Minnesota becomes 12th

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/13/18228931-minnesota-senate-passes-same-sex
The Minnesota Senate gave final approval on Monday to a bill that will make the state the 12th in the United States to allow same-sex couples to marry and only the second in the Midwest.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/207231321.html
With deafening cheers and overwhelming emotion, the Minnesota Senate voted 37-30 to legalize same-sex marriage.
“Today, love wins,” said Sen. Tony Lourey, DFL-Kerrick.
The vote, on the heels of a vote last week in the House, brings to a close a decade of debate over marriage that has echoed through the Capitol, bringing thousands of friends and foes of gay marriage to its marbled dome to express their deeply held feelings.
The measure next moves to Gov. Mark Dayton, who will welcome it with his signature in a celebratory ceremony at 5 p.m. Tuesday on the south steps of the Capitol.

http://www.twincities.com/ci_23233552/gay-marriage-passed-by-minnesota-senate-bill-goes

A Google of the phrase "Right side of history" gets you hit after hit of proponents of gay marriage declaring that this movement is on the right side of history. Who are they to judge this early in the narrative? Are the arrogrant pricks so prescient that they can determine the correctness of a historiography this soon? Fifty years from now, society very well might judge this a colossal mistake. But us knuckle dragging Neanderthals best not stand in the way of History's March and the tidal wave of love. Can't you just feel the love?

Gomezz Adddams wrote:A Google of the phrase "Right side of history" gets you hit after hit of proponents of gay marriage declaring that this movement is on the right side of history. Who are they to judge this early in the narrative? Are the arrogrant pricks so prescient that they can determine the correctness of a historiography this soon? Fifty years from now, society very well might judge this a colossal mistake. But us knuckle dragging Neanderthals best not stand in the way of History's March and the tidal wave of love. Can't you just feel the love?

For some reason when I envision the love of the gay, I get a pain in the ass.

Just another hammer the Meeneesooooohtah Soviet Socialist Republic can use against us. Hopefully we can show the same balls we did when the Iowegians came calling on the very same issue.

nightlight88 wrote:

Gomezz Adddams wrote:A Google of the phrase "Right side of history" gets you hit after hit of proponents of gay marriage declaring that this movement is on the right side of history. Who are they to judge this early in the narrative? Are the arrogrant pricks so prescient that they can determine the correctness of a historiography this soon? Fifty years from now, society very well might judge this a colossal mistake. But us knuckle dragging Neanderthals best not stand in the way of History's March and the tidal wave of love. Can't you just feel the love?

For some reason when I envision the love of the gay, I get a pain in the ass.

Meanwhile, down in the Peoples Republic of Portland...



See, now the girly men can get "married" in the Meeneesoooohtah Soviet Socialist Republic and head out to the Peoples Republic of Portland and plunk down 90 grand to buy their kids. Who needs women and all their PMS.

Anybody want to bet on this being a future ballot issue in the Land of Lakes?
With Marcus Bachmann as the poster boy.

They'd better be quick about gathering signatures. The "law" takes effect in August.

Do you think this will help or hurt Gov. Daugaard in his current quest to get MN businesses to move to SD?

RedWhiteBlue wrote:Do you think this will help or hurt Gov. Daugaard in his current quest to get MN businesses to move to SD?

Help...GREATLY. We'll get all the Christian businesses, much like Mizzou and the Twilight Zone got all of Ioway's Christians when the Iowegians'wrists went limp.

sodaknomad wrote:

RedWhiteBlue wrote:Do you think this will help or hurt Gov. Daugaard in his current quest to get MN businesses to move to SD?

Help...GREATLY. We'll get all the Christian businesses, much like Mizzou and the Twilight Zone got all of Ioway's Christians when the Iowegians'wrists went limp.

Really? How many businesses did Iowa lose to Missouri? I was unaware of that.

