Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

dontreadonme wrote:

OleMan wrote:2) There are also reasons why "gay marriage" should not exist, and the story in this link is one of those reasons.

That is a truly awful story, but I don't see where it is any metric for prohibiting gay marriage, when those same events are perpetrated by married heterosexuals as well.

Quite right, and its not as if staying unmarried is going to make someone any less sick in the head.

BertMacklin wrote:

dontreadonme wrote:

OleMan wrote:2) There are also reasons why "gay marriage" should not exist, and the story in this link is one of those reasons.

That is a truly awful story, but I don't see where it is any metric for prohibiting gay marriage, when those same events are perpetrated by married heterosexuals as well.

Quite right, and its not as if staying unmarried is going to make someone any less sick in the head.

Part of the issue is that gay "marriage" gives them (especially males) easier, more "acceptable" access to children. Adoptions by gay "couples" are already being permitted. The man charged in this case has a son of his own. Just talk to a LEO who has spent significant time investigating child porn or sex crimes against children. Child porn and sexual abuse of children happens all together too often.

Another part of the problem is that a story such as that will not make it to the national news, so people cannot readily see how common it is.

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/faculty_s ... ation.html

A child molester is typically on a different level, identifying most times as neither a homosexual nor a heterosexual, studies to the contrary are typically flawed in interpretation usually in an attempt to demonize gays.

OleMan wrote: Part of the issue is that gay "marriage" gives them (especially males) easier, more "acceptable" access to children.

I don't really buy this. By the same logic, a heterosexual man who has children (his own or adopted) has more acceptable access (to use your term) through his kids' friends.

A child molester will find a way to get his victims. Banning gay marriage won't affect that.

OleMan wrote:1) There are reasons that true marriage between male and female parents exists. One of those reasons is to protect and train children.

2) There are also reasons why "gay marriage" should not exist, and the story in this link is one of those reasons.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael ... child-porn

Let them call it a "junction", "life-partner", "home-mate" or whatever but never should it be treated called a marriage.

Gee my parents were straight and instilled in me good morals. They never abused me and are still married, and I was treated exactly the same as my brother who is now married and has children of his own. Yet here I am a gay man, son of the same parents that raised a straight kid. No different than anyone else save my attraction to the same sex, which is between cosenting adults by the way.

And as for your second reason, I hate to tell you and snap you out of your fantasy land but there are just as many if not more straight pedophiles than gay ones. Just ask a priest! The fact that you would blame pedophilia on homosexuals is truely deplorable and shows only the greatest lack of character.

So excuse me for desanctifying joe schmoe's fifth marriage!

"So excuse me for desanctifying joe schmoe's fifth marriage!".

You don't think Joe has done that already? If anything, that would bolster the argument for doing away with marriage altogether.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

thekinetic wrote:

OleMan wrote:1) There are reasons that true marriage between male and female parents exists. One of those reasons is to protect and train children.

2) There are also reasons why "gay marriage" should not exist, and the story in this link is one of those reasons.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/michael ... child-porn

Let them call it a "junction", "life-partner", "home-mate" or whatever but never should it be treated called a marriage.

Gee my parents were straight and instilled in me good morals. They never abused me and are still married, and I was treated exactly the same as my brother who is now married and has children of his own. Yet here I am a gay man, son of the same parents that raised a straight kid. No different than anyone else save my attraction to the same sex, which is between cosenting adults by the way.

And as for your second reason, I hate to tell you and snap you out of your fantasy land but there are just as many if not more straight pedophiles than gay ones. Just ask a priest! The fact that you would blame pedophilia on homosexuals is truely deplorable and shows only the greatest lack of character.

So excuse me for desanctifying joe schmoe's fifth marriage!

It is good for you and your brother that you had good parents who attempted to instill good morals. As to you being gay, that is your business. However if I were to meet you, I would be polite and friendly so long as it is reciprocated. In fact, I have multiple in-laws and step relations who are gay, have gay neightbors, and have worked with a number of gay people in past jobs and there have never been any problems between us. No gay bashing for me.

I am not in any fantasy about either straight or gay pedophiles. The fantasies of either straight or gay pedophiles, if carried out, are equal crimes. And nowhere in any of my posts did I blame homosexuals for pedophilia. To say so is twisting my words.

However there are pedophiles who are homosexual (and have little or no desire for females) and strongly orient to little boys. That is a truly "deplorable" behavior.

As far as gays being more likely to be pedophiles that is neither here nor there. I have known of pedophiles with marriages too that does not mean that heteros are likely to assault children. Perhaps a scientific study has been done, but anecdotally I have not see a serious connection between the two.



Thekinetic, though you and I may disagree on many things I am always kind to those who are civil. You do not have to agree with me, I can live and let live, and I wish we could create a way for the law to do that as well.

