his wife orders that she was to do all the cleaning, dishes, and the cooking. The first day he didn't see any results, but the next day he saw it was better. By the third day, he saw his house was clean, the dishes were done, and there was a huge dinner on the table.
The third man married a girl from Texas. He ordered her to keep the house cleaned, dishes washed, lawn mowed, laundry washed, and hot meals on the table for every meal. He said that the first day he didn't see anything, the second day he didn't see anything but by the third day some of the swelling had gone down and he could see a little out of his left eye, and his arm was healed enough that he could fix himself a sandwich and load the dishwasher. He still has some difficulty when he pees...
Thanks to William.
|
 |
- As gay marriage begins in Washington, opponents vow to fight
Gay marriage officially became legal in Washington, D.C. on Tuesday. Many same-sex couples embraced the opportunity to get married, but some opponents want to put gay marriage on the ballot through the District’s initiative process. Christian Science Monitor, By Michael B. Farrell Staff writer, March 9, 2010
Gay rights groups celebrated the start of same-sex weddings Tuesday in Washington, D.C., but gay marriage foes say the issue is not yet settled. Before the Washington City Council finalized its decision to legalize same-sex marriage last year, a coalition of the area’s religious leaders tried to put the question to voters through a citywide referendum. That move was blocked by the city’s board of elections and later by the a D.C. Superior Court judge (The Monitor covered the ruling here). But same-sex marriage opponents are now trying to put the question on the ballot through the District’s initiative process, which gives voters the opportunity to weigh in on existing legislation. “It’s not over in D.C. by any means,” wrote Brian Brown, executive director of the National Organization for Marriage, on the group’s blog. “The people of D.C. have a right, granted by Congress in their charter, to vote to overturn legislation passed by elected officials, just as people in many states (like Maine) have that right.” In an interview, Mr. Brown said a case over the initiative is pending in the D.C. Court of Appeals. If the ballot initiative is allowed, many expect that voters would overturn gay marriage. Same-sex marriage has been defeated in the 31 states where the question was put to voters. Before the city’s law took effect last week – the District granted same-sex marriage licenses last Wednesday, but Tuesday was the first day for gay marriage ceremonies – opponents of the new marriage law asked the US Supreme Court for a temporary injunction. In the court’s decision not to get involved, Chief Justice John Roberts said the case should be handled in the local courts, but that gay marriage opponents had “some force” to their arguments. “Clearly the law is on our side, and I think the courts will be sympathetic,” says Brown, regarding the effort to have a ballot initiative on the gay marriage question. . .
RELATED VIDEO: Washington
Weddings for Same-sex Couples AP,
March 09, 2010
Tuesday was the first day that same-sex
couples could get married in Washington DC. Dozens of DC's residents
wasted no time in taking the plunge. . .
|
RELATED BLOG: NOM Marriage News: March 5, 2010 National Organization for Marriage, By Brian Brown
A few words about where we are in D.C. Notice the headlines from the mainstream media: a persistent drumbeat of despair. Recognize that the keenest weapon in the hands of our opponents are these spiritual weapons--which means they are weapons we can strip from them any time we see that they are being wielded against us. That's a longwinded way of saying: Don't believe the lies. It's not over in D.C. by any means. Here's what really happened. . . |
RELATED ARTICLE: Unfair and Unbalanced: The Washington Post Townhall.com, By Harry R. Jackson, Jr., February 08,
2010
I wish the Post would stop writing sophisticated trash talk and
encourage the DC City Council, the US Congress, and the Courts to let
the people vote. Since their own polls suggest that most Washingtonians
would like to vote on this issue, we should let the people vote. . . .
From every conceivable vantage point, the Post seems to be committed to
spending barrels of ink attempting to sell the citizens that a host of
other issues are “their” ideas. The newspaper has been especially biased
with regard to same-sex marriage. I could point to any number of
instances in which this pro same-sex marriage bias has reared its
manipulative head. Let me cite just one example. . .
RELATED INFO: Putting strategies to work: the homosexual propaganda
campaign in America's media MassResistance.org
Read
below: The powerful, sophisticated psychological techniques that the
homosexual movement has used to manipulate the public in the media. If you think that the radical changes in the minds of Americans -- and in your own mind -- about homosexuality in the last decade are an accident, you must read the section below from the 1989 book, "After the Ball - How America will conquer its fear and hatred of Gays in the 90s" (Penguin Books), which immediately became a beacon for the then-emerging homosexual movement. Building on the basic strategies outlined in Marshall Kirk's groundbreaking 1987 article, "The Overhauling of Straight America", this book puts forth the very sophisticated psychological persuasion and propaganda mass media techniques that we've all seen and been affected by over the years -- but never understood what was happening. . .
RELATED POLLS & RESEARCH: Americans Expect Court to Reject Gay Marriage
Angus Reid Global Monitor, January 31, 2010
-
Many Americans believe their Supreme Court will ultimately ban same-sex
marriage, according to a poll by Angus Reid Public Opinion. 52 per cent
of respondents expect a decision that would define marriage federally
as between a man and a woman. In addition, 58 per cent of respondents
say they would prefer a ruling that defines marriage federally as
between a man and a woman. . .
