CNN’s Larry King Sides With Same-Sex 'Marriage' Advocates

Photo of Matthew Balan.
  • Bookmark and Share

Larry King, CNN Host; Dennis Prager, Conservative Talk Show Host; & Dr. Jim Garlow, Pastor, Skyline Wesleyan Church | NewsBusters.orgCNN host Larry King used many of the arguments that advocates of same-sex “marriage” use during his “Larry King Live” program on Tuesday. Hours after the California Supreme Court upheld the voter-approved Proposition 8 which protects traditional marriage, King used the oft-used comparison between the ban on same sex “marriage” and the ban on interracial marriage in the South, and brought up how the Book of Leviticus condemned other practices like the eating of certain foods besides condemning homosexual sex acts. He also repeatedly asked conservative talk show host Dennis Prager what the “big deal” was about same-sex “marriage.”

During the first segment on the topic, which began 13 minutes into the 9 pm Eastern hour of his program, King interviewed San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and Dr. Jim Garlow, pastor of the Skyline Wesleyan Church in La Mesa, California. The CNN host turned to Dr. Garlow for his thoughts after asking Newsom for his reaction to the Prop 8 ruling: “Doctor Garlow, are you annoyed that those 18,000 can stay married?” After the pastor answered that “we wish they would have not done that” and expressing his gratitude for the court’s decision, King followed up by asking, “From the way the voting has gone over the years, Doctor, does it look like the tide is turning against your position, with other states now -- six states, I believe -- allow it?” Garlow replied, “Well, 30 states have voted on this, and all 30 states where they -- people have been allowed to vote, they have all voted for traditional marriage every single time....Where the people get to express themselves, the average pass rate has been 68 percent. That means seven out of 10 Americans support traditional, natural marriage.”

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Doctor Garlow stayed on for the second segment, while King brought on Prager and two openly-homosexual men -- Rev. Gene Robinson and James van Praagh. The host questioned Prager extensively about his support for traditional marriage, and included the interracial marriage comparison used by same-sex “marriage” advocates:

LARRY KING: Dennis Prager, what’s -- what’s the rub? Why isn’t marriage only in religious institutions and the state have its own system?

DENNIS PRAGER: Well, if it’s --

KING: Why is the state into marriage?

PRAGER: Well, well -- oh, very simply, because, first of all, somebody who is not a member of a church or a synagogue or a mosque would have no chance to marry, then. You just can’t have it in churches, because then secular people couldn’t get married. And the state -- all states, essentially, in history, have understood how important it is to bond men and women legally and formally -- and, hopefully, for a long time.

KING: But you will agree, states had slavery. You couldn’t intermarriage [sic]. Blacks could marry whites. The public would have voted for that.

PRAGER: I don’t know if the public would have voted for that. I think there’s a certain mythology about it --

KING: Oh, trust me, in the South -- trust me.

PRAGER: All right. Well, the South is not the same thing. But the key point is race and sex are not the same thing. A black man and a white man are the same human being. But a man and a woman are not the same. Sex is utterly different. That’s why we have Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. We don’t have Black Scouts and White Scouts.

KING: We did.

PRAGER: And it was wrong --

KING: And it was wrong.

PRAGER: Because there’s no difference --

KING: But a lot of people defended it.

PRAGER: Larry, a lot of people defend a lot of junk.

KING: Right.

PRAGER: But this is not junk.

Later in the segment, after van Praagh invoked Harvey Milk and cried that “we’re all the same people....you can’t limit love,” King prompted Prager for his response. When the talk show host answered that “nobody is for limiting love,” the host replied, “So what’s the big deal then?...So get married.” Prager answered that “one of the big deals is what does the next generation aspire to? If we make marriage independent of gender -- it doesn’t matter -- then little kids will be asked.... well, do you want to marry a boy or girl when you grow up?”

