The Gay Marriage Disgrace
Posted: Monday, August 15, 2011
by Josh Greenberger
(August 15, 2011) In support of gay marriage, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo asked for "one logical reason" why it should be denied.
Why are we pretending we don't know what the issue is. It's about morality, Governor.
History has shown that some great nations and empires have gone through the same three basic stages: prosperity, corruption and immorality, and destruction.
And you don't have to dig too deep to see the decline in today's moral standards. All you need is to watch a few episodes of TV shows from the 1950s and compare the language and demeanor to those of TV shows of the 21st Century; it's like day and night.
Movies today, fugetaboutit! There are no constraints in the movies; anything goes.
(Please note, vile TV shows and movies, per se, are not the problem. It's their acceptance by the public that are symptoms of a morally degraded society. By the same token, rampant corporate and government corruption is a symptom of a corrupt population.)
But here's the strange difference between the decline of honesty and the decline of morality. When it comes to the decline in honesty, people complain about corporate executives and government officials. But when it comes to the decline in morality, you always here the same stupid remark: We've come a along way.
Yes, we've certainly come a long way.
We've already gone through the first two stages that preceded the demise of some great civilizations: prosperity and moral decline. And we've begun our slide into the third stage, a financially unstable abyss, the likes of which we've never experienced. And no one knows how to fix it.
After all those years of prosperity, you'd thing we would have become good at sound financial planning, the way doctors become better doctors, engineers become better engineers, etc., after years of being in practice. But, it's as if we've suddenly become financial morons. The "experts" can't even agree on what the solution is, let alone implement one.
What does this tell you? It should tell you that we were never prosperous because of our cunning intelligence or brilliance, in the first place.
Is the connection between moral decay and calamity just a coincidence?
In 1980, the Democratic Party became the first major political party in the U.S. to endorse a homosexual rights platform. That same year, David McReynolds was the first openly gay man to run for President in the U.S.
The year 1980 was certainly a period of great milestones in the history of gays in this country. But there was another milestone in 1980 that many have forgotten, as described by an article on New York magazine's NYMag.com, an excerpt of which reads:
"In early 1980 a young gay man in New York City contracted an unusual illness that defied diagnosis. Upon his death an autopsy revealed that he had suffered from toxoplasmosis, a disease caused by cell-invading parasites. Joel Weisman, a Los Angeles doctor, noticed that a number of his patients -- all homosexuals -- were suffering from an illness he diagnosed as cytomegalovirus (CMV). Five suspicious cases of pneumocystis in Los Angeles were reported to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in Atlanta ... In the summer of 1981, physicians in New York City found 26 gay patients suffering from Kaposi's sarcoma, a rare form of skin cancer. Normally, these were treatable afflictions, but in each case the patient's immune system was abnormally, mysteriously, suppressed. By the end of the summer the CDC was aware of 70 more cases of Kaposi's and pneumocystis in New York and California. The victims were young , white, gay males, and 40 percent of them had died. The CDC announced that the 'fact that these patients were all homosexuals suggests an association between some aspect of a homosexual lifestyle' and the disease."
By 1982, the disease responsible for the above cases was named GRID -- Gay-related immune deficiency. Only after gays complained about the stigma attached to the name GRID, the disease was renamed to AIDS.
By the end of 2008, the total number of deaths, according to the CDC, of people in the U.S. diagnosed with AIDS was over 617,000.
An epidemic that has its origins in a lifestyle, and is still predominant in that lifestyle to this day, is unprecedented in history. What's particularly odd is that AIDS existed globally and in this country before the 1980s, but the epidemic in this country did not begin until 1980.
So, instead of recognizing the history of moral decay, we have a Governor of a great state such as New York with the gall to make speeches as if it's a moral obligation to support a base lifestyle, and as if the passage of his gay marriage bill was a noble act. What an absolute disgrace.
We must rid ourselves of such politicians and get back to the values that made this a great nation. We've witnessed prosperity and we've witnessed financial collapse. You don't have to be a Bible scholar to see the connection between a nation's success and its Bible-based traditional values.
Some people seem to be under the impression that God's existence depends on their belief in His existence. That's like thinking the IRS will not exist if I believe it doesn't exist. Either way, you'll pay your taxes. It's just a question of whether you'll pay voluntarily or involuntarily.
You may have the free will to believe or not to believe in God, but God runs the world in either case. Our politicians can obviously not pull us out of this financial mess, maybe it's time to start thinking of a Higher Authority. The first step would be to get rid of all politicians who have completely lost their moral compass.