RELATED POLL RESULTS: Majority of Americans Continue to Oppose Gay Marriage
Gallup.com, By Jeffrey M. Jones, May 27, 2009
Americans'
views on same-sex marriage have essentially stayed the same in the past
year, with a majority of 57% opposed to granting such marriages legal
status and 40% in favor of doing so. Though support for legal same-sex
marriage is significantly higher now than when Gallup first asked about
it in 1996, in recent years support has appeared to stall, peaking at
46% in 2007. . .
|
- Simon Cowell plans to marry his current girlfriend,
Mezhgan Hussainy. Bryony Gordon wonders what could drive a girl into his
waxed arms The Telegraph- UK, By
Bryony Gordon, March 09, 2010
Clocks stopped, ravens were
spotted leaving the Tower and there was a nip in the air down in hell
when Simon Cowell announced on Saturday night that he had met “the one”.
The entertainment supremo’s heavily Botoxed face expressed something
near emotion as he spoke of his new love, Mezhgan Hussainy. “She’s very
special,” he said during a tear-jerking interview with Piers Morgan.
“You know when you’ve found somebody very special.” Mezghan must be very
special indeed because Cowell has bought her a £250,000 engagement
ring, with a wedding apparently planned for the summer. This comes as
somewhat of a surprise, given that the X Factor judge is 50 years old
and has not expressed a desire to commit to any of his previous
girlfriends – he never told the last one, Terri Seymour, that he loved
her, though he did buy her a house in Los Angeles when they broke up.
Indeed, Cowell has been vehemently anti the institution of marriage,
describing it as an “outdated contract”. “I don’t believe in marriage,
certainly not in this business. The truth is that you get married and in
a year or two they clean you out.”. . .
RELATED ARTICLE & VIDEO: Now Simon Cowell gets a kiss from American Idol judge Ellen DeGeneres The Daily Mail- UK, By Chris Johnson, March 11, 2010
With two TV kisses in two days, Simon Cowell's heart-throb status can be in no doubt. Okay, the first smacker was from his fiance and the second from a famous lesbian, but at the age of 50 most men happily accept affection from any source. The first kiss, from Mezhgan Hussainy, appeared to catch Cowell out on the Jay Leno show on Monday. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Blushing Simon Cowell (Sort of) Confirms He's Engaged
People magazine,
By Cynthia Wang, March 08, 2010
Simon Cowell scowling – typical. Simon Cowell blushing? Indeed. The
famously cantankerous American Idol judge squirmed in his seat on The
Tonight Show with Jay Leno on Monday as the host dissected reports of
Cowell's engagement to Idol makeup artist Mezhgan Hussainy. "Are rumors
you're engaged true?" Leno asked. Cowell took a moment and responded
carefully, "Are they true? Well, I do have somebody in my life now, Jay,
yes. And I kinda made a decision this year to make somebody happy." As
the audience cheered, Leno asked about the huge ring Hussainy has been
sporting on her left hand. "I thought she broke her arm," Leno joked.
Cowell responded, "It's quite a big one, yes." When Leno called Cowell
out for turning red, Cowell confessed, "I am blushing." Leno asked,
"Where did
you, or may have, gotten engaged?" Cowell said, "I find this very
uncomfortable. I was asleep, I think. No, look, I bought her the ring in
London." Later, Leno spotted Hussainy, 36, in the audience and invited
her to come on stage to join Cowell, 50. The pair looked giddy and
comfortable with each other, said a witness. . . .
|
 |
|
|
RELATED ARTICLE: Simon Cowell declares that new girlfriend Mezhgan
Hussainy is 'the one' The
Telegraph-UK, February 17, 2010
Simon Cowell has told how
his new girlfriend is "the one" and hinted for the first time that he
may be ready to settle down and have children. The X Factor judge has
had a string of high profile relationships, notably with the singer
Sinitta and his most recent ex Terri Seymour, but has never married. His
romance with Mezhgan Hussainy, 36, who worked as a make-up artist on
American Idol, was made public recently after they were photographed out
on a date. Now, in a television interview to be screened on ITV1 next
month, Cowell hinted to Piers Morgan that the pair could be engaged,
according to The Mirror. He said: "I’m smitten with Mezhgan, I think
she’s the one. She’s very special. “You know when you’ve found somebody
very special.” Then, on the subject of children, he added: “I think I
need to have little Simons around.” His comments come after years of
cultivating an image as the eternal bachelor, during which he even
publicly vowed that he would "never marry". Cowell, 49, first hinted the
relationship with Miss Hussainy was serious last week when he kissed
her at a Britain’s Got Talent audition. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Golden goodbye: Simon Cowell hands ex-girlfriend Terri
Seymour £6million The Daily Mail- UK, By Simon Cable,
November 2008
On television he revels in his role as
Mr Nasty.But away from the cameras it looks as if Simon Cowell is in
danger of turning into Mr Nice Guy. The X Factor judge and music mogul
has reportedly handed over almost £6million as a 'parting gift' to
former girlfriend Terri Seymour. . . . Their relationship ended over his
reluctance to marry and have children. Cowell said earlier this week:
'I know some find it hard to fathom, but it's who I am. 'Bottom line is,
I'm married to my job. She wants a different path in life, I totally
respect that.'. .