After a commercial break, the CNN host returned to questioning Doctor Garlow: “Leviticus says that lying with men is an abomination, but it condemns the act of eating shrimp and lobster together, as well as wearing material woven of two kinds of material. Do you ever do any of those?” After the pastor’s initial answer, King unsurprisingly asked, “Isn’t the Bible contradictory a lot?” Garlow denied that this was the case: “It is consistent all way through that marriage consists of one man and one woman. What’s interesting to this, Larry, is wherever the government has a vested right to redefine marriage, it also has a perceived right to try to silence those who disagree with it, and there’s a loss of rights that comes when same-sex marriage is validated by the government.”

King’s decision to side with the advocates of same-sex “marriage” is not surprising. U.S. News’s Paul Bedard reported on May 25, 2009 that the CNN anchor admitted to his “left-of-center politics” in his recent autobiography.

[H/t to BMI's Dan Gainor for the Bedard article.]

—Matthew Balan is a news analyst at the Media Research Center.


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Logical conclusion of King's pro-gayness

King has no idea what he's talking about.  Using LEVITICUS to promote gay?  The law of Moses was fulfulled in Christ, along with all the weird dietary restrictions that were part of it (as outlined by the vision of Peter in Acts).

But the commandments of God to lead virtuous lives was NOT done away with like blood sacrifice was.  The ten commandments were still firm in place, and homosexuality was still condemned in the early days of the church.

What King really meant when he said 'isn't the tide turning against you', is: 'Don't you realize the tide is turning against religion?'

Since 2004, when liberals thought it was 'Jesusland' that beat them and kept Kerry out of the White House, they've fully embraced atheism and all it's associated arguments.  Pro-gay is just part of it.  They'd love nothing better than to overturn the constitution put freedom of religion on the chopping block.

They think it's war people.  If they're using the language of tolerance to pimp being gay, then any religion that says gayness is a 'sin' will be a target.  Think they wouldn't destroy a church by force if they don't accept gayness?  They're already trying.  King's words are part of the campaign to pressure churches into brooming over 8,000 years of established canon.

And that would just be the beginning.  Any perversion that's embraced by the left and decried by any church could become national law, and churches would be forced to ban their doctrines at the point of a government bayonet.  And alas, it's not the first time secret combinations like this have waged war against God.

Like all the previous times, they'll ultimately fail.  But in the meantime, they could do great damage.  It will help in 2010 if we can throw the liberal left out of the majority in the House/Senate and slow down some of these abominable creeds....

King Knows More About Marriage than most of us

after all, he has been married upteen times. Perhaps his next wife will be a man. Why discriminate?

Wasn't Larry

King at Joseph and Mary's wedding?  Maybe he was the Rabbi?

...much to liberal dismay

...much to liberal dismay we really don't need the Bible on this...

obviously from a physiological standpoint the human body is not designed for homosexual activity - therefore it's practice causes disease - for which the Psychiatric community originally listed homosexuality as a mental disorder - a fact which remains unchanged dispite the contemporary homo inquisitions forcing the disorder dropped from list in 1973...

"...the head of the surgery department at Stanford...related case histories of homosexuals needing emergency surgery due to "fisting," "playing with toys," (inserting objects into the rectum) and other bizarre acts.� I am certain--in light of my clinical experience, and since doing considerable amount of studying about it since that time--that homosexuality is neither normal nor benign; rather, it is a lethal behavioral addiction as Dr. Jeffrey Satinover outlines in his book, Homosexuality and the Politics of Truth."

http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/narth/medconsequences.html

read it and weep larry - its the "big deal" astounding dunces like you are asking for

Heterosexual activity can

Heterosexual activity can cause disease, too. 

→ Tru dat

But you're not saying heterosexuality and homosexuality are equal in their tendencies to transmit disease are you?

We're way past the '80's and AIDS is still primarily a gay disease.

 

I don't really know. I think

I don't really know. I think in the '70s and '80s there was a lot more reckless behavior in the gay community. I have no idea now what the statistics would be.

Compaired to who?

 
there was a lot more reckless behavior in the gay community.

 Maybe it is just me, but this statement kinda gives me the willies?

