Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Why Washington Should, Must and Will Ban Gay Marriage in USA Elections 2012

Why Washington Should, Must and Will Ban Gay Marriage in USA Elections 2012

Ratings: (0)|Views: 51 |Likes:
Published by RogerWilliams
Why the people of Washington will ban "gay marriage" in 2012 ... 37 reasons ...
Why the people of Washington will ban "gay marriage" in 2012 ... 37 reasons ...

More info:

Categories:Types, Research, Law
Published by: RogerWilliams on May 21, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/21/2012

pdf

text

original

 
WHAT PRICE POLITICAL/LEGISLATIVE/JUDICIAL DECEPTION AND TYRANNY IN WASHINGTON? ... IN THE USA?PREAMBLE (37 additional reasons/answers are listed from page 3)Some clear answers are forthcoming from the Tar Heel State! Three important questions were asked by the people of North Carolina asevidence, logic, reason and detail were given their proper place in social policy in May 2012:
1.
When the evidence is ignored by our politicians and legislators, are we in the realm of a political/legislative tyranny that deliberatelycircumvents a credible conclusion the people would have come to had they been allowed to consider the facts?
2.
How reasonable is it to believe that “civil rights” ,,, and “gay rights” ... should not be based on evidence, reason, and detail?
3.
When the evidence is ignored by our politicians, legislators and the judiciary, are we at the end of the law, the end of reason?Homosexuality and Transgenderism are the only two psycho-sexual/mental disorders so identified that set up as their ultimate and non-negotiable goal the destruction of core creation-structures in the Judeo-Christian and American ethos ... fact, truth, evidence, manhood,womanhood, sex, family, marriage ...
!
How significant is this?The people of North Carolina focused on seven fundamental analytical perspectives which some politicians in the USA are prepared to lie totheir teeth about... or completely ignore. After the very liberal Justice Kirby, the people recognized that good law should be based on good data,and the very least that our politicians and legislators can do is to familiarize themselves with the details!
1.
They understood, with Justice Antonin Scalia in his written/read dissent in
Lawrence v. Texas
, that “gay rights” ... and thereby “gaymarriage” ... threaten entire swathes of the law of the land, portending anarchy in the name of defending a mental/psychosexualdisorder... and pro-gay politicians completely ignore the threat to the national ethos, citing Quinnipiac “polls” and an “evolution of thought” instead: “...
 
This effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation. If, as the Courasserts, the promotion of majoritarian sexual morality is not even a legitimate state interest,none of the above-mentioned laws can survive rational-basis review 
....” 
No one ever addresses the astonishingly bad and “activist-court” inspired law ... dissected step by step in his dissent ... that AntoninScalia reveals
Lawrence V. Texas
to be! How much more, then, does a refusal to consider the implications of the law review “Child Molestation and the Homosexual Movement“ indict recklessly irresponsible politicians?
2.
They understood, with Kathleen Melonakos (“Why Isn’t Homosexuality Considered a Disorder on the Basis of Its Mdeical Consequences?”), the Surgeon-General (FDA Document 90-4239) and the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) “FastFacts on HIV/AIDS  2010”, that some politicians and legislators in 2012 are so bent on an activist pro-gay electioneering agenda that they were prepared tolie by omission ... or else ignore the country’s medical establishment ... about the astonishing fact that the gay “lifestyle” needs entiremedical brigades to support it, or else an entire national health policy built on the premise of “behaviour accommodation” rather thanthe strong demands for “behaviour modification” suggested by the common-sense of epidemiological protocol:The Surgeon-General:
"... Condoms provide some protection, but anal intercourse is simply too dangerous a practice..." ("Condoms and sexually transmitted diseases, especially AIDS": Article 7, FDADocument 90-4239).
Kathleen Melonakos asks: Why are recklessly indulgent politicians and legislators wilfully ignoring these facts?
“... As far as I know, there is no other group of people in the United States that dies of infectious diseases in their mid-forties except practicing homosexuals. This, to me, is tragic, when we know that homosexuality can be prevented, in many cases, or substantially healed in adulthood when there is sufficient motivation and help...” “... Dr. Satinover brilliantly laid out in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth the solid, irrefutableevidence that there are lethal consequences of engaging in the defining features of male homosexuality—that is,
 