RELATED ARTICLE: The
Marrying Kind: Which Men Marry and Why The
National Marriage Project- The State of Our Unions
2004, By Barbara Dafoe Whitehead and David Popenoe
Challenging the popular stereotype of the marriagephobic male, findings from a new national survey of young heterosexual men, ages 25-34, indicate that while men are delaying marriage until older ages, most men are “the marrying kind.” Among all men surveyed, those from traditional, religiously observant family backgrounds are more likely to be married, to seek marriage and to have positive views of marriage, women, and children than young males from nontraditional and nonreligiously observant family backgrounds. Among the unmarried men surveyed, however, there is a small but significant subset of men who are personally averse to marriage. Slightly more than two out of ten expressed strongly negative views about their own personal desire to marry as well as more negative attitudes toward marriage, women, and children. Compared to other unmarried men in the survey sample, they are significantly more likely to come from nontraditional and nonreligiously observant families. . .
RELATED
ARTICLE: Ten
Important Research Findings on Marriage and Choosing A Marriage
Partner: Helpful Facts for Young Adults The
National Marriage Project- Rutgers University, By David Popenoe and
Barbara Dafoe Whitehead, November 2004
Counters prevalent myths about marriage and highlights facts that may change the way young adults think about marriage. Cited resources for each point. November 2004. . . . .1. Marrying as a teenager is the highest known risk factor for divorce. People who marry in their teens are two to three times more likely to divorce than people who marry in their twenties or older. 2. The most likely way to find a future marriage partner is through an introduction by family, friends, or acquaintances. Despite the romantic notion that people meet and fall in love through chance or fate, the evidence suggests that social networks are important in bringing together individuals of similar interests and backgrounds, especially when it comes to selecting a marriage partner. According to a large-scale national survey of sexuality, almost sixty percent of married people were introduced by family, friends, co-workers or other acquaintances. 3. The more similar people are in their values, backgrounds and life goals, the more likely they are to have a successful marriage. . .
|
 |
- Oscar Night = Date Night Sleek Gossip, Posted by: Tallia, March 08, 2010
Best actress winner Sandra Bullock, along with husband Jesse James took home another award last night: sweetest couple at the Oscars. The pair showed nothing but affection for each other as they made their way down the red carpet and later took their seats side-by-side in the Kodak Theatre. After her name was announced as the winner in the best actress category, a shocked Bullock automatically leaned closer to James as he whispered something in her ear. Another winning moment: both James and Bullock tearing up as the best actress made her speech. Nominees in respective best actor in a supporting role and best actress categories, The Last Station costars and fellow Brits Christopher Plummer and Helen Mirren attended the event together. The pair joked about their age on the carpet with Mirren saying, "He can laugh at my bad back and I can laugh at his bad knees." The deejay for the event, Joel Madden, hit the red carpet with fiance Nicole Richie, who joked with Ryan Seacrest about details of their upcoming nuptials. When pressed for a date, Richie responded, "Tomorrow." As far as big or small, she wants a big wedding while he would prefer to keep it small, Madden explained. Presenter Miley Cyrus hit the red carpet with a special date: her mom. But all talk was about her current boyfriend and The Last Song costar Liam Hemsworth. When asked by Seacrest if she was in love, the starlet replied with a coy "maybe" and a grin. Best actor nominee Jeremy Renner also brought this mom along as a date. Thought the actor didn't go home with a date, he may have a romantic plus one in his future. Rumor has it the Renner exchanged numbers with Jessica Simpson at a pre-Oscar bash last week. Couples we'd like to have seen: Friends and costars, Kristen Stewart and Taylor Lautner made a cute pair presenting together, but we would have loved to finally see Stewart and rumored boyfriend Robert Pattinson debut their relationship on such a high profile red carpet. Jennifer Aniston and Gerard Butler made such a dashing pair as presenters at the Golden Globes earlier this year. Who wouldn't have liked to see a repeat performance? Bradley Cooper served as a presenter alongside Butler, but where was his rumored girlfriend Renee Zellweger? We would have loved to see the pair together--and Renee's signature style--on the red carpet. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Oscar 2010: Jesse James: Sandra Bullock 'Takes My Breath Away' People magazine, By Alexis Chiu and Aaron Parsley, March 09, 2010
Jesse James may be a tough guy who builds motorcycles and performs death-defying stunts, but he's not above the pomp of the Oscars – or being a plus-1 to the night's most celebrated actress, his wife Sandra Bullock. "It's awesome," he told PEOPLE of being her date as they made their way into the Governor's Ball at the Hollywood & Highland Grand Ballroom after the Oscar ceremony Sunday. "It's a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to support my wife and her work. She does it all the time for me. She goes to Mexico, to the desert, to the hospital – a lot – to support me and my work. The least I can do is put on a suit and support her." James may be more comfortable in his garage than on the red carpet, but he was bursting with pride as he checked out his wife and her shimmering, gold-beaded Marchesa gown. "She's beautiful. She's amazing. She takes my breath away,” James said. "Sometimes I look at her and I do, I just lose my breath.". . .
RELATED VIDEO: Sandra Bullock, Kathryn Bigelow on Oscar Wins CBS News Online, March 08, 2010
Oscar winners Sandra Bullock, best actress, and Kathryn Bigelow, best director, spoke to Harry Smith outside the Governors Ball about their awards and the historic night for women.