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Reckless behavior?

How 'bout this one: 'Bug Chasers'?

"I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them."
George Mason

not tru dat

Clarification: Promiscuous heterosexual activity causes STDs, or, more accurately, it spreads STDs.  No one here is advocating for "promiscous marriage" (although this is yet another logical permutation of "same sex marriage").

Does anybody here know what the current thinking is on the origins of STDs?  Fact is, STDs do not just spontaneously spring to life from natural sexual intercourse.

 

"Let's wrap him up, alright?" -- Keith Olbermann

I thought Reagan caused

I thought Reagan caused AIDS.... hmmm

Who said that?

Who said that?

Nobody here, Bal - (that I

Nobody here, Bal - (that I know of anyway)

I was just thowing that out there for the fun of it.  I'm sure you know, but this was an accusation made by a guy named Randy Shilts, and others, back in the 80's.

This turd did. In the

This turd did.

In the link above, this woman alleges AIDS is a biological warfare agent. 

And this much more well known turd,  Barack Obama's spiritual mentor of 20 years said:  "Mr. Wright said: "We started the AIDS virus . . . "

This is who the left is.

 

Good reference, TM. I

Good reference, TM.

I often wonder how the APA proscribed homosexualality as a disease and/or addiction.  Interesting reading . . . 

Thanks.

WOW

Didn't see this one coming.

 

Thanks for watching his dopey show. Someone has to I suppose.

Dopey show indeed....I

Dopey show indeed....I don't watch it either...in fact I could care less what he has to say about anything.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

It's Personal

Maybe King is just keeping his options open in case his eighth marriage fails.

Lawrence Harvey Zeiger (Larry King) is one of the foremost

experts on marriage. Listen to him. This man knows marriage like the back of his hand. Larry has been married eight times to seven different women.

Larry King has an obvious reason for supporting same sex "marriage." Why should he be the only one to suffer through seven failed marriages. Gays and lesbians deserve to suffer the ills of marriage also.

I'm the man of this house
and I have my wife's permission
to say so

Question: HOW DO YOU DECIDE WHO TO MARRY?

Answer: No person really decides before they grow up who
they're going to marry. God decides it all way before, and you get to
find out later who you're stuck with. ~
Kirsten, age 10

------------------------------------------------------

"Some people claim that marriage interferes with romance. There's no
doubt about it. Anytime you have a romance, your wife is bound to
interfere." ~
Groucho Marx

→ Rush fan

Eight marriages to seven different women says "horndog"

 

Cool Arrow - Yes, can you say "horndog" eight times real fast.

On his show last week King had others, such as Joy Behar and Regis Philbin, interview him about his career and the women in his life:

LARRY KING: A lot went into it. She (his current wife) was considerably younger than me.

BEHAR: And pretty.

You love a beautiful woman, don't you?

LARRY KING: Yes, that goes with it. Yes, she is.

(LAUGHTER)

LARRY KING: She's pretty.

BEHAR: Yes.

Have you ever married a woman who's not that pretty?

LARRY KING: No.

BEHAR: No.

(LAUGHTER)

→ Rush

Sounds like something that cop, Peterson, would be saying from his jail cell.

 

And his latest wife is a

And his latest wife is a mormon.  I wonder how his stance is playing out at home?!

does he matter?

No one really watches his show... it's always in the bottom of the ratings on cable.

I am completely stunned by

I am completely stunned by this today.

Ted Olson...who'd of thunk it!

Wonder what Barbara would think if she were still here...she was killed in the plane that crashed into the Pentagon...and a very conservative activist...one of my favorites. 

I am so disappointed.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

bigtimer, Nothing

bigtimer,

Nothing surprises me anymore.

bigtimer - Ted Olson? I also was stunned after reading the

link you provided. It appears more RINOs are coming out of the closet.

Olson has at various times been considered a potential nominee to the Supreme Court. Perhaps he believes that by joining the other side and arguing against Prop. 8, Obama may consider him for a slot.