 promiscuity and anal intercourse....” “... Diseases to which active homosexuals are vulnerable can be classified as follows:Classical sexually transmitted diseases (gonorrhea, infections with Chlamydia trachomatis, syphilis, herpessimplex infections, genital warts, pubic lice, scabies); enteric diseases (infections with Shigella species,Campylobacter jejuni, Entamoeba histolytica, Giardia lamblia, ["gay bowel disease"], Hepatitis A, B, C, D, and cytomegalovirus); trauma (related to and/or resulting in fecal incontinence, hemorroids, anal fissure, foreignbodies lodged in the rectum, rectosigmoid tears, allergic proctitis, penile edema, chemical sinusitis, inhaled nitriteburns, and sexual assault of the male patient); and the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS).[iv] Can anyone refute that increased morbidity and mortality is an unavoidable result of male-with-male sex—not tomention the increased rates of alcoholism, drug abuse, depression, suicide and other maladies that so oftenaccompany a homosexual lifestyle?[v] People with this whole cluster of behavior patterns are somehow "normal"?...” 
The CDC asks
:
Why are recklessly indulgent politicians and legislators willfully ignoring these facts?
 
MSM account for nearly half of the more than one million people living with HIV in the U.S. (48%, or anestimated 532,000 total persons)..
MSM account for more than half of all new HIV infections in the U.S. each year (53%, or an estimated 28,700 infections).
 
While CDC estimates that MSM account for just 4 percent of the U.S. male population aged 13 and older,the rate of new HIV diagnoses among MSM in the U.S. is more than 44 times that of other men (range: 522–989 per 100,000 MSM vs. 12 per 100,000 other men).
MSM are the only risk group in the U.S. in which new HIV infections are increasing. While new infectionshave declined among both heterosexuals and injection drug users, the annual number of new HIV infectionsamong MSM has been steadily increasing since the early 1990s.
 
Note that the CDC has, apparently under pressure, had to remove that last statement from later editions of the article ... we should ask them to explain the reasons why ... and to publish the original data that ledthem to that fateful conclusion!
3.
They understood that,
as to America the “secular state” relative to “gay rights”, we have yet to find a more concise statementon the relationship between state, government, man and God as that offered by Daniel Garcia and Robert Regier in the onlinearticle “
Homosexuality is Not a Civil Right 
” (www.crrange.com/wall34.html).Ad nauseam, we seek recourse yet again to those words: “… 
When protecting one’s inalienable and civil rights, the government must discern between liberty and license. This requires that rights attach to persons because of their humanity, not because of their behaviors, and certainly not those behaviors that Western legal and moral tradition has regarded as inimical to the "Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God," as stated in the Declaration.Yet, today some advocate granting "rights" to behaviors hostile to the most fundamental forms of self- government—family, church, and community. This is especially the case with homosexual activists, whoironically seek to hijack the moral capital of the civil rights movement 
...."
4.
They understood that Dr. Joseph Nicolosi in
The Removal of Homosexuality from the Psychiatric Manual 
” (http://www.catholicsocialscientists.org/CSSR/Archival/2001/Nicolosi_71-78.pdf ) summed up the social pathos generatedby a current crop of politicians and gay-activists in these fatal words: “…
Militant gay advocates working in a small but forceful network have caused apathy and confusion within our society. They insist that acceptance of thehomosexual as a person cannot occur without endorsement of the homosexual condition. Intellectual circlestoo—who are self-conscious about sounding intolerant—proclaim homosexuality as normal, yet it is still not sofor the average person for whom it “just doesn’t seem right 
...” 
 “…
 All three great pioneers of psychiatry—Freud, Jung and Adler—saw homosexuality as disordered. Yet today, homosexuality is not to be found in the psychiatric manual of mental disorders. Were these three great pioneers just reflecting the ignoranceand prejudice of their times? Is this radical shift due to our modern-day enlightened, sophisticated attitude? Has there beenany new research to account for this shift of opinion? I submit that no new psychological or sociological research justifies thisshift. Research did not settle the question. Research simply stopped, and it is politics that has silenced the professional dialogue. Now, the only studies on homosexuality are from an advocacy perspective
….’ 
5.
They understood, with Dr. Charles Socarides in “Sexual Politics and Scientific Logic: The Issue of Homosexuality”” that somepoliticians and legislators have shown gross immaturity and naiveté in accommodating gay-activism rather than the science America’sfinest minds have produced ... and perilous consequences will accrue in left unchallenged:
“ …
Should we dismiss our scientific findings for social/political reasons? Joseph Stalin's insistence on substituting Lamarckian concepts in placeof those of Mendelian inheritance for political purposes and the serious consequences to the science of genetics immediately came to my mind.We psychoanalytic clinicians had long been and continue to be in the vanguard of protecting our homosexual patients against assertions of degeneracy and unfair laws. After all, it was Freud who first admitted homosexuals and others were sexually deviant into the consultation roomas respected and worthy patients on a par with till those suffering from emotional disorders of any kind.Despair would be created within the individual homosexual who wished help. The homosexual would forfeit his mammalian heritage, the chanceto engage in the male-female design;Suicides among those with gender identity disorder might well increase. Where would individuals get help if they could not turn to psychiatry?The individual homosexual who wished to be helped, to rid himself of his condition, would be doomed by pronouncements of the Board of Trustees, family and friends would despair.Psychiatric residents would be reluctant to enter an area of psychiatric research where they would only receive attack, belittlement, and demeanment. Thus there would be a decrease in both our knowledge and psychiatric research in this condition.
 