This Article has been viewed 676 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (4 total)I find some of your (most, actually) line of reasoning rather presumptive and didactic. Not only are there morals outside the bible, there are morals within the homosexual community. There can be no blanket assumptions in regard to humans and to hold up one area of any community as a moral wasteland because of something you disagree with is curious at best and wilfully ignorant at best. To then use that area of community to herald the fall of civilisation is, as kindly as I can put it ‘laughable’. Actually, it is potentially immoral because it can and does reinforce not only hateful and discriminatory belief and therefore behaviours in attitude, but the all-too-often shame and self-negative even destructive wasteland of those unable to cope with such attitudes towards them.
There are moral and immoral people in every variant of community and morality is not automatic to religious or Christian belief. There is as much immorality within religious followers as there are without. I won’t even bother to discuss the priesthood in detail but there is a prime example of both sides of the morality coin right there.
Throughout history there have always been a wide mix of both sides of that coin, from the persecution and killing of followers by non-followers and vice a versa. Religions come and go yet always, as a base, human communities work together for the betterment of the human community. Christianity is one of the old religions, not the oldest, but there was a basic morality long before that, even if you take the Old Testament literally. Without it, human community would never have survived in the first place, yet it has, for thousands of years and all over the world and before widespread, common contact.
We are as dependent on each other as a community no matter how technological or wealthy or well-fed we become, or how long we survive through history. Holding up examples of any community you disagree with on moral grounds is somewhat simplistic. To further expand your ‘thesis’ to include homosexuals with common criminals, such as those in Lehmans and their ilk, is immoral. Homosexuals no more choose to be homosexuals than a person born with spinabifida chooses to be crippled. According to your beliefs, they don’t have to act on their sexual proclivities. I wonder how many practising Christians have sex only for the purpose of having children. A small number of a particular section of that particular community I’m sure, and then only the truly ‘moral’ ones within that particular section of that particular community.
If a person is moral or not depends on their attitudes towards both themselves and others, not towards what is written in the bible or any other dictate. To impose oneself on another, sexually or otherwise, is immoral. To be or practice homosexuality between consenting adults is only immoral if done in some way to confront others, i.e. in public. In private, especially in a long term and committed relationship is not immoral, it is only affronting to your particular sensibilities and beliefs.
Oddly, throughout history, when there has been a rise seemingly in homosexuality, it has been when populations are growing too big to sustain themselves. I find it worrying that many Christians do not believe in climate change/unsustainability. Too many people and over-consumption, and greed in general, is far more likely to make every civilisation fall in the end. Fortunately, for the human community in general, another one rises from the ashes.
Sorry this comment is as long as an article, but I feel strongly about this, too, just not in the same way you do. That doesn’t make me immoral or dishonest, in fact, I believe it makes me both moral, because I believe in saying why I disagree with your hypothesis and explaining what I believe, and honest because I do so say. (I have to get back to work, lunch is over, but I'll come back and reread my comment ASAP in case there are typos.)
"...there [are] morals outside the bible ..."
What on earth are you talking about? Did you make up your own definition of morals? There's only one provable source of morals -- the Bible. You can make up your own rules if you like, but don't call them morals. If I decide to call taking a dump from a rooftop morals does that become morals? What's wrong with you?
I disagree with you completely. There is only one source of Christian morals, i.e. the bible. You choose to believe it as definitive. I see it is one encapsulation of many. The proof that morals are also outside the bible is the very fact that we, humans, are a functioning community regardless of faith, race or wealth. There are multitudes of cultural differences, but there are irrefutable facts that demonstrate we develop and follow morals in order to maintain that micro and macro community as functioning. I am a highly moral person, as are my children. As an atheist divorced woman, I worked hard to ensure this was the case. I didn't slap my children, nor spoil them, nor neglect them or expose them to immorality. My grandchildren are now being raised in a similar manner and are continually praised for how well mannered and considerate they are; as were my children. This is a choice I made and which most people make and has nothing to do with the bible or any particular form of faith. I acknowledge and respect your faith in the Bible, but it is not my faith nor my truth. If God made us, he/she/it made us reasoning. I prefer to reason by looking, reading and learning wider than from within the pages of one book. As to your crude example on morals, that is not worth responding to. I will, however, ask you a question. Do you think crudity and demanding to know what is wrong with someone who does not believe what you believe is a true demonstration of Christian moral practice?
