Gabriel Abed’s Blog

I personally thought this was hilarious. Others may not share my humor, but everyone is entitled to their opinion, right? If gays are should be allowed to flaunt their ways, I should be allowed to laugh at them. Just as it is their right to be gay, it is my right to make humor of my surroundings if I please. Do not misrepresent me, I am not against homosexuality. I am against the gay guys that dress in their fairy outfits and go out of their way to show that they are gay. I am happy you have something to be proud of, but why FLAUNT IT?

I would like to be a narrow minded a-hole and say I am all for Proposition 8, however, I will be equal to the Nazi or KKK when they tried to eliminate Jews and blacks. The only reason I am against Prop-8 is due to the fact that I was born in a society that frowned upon gays and taught us in school and through our own religion that it was wrong. Truth be told, people should be able to live the life they want, without fear or control to an extent. The only problem is society governs what we can or cannot do. Civil rights movements, we are often and correctly reminded, are not linear projections moving inevitably into the future. One step forward, two steps back.

The truth is, my heart breaks for the gay couples and their children who had a five-month window in which their families could celebrate the ultimate expression of commitment and love our culture knows. There was nothing academic about any of this for them. They don’t really care whether they get to marry by court decree, or legislation, or proposition. They simply want the protection, security, and support they believe marriage gives them. They want their families and communities to understand how much their relationships mean and how fiercely they will fight to protect the children they love.

Want to hear the funny part? Same-sex marriages can be associated with black inferiority of the early 1900’s where whites didn’t give blacks the rights they deserved as human beings. In California where the proposition 8 legislation was taking place, over 70% of African-Americans voted for it! Yes, 70% of the black community supported NON-GAY marriages. How selfish of a people who once endured the same hardship. Read about it here.

On the flip side, Jeffrey Harmon raises an EXTREMELY valid point that makes me approve proposition 8!! Part of me wants to agree, part of me wants to disagree.

I agree with the conservatives: “marriage” is an institution of religion, a sectarian concept that the secular state has no business redefining.
Government institutions should offer only civil unions and let the God-fearing fight to define their word “marriage” on the open fields of the culture war. This debate does not even belong on the ballot.

Jeffrey Harmon

While there are strong similarities between the gay rights movement and the civil rights movement, believing that gay unions are equal to heterosexual unions and that opposition to gay marriage is equal to the discrimination of race is a misconception.

If the state legalizes gay marriage, then suddenly marriage changes from a protected belief of a small minority, to the false impression that the state (which is an extension of the people) believes that it is morally acceptable to practice homosexuality.

As individuals, law abiding homosexuals should be entitled to every inalienable right held by any heterosexual; but as couples, gay relationships no longer hold an equal stance to the synergy of a heterosexual relationship. The answer lies in procreation—the primary responsibility of a family.

The gay agenda wants to redefine marriage as simply commitment, honesty, affection, and warmth between two loving individuals. If so then it simply becomes an equal protection issue and the gay couple argues they are being discriminated against for a relationship they claim holds equal commitment and value to the heterosexual relationship. This argument breaks down because it ignores posterity and procreation. Children are what differentiate the marriage contract from all other consensual adult arrangements. The state has always had a keen interest in the bearing and rearing of children. Indeed that is why the state got in the business of registering and recognizing marriage in the first place.

The point, both legally and historically, the gay family can ONLY exist as a product of government policy and modern science, and a dependence on the natural family. It is very clear that there is no natural procreative ability between gay partners. The procreative ability between heterosexual couples is, by contrast, perfectly natural, and dates back to the start of recorded history. The natural family would continue whether the government or science became involved or not. Thus, we see that a homosexual relationship is not naturally equal to a heterosexual relationship.

The Declaration of Independence proclaims that we are endowed with unalienable rights, “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness”. John Locke, called this “natural law”. Natural law is not a creation or product of the state, but was to be protected by the state as these are the natural rights of all men inseparably connected to being human. Gays may argue that they are in the pursuit of liberty and happiness, yet there is no logical means by which they are naturally in the pursuit of life. Indeed we may argue that the gay movement, by its very nature, is a movement in pursuit of death, its own extinction, for without the intervention of the state and modern science, homosexuality results in the termination of posterity. Thus, from the perspective of both science and state we can see that the union of man and women, with their resulting children compared to the gay union are polar opposites both in origin and fruit.

What about couples who are infertile? Many married heterosexuals choose not to have children, and others cannot because of medical problems or physical handicaps. But gays fought furiously to convince the American Psychiatric Association to remove homosexuality from their books as a “disorder”, or medical problem. The majority of the United States will now agree that homosexuality is not a medical problem or disorder. Even in perfect medical condition, a gay couple cannot procreate without the help of a third party. Therefore homosexual relationships and heterosexual relationships are inherently, and naturally, unequal. Gays should NOT shunned because of their beliefs and tendencies. Nor does this fact infringe on their God given rights. The argument is that the two relationships are very different from one another and for that reason they should be defined differently.

Guy Protesting Gay Rights? Not. Sorry everyone, I found this hillarious