By declaring a condition a "non-condition," a group of practitioners had removed it from our list of serious psychosexual disorders. The actionwas all the more remarkable when one considers that it involved the out-of-hand and peremptory disregard and dismissal not only of hundreds of  psychiatric and psychoanalytic research papers and reports but also of a number of other serious studies by groups of psychiatrists, psychologists, and educators over the past seventy years, for example, the Report of the Committee of Cooperation with Governmental (Federal) Agencies of the Group for the Advancement of Psychiatry (1955); the New York Academy of Medicine Report (1964); the Task Force Report of the New York County District Branch of the APA done in 1970-72 (Socarides, et. al., 1973)
….”
6.
They agreed with Peter Sprigg (“The Top Ten Harms of Same-Sex Marriage”) that no member of the current administration in 2012 hashad the political courage to rebut in any sane fashion the stupendous fallout of a decision to force gay-marriage upon an unsuspectingpublic in the USA... and the fact that a complicit media (NBC, ABC, The New York Times ... among others) will never touch thesepublications since they completely invalidate the partisanship and bias that these news outlets have adopted.
7.
They understood and agreed with Dr, Paul McHugh in “Surgical Sex” that a reckless preoccupation with avenging recent politicaldefeats to political/legislative tyranny in New Jersey and North Carolina has forced an election tactic for November 2012 called “go for 
 
broke” ... but that the fundamental defect in that strategy STILL is : “...
We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather than trying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it 
...."
37 REASONS WHY NORTH CAROLINA VOTED NO TO GAY MARRIAGE!
(20 at FRC’s “Ten Arguments from Social Science Against Same-Sex Marriage” and Sprigg’s “The Top Ten Harms of Same-Sex Marriage”) REASON 21: AMERICA ... AND NORTH CAROLINA ... REASSESSED THE EVIDENCE AGAINST HOMOSEXUALITY & TRANSGENDERISMDr Paul McHugh: “Surgical Sex”http://www.policystudies.ca/documents/Surgical_Sex_Change.pdf 
 
Paul McHugh is University Distinguished Service Professor of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins Hospital.
“...
 