Don't forget, my wonderful youngest daughter was born in 1980, too. Thanks for sharing.
It isn't true because you said it and it isn't true because I said it - it is true because there is absolute truth as shared by the Creator of the Universe with the people who live on earth (through His Word, the Bible). God loves us - His "rules and regulations" are so that we can live lives we were given to have the greatest fulfillment and joy in those lives. God is not the great cosmic kill-joy in the sky but a loving Father who wants His kids safe, growing up and with increasingly positive character traits (becoming more like Jesus as we mature, hopefully) It is really difficult for selfish mankind (man or woman) to think that maybe someone else really does know best. It is also difficult for us to realize there are absolute truths. When we function within those parameters we really are better off.... blessed as it were.
My final comment (before I end up writing an article here) is to say MARANATHA!!! Then and only then will we see in practice what government was intended to be, eh?
Thanks for writing this insightful piece. Because you are hitting some sore spots and getting comments you know it was written effectively. Keep 'em coming!What is true is that this is what you believe. Nothing more. I do not understand what you mean about God not being the great cosmic kill-joy. People do not behave morally or else are unrestrained hedonists. You'd be surprised how moral non-believers are. Be wary of believing every atheist or other religion follower is unprincipled, crude, selfish and/or criminalistic. Why not take a look outside the mould and see who else is out there. I'm sure Jesus would be pleased with you.
You seem to make a lot of baseless assumptions. I have no doubt that you came to your atheistic views with the same type of flawed reasoning.
Let me make something very clear -- I am not Christian. Jesus means nothing to me. I do not believe in Jesus. Why do you even assume that? When I say God I am not referring to Jesus, and when I say Bible I am not referring to anything Jesus said. The only Bible that I know of that has verifiable authenticity is the original Five Books of Moses (the Old Testament), a subject that is too lengthy to get involved in here, but there is much evidence for the veracity of the Bible (not the Jesus one).
I'm sure you don't really care about the evidence, you sound like your very comfortable with your views, and the last thing you'd want to do is find out that you've raised a family with flawed views.
In the off chance that you really do care about what's real, and not simply your imagination, here's a book, Permission to Believe, you might want to look up on Amazon.
There is no "your God," "my God," "their God," etc. There are no personal definitions of God. There is only one logical definition of God -- the One Who created everything that exists. Anything else is not God.
As far as my example being crude to you: That's really funny coming from someone who believes that the gay lifestyle is okay. The gay lifestyle to me is as repulsive (not to mention unhealthy) as my example was to you. So what do you mean you don't want to address my example? Who are you to decide what's nice and what's not nice? What to you defines nice and not nice? And how did you come to the conclusion that the gay lifestyle -- just to remind readers of how repulsive it is, it's when one guy sticks his you-know-what up another guy's you-know-what -- is okay? You mean that's not repulsive, and you don't mind supporting that? You're being ridiculous.
I ask the question again, if I call taking a crap off a roof a moral thing to do, by what standards do you call that not moral or repulsive? Am I hurting anyone (if I'm careful there's no one underneath)? On one hand you believe that anything anyone believes in is okay, and then you decide what's nice and what's not nice. That's a little phony of you. There was a religion, I believe Paganism, where they took a crap in front of their "god." If you don't get your moral standards from the Bible, what's bad about that, and how can you tell me anything is wrong?
With all your talk, you completely ignored the evidence presented in the article, which doesn't really surprise me. The article showed how there is a connection between immoral & corrupt behavior and calamity. Especially the evidence for AIDS' connection to homosexual activity. This is not an opinion! This is not a Biblical verse! The is irrefutable, medically and historically verifiable fact. If there is no God, either nature has moral values or a morbid sense of humor.
Instead of addressing the issue, you're just giving your personal views. Your views contradict the facts.
p.s. This "good" (God-less) values you've been bringing your family up with, by the way, are in fact rooted in the Bible. "Proper" behavior has become so part of civilization, most people don't even realize where it comes from. The institution of marriage, for example; there is no historical record of where it originated from except the Bible.