RELATED PHOTO ESSAY: Oscars 2010: Cursed? From Oscar to Split! People magazine- Style Watch
Go to the awards together – and break up within a year. From Reese & Ryan to J.Lo & Ben, see the couples who were casualties of the Oscar jinx!
|
 |
- Five Myths about Same Sex Marriage Townhall.com, By Janice Shaw Crouse, March 09, 2010
March 9, 2010, is the first day that same-sex couples in District of Columbia (D.C.) will be able to have legal marriage ceremonies. More than 100 couples — some coming from nearby states — have licenses for ceremonies. So-called same-sex “marriages” are legal in five other states — Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont — where the words “bride and groom” are replaced with the names of the individuals, who are each called “spouse” or “Person A” and “Person B.” Those who oppose same-sex “marriage” are called by derogatory labels: bigot, narrow-minded, hate-filled among the nicest. Such name-calling obscures the very real problems associated with watering down and denigrating traditional marriage. Let’s begin with the basic argument that people are “born gay.” Apparently, activists are operating under the assumption that if they say this long enough, people will believe it. Yet the science is not there to substantiate their oft-stated premise that homosexuality is genetic and is immutable. The studies that purport to support the idea have not been replicated; instead, they have been repudiated or considered inconclusive. The generally accepted theory is that some people may be predisposed to emotional vulnerabilities that can be exacerbated by external factors, such as parental approval, social acceptance and gender affirmation. Indeed, a growing number of individuals have chosen to reject the homosexual lifestyle. In addition, there is an acknowledgement, even among homosexuals, that persons can “choose” their sexuality (be bisexual or not). Let’s look at five other myths associated with same-sex “marriage.”: Myth #1: Having same-sex couples celebrate their love does nothing to harm anybody else’s marriage or damage the institution of marriage. . . . . .Myth #2: Same-sex “marriage” is an “equal rights” issue. . . . .Myth #3: Any group of people — including homosexual couples — can contribute to the well-being of children and form a productive unit of society. . . . Myth #4: Same-sex “marriage” is a matter of freedom of conscience and freedom of religion. . . . . .Myth #5: “Same-Sex Marriages” are just like heterosexual marriages. . .
|
RELATED ARTICLE: First same-sex marriages celebrated in D.C. Washington Post, By Ann E. Marimow and Keith L. Alexander, March 9, 2010
There were yellow roses, champagne toasts and tiered white-frosted cakes to celebrate the District's first same-sex marriages Tuesday morning. In a joint ceremony at the downtown headquarters of the Human Rights Campaign, three of the first gay couples to marry under the city's new law said their vows and exchanged rings in services that underscored the historic significance of the day. . . |
RELATED ARTICLE: Gay Marriage v. Religious Freedom: A Cautionary Tale The Christian Post, By Chuck Colson, March 08, 2010
Catholic Charities in Washington, D.C., has announced changes to its employees’ health care benefits. Normally, this wouldn’t be big news. But this story isn’t only about deductibles and co-pays-it’s about the increasingly fragile state of religious freedom in the America.Employees were told that starting March 2, Catholic Charities would “not offer benefits to spouses of new employees or to spouses of current employees not already enrolled” in the health plan. Spouses currently covered under the plan would still be covered. The timing of the changes wasn’t a coincidence. On March 3, same-sex “marriage” became legal in the District of Columbia. In connection with the new law, the D.C. Council insisted that, as a city contractor, Catholic Charities had to offer the same benefits to same-sex couples that it did to heterosexual ones. In other words, Catholic Charities had to choose between church teaching and ministering to the city’s neediest residents. To put it mildly, the Council wasn’t sympathetic to the Archdiocese’s concerns. One Council member called them “childish.” It’s also no surprise that the D.C. Archdiocese is being portrayed as the villain. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Putting Religion on Trial? Townhall.com Columnist, By Maggie Gallagher January 27, 2010
I have my speech tonight. I can explain why every human culture across millennia has recognized marriage as the union of male and female. These unions are unique. They create life and connect children to their mother and father. When I point this out, typically half the audience gets it. The other half stares blankly: How will gay marriage change anything? Why do you care?. . .
|
- Anti-Gay Lawmaker At Gay Club Before DUI Arrest CBS-13, March 04, 2010
Sources tell CBS13 that a state senator from Southern California was arrested for allegedly driving drunk after leaving Faces, a gay nightclub in midtown Sacramento, early Wednesday morning. The California Highway Patrol pulled over Senator Roy Ashburn at 2:00 a.m. Wednesday after an officer noticed a black Chevy Tahoe swerving at 13th and L Streets. The Sacramento County district attorney says Ashburn's blood-alcohol level was .14 percent when he was arrested on suspicion of drunken driving near the Capitol. Ashburn, a father of four, is a Republican Senator representing parts of Kern, Tulare and San Bernardino Counties, with a history of opposing gay rights. When the officer stopped the state-issued vehicle, Ashburn identified himself as a senator. He was arrested without incident and charged with two misdemeanors: driving under the influence, and driving with a blood alcohol level higher than .08% or higher. A male passenger, who was not identified as a lawmaker, was also in the car. He was not detained. Ashburn was booked into the Sacramento County Jail and released on $1,400 bond. Ashburn issued a statement on the arrest Wednesday afternoon:. . . . . Ashburn served six years as a state Assemblyman before being elected to the State Senate. According to Project Vote Smart, Ashburn's voting record shows he has voted against every gay rights measure in the State Senate since taking office including Recognizing Out-Of-State Same-Sex Marriages", Harvey Milk Day and Expanding Anti-Discrimination Laws. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Sin: The Rest of the Story: What the snark-infested
news media just don't seem to understand. Christianity Today, By Mollie Ziegler Hemingway, October
26, 2009
Perhaps
the media and popular culture are confused about what Christians
believe regarding sin and forgiveness because we are, too. Churches
with liberal and conservative doctrine are frequently tempted to reduce
Christianity to nothing more than morality. One side may be more
interested in social change and the other side may be more interested
in personal change. But far too often, churches preach and teach the
importance of our own moral actions, thereby belittling the importance
of what Christ has done for us. The result is that every time a scandal
breaks involving a prominent Christian laid low—South Carolina Governor
Mark Sanford, Ted Haggard, Mel Gibson—we're treated to an endless news
cycle about hypocrisy. But hypocrisy isn't failing to practice what you
preach. Hypocrisy is pretending to have beliefs that you don't actually
have. Real hypocrisy is rare and difficult to discern. . .