..We have wasted scientific and technical resources and damaged our professional credibility by collaborating with madness rather thantrying to study, cure, and ultimately prevent it….”REASON 22: NORTH CAROLINA REJECTED THE EFFORT BY A COMPLICIT MEDIA TO SWAMP IT WITH DISINFORMATION!
Lawyer and author Roger J. Magnuson ... on Gay America’s determination with hijacking Black America’s struggle!(“
 Are Gay Rights Right?: Making Sense of the Controversy 
”; Multnomah Press; 1992; Portland, Oregon 97266).The excerpt below is taken from his arguments at pgs. 67-107, specifically p. 82-89):“...
As we have already seen, proponents of gay rights laws rely heavily on an analogy to other human rights legislation. If human rights lawshave provided protection to other minorities, why should society not add one more group to those protected from discrimination? Hitching their wagon to the broadly based support Americans have traditionally given civil rights laws, gay rights advocates have made surprising progress inthe past decade.The human rights analogy, though popular and politically understandable, cannot withstand careful analysis. Adding homosexual behaviour to alist of classes that includes racial and religious minorities makes no sense. The tenuous balance of social interests represented by these laws isreflected in the few, and carefully chosen, classes they protect. Relief has been given only in extraordinary circumstances.To add another protected class, at least five requirements have had to be shown:(1) A demonstrable pattern of discrimination …(2) … based on criteria that are arbitrary and irrational …(3) … causing substantial injury …(4) … to a class of people with an unchangeable or immutable status …(5) … which has no element of moral fault...
.”
REASON 23: AMERICA ... AND NORTH CAROLINA ... AGAIN REJECTED PROBABLE GAY-MILITANT INTIMIDATION!“Matt Gurney: California's gay marriage vote sparks retribution”
Posted: November 14, 2008, 1:00 PM by Kelly McParland
 
“…
 
.
Democracy requires voters to sometimes decide painful, contentious issues. An absolute prerequisite to that is being able to rest assuredthat one may cast their vote – and yes, donate their money – safe in the knowledge that their legally-discharged democratic duty will not exposethem to vigilante retribution or political intimidation
.Eckern chose to step aside without a fight, and seems genuinely mortified to have caused offence.
I cannot help but wonder, though, what would havehappened if he'd stuck by his guns and simply stated that how he spent his money was his business?
Would the California Musical Theater havechampioned their employee's right to vote his conscience, or would they have exercised political censorship by finding some way to turf him for supportingYes on 8?Scott Eckern is an accidental symbol, a man thrust into the spotlight by the vagaries of chance and the realities of instant electronic communication. Butthere are thousands of others like him who have been left equally exposed to revenge or social stigmatization for disagreeing with another person's opinion.
Democracy cuts both ways, and financial supporters of gay marriage are just as vulnerable to retaliation as those who opposed it. The aftermathof this campaign has already turned ugly, and if the situation deteriorates further, lives could well be endangered.
When contacted for comment, Andrew Pugno, a spokesman for the Yes on 8 Campaign, wrote,
"It is unlike anything I have ever seen before. It isscary. And notable that law enforcement and government leaders stand by silently."
California's choice to publish the names, addresses, andoccupations of those who donate large sums to political causes is not only dangerous politically, but could quickly become dangerous in the most literalsense possible. With tempers running hot, the shaming of Scott Eckern and his resignation might strike some as a victory.
Those who would celebrateshould be mindful, however, of the potential ramifications of having opened this particular Pandora's Box. Indeed, opponents of Proposition 8might soon rue the day that in their earnest and understandable haste to drive the government out of their bedrooms, they pushed themselvesinto another citizen's voting booth….”REASON 24: AMERICANS ... AND NORTH CAROLINA ... AGAIN REJECTED GAY-MILITANT PSYCHO-VIOLENCE“Prop. 8 supporters suffer vandalism, violence” ...
 Associated Press - 11/3/2008 7:15:00 AM
 
SAN DIEGO - A pastor leading efforts to pass a ballot initiative that would end same-sex "marriage" in California says the campaign has become the targetof vandalism and violence.
 
“... Rev. Jim Garlow says signs urging a "Yes" vote on Proposition 8 are being stolen, churches have been pelted with eggs, cars have beenparked outside the homes of supporters bearing the message "Bigots live here," and some supporters have been physically assaulted. Garlowsays a pastor even had the windows of his car shot out because he was displaying a "Yes on 8" sticker. "One man in Modesto was beaten as hewas handing out 'Yes on 8' signs, and had stitches in his eye," he adds."We have boys dying...protecting our freedom in Iraq, while we have our freedom being taken as people rip signs out and destroy them anddeface them," says Pastor Garlow. "It's quite an amazing venue to find ourselves in [here] in America.
"

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->