Better Than Drudge

recent posts

about

New York Senate to Homosexual Lobby: Fuggedaboutit!

Sex Symbols-Confusion In a surprising vote, the
senate of one of our nation’s most liberal states decisively rejected a bill
that would have legalized faux marriage.

By Selwyn Duke

As you may know, New York State
is known more for the Borscht
Belt than the Bible Belt, but this didn’t stop its senate from soundly
rejecting the arguments of faux-marriage social engineers this past Wednesday. Reporting
on the story for The New York Times,
Jeremy W. Peters writes:

The
38-to-24 vote startled proponents of the bill and signaled that political
momentum, at least right now, had shifted against same-sex marriage, even in
heavily Democratic New York. It followed more than a year of lobbying by gay
rights organizations, who steered close to $1 million into New York legislative
races to boost support for the measure.

Read the rest here.

Posted in , ,

34 responses to “New York Senate to Homosexual Lobby: Fuggedaboutit!”

  1. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Great article Selwyn! The left does not create anything. They simply steal, distort and destroy what others have built. Their inability or lack of initiative to create and produce, spawns hatred. Such vile distain and jealousy were first recorded with Cain and Able. Ultimately left’s infatuation with faux-marriage is nothing but a frontal assault on Christianity. The earthly players in this game are simply acting out the desires of The Great Destroyer, AKA The Serpent. His goal is to distort and destroy the object of The Creator’s love; mankind.

    Like

    Reply
  2. Philip France Avatar
    Philip France

    Another excellent and brilliantly eloquent article by Selwyn, supported by an excellent point from Walt.
    The homosexual community is doing itself a disservice by advocating for faux marriage. Homosexuals enjoy every right under the amendments to the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights that heterosexuals do. What they falsely and dishonestly seek are special rights. This is akin to George Orwell’s Animal Farm assertion that “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.”
    Every time that faux homosexual “marriage” has been put to a vote it has failed. This is so even in the bluest of states of which California and New York are the most stark examples that this very idea is utter lunacy. Only by unconstitutional judicial fiat has this absurdity ever been enacted into law. And judges are supposed to interpret law, not legislate. The whole “debate” is a house of cards.
    Homosexuals, like the rest of us, want respect and acceptance. I say this: Why don’t you start by doing the same?
    The vast majority of us respect your decision to pursue a lifestyle and practice of human sexuality that is contrary to the exquisite and elegant design of nature and of nature’s God. That is your choice as a mature adult and the vast majorities of us accept this and respect this as your choice. Live and let live, in other words.
    But the homosexual community continues to exceed our modicum and qualified (by time-honored and Biblically endorsed) acceptance by insisting on “special” and “unique” “rights” that defy logic and offend common sense.
    Homosexuality is NOT normal. If this were so, the human race would not survive its first generation. (Robert Berger and yoyo need to read that sentence again; it is plain, simple and true). By this plain and simple logic, the abnormal should respect the affronts of the normal to oppose the illegitimacy of their advances to “normalize” their obviously abnormal proclivities.
    Most importantly, stay the HELL away from our children. The gains of the homosexual agenda in our society have come at the expense of our most innocent. The most devious and evil among you have targeted young children who are so vulnerable and pliable. This is pure evil. You cannot debate logic with mature adults so you deceive impressionable children… woe unto you!
    Our very own “Safe Schools Czar”, Kevin Jennings is a pedophile! At the very least, this sh*tbag, this vermin, this SCUM of the earth has promoted pedastery to children as young as five years of age! For proof and evidence: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=117978.
    How can ANYONE reading this justify or even rationalize such evil?

    Like

    Reply
  3. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Homosexuality is not normal, nor accepted. Not even among homosexuals.
    The whole argument of “its normal and harmless” falls apart with one question. “Would you want your child to be gay?” Meaning, if you somehow had the choice, to make your child gay or straight. The initial response is something to the effect of. “Well, id want them to be whatever makes them happy” Which is of course, not an answer to the question. They then usually refuse to answer the question when they realize I wont accept a tip toe around it. Cause they don’t want to be caught contradicting the propaganda they spew. Which proves that homosexuality is not normal, its not accepted even among homosexuals and the useful idiots who promote the agenda.
    And only the truly insane would say they would actively choose for their child to be gay. But then again, we are talking about leftists here….so I shouldn’t be surprised if there are many who would make that choice merely to further their agenda and sick vision of a liberal utopia.
    And Philip you are correct. Homosexuals just want special rights and forced acceptance. Not equal ones. Any 2 gay people, can go get “married”(term used loosely) and commit to each other for a lifetime anytime they want to. Nobody can stop them. Nobody can stop their “love”. In fact, its recognized in many countries that any religious marriage and legal one are in fact, separate. Even if they happen at the same time. No religious ceremony is recognized legally in the USA(no, not even a Mormon wedding in Utah). Marriage is between a man and a woman. It just so happens that all legal marriages are also civil unions. I.E. All Fords are cars, but not all cars are Fords.
    So gays, rejoice! Go get “married” and then fill out your civil union contract! Nothing is stopping you! But while you are at it, figure out your own socially accepted and respected word. And don’t piggy back on ours. But it also might help your case that you guys REALLY want to get married(committing to a lifetime to each other), if the poster children for gay marriage didn’t file for divorce in just 3 years.
    Selwyns article brings me hope that this is one of those times where truth and light will prevail and we will heed the words of God and His judgment will pass over us and us not go the way of Sodom and Gomorrah.