I do wonder what you think about this. Homosexuals have been a persecuted group of individuals in many societies past and present and they are a small percentage of general population. In light of that, do you think it is a good idea to basically create registry of most homosexuals. Do you think or would you be concerned over the implications of that.

Same sex marriage/civil union is a civil rights issue, so is owning a gun. Same rules apply. Me owning a gun, doesn't affect anyone elses rights , just like same sex marriage doesn't effect my rights. Im a gun owner I dont force my right to carry on anyone (well id like my wife to carry) and two guys/girls that wanna get hitched doesn't force me to want to be with a guy.

What ever happened to life liberty and pursuit of happiness?

Darkwaters....

I agree right up until the point where they force a person who thinks believes that marriage is between a man and a woman participate in a same sex union. Recently bakers and photographers have been ordered to participate in gay marriages. The courts are forcing people to either participate in what they see as sin or don't engage in commerce. That is a civil rights violation as well.

You ask what happened to life liberty and pursuit of happiness. I ask what happened to freedom of religion (a persons faith extends beyond the church walls if it it real at all) and freedom of conscience.

mamabearCali wrote:Darkwaters....

I agree right up until the point where they force a person who thinks believes that marriage is between a man and a woman participate in a same sex union. Recently bakers and photographers have been ordered to participate in gay marriages. The courts are forcing people to either participate in what they see as sin or don't engage in commerce. That is a civil rights violation as well.

That is a different issue entirely. Can you state a source, I would like to read up on that.

I think it can get annoying when any group gets extreme.

If you want to read up on this here are a few stories.

http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=21136505

http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_24672 ... ay-couples

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/court- ... y-couples/

The Denver article mentions the florist suit in Washington as well. The photographer was in New Mexico.

In San Antonio if you are not pro gay marriage don't bother even trying to get a contract with the city.
http://www.burntorangereport.com/diary/ ... ty-council

As you can see there are attacks everywhere against people who hold the same view on gay marriage our president did before the last election.

If the common homosexual individual wants a peaceable solution that lets everyone live in peace and gets them the civil rights they think are lacking, this will not help. It makes even reasonable people like me think that someday not too far off my church, my friends, my family will be the target based on what we believe.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Just another example of how a minority in this country ends up changing policy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would close my business and go to jail before I let the courts force me to do something against my values. Screw that.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Really, I truly don't care whose gay and whose not. And, for the most part, I don't care what gay folk do.

From a Christian view point, I am morally opposed to homosexual activity, but, from the same view point, I cannot judge those who participate in such activities.

Legally speaking, I cannot oppose an officially recognized homosexual union. I am opposed to referring to that union as a marriage. Such a union does not fit the definition of the word. To get a firm grasp on my opposition to "Gay Marriage", go prepare a " Vegan Ham and Cheese Omelet". Or, looking at it from a slightly different angle, if you take two bottles of orange juice, and blend them in a pitcher, you will not have a mimosa, even if you call it such, you are still missing a key ingredient.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I'm not going to refuse to do business with someone or mistreat someone because of it. My objection is to the government getting involved in private business and private life. Its none of their business.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

And if your business (photography) put you in a place where you had to be part of the celebrations?

None of these people said they would not serve homosexuals, they said they could not be a part of their wedding.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

Let me be a bit more clear. If I am not mistreating someone, just simply choosing not to associate myself with them do to a conflict in morals... The court should not be forcing me to associate with that person or group of people.

Where will it end? I don't invite my indian neighbor for bbq's because I cook meat on the grill. Should the court force me to have a veggie bbq and invite them bvecause if I don't, I'm discriminating? No thanks. Stay out of my private life.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]

I really don't know why these threads come up. Why do you care what other people do?

Makes me wonder if on gay forums they talk about how we shouldn't be allowed to own guns all the time.

I'm willing to bet there are several gay couples trying to get married, that are also very pro gun and help to fight that cause.

For christs sake (literally) people need to mind their own business and worry about themselves.

These threads don't even belong on a gun board. We're supposed to be the ones taking the high road, not the ones making a thread every week about how gays are just dirty sinners.

As far as the business thing. I absolutely don't think you should be forced to. But financially, why wouldn't you?

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Did you read the intro? Obviously not. I made this thread to discuss the possibility that homosexuals are being duped to registering themselves as homosexuals and thus at a later date (possibly hand in hand with Islam) they left will turn and like the scorpion and the frog and do what has been done again and again eliminate those who they no longer need.

It is not out of "you dirty sinner" though process but a "you are a part of a group of people that have been persecuted past and present." "Are you sure you want to give up your relative anonymity?"


This is a politics board.....so most thing are supposed to be open to debate here. If you don't want to talk about. If it annoys you.....don't open the thread.

[ Post made via Mobile Device ]