|
 |
RELATED ARTICLE: Are Sen. Roy Ashburn's excuses persuasive? Los Angeles Times Blog-Opinion L.A., March 09, 2010
By now, you've probably come across the excuses offered by Republican state Sen. Roy Ashburn, outed following his DUI arrest after reportedly leaving a gay bar in Sacramento last week, for his history of voting against gay-rights legislation. The gist is that his voting record merely reflects the wishes of his constituents, and that he thought he could separate his personal life from his political career. . .
RELATED RESOURCE: National Association for Research & Therapy of
Homosexuality (NARTH) NARTH.com
Narth
upholds the rights of individuals with UNWANTED homosexual attraction
to receive effective psychological care and the right of professionals
to offer that care. |
RELATED
QUOTE:
"Following the twisted logic of the gay lobby, if we personally engage in theft, prostitution, adultery, and practices that abuse the elderly, then we should be expected to support laws that promote same.... utter rubbish! Well, God bless us, finally, that one of our State Representatives gets that he was voted in to represent - and vote in alignment with - the will of his constituents, not his personal proclivities!" The Real
Proposal magazine, March 05, 2010
RELATED ARTICLE:
A Vote Against Gay Marriage is a Vote FOR Tolerance Townhall.com, By Frank Turek, October 26, 2008
Twenty
years ago, a group of prominent homosexuals got together in Warrentown,
Virginia to map out their plan to get homosexuality accepted by the
general public. In the book [After the Ball] that resulted from their meeting, they
revealed a strategy that achieves its effect "without reference to
facts, logic or proof . . . the person's beliefs can be altered whether
he is conscious of the attack or not." In other words, their strategy
was pure propaganda. That propaganda campaign has many people today
believing that denying same-sex marriage involves denying rights to a
victimized minority. That belief could not be further from the truth.
In fact, let me suggest what the same-sex marriage debate is not about.
It is not about equality or equal rights.
It is not about
discrimination against a class of people.
It is not about
denying homosexuals the ability to commit to one another.
It is not about love or private relationships.
It is not
about bigotry or homophobia.
It is not about sexual
orientation or being born a certain way.
It is not about
race or the civil rights struggle.
It is not about
interracial marriage.
It is not about heterosexuals and
divorce.
It is not about the separation of church and
state.
It is not even about religion.
“But
that’s all I hear about,” you say. Of course, that’s because the
propaganda campaign continues to be successful. Those topics are all
smokescreens designed to divert you. . . . Greg Koukl puts this very
well: “Same-sex marriage is not about civil rights. It is about
validation and social respect. It is a radical attempt at civil
engineering using government muscle to strong-arm the people into
accommodating a lifestyle many find deeply offensive, contrary to
nature, socially destructive, and morally repugnant.”. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Hope for Homosexuals Good News magazine,
Interview with Dr. Joseph Nicolosi conducted by Melvin Rhodes
Dr.
Joseph Nicolosi is a clinical psychologist. He is the president of NARTH,
the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality, a
1,000-member organization. Dr. Nicolosi has successfully treated
thousands of patients to help men transition from homosexuality to
heterosexuality. He is author of several books, including
A Parent's Guide to Preventing Homosexuality and Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality: A New
Clinical Approach . He has spoken at hundreds of
conferences worldwide and has appeared on hundreds of radio and
television
programs around the world as the preeminent authority on reparative
therapy. He also heads the Thomas Aquinas Psychological Clinic in
Encino, California. . . . .
GN:
In the last few years, AIDS has become primarily a heterosexual problem
internationally. In the United States it still affects gays
disproportionately. Why is that?