--------------------------------------------------------

“Conservatism is a universal set of core principles. You don't check principles at the door.” ~  Rush Limbaugh

bt...I just can't believe this...

Like you, I am so disappointed, and like you, I wonder what his wife would have thought about his decision to do this...Barbara Olson was terrific, and sooo smart...I used to love seeing and hearing her analysis on issues...She was as bright as a new penny.

What can possibly be going through his head? What is the angle here? I guess sometimes we never really know people, do we?   

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

BT-- it just gets worse--doesn't it??

"Ted Olson said, in explaining his support for same sex marriage, "I personally think it is time that we as a nation get past distinguishing people on the basis of sexual orientation, and that a grave injustice is being done to people by making these distinctions. I thought their cause was just.""

My suspicion is that Olson has stated polishing knobs or wants Monica's spot under Obama's desk.

misterbill...Boy, Olson has really...

been downing the Kool-Aid, hasn't he?

I am just stunned by this... 

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

prairie---

It must be Kool Aid--or in the water. So many supposed republicans or conservatives are switching these days. American's have lost faith. Our leaders are in it for what they get out of it.

Noticed somewere here earlier this evening a reference to fascism. Ironic--my wife and I had been watching the news and I commented to her that the man in charge is moving us not to just socialism, but fascism.

I can't wait to hear from a cyber czar about this site.

misterbill...Kool-Aid or the water...

Whatever it is, it seems to be contagious...Doesn't anyone have convictions and principles that they stick to anymore without abandoning them when an easier or potentially more profitable path presents itself? Makes me sick...

I also had the same thought as you about the "cyber czar" that "O" wants...NB will likely be at the top of their "hit list"...Well I say, "bring it"...Can't wait to see and hear what comes from this...  

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

Prairie--

Last night CVGBuckeye wrote a post that really resonated with me. He discussed the possibility of the creation of two countries. As a person who has served this country, I, originally would have shuddered at that thought. Now I say--bring it on--as peacefully as possible. I have more confidence in the legislators in the general area where I live to manage our tax money much better that the combined fools in DC.

The incredible ignorance of the American population, in general, about our republic, just leaves me cold. I watched Lawrence O'Donnell debate Pat Bucahnan on Youtube today and I found myself thinking that the country is lost. O'Donnell is insane and his logic just left me gasping. His rudeness aside his thinking is so distorted it is unbelieveable.--But--here is the bad part-- approximately 50% of Americans probably agree with him. The Kool Aid, the welfare mentality, the open borders philosophy, the guest worker programs, the shipping of manufacturing to a country that may be our biggest enemy (and conqueror one day), all theses things lead to our destruction..

Add to that our finavcial and economic decision, our new appeasing butt kissing sycophant. I liked it better when we were hated but respected. Now we are hated and laughed at because of the toady in the White House.

The men of the cloth, in this country, by and large are becoming the men of carnal knowledge and chief immigration lawbreakers.

I am not and never was much of a bible reader, though I am a deep believer in Jesus and Christianity. The quotes of fellow Christeians about the end of days certainly seem to be true.

We will soon be the USAM. United Sodom And Gomorrah.

misterbill...You have just summed up...

many of the same things that I have thought to myself, more than once. While I am certainly not a proponent of a "2 country" idea for the US ( such a thought just horrifies me, and I just am not ready to "go there" yet, even hypothetically), I definitely understand the thinking behind it.

What pops into my head more and more often these days is something that President Lincoln spoke about when he said that "...a house divided against itself cannot stand..." I feel that as a country and as a people, we are near a precipice now, and are rapidly coming to a point like the one that Lincoln referred to, and that we experienced during the Civil War. So many things seem to be coming together now, and not in a good way, and it seems that no one and nothing seems to be able to stop it or change the direction that we are headed in. It is frightening, and it seems we as a nation are all standing on quick sand. While I am a Christian, I am not a real adherent in the "end times" thinking, but from time to time, it does make one stop and think...