Homosexuality: Psychological Origins Part 1
Posted by Ann Barnhardt – May 16, AD 2013 6:08 AM MST

I have written on this before, but it has been a couple of years, and since my posts disappear into the void forever after falling off the bottom of this 80 post page, I’ll just write it up again. Even within the last two years, the inroads made by the satanic sodomite culture have been staggering. And sadly, typically, no one seems able to make any sort of intelligent, informed response to the satanic sodomite propaganda. “That doesn’t go there,” while a pithy and witty enough retort in a Dorothy Parker sort of way to the sins of Sodom, does exactly nothing to genuinely explain WHY the sins of Sodom cry out for God’s vengeance and cannot be tolerated in a culture that expects to survive, much less to actually help the people who are ensnared within them. The fact that the Church, the one body on earth tasked with standing in the breach between the satanic sodomite forces and leading the defense against their relentless, unceasing bayonet charge … has itself been massively infiltrated by sodomites just makes the situation all the more grave.
First, we have to understand the origins of same-sex attractions, because one of the major weapons being used by the satanic sodomite hordes is the lie that the origins are genetic, and thus on par with race. This is total, complete, utter nonsense. There is no “gay gene” any more than there is a “bestiality gene” or a “necrophilia gene” or a “rape gene”. The satanic sodomite hordes are masterful at using the profound stupidity and total lack of critical thinking skills of the modern western mind, and know that all they need do is publish and spread the gay gene lie, and the average mush-brained American will eat it up. Nevermind anything like, oh, you know, EVIDENCE. Nah. “Kathy” will just KNOW it’s true because a.) she saw it in writing on the innerwebz and everything on the innerwebz must be true and b.) it just FEELS true because Kathy’s gay hairdresser and his boyfriend are just so CUTE and they tell her she is pretty every time she sees them.
Yes, that’s right. The entire world is being sent careening down the latrine with zero resistance largely because a bunch of stupid, insecure, middle-aged women like being lied to about their looks, and the men are all too flaccid and emasculated to tell the “Kathys” of the world to SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.
There are two broad classes of the origins of same-sex attractions. The first is sexual abuse in childhood itself. Interestingly, childhood sexual abuse may actually be the easier origin to correct in adulthood. An adult who was raped as a child can actually have an easier time getting their head around and correcting the psychological disorders that came from their childhoods. Childhood rape victims also tend to be less “flamboyant” in their carriages and comportments as adults and tend to fit well into healthy gender roles ON A DAY TO DAY BASIS. The women tend to be feminine, not butch, and the men tend to be nominally masculine, not flamers.
Let’s start with a female childhood rape victim. Did you know that in excess of 95% of female strippers and “exotic dancers” in the U.S. today were raped by men as children – with the vast majority having been raped by their mothers’ boyfriends and husbands? Did you also know that the incidence of lesbianism amongst female strippers is massive? These girls are very feminine, obviously. The descent of these women into the world of the sex trade, specifically dancing, is, for them, about having power over their abuser. When they are on stage, they are in charge and they are, in a sense, dominating the men. The lesbianism is a manifestation of the deep-seated fear and mistrust of men in any truly intimate context, spurred on by the fact that they are immersed in a world of sexual perversion to begin with.
A guy worked in my office years ago who was a big-time Democrat, and presented himself as this super-pious Catholic, even teaching catechism classes in the biggest parish in Denver. One day a stripper showed up that one of his equally hypocritical clients had sent him for his birthday and he happily opened all of his blinds in his office so that all of the people outside eating lunch could see this girl strip completely naked and grind her genitals on his pelvis for ten minutes. I wonder how old that girl was the first time her mother’s boyfriend slipped into her bedroom and felt her up. Seven? Eight? I wonder if she knew what was happening the first time she was orally or digitally raped. But you know the question that still haunts me?
I WONDER WHAT HER NAME IS.
Boys who are abused tend to likewise turn into fairly normal-looking, nominally masculine men. Their pathology is, again, centered around sexual power and domination. True pedophiles, that is to say men attracted to pre-pubescent little boys, are almost never “swishing, flaming” homosexuals. The guys at the hair salon or the florists probably aren’t into little boys – they like men and probably sexually mature teenagers – more on that is a second. That is one of the big misconceptions in this culture and why true pedophiles have such an easy time victimizing children. There is a misconception that pedophiles are swishy, and they aren’t. They are masculine and are looking to sexually dominate a child the same way that they were sexually dominated when they were children. Many true pedophiles are married with children themselves and are never suspected in their communities until they are caught.
And yes, this sexual abuse dynamic is basically THE driver behind every islamic culture on the planet. It is just a massive cycle of man-boy rape perpetuated for 1400 years, and yes, this absolutely helps explain why musloid men are all suicidal, homocidal, sexually perverted satanic rage monsters. Getting raped on a regular basis from the age of four will do that.
Now on to the more complex psychological genesis of same-sex attractions: self-loathing. This tends to be the domain of children and teenagers who are of above-average intelligence and are thus more acutely self-aware and emotionally sensitive. It can begin quite early in childhood, depending on the intelligence level of the child. The smarter the child, the earlier “the lights come on” and memories and emotional patterns start being laid down in the brain. For some people this happens very early – before the age of five. For some, it barely happens at all. Deep emotional sensitivity and self-criticality literally never happens for many people. They go through their lives largely unencumbered by feelings of angst, self-doubt, lack of confidence or navel-gazing. I view this as a tremendous mercy in God’s Providence. He gives each of us what we will need in order to live up to the potential He plans for us. If it is not God’s will that a man be a “welder”, God does not shoulder that man with an “arc welder” that he has to carry around on his back. The question always is, are we living up to our God-given potential and using the gifts that He has given us? If our gifts are acute emotional sensitivity, above average intelligence OR a strong back and a love of manual labor, are we maximizing those gifts and traits to the glory of God?