JN:
AIDS affects gays disproportionately because of the behavior that they
engage in, behaviors that will spread AIDS. Anal intercourse is the way
of spreading AIDS. And there is a great deal of sexual promiscuity and
a lot of reckless self-deceiving, self-destructive impulses in gay men
and they are killing each other. Paradoxically, all this talk about
homophobia and hatred toward gays—when you think about it, who is
really killing gays? Other gays! A very sad irony is that they are
killing each other through a behavior that should be associated with
love. Paradoxical, isn't it?. . .
|
 |
- Permanence Before Experience - The Wisdom of Marriage Christian Post, By Albert Mohler, March 04, 2010
Rightly understood, marriage is all about permanence. In a world of transitory experiences, events, and commitments, marriage is intransigent. It simply is what it is - a permanent commitment made by a man and a woman who commit themselves to live faithfully unto one another until the parting of death. That is what makes marriage what it is. The logic of marriage is easy to understand and difficult to subvert, which is one reason the institution has survived over so many millennia. Marriage lasts because of its fundamental status. It is literally what a healthy and functioning society cannot survive without. And yet, modernity can be seen as one long attempt to subvert the permanent - including marriage. The modern age has brought the rise of individual autonomy, the collection of populations in cities, the weakening of family commitments, the waning of faith, the routinization of divorce, and a host of other developments that subvert marriage and the commitment it requires. Added to this list is the phenomenon of cohabitation. The twentieth century saw the phenomenon of cohabitation become the expectation among many, if not most, young adults. But the end of the century, the progression of intimacy (including sexual intimacy) was likely to follow a line from "hooking up" to cohabiting. A new study conducted by the National Center for Health Statistics suggests two very important findings: First, that cohabiting is now the norm for younger adults. Second, cohabiting makes divorce more likely after eventual marriage. . . . . . . The experience of cohabiting just makes sense to many young adults. Their logic is that marriage is what happens after a relationship becomes sexually intimate and is found to be adequately fulfilling - not before. They do not know that what they are actually doing is undoing marriage. They miss the central logic of marriage as an institution of permanence. They miss the essential wisdom of marriage - that the commitment must come before the intimacy, that the vows must come before the shared living, that the wisdom of marriage is its permanence before its experience. Cohabitation weakens marriage - even a cohabiting couple's eventual marriage - because a temporary and transitory commitment always weakens a permanent commitment. Having lived together with the open possibility of parting, that possibility always remains, and never leaves. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Study Finds Cohabiting Doesn’t Make a Union Last New York Times, By Sam Roberts, March 2, 2010
Couples who live together before they get married are less likely to stay married, a new study has found. But their chances improve if they were already engaged when they began living together. The likelihood that a marriage would last for a decade or more decreased by six percentage points if the couple had cohabited first, the study found. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Marriage, Parentage, and the Constitution of the Family
The Heritage Foundation, By Chuck Donovan,
January 27, 2010
The family is a prime institution of civil
society. In its origins, it is both natural and pre-political. Family
is not the creature of the state but a network of relationships between a
man and a woman, their offspring (if any), and the families from which
they themselves come and that their union will create. In the modern
era, temptations to experiment with the institutions of marriage and
family have multiplied. With less emphasis on the long-term
responsibilities of marriage, the consequences of redefining the
institution for children and society are subordinated to the desires of
adults. Rather than compound these weaknesses, policymakers and citizens
should consider and adopt necessary reforms to strengthen families and
rebuild civil society as the engine of the greatest human goods. . . . .
. . Decades of Failed Experiments: Current challenges to the primacy of
marriage and family as well-established civil institutions are often
premised on the assertion that they will inflict little damage beyond
that done by previous changes in law and culture. Those prior
experiments, however, bear witness to the unintended consequences of
ill-considered changes in public policy. . . . No-Fault Divorce:
Advocates of no-fault divorce assured policymakers that the impact on
children would be minimal if not beneficial.[12] National studies of the
children of that generation who are now adults provide a clearer
picture, as do surveys of divorced adults. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: In a TMZ World, Marriage Is a Nuisance and Babies Are Accessories Huffington Post, By Donna Estes Antebi, January 26, 2010
I'm starting to think I'm an anomaly. And I'll admit it. I run seriously out of step with our fame-obsessed, tabloid-saturated, "hook up" culture. I just don't get the nation's acceptance of casual sex and the rejection of the American family. I just read a new study which shows that the teenage pregnancy rate is up after a 10-year decline, and I am concerned for my daughters. In fact, I am concerned for all American children who are now growing up in an instant gratification, pop culture-obsessed society where rich and famous celebrities are showing off their multiple plastic surgeries, parading around their Size 2 bodies for TMZ cameras, checking in and out of rehab, and treating marriage like a nuisance, men like sperm donors and babies like accessories. And no one calls them out on it. In fact, this ever-extreme, attention-seeking behavior is more likely to land them on the cover of People magazine, or as a feature story on Entertainment Tonight. How are parents supposed to counter this cultural phenomenon? I'm alarmed that this is not just a passing trend, but something deeply corrosive to the foundation of our society. They say decadence preceded the fall of Rome. And I am seeing that all across America, young people are emulating the reckless behavior of celebrities by self-medicating with prescription drugs, having "body part" sex without love, and by desiring the latest, greatest attention grabber: a baby without a marriage. Unfortunately, these young Americans are highly unlikely to grow up to be either rich or famous. They are even less likely to have an entourage around them to pick up the pieces when life doesn't work out by giving them their own reality show. We are now three generations past the 1960s divorce revolution and one thing is abundantly clear: The "divorce revolution" has failed our families, leaving the children of America to pay a tragic price. Bill Cosby said, "I don't know where we lost it or how we lost it, but people aren't parenting." He couldn't be more right. The fatherless crisis that has long plagued the African-American community has now spread like an epidemic across the entire nation. This is an American tragedy. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Why
falling marriage rates are bad for the culture Scripps News, By Betsy Hart, October 30, 2006
So
the question is, are we at a tipping point yet when it comes to whether
or not we as a culture value and sustain marriage? That's a crucial
question even for those living outside of marriage. For instance, I may
be raising my kids on my own but they still derive huge benefits,
including safety, community stability, male and family role modeling and
more from living in the neighborhood we do in which marriage rates are
extremely high. If more and more kids aren't getting that either in
their own homes or in their neighborhoods or larger communities, the
negative cascading effect is and will be profound. So what' going on?