Did you decide to remove my response here and if so, why?It's interesting that atheists make up their own rules but tell other people their rules are no good. If there's no god who made up the rule book? Anything you do is ok, right?No, not right. You are misinformed if you think that is what people who don't believe in god are all about. Some one has fed you porkies. The only rule atheists have that are vastly different to anyone else is that they do not believe in a divine being. There are as many good and bad amongst non-believers as there are among believers. In fact, in many ways, those who do not believe in a god, choose their 'good' behaviour because it is the right thing to do for the continuity of the social structure, not because someone has trained them from an early age to follow a particular dogma printed in an ancient book, although many were raised in dogma and chose later, upon rational thought and wider edification to not the dogma in which they were raised. You do not have to approve or agree with anyone who believes differently to you, but surely you should not make mere assumptions about what other people are like based on that differing belief. At the very best, it is limiting, self-serving and ignorant of the very wide spectrum of people, who you believe were all created by god in the first place.
Thanks for clearing something up for me. I've always wondered how people become atheists. Atheism, it seems, is a purely emotional state, nothing whatsoever to do with reason or logic.
You keep talking about how you feel about things and absolutely do not bother to address the indisputable fact that an epidemic in this country was started by the gay lifestyle. Do you look at buildings and say they're not there? I hope you admit there are cars on the street when you cross.
It's one thing for you to be an atheist, but for you to impose such views on your family is probably the cruelest thing a person can do to their own family. If you had taught them about God and let them choose what they want to believe, it would be one thing. What you've done is make sure that your family's life has no meaning or purpose.
You speak of atheism like you're proud of it. You should be a shamed of yourself. You're a disgrace to your family and to mankind. It's one thing to not adhere to religious rituals (and I'm not referring to any one specifically). But not to even recognize that there must be a God Who created everything, that's the sign of a complete ignorant and biased buffoon.
I strongly recommend you apologize to your family for leading them down the same ignorant road you've gone down on. You are exactly what the problem is with today's society and people like you are one of the major reasons why this country is going down the drain.
I suggest you read my latest article, which I posted an hour or so ago, What is an Atheist? It might clear up some of your misconceptions and ignorance, especially to the difference between an atheist and atheism.
As to disease, I addressed this in the comment you chose to delete. Not only is HIV/AIDs a disease which affects both genders, although most easily passed sexually through male homosexual activity, it is one of many (not only but mostly) sexually transmitted diseases. There are many heterosexual activities which have also claimed the lives of people. Do you know that cystitis and cervical cancers are also transmitted through heterosexual activity?
I read widely, of a wide variety of subjects and draw my own conclusions. I do not say this is the only way, or that is the only way, this is the right way or that is the wrong way. I say I feel and I think because I am in no way imposing what I believe on anyone.
I am considered and considerate. I do not insult nor attack you. Can you say the same?I "draw my own conclusions"
Let's just leave it that. You live in your own world. Reality has no bearing in your life. I don't have to insult you. There is no bigger disgrace than someone pushing her own faulty opinions on the rest of her family. It's your family you'll ultimately need forgiveness from. Good luck with that.
btw: I didn't delete your post. Have no idea what happendd to it, or even which post you're referring to.
'Your' reality definitely has no bearing on my life. If you bothered to read my article, you would see that many of your comments are faulty and filled with supposition. I have no apology to make to anyone. Opening a person's mind to see broadly and draw their own conclusions is invaluable, not faulty.
I don't know if you have children or not, but I only hope that you did not/do not raise them with the view that your belief is absolute. If you did/do, you owe them an apology for not affording them the opportunity to come to a belief of their own, which might well be the same or similar to yours, but imposed a belief on them.
One thing we agree about. ...leave it at that.
I've been following this thread and I can't understand why anyone would want to read your article. You've addressed not even one real issue presented. You keep talking about what you believe, what you feel, what you think -- who cares about all that. Everyone has opinions. How about presenting some facts the way this article did.
What's really funny is how atheists and homosexuals always refer to other people's opinions as "ignorance" because they don't agree with those of atheists and homosexuals. Really? Are all people who don't agree with you ignorant? You haven't displayed any great knowledge here yourself. Maybe it's you and your kind who are ignorant? That was a rhetorical question. It's obvious to me that you are ignorant. Not because you don't agree with others but because you display no solid knowledge of anything. An opinion is only as good as the person giving it. If you display no knowledge of anything, your opinion only displays your ignorance. That's, real ignorance, not the kind you consider "ignorant."
My use of the word 'ignorance' relates to other people's view of what is an atheist. You demonstrate this by your response here by saying
'What's really funny is how atheists and homosexuals always refer to other people's opinions as "ignorance" because they don't agree with those of atheists and homosexuals. Really? Are all people who don't agree with you ignorant?'