This is nothing more than an attack on the traditional family. As the family goes, so goes the culture. The evolved thinker has no clue what I'm talking about and is part of the problem. To them being pro gay is hip and cooll. Everybody is doing it. nothing but sheep.

The Communist Manifesto discusses how to destroy a society but welcoming deviant and immoral behavior. I am done with this PC crap.

Darth Cheney wrote:The Communist Manifesto discusses how to destroy a society but welcoming deviant and immoral behavior. I am done with this PC crap.

Ann Barnhardt says it like it is. She must now be discredited and attacked!

Acceptance of deviant behavior creates more deviants.


In the UK they are now promoting child molesters are born that way. Don't need to be a rocket scientist to predict the future.

Mr Nifty wrote:Acceptance of deviant behavior creates more deviants.


In the UK they are now promoting child molesters are born that way. Don't need to be a rocket scientist to predict the future.

Soon to be adopted by our left and others from the amoral side. Remember we can't judge. The Bible say so ....

Freedom Forever wrote:This is nothing more than an attack on the traditional family. As the family goes, so goes the culture. The evolved thinker has no clue what I'm talking about and is part of the problem. To them being pro gay is hip and cooll. Everybody is doing it. nothing but sheep.

Know what's really an "attack on the traditional family"?
Divorce. Jeeezzzz. Half. 50%.
Add in the single Moms, the unmarried couples living together raising kids. Completely absent Dads. The "every other weekend" custody. Kids raised with half-siblings, half the time. Holidays with 8 sets of Grandparents (who are half step-grandparents or grandma's boyfriend). Ex-aunts' and ex-uncles' new live-ins. How many names are on the "safe" list for each child at the daycare? How often does that change? Ask an 8-yr-old about his 'room', and he asks if you mean at his new Mom's or old Mom's or at Dad's before Dad moved in with his girlfriend.

RedWhiteBlue wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:This is nothing more than an attack on the traditional family. As the family goes, so goes the culture. The evolved thinker has no clue what I'm talking about and is part of the problem. To them being pro gay is hip and cooll. Everybody is doing it. nothing but sheep.

Know what's really an "attack on the traditional family"?
Divorce. Jeeezzzz. Half. 50%.
Add in the single Moms, the unmarried couples living together raising kids. Completely absent Dads. The "every other weekend" custody. Kids raised with half-siblings, half the time. Holidays with 8 sets of Grandparents (who are half step-grandparents or grandma's boyfriend). Ex-aunts' and ex-uncles' new live-ins. How many names are on the "safe" list for each child at the daycare? How often does that change? Ask an 8-yr-old about his 'room', and he asks if you mean at his new Mom's or old Mom's or at Dad's before Dad moved in with his girlfriend.

Ugh! not that same old argument again. First of all your 50% stat is intentionally misleading. When you break down the demographics of the that 50% the real truth is revealed. Which most libs are NOT interested in.