Whatever does happen, I am, to an extent, a believer in fate, and that things will unfold as they are meant to. I believe that this country is here for a reason, that it was divinely inspired, and because of that, no matter how dark things may seem, I try to have faith that things will happen as they should, and that good and what's best for this country will ultimately triumph. 
   

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

→ Better yet Prairie

How about we have the States function individually as prescribed in the US Constitution.

Sorry, It's just a dream.

 

Count me in

 For the lack of having anywhere else to turn?

My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

Cool...Yeah, what a thought...

huh?? As you said, it may be just a dream now, but it is what our founders had in mind in the beginning. Sad to see where we are now, isn't it?? 

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

Well I am not sure about a 2 country deal

When I think of the hard work that went into getting La straighten out, I think it might be better to simply ignore DC and continue on our own until they regain their senses.

Glenn Beck had a good idea a while back, suggesting we give the left any 25 states they want. Because with the current rate of governance we would be able to buy them back full of freedom seeking individuals at a bargain in know time at all.

 My Gov. thinks I am dangerous, so be careful

"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg

gc...Works for me!

"...I think it might be better to simply ignore DC and continue on our own until they regain their senses." Makes sense to me...But, I guess that makes me dangerous, too...LOL! (that's okay...I'm in good company!)

"The problem is not that people are taxed too little...the problem is that government spends too much." ~President Ronald Reagan

misterbill - Speaking of Lawrence O'Donnell, conservative Talk

Radio host Hugh Hewitt had Lawrence O'Donnell, as well as Christopher Hitchens, on his radio show today.

Here is the link to the audio.

-----------------------------------------------------------

“Conservatism is a universal set of core principles. You don't check principles at the door.” ~  Rush Limbaugh

misterbill,

I think we are getting close to the bibically-promised "Big Snatch."

After all, that book is very specific in that telling us it will happen when things are all upside down and backwards.

Just how much more inverted and bass-ackwards can things get?

-Dave

→ No RD

We'd be seeing Iran aligning itself with Russia, promising to annihilate Israel.

And we'd be seeing Countries all over the world refusing to defend Israel.

And there would be rumors of war, and stuff like that.

And Satan said to his favorite demon, Procrastination, "That's it!  Tell them they've got plenty of time".

 

Dave--

I am at a point where I can be described as a xenophobe and a racist by certain types--you know who. But these feelings I have are justified by those who, daily, continue to agitate and cause these problems.

Simple questions--

1.what group or groups of people in America (including citizens, remain members of their ethnicity and do not assimilate in our culture??

(Clue--it is not Lower Slobovians)

2. Which political group(s) favors the country to be run by the government and not by free enterprise?? 

(Clue-- it's not the Whigs or the Tories) 

3. Which political group practices or wants to practice security measures that are less safe than the last 8 years??

 4. Which group wants to control what Americans are free to say and do?? (1st amendment)

5. Which political group wants to modify the 2nd amendment??

(Clue--it's not Smith & Wesson

6. Which group wants to save the lives of convicted murderers and take the lives of innocent babes?

7. Which group(s) have the most out of wedlock pregnancies resulting in #6???

It's late-- I will stop there. 

 

misterb & All

misterb & All above...

I'm just in and out of here...you know I just want to add, I was hoping he would be named AG during the Bush administration...and possibly named as an SC Judge.

I tell you...I guess the day is never going to come anymore when I am not completely disappointed, shocked, hurt by some of the very people I really believed and trusted in...one thing about it, the pain is less as I grow older.

I used to get angry inside in what my father-in-law would say about politicians and why he just didn't vote anymore....and we would banter somewhat....but the longer I live, the more I see his point.

He served....along with his brother...World War Two....the little he would talk about would chill you...anyway, I will it at that.

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

bt,

Guess we can just call him "Turncoat Teddy."

Not to be confused with that now worthless founder of CNN:

Capt. Outrageous.

