Homosexual Agenda Could Care Less About Marriage

Tribes were one of the first recognizable organizations of humans in scientific history, and originated from groups of extended families, with the family as the basic building-block of society. There is substantial evidence that the best environment for the growth and development of children is an intact traditional family with both a mother and a father (see references below). No claim is made or intended to argue that the mere existence of gay couples has any influence on the development of children raised in traditional families. However, if society were comprised entirely of homosexual couples, within a generation that society would perish. Thus society has a strong self-interest in the preservation of traditional families and procreation.


Some may be shocked to discover that religion and morality motivates traditional marriage. However, it is clear that religion and Judeo-Christian morality were explicitly and justifiably responsible for most of our laws, customs and social definitions, including those related to marriage. With a fervency paradoxically typical of a religion, some believe that religion should have nothing to do with our rights or government. The truth is, in America, religion has and must continue to have everything to do with our rights and government.


The individual’s “unalienable rights” and powers of governance were derived from the Creator. With this gift from God, the people lend their powers to government, which acts through these powers as delineated in the Constitution. The Constitution, where it denies powers to the federal government, affirms the individuals’ rights. In the world of the statist, government grants and denies rights to individuals at will; without a Creator or “unalienable rights”, the source of all rights is the government. What government gives, it can take away. This is why governments who seek to subjugate their people, try to abolish or replace religion with the state, to extinguish any idea that the people might have inviolable rights. Tyranny, which originated with Lucifer, cannot abide religion or morality, and a free country cannot survive long without them.


The Lame Stream Media has brain-washed its audiences to believe that society, which is admittedly influenced by religion and Judeo-Christian morality, is attempting to unfairly impose its views on homosexuals who are victims of discrimination and being denied their civil rights. Such beliefs could not be more misguided, further from the truth or more dangerous.


Homosexual activists are attempting to forcibly impose their views of morality and decency, and their definition of marriage, on American society. They want to foist their behavior on society, to have the homosexual lifestyle acknowledged and accepted as legitimate. They want to indoctrinate the young and vulnerable in elementary schools with homosexual propaganda to create new generations more malleable to aberrant lifestyles. They want to define religious teachings as “hate speech”, intimidate congregations and jail pastors and priests to stifle free speech and squelch resistance. But marriage is not the real issue. Nothing less than a fundamental transformation of society will suffice. In truth, the Homosexual Agenda would admit they could care less about marriage, except as another “brick in the wall” toward complete domination of American society.




David Blankenhorn. The Future of Marriage. New York: Encounter Books, 2007.


Roberta Achtenberg, et al., “Approaching 2000: Meeting the Challenges to San Francisco’s Families,” the Final Report of the Mayor’s Task Force on Family Policy, City and County of San Francisco, June 13, 1990, p. 1.

Maria Xiridou, et al, “The Contribution of Steady and Casual Partnerships to the Incidence of HIV Infection among Homosexual Men in Amsterdam,” AIDS 17 (2003): 1031.

“Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence,” U.S. Department of Justice: Office of Justice Programs (July, 2000): 30. Cp. “Violence Between Intimates,” Bureau of Justice Statistics Selected Findings, November 1994, p. 2.

“PCT 14: Unmarried-Partner Households by Sex of Partners” (U.S. Census Bureau: Census 2000 Summary File 1). Cp. Dan Black et al., “Demographics of the Gay and Lesbian Population in the United States: Evidence from Available Systematic Data Sources,” Demography 37 (May 2000): 150.


Bradley P. Hayton, “To Marry or Not: The Legalization of Marriage and Adoption of Homosexual Couples,” (Newport Beach: The Pacific Policy Institute, 1993), p. 9.