[Rushtalk] RINO Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice

Stephen A. Frye s.frye at verizon.net
Mon May 11 18:17:06 MDT 2015

I agree with your points here, but if the sanctity of marriage was the focus
of your original post, you hid it well.


From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of Dennis Putnam
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 4:57 PM
To: rushtalk at csdco.com
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] RINO Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice


I think you two are arguing different points. The cause of homosexual
behavior is irrelevant to the issue I am arguing. My objection is usurping
Holy Matrimony (aka marriage) which was established by religions long before
the western hemisphere and even much of the eastern hemisphere were settled.
Not by governments. Using force of law to change that tradition is a
constitutional issue as it violates both the free exercise clause and
freedom of speech clause. I have no objection to civil unions and extending
the same benefits to that as marriage. However, homosexuals object to that
as well which means there is a hidden agenda different from the purported

This is a very slippery slope we are starting down. The exact same arguments
about civil rights to justify changing the millennia old tradition of
marriage can be applied to plural marriages, incestuous marriage and even
bestial marriage. If that doesn't sound like Sodom & Gomorrah I don't know
what does except regardless of religion all will be force to accept it.

On 5/11/2015 6:46 PM, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

BFD.  Often, over time, we, as a species, learn.  It's an ongoing process.


Sometimes it pays to tenaciously hold onto our beliefs, sometimes they're
not quite as right as we want them to be.


From: rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com [mailto:rushtalk-bounces at csdco.com] On
Behalf Of John A. Quayle
Sent: Monday, May 11, 2015 1:58 PM
To: Rushtalk Discussion List; 'Rushtalk Discussion List'
Subject: Re: [Rushtalk] RINO Marco Rubio: Being Gay Is Not A Choice


At 11:11 AM 5/10/2015, Stephen A. Frye wrote:

Content-type: multipart/alternative;
Content-language: en-us

         Somebody ask this fool why there are no gay dogs, cats, bulls,
cows, sheep, and so forth...................
Uh, actually there are according to studies done by Canadian biologist Dr.
Bruce Bagemihl.

However, in the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter. Homosexual
behavior is counter productive to reproduction and thus abnormal. If a
choice then psychiatric help is needed, to which homosexuals strongly
object. If genetic then research is needed to correct the defect, to which
homosexuals strongly object. That conundrum by itself tells me homosexuals
require psychiatric help either way. 

I agree with you - up to this point.  But there is much in human behavior
and development that is explained neither by choice nor by genetics. The
formation of the trillions of neural pathways is one example.  There simply
aren't enough DNA pairs to account for that.
I don't know what causes homosexuality.  Frankly, I don't care.  But I don't
think, that in the complexities of human life, and vastly not-understood
human brain, we should limit our thinking to only two possibilities.

         Homosexuality was viewed by the AMA as a "mental problem" up until
the very early 1970s, when the bully homosexual advocates began to throw
their weight around............


Rushtalk mailing list
Rushtalk at csdco.com


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20150511/03e92ba0/attachment.html 

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list