Here's one part of the puzzle _ another report titled "Why Men Won't
Commit," part of the "State of Our Unions" series from the National
Marriage Project. (While recently reported at MSN.com, the study is from
2002.) Anyway, I saw the headline and it was so easy to guess the first
several reasons before even glancing at them. Sure enough the study of
younger men, age 25-33, showed that:
— Men can get sex without
marriage more easily than in times past.
Duh.
— Men can enjoy the
benefits of having a wife by cohabiting rather than marrying.
Double
duh. (Oh, yeah, thanks feminist foremothers.). . .
|
 |
- Mo'Nique on Sex Outside Marriage: 'That's Not a Deal-Breaker'
'Precious' Star Describes 'Open Marriage' to Husband Sidney Hicks ABC News.com, By Lauren Sher, March 04, 2010
For Oscar nominee Mo'Nique, sex outside of marriage is "not a deal-breaker. In the 29th and final "Barbara Walters Oscars Special," Mo'Nique opened up to Walters about her almost-four-year marriage to childhood friend Sidney Hicks. Mo'Nique said it is an open marriage, which she defined for Walters as "no secrets." "Open means, you know what, let me tell you my every secret, my fantasies, my thoughts, so that way, there are no surprises," Mo'Nique said. When asked by Walters if the couple had sex outside of the marriage, Mo'Nique said: "Let me say this: I have not had sex outside of my marriage with Sidney. Could I have sex outside of my marriage with Sidney? Yes. Could Sid have sex outside of his marriage with me? Yes. That's not a deal-breaker." Walters pressed: What if it happened more than once? "What if it's 20 times?" said Mo'Nique, who has twin boys with Hicks and a son from an earlier marriage. "That's not something that ... would make us say, 'Pack your things and let's end the marriage,' because we've been best friends for ... is it over 25 years? And we truly know who we are. Truly. Oftentimes," she added, "people get into marriages and they don't know who they're laying next to. I'm very comfortable and secure with my husband." . . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Mo’Nique: Open Marriage Not a 'Deal Breaker' Newsbusters.org, By Sarah Knoploh, March 08, 2010
March 7 marked Barbara Walter’s final Oscar Special, where Oscar nominees are typically interviewed about their particular roles. But last night’s special took an unusual turn when actress Mo’Nique endorsed and spoke about her open marriage, leaving many wishing for Less’Nique. . . . Maybe the reason Mo’Nique has endorsed open marriage is because she’s been paying attention to the mainstream media. In December Newsweek alleged that open marriages were a way to stop all the ‘cheating scandals.” A Nightline episode in September featured Jenny Block, an author (and participant) who has pushed for open marriages. Even as early as 2007 Oprah featured a couple that participated in an open marriage, while having experts who advocated for having friends with benefits. . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Mo'Nique talks about her open marriage and hairy legs USA Today, March 03, 2010
|
RELATED VIDEO: Mo'Nique Discusses Open Marriage Eyeblast.tv, March 08, 2010
Oscar winner Mo'Nique discusses her open marriage with Sidney Hicks on the Barbara Walters Special. |
RELATED ARTICLE: The New Monogamy: Until death do us part—except every
other Friday New York magazine, By Em & Lo, November 12,
2005
For much of human history, monogamy (or, at least, presumed monogamy) has been the default setting for long-term love. Hack the system, goes the theory, refuse to forsake all others, open the door even a crack—and the whole relationship will crash. Any dissenters have been pathologized as delusional idealists or worse. But now a new generation of couples is employing a kind of homeopathic hypothesis: that a tiny injection of adventure will ward off the urge to stray further—as long as it’s all on the table and up for discussion. (And just as with homeopathy, a healthy percentage of the population considers this premise bunk.). . .
RELATED ARTICLE: Judaism's Sexual Revolution: Why Judaism (and then
Christianity) Rejected Homosexuality
OrthodoxyToday.org, By Dennis Prager
It is probably impossible for us, who live thousands of
years after Judaism began this process, to perceive the extent to which
undisciplined sex can dominate man's life and the life of society.