-Dave

Get gov't out - stop all entitlements to everyone

Conservatism has been historically about fiscal responsibility; however, for years it has been co - opted by those with other social issues by which to influence an otherwise free society.

If Republicans would step off the soapbox of social issues and bathe in freedom, free choice, individual freedom and nothing more politically - they would find more support.

Like the free market - let each place value as he decides and let none infringe on that choice in as much as the choice is at no cost to you without consent.

Each must decide for self the pursuit of happiness - anyone identifying the nation as Christian starts to distance from all other Americans who have a different identification or no identification of religion

It’s not to say that Christians would not or could not continue to advocate for issues which are important to them, they would just do it irrespective of government.

consider gay marriage as a recent example - how could Republicans shift the discussion?

Get government out of marriage

Secular ceremonies are symbolic

Religious ceremonies are religious but symbolic in the eyes of gov’t

Legal contracts for issues of health, wealth & bequeathment

Eliminates all discrimination

Does not favor one religious view over another nor imposes religious view of marriage

Churches continue to define marriage as they wish

Equality - equal access to all who wish to get married, can do so and no individual freedom, ideology or choice is infringed

If someone is looking for “acceptance” or “endorsement” they will need to get it outside of their government

No tax credits, subsidies or entitlements for a personal choice to get married

Now, start applying the idea of getting gov’t out of abortion, education, etc. and more people can sign onto the idea of individual freedom, free choice for all and each will decide for self.

Who would be the person to stand up to a microphone and say, “I don’t want to endorse or uphold personal freedom” for the world to see & hear?

Those who don’t endorse such action toward freedom, seek to control by limiting choice rooted in personal identification and decision about what religion, what god and what ideology needs to be upheld, favored & followed to the extent of enacting laws, legislation and putting civil rights to a vote.

Republicans have the health to self-correct on this if they make the choice to do so; if they don’t, they only reveal that their ideology is greater than wanting human beings to live free in free choice, even if that choice isn’t their choice - unless they think they know how others should live, much like liberals behave

I am not as disgusted with

I am not as disgusted with the idea of "Gay Marriage" as I am with the militant methods the left-wingers and Hollywood have used in promoting deviations from everything that is good and wholesome in the United States.  Flip on your T.V. and it is obvious that homosexuality is an agenda being forced upon the American people.  My concern is "why" it is an agenda.  Afterall, if homosexuals claim they are "born that way" then why the constant promotion of homosexuality in TV and movies?  Why is a homosexual like Perez Hilton the best choice for a beauty pageant?  Why are movies made about gay cowboys?  Why is every sitcom making innuendo about someone being gay? And for God's sake, why are they showing more and more tongue kissing between two men?  Enough is enough.

I might have supported the gay communities concerns if I hadn't been told "I MUST SUPPORT THE GAY COMMUNITY" in the last 10 years. The way people reacted to Ms. California is only one example of how we are being told that "we must".

Very good point. It's like

Very good point. It's like that episode of Seinfeld where Kramer got beat up for not wearing the AIDS ribbon. Why does he have to wear the ribbon?

I would state a couple of theories: One, there are a lot of gay people in entertainment, so they have a voice in what goes into a show's writing. Two, gay people were shunned for so long, picked on, told to shut up about being gay, that many in the community became angry, defiant. "You tell me to not be gay? Well, OK, I'm gonna be REALLY gay, just to show that you don't control what I do!"

I would agree with that for

I would agree with that for the most part -- they have been the subject of downright mean ridicule and scorn in the past, which, from a Christian perspective, is wrong, as all people have the innate dignity bestowed upon them by the Creator.

However, that same Creator has ordained from the beginning of time, that marriage (i.e., "male and female He created them") is the most intimate of human relationships, the progenitor of the family, and thus the fundamental "building block" of all human societies at all times since the beginning of recorded history.

Hence, I, like many others (e.g., the Pope), while compelled to oppose mistreatment of homosexuals, will at the same time strenuously oppose any attempt at perverting the very essence of what "marriage" constitutes.