    Like

    Reply
  4. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    Whenever I read something like one of Selwyn’s gay marriage rants, I’ve got to remind myself that he probably believes what he’s saying, at least to some degree. But, it inevitably leads me to wonder where he gets the time to worry about all the stuff that troubles him.
    I’ve followed his writing for a while and I would guess that 98% of the time, he’s either critical of something or mad at someone. He doesn’t generally sound very happy. He must have more time in his day than most, I suppose, to ponder the depth that, in his mind, America has sunk. He really doesn’t like America circa 2009. And it’s always a product of some sort of liberal thinking or value. In fact he is so critical of America that I’m surprised Philip hasn’t told him to get out yet.
    I think we’ve got larger issues in this country to worry about than gay marriage…Like how the genius in the White House is going to handle Afghanistan, Iraq, the economy, and figure out a way that we can get on an airplane without submitting to a body cavity search. It’s kind of a mystery to me what B.O. has in mind there.
    Speaking of mysteries, Duke himself is a good example of one. I don’t know anything about him; about where he’s coming from. Some one left a comment on the JBS site wanting to know if Duke himself was married (and I suppose to whom.) It’s a fair question.
    Who the heck are you Selwyn?

    Like

    Reply
  5. Shaun Avatar
    Shaun

    Larry,
    I guess its a fair inquiry to wonder about the author of these posts but its not very relevant either. You do realize you criticize Duke for being utterly suspicous of the United States than you validate his concerns by pointing out the numerous issues that challenge our state today. You say there are bigger issues than homosexual marriage but what bigger issues is there than that of the moral character of your country?
    Larry I hate to say it but its almost a common understanding among Americans that our country is heading in the wrong direction. We may still be the most powerful state in the world but its universal speculation that we wont hold that position into the next century. Why is every pillar of the United States seemingly crumbling away? Some concerned citizens spend their energies pondering this because many of us dont have the time. Duke has a great gift in that he can synthesize information and report it so that the rest have a better understanding.
    If you are concerned about the homeland where our future generations will grow up in, what would you do to help out? Duke uses his energy and gifts to influence many of the issues which trouble us. I do not personally know Selwyn, but I would wager that he is a devout patriot who genuinely cares for his country. Would you argue otherwise?
    Shaun

    Like

    Reply
  6. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Larry, I think we found something we can agree on when you said,” I think we’ve got larger issues in this country to worry about than gay marriage…”
    Yes, the US/world is a real mess! I sure wish you would write your senators and congressmen and have them lay of all the extra BS like faux-marriage until we can address the real issues of today that should have the full attention of the public. Issues like the Copenhagen power grab, Health care deform a definition of victory in Afghanistan, and the economy. If you could take care of calling off Cloward and Piven, you know ’till we get all of that important stuff taken care of that would be just neato.

    Like

    Reply
  7. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    The trouble with patriotism is that too many patriots practice their patriotism from bar stools. Like the cocktail party revolutions of days past, their convictions never have the rubber to meet the road. One thing that is totally repellant to me is a man beating the war drum for someone else to fight.
    Anyway, patriotism itself is a word that doesn’t mean much in and of itself. Historically, we don’t have to go that far back to illustrate that. I am absolutely sure that the American Birmingham church bombers the German S.S. men were both patriots in their own right. Had they prevailed, they would be something other than where they sit in history today.
    I don’t doubt Dukes patriotism. That’s a cheap shot anyway. It’s where his patriotism is going and why it’s going there that worries me. That’s why I would like to know more about him. Is he the genuine article or just a gunslinger for a cause? Does that make me suspicious…darn right it does! There have been many recent examples of public figures that have not proved to be what they seemed. Some were so transparent they stood out as phony as carnival pitchmen. Duke is smarter than that. He’s very smart and I wonder why he isn’t more widely known.
    I want to know more about him than a one paragraph bio. That’s my point is all.

    Like

    Reply
  8. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    You’ve got about as much chance in deciding if your child will be gay or not as you have in deciding what Santa is going to bring you for Christmas.
    It’s the wrong question. You shouldn’t be asking people if they want their kids to be queer, but how they would want them treated if they were.

    Like

    Reply
  9. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    As one of the few women posting here, I realise my perspective is probably a little different. Mothers tend to have a different attitude to their children than fathers, and statistically mothers have less hang ups about their children being gay or straight than fathers do. Regarding Dan’s point both my children know that their parents would be fine with them being gay or straight. That’s part of knowing that you are truly loved. I’ve seen the misery caused by parents who cant love their children if they are gay, similar to a greek girlfriend who’s father disowned her for marrying a non-greek. In both cases it’s not about love but ownership.