Secondly if the traditional family is having problems why make it worse by accepting a deviant redefinition of family?

Get some new talking points. and strawmen

If only there could be more sodomy marriage would be saved. /lib

RedWhiteBlue wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:This is nothing more than an attack on the traditional family. As the family goes, so goes the culture. The evolved thinker has no clue what I'm talking about and is part of the problem. To them being pro gay is hip and cooll. Everybody is doing it. nothing but sheep.

Know what's really an "attack on the traditional family"?
Divorce. Jeeezzzz. Half. 50%.
Add in the single Moms, the unmarried couples living together raising kids. Completely absent Dads. The "every other weekend" custody. Kids raised with half-siblings, half the time. Holidays with 8 sets of Grandparents (who are half step-grandparents or grandma's boyfriend). Ex-aunts' and ex-uncles' new live-ins. How many names are on the "safe" list for each child at the daycare? How often does that change? Ask an 8-yr-old about his 'room', and he asks if you mean at his new Mom's or old Mom's or at Dad's before Dad moved in with his girlfriend.

Your statement about 50% of marriage ending in divorce shows me one of two things: 1) You are a liar; or 2) you are stupid. Which is it?

But then as a liberal it could be both.

Wow!
Some of you actually think that divorce is a "lib" vs. "cons" issue?
Unbelievable.

What do you guys consider a "traditional" family - - - -

"(CNSNews.com) - Only 45 percent of American children have spent their childhood in an intact family, according to a survey produced by a conservative advocacy group.

The "Index of Belonging and Rejection," produced by Dr. Pat Fagan of the Family Research Council's Marriage and Religion Research Institute, defines an intact family as a biological mother and father who remain legally married to one another from the time of their child's birth."

"Of all children born this year, half will not be living with both natural parents by their mid-teens."

RedWhiteBlue wrote:

Freedom Forever wrote:This is nothing more than an attack on the traditional family. As the family goes, so goes the culture. The evolved thinker has no clue what I'm talking about and is part of the problem. To them being pro gay is hip and cooll. Everybody is doing it. nothing but sheep.

Know what's really an "attack on the traditional family"?
Divorce. Jeeezzzz. Half. 50%.
Add in the single Moms, the unmarried couples living together raising kids. Completely absent Dads. The "every other weekend" custody. Kids raised with half-siblings, half the time. Holidays with 8 sets of Grandparents (who are half step-grandparents or grandma's boyfriend). Ex-aunts' and ex-uncles' new live-ins. How many names are on the "safe" list for each child at the daycare? How often does that change? Ask an 8-yr-old about his 'room', and he asks if you mean at his new Mom's or old Mom's or at Dad's before Dad moved in with his girlfriend.

So let's double down on all the stuff that's going wrong with marriage and throw another effeminate on the fire, so to speak. Get that sucka really roaring!

As for your 50% figure, well....

When comparing marriage and divorce statistics, the two need to be analyzed independently of one another. The number of people getting divorced in a given year originally married at different times — and it's a fact that that number is decreasing. Marriage and divorce statistics are linked, but shouldn’t be analyzed together. To say right now that 50 percent of marriages will end in divorce is an uninformed statement.

http://magazine.foxnews.com/love/whats-divorce-rate#ixzz2VGnLAWPk

The divorce rate varies somewhat, depending on the source and methodology.
Again - do you agree with Dr. Fagan's definition of "intact" family? What do you consider a "traditional" family? (see my prior post 12:20pm today)

RedWhiteBlue wrote:The divorce rate varies somewhat, depending on the source and methodology.
Again - do you agree with Dr. Fagan's definition of "intact" family? What do you consider a "traditional" family? (see my prior post 12:20pm today)

Your percentage of "divorce rate" is essentially obtained by comparing the crude marriage rate to the crude divorce rate and is next to a meaningless statistic.

The definition of an "intact family" is a sociological one, not Dr Fagan's. He is only using it for clarity in his argument.

What argument?
The Family Research Council is simply providing their findings.

Are you attempting to argue something? Do you think Dr. Fagan is?
Do you seriously think 'divorce' or lack of 'intact' families is somehow a 'political party' issue?
What is a "traditional" family to you?