Throughout the ancient world, and up to the recent past in many parts of
the world, sexuality infused virtually all of society. Human sexuality,
especially male sexuality, is polymorphous, or utterly wild (far more
so than animal sexuality). . .
|
- Gay Marriage Is Legal in U.S. Capital New York Times, March 03, 2010
It was cold and drizzling outside the City Courthouse just after 6 a.m. on Wednesday, but no one seemed to mind among the same-sex couples waiting for the chance to apply for a marriage license. . . . .Gay rights advocates hailed the day as a milestone for equal rights and a symbolic victory as same-sex marriage became legal in the nation’s capital. Washington is now the sixth place in the nation where same-sex marriages can take place. Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont also issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. Despite failing in court, opponents of the law vowed to fight another day. The law survived Congressional attempts to block it, and Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Tuesday rejected a request from opponents of same-sex marriage to have the United States Supreme Court delay it. Mayor Adrian M. Fenty signed the measure into law in December, but because the District of Columbia is not a state, the law had to undergo Congressional review, which ended Tuesday. Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Washington on Tuesday limited employee health care benefits to avoid coverage of same -sex couples. It was the second time Catholic Charities changed its rules to protest same-sex marriage, having earlier ended its foster care program. The new law was already having regional implications. Maryland’s attorney general, Douglas F. Gansler, issued a legal opinion last week concluding that Maryland should immediately recognize same-sex marriages performed elsewhere. . . . . . Court officials explained that the Marriage Bureau had changed its license applications: They ask for the name of each spouse rather than the bride and groom. Officials who perform the weddings read, “I now pronounce you legally married.” On a typical day the office processes 10 licenses, court officials said. By late Wednesday afternoon, more than 140 couples had filed to be married, the mayor’s office said. Because of a mandatory waiting period, couples will not be able to marry in the city until Tuesday. . .
RELATED
ARTICLE: After Roberts Steps Aside, Same-Sex Marriage Becomes
Law in D.C. Wall Street Journal, March
03, 2010
Same-sex marriage may ultimately get its day at
the U.S. Supreme Court. But Chief Justice Roberts on Tuesday made clear
that that day wasn’t going to come this week or next. The chief declined
on Tuesday to stop Washington, D.C.’s new law legalizing same-sex
marriage from taking effect. D.C. mayor Adrian Fenty signed the bill in
December, but it didn’t become law until Congress had a chance to review
the law. That process wrapped up earlier this week. Immediately,
gay-marriage opponents asked the Chief Justice, acting as Circuit
Justice for the D.C. area, to halt the law. But in this three-page
order, the chief said no. . . . .In his opinion, the chief noted that
the justices traditionally defer to the District’s courts on issues of
local law. He added that deference should be given to Congress, as
Congress had chosen not to put a kibosh on the act before it became law.
Roberts pointed out, however, that gay marriage opponents are pursuing a
ballot initiative, which would give D.C. residents the opportunity to
vote down the law after it goes into effect. . . |
 |
RELATED ARTICLE: Let the People Vote Townhall.com,
By Harry R. Jackson, Jr., January 13, 2010
The following
is an excerpt of a letter that was presented to Nancy Pelosi, Harry
Reid, Mike Pence, Mitch McConnell, Barbara Lee and the Congressional
Black Caucus this week by national pastors and leaders who want to be
counted among those who see marriage as an important issue in America
today. . . |
RELATED ARTICLE: The Tyranny of the Minority: How the Forced Recognition
of Same-Sex "Marriage" Undermines a Free Society Salvo magazine, By S. T. Karnick, Autumn 2008- Salvo 6
Issue
From
the beginning, the debate over "same-sex marriage" has been one of
those topsy-turvy issues in which the side that is truly tolerant and
fair has been characterized as narrow-minded and oppressive, while the
side that is intolerant and blatantly coercive has been depicted as
open-minded and sympathetic. Favoring government-enforced recognition
of same-sex "marriage" is not, as the media invariably characterize it,
a kindly, liberal-minded position, but instead a fierce, coercive,
intolerant one. Despite their agonized complaints about the refusal of
the majority of Americans to give in on the subject, those who advocate
government recognition of same-sex "marriage" want to use coercion to
deny other people their fundamental rights. . . . . .[I]t is not correct
to argue that government recognition of two-sex marriages is unfair or
oppressive. If proponents of same-sex "marriage" ask why the government
should be allowed to require people to acknowledge traditional two-sex
marriages, the answer is simple: It does not. The institutions of
society acknowledge heterosexual marriages on the basis of historical
and cultural preferences dating back millennia. The government didn't
decide this; society did. Government recognition of traditional marriage
was not a change forced upon society, but rather a legal codification
of what society had already established. Moreover, even homosexuals
agree that marriage is a valid institution. They confirm this powerfully
by trying to alter the institution through force of law so that
same-sex couples can be included in it. The key difference between
traditional marriage and same-sex "marriage," however, is that the
government, in acknowledging heterosexual marriage, does not force
anything on society; it merely effects the enforcement of a contract
that all—or nearly all—people accept as valid and sensible. Same-sex
"marriage," by contrast, is not seen as such by most people; forcing
individuals to recognize it is not the legal codification of an existing
social reality, but instead a radical social change forced by a few on
the many. . .
|
RELATED ARTICLE: Facts, not flattery, about same-sex attraction: Blithe
assertions about the gay lifestyle are seldom backed up by scientific
studies -- and when they are, the studies are weak. Mercatornet.com, By Ad Hoc Committee on Homosexuality
and Scientific Research, May 22, 2007
Who helps you:
someone who fails to tell you the truth or someone who does tell you the
truth? The former may make you feel better; they may soothe and
flatter, but the truth is more loving. It will help you live a
healthier, happier and more fulfilled life. Defenders and promoters of
homosexuality try to cover up the scientifically documented serious
promiscuity, inability to maintain sexual fidelity, partner abuse and
psychological and medical illnesses associated with the lifestyle. Also,
they tell persons with same-sex attractions (SSA) that "It's genetic,"
"You were born that way," or worse "God made you gay.". .
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