 

"Let's wrap him up, alright?" -- Keith Olbermann

By their own logic of 

By their own logic of  'tolerance' and 'gay marriage is a civil right', they would have to give incest and beastiality relationsships the same level of 'tolerance' as gay ones.

After all, some folks were just born that way.  And they can't help themselves.  Plus, they'll do it anyway, and we can't stop them.  So we might as well make it 'legal' so they don't have to go to jail.  I mean, their rights are being denied too, aren't they?

And murder?  Well, some people just get mad and they can't help themselves.  Like the terrorists.  They're gonna kill people no matter what we do, so we may as well make it legal so they don't have to go to jail and disrupt their private lives.

King - you really are the King - of fools.

...

I told my husband ten years ago after having a man-kissing-man scene thrust upon us in an HBO show I couldn't finish watching -- really is gross -- that there would come a time when such displays on the big and small screen would eventually make people shrug their shoulders after at one time recoiling -- and that's Hollywood's intent. 

And it won't be relegated to the screen anymore, especially if gay "marriage" is legalized and normalized.  You'll be seeing lovely ads of men kissing in commercials, on billboards, grocery stand magazine covers...  In other words, the ubiquitous nature of this chosen lifestyle is going to be in our faces even more than now.  God help us who are trying to rear children for the kingdom of Heaven.

 

Eugenia - Excellent point! Frankly, it never occurred

to me that if same-sex types are permitted to marry, that the gay lifestyle would be promoted by every business and commercial enterprise throughout our lives.

If that happens, are the children going to be confused about "mommy and daddy" or what?

----------------------------------------------------------

“Understand something about liberalism.  They never stop until they get what they want, and when they get what they want, it's never enough.  That's why it's a constant thing to have to oppose them.  You can't join forces with them, you can't moderate them, you can't slow them down by joining them, you can't make them like you and have them change their agenda.  They have to be stopped.” ~ Rush Limbaugh

We have to be firm in the

We have to be firm in the teaching of our children about the sin of homosexuality in all the ways we know, we must not be politically correct in that teaching, and we must never let our guard down for a moment.  Above all, we must pray for our children constantly and for the conversion of sinners.

 

 

"When people stop believing in God, they don't believe in nothing -- they believe in anything."
  --  GK Chesterton

When is the GLBT community.....

 going to get it?  Marriage is a "RELIGEOUS" ceremony.  It is a covenant made by a man and a woman under the eyes of God.  Any "ceremony" outside of a church is a contract.  When my husband and I got married, we filled out the license at city hall, and technically, we were "married" in the eyes of the law.  We were not married, we had entered into a contract.  We were "married" when we went to our pastor and made our vows under the eyes of God. I have no problem with gays couples haveing all the "legal" rights as hetero couples, (I'll even go so far as to admit that long term couples should be able to get federal rights) but I draw the line at the GLBT community trying to HIJACK my religeon.  What happens when a church refuses to perform a gay wedding ceremony?  Will they be sued?  Will churches have to stop performing wedding ceremonies all together for fear of being sued?  Will they be grandfathered in?  Who knows.  All I know is that I feel like my beliefs are being hijacked and I don't like it.

 

Destiny rarely calls on you when it is convenient!

"A black man and a white man

"A black man and a white man are the same human being. But a man and a
woman are not the same. Sex is utterly different. That’s why we have
Boy Scouts and Girl Scouts. We don’t have Black Scouts and White Scouts."

 Prager is one of the best there is at articulating the importance of traditional marriage in a common sense, kind manner. Good stuff.

 

 “Americans are looking for more government in their life, not less.” - Colin Powell

 

Gay boy: Prom Queen for LA

Gay boy: Prom Queen for LA HS:

http://www.latimes.c...

The assault in on.

 

He's still on the

He's still on the air?

Amazing.

There again, so is Andy Rooney.  It's like some kind of weird wrinkle in the space-time continuum where people just stay on and on and on no matter how much they suck, because if they go away then the universe will collapse in on itself or something.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).