Well, well, what do we have here? I thought we were told over the past several years that any Christian business owner who refuses to “do business with” a homosexual couple getting married is “evil” because they are “discriminating” against them, violating that couple’s Constitutional rights.
Of course, it wasn’t that at all. Those Christian businesses did not refuse to serve those individuals. They actually were happy to sell goods and services to those couples, but they weren’t willing to do anything that would show an implicit endorsement of their wedding, like creating a wedding cake. In all cases, the Christian proprietors gave the couples the address of other businesses that would probably be willing to help them. These were not Christians trying to make a roadblock for those couples. They just wanted to exercise their First Amendment Right of Religious Freedom.
Now, we have a gay owner of a coffee shop refusing to even allow Christians to be in his shop. He berates them, cusses them out, and tells them to leave. Notice that the Christians weren’t proselytizing, passing out literature, or being a nuisance. They were just having coffee.
They could bring a class action suit against the coffee shop.
In the following story, a woman raised by lesbians tells how she craved having a father in her life.
She said that every moment of her life as a child, she missed having a father. Her father was a sperm donor, so she never really had a father physically in her life. When she was 11, she was allowed to meet the donor father. This turned out to be the happiest day of her life. She felt that she belonged to a much larger family than just her two mothers. And she loved just knowing he was there.
We now know that children who have missing fathers actually have a problem at the cellular level. They have shortened “telomeres”, which are the caps on the end of chromosomes. Each time your cell divides, the telomeres shorten. When the telomeres get too short, no more cell division is possible for that cell. People with shortened telomeres are similar in this way to people who suffer from stress, and it contributes to the shortening of their lives.
Of course, we don’t know all of the long-term effects of homosexual marriage, since it was imposed upon us without any real scientific understanding of how good or bad it is. We were simply told that it was a matter of equality. As mentioned in the first article, it is all about the parents’ equality, not about protecting children.
This article claims that the pill by women exposes their offspring to a higher incidence of homosexuality. Although some evidence is presented, I am still skeptical about this. The author claims that homosexuality has “exploded”, but statistics indicate that it’s incidence is still only about 4%. It this article is true, it would seem like we would have a much higher incidence.
We have seen this before. Children who start out wanting to transition to another sex later change their minds. It’s child abuse to force them to take those hormones and go through surgery.
It’s even sadder that the LGBT crowd won’t let these children be.
No matter what strange things people may dream up, we still have to deal with “gravity”, or the laws of God set in nature. We will always be pulled in the direction of reality. It is only our selfish minds that resist the way he created the world.
To those of us who have been paying attention, this is nothing new. But the author does put forward some good statistics.
At least some of the sex education programs for schools were well-intended. They wanted to help kids avoid pregnancies, STDs, and other unpleasantries that come with premarital sex. Unfortunately, we were also indirectly promoting sex.
This story indicates that the sex ed classes weren’t working. This is not the first report that has come out recently identifying the fact that sex education classes from the government either don’t work or actually make things worse.
Think about it: when was the last time you saw a character on TV or in the movies have an abortion? It is really quite rare. No one wants to see that in a story.
This continues to be the primary belief of liberals concerning freedom of religion. You are free to exercise your religion anywhere. But in public. That’s not freedom, and it’s not constitutional.