I didn't say that nor do I purport that anywhere. It is your assumption based on ignorance. Whether you read my article or not is irrelevant to me. I would encourage you, however, to seek edification on a broader canvas that religious text or ideology. The word 'atheist' by the way, does not refer to a system of belief, a practice of any type, nor is it proselytising in anyway whatsoever. I prefer people to draw their own conclusions on what they believe and how they go about leading their lives.
I have no vested interest in whether you believe in God or not. To me, god is irrelevant (as the Buddha said - although I am not a buddhist) and if you believe, I am sanguine about it. I prefer to know that people believe, regardless of the faith or practice they follow or do not follow, because they have come to that belief through their own doubts and questioning and seeking over a broad canvas than because they were trained to believe (or else) from a very young age. I also accept that parents who believe will teach their children to believe; I don't see anything wrong with it. However, I would prefer it was done in an atmosphere of questioning and discovery than as an absolute without alternative.* I " prefer people to draw their own conclusions on what [they] believe"
* "I prefer to know that people believe ... because they have come to that belief through their own doubts and questioning and seeking than because they were trained to believe (or else) from a very young age"
Is this why you brought your family up as atheists? Shouldn't you have taught them about god so they would not grow up atheists because they've been taught that from a young age? How dishonest can you get? Are you lying to us or to yourself?
With all you beliefs in other people's ignorance, and your ridiculous belief that you're enlightened, you have not said one thing here that's new or enlightening. You're basically regurgitating the same thing every atheist says -- and they all think they're saying brilliant new things.
I'm afraid it is you who is ignorant. And I don't mean this as an insult, although I realize it probably is. It is you who should read up on material that will show you how wrong you are. And I'm not talking about Jesus, Buddha, Mohammed, or whoever. I'm talking about the One God who created everything, a God that can be arrived at through logic, an area you're obviously lacking in.
Now, here's the part that's going to shock you. Do you know why you're able to so convince yourself that there's no God, despite so much logical proof that there is a God? Because of God. The ability to not believe in God is a deliberate design by God. There's a Cabalistic proverb, "God can give you everything, but the fear of God."
What does that mean? Of course God can make you fear Him if He wants to. What it means is that believing in and fearing God must be a result of your own free will and efforts. Furthermore, it also says that if you're looking to not believe in God, they'll actually help you toward that end from Above; this proverb says, "In the way you want to go, that's the way in which they lead you (from Above)."
You've obviously chosen what you want to believe in (or not believe in, depending on how you want to look at it), and there's no logic that will change that. It is you who needs to seriously open your mind; it's as closed as they come. If you ever come out of your lunacy, I assure you you will not understand how you ever believed in the insanity you now believe in.
There are always going to be those people, however many, whose views celebrate the triumph of the past. The 1950's might have been awesome.....if we decide to disregard racial discrimination, sexism and the abuse of human rights. These views are concentrated around a single text, written couple thousand years ago (the First and Second testament and the Quran). And we're ignorant, us non-believers, many of whom know more about the bible than believers, and have thus confidently reached the conclusion that the bible shouldn't be taken seriously. You say there is evidence all around us, that's not evidence, that's just things you've pointed at and proclaimed, "Aha, God, see. Must be God. No other explanation." You know what's a more likely hypothesis....Aliens. See, I can also make up outrageous theories. Maybe it was a group of reptilian humanoids from outer space,who, feeling bored with their mundane lives, decided to create a Sim's like world inhabited by us. So please, don't make make up garbage and say we're ignorant."The 1950's might have been awesome.....if we decide to disregard racial discrimination, sexism and the abuse of human rights"
It's this kind of stupidity that got us into the whole we're in today.
Now that we're doing better with regard to "racial discrimination, sexism and the abuse of human rights" how has our lives improved? We're in worse shape than we ever were. Obviously these issues have nothing to do with anything. If these issues were broken than it's these issues that needed fixing. We've "fixed" a whole lot more than this -- for the worse.
All you need is simple statistics and a little knowledge of history to tell you there's a correlation between a decadent society and a decline of living standards. You're like the guy who keeps getting an upset stomach every time he eats a certain food but refuses to acknowledge the food may have something to do with his problem. By the time you get your head out of the ground, you'll be left with your cherished "rights" and no country.
The simple fact is that when this country was more of a Bible-based society we were doing much better as a whole than we're doing now. It's the kind of lack of intelligence that you've displayed here that has destroyed what we once had.
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.