    Like

    Reply
  10. Matt Avatar
    Matt

    And you proved dans point. You didn’t answer the question. As he put it you “tip toed” around it. The question wasn’t “would you love them”. The question was, had you the choice, would you actively choose for them to be gay. So, since he has professed that you do not exist I shall ask the question for him.
    If you had the choice would you want your child to be gay?
    It really is a simple question. There are only 2 possible answers. Yes or No. There is no “yes, but…” or “no, but…”
    Or do you not posses the integrity and courage to answer a question to which there would be no wiggle room for your answer?

    Like

    Reply
  11. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    How is it “the wrong question”? Its a perfectly legitimate question. You hold the position that being gay is natural, normal, benign, etc. So, whats the problem? Why cant you answer the simple question regardless of it being the right or wrong one?
    If you could pick if your child would be gay or straight. Would you actively choose for them to be gay? Its a yes or no question.

    Like

    Reply
  12. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    Matt, sorry, you hit fail! yes i would be PERFECTLY content if my dauighter was a lesbian. How much more do you need it spelt out?
    PS I didn’t want to get into the weird difference some “christian” closetted males feel about lesbians as opposed to gay males.

    Like

    Reply
  13. John Avatar
    John

    Yoyo, you are dodging the question. They didn’t asked you if you would be content. They asked you if you could choose, which one would you choose? If you don’t answer it’s an admission that you can’t answer honestly without refuting what you’ve already said. Try being honest for a change.

    Like

    Reply
  14. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    By the way Matthew, how “christian” do you feel a father is who refuses to hold his dying son’s hand because the son is gay?
    No strawman, unfortunately an all too common scenario that I had to witness in the 80’s and early 90’s. Additionally, a more than cogent argument for gay marriage and gay partnerships. If you can justify why a parent who has had NO contact with their “errant” son for many years gets to chose who attends the funeral and the disposition of joint assets over a loving partner who has nursed their love for years, then I will listen to your argument but I cant see how a merciful god would support such cruelty.

    Like

    Reply
  15. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    John, again I would not chose my child’s sexuality just as I would not try and chose their sexual expression in any way. What a perverse idea! I would be equally happy with my child being gay as straight, now try parsing that in your bigotted world view.

    Like

    Reply
  16. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    Here’s a question for the Johns, Matts, Dans and Seans, how much less would you love your child if they were gay?

    Like

    Reply
  17. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    “Answer the question…Yes or No!” Sure, I’ll keep it simple for you. You can handle simple; everything in your world is simply black or white. Well here goes…
    No! As long as there are people in the world like you Dan, I would not want a child of mine to be gay. But, it has nothing to do with being gay and has everything to do with you. Get it now? Simple enough?
    Now, you answer one for me. (Yes or No of course.) If your child were gay, would you want them to have to deal with someone like you?

    Like

    Reply
  18. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    I would answer your question Larry. But you STILL have refused answer mine. You cant just answer it can you? You have to throw some sort of conditions and attack me. So, based on your response to me… The real answer is “yes”.
    Yes, given the choice(and a world free of “bigotry”), you would actively choose for your child to be gay, given the choice.
    True, or false?
    Actually answer my question, without any qualifications. With a yes or a no. And thats it. And just for you, ill refine my question. Here it is once again….
    In your ideal world. Given the choice, would you actively choose for your child to be gay?
    Answer me that and I swear I will answer your question.

    Like

    Reply
  19. Steven Hewitt Avatar
    Steven Hewitt

    Personnally, I myself tolerate. I don’t accept, and my answer would be NO!

    Like

    Reply
  20. W. Tieff Avatar
    W. Tieff

    Well shoot… I for one would prefer to engineer my child’s personal sexual preferences in the image of my own. And I would choose for them to be straight, not gay, so as to increase the likelihood of grandchildren for me…….. It’s called being selfish. And it is an answer to the question.
    Final answer.

    Like

    Reply
  21. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Yes sir! Even from a Darwinistic perspective the answer would be affirmative. In the animal kingdom, most species have the instinct to protect their bloodline. If we were simply animals, as atheists would suggest, the natural course of the breeders would be to protect their progeny via discrimination against any force that would stand in the way of the line.
    But we are not animals…we have a will and a choice to pick the course of our life. Even though the One who designed us, built heterosexuality into us as a natural cause and effect of reproduction, we can still choose to satisfy our own selfish desires and choose not to reproduce and even choose to act un-naturally in reference to the act of sodomy (not sex).

    Like

    Reply
  22. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    Walt by your reductive analogy, priests and nuns are selfish.We are more than just our genomes.

    Like

    Reply
  23. Walt Avatar
    Walt

    Yoyo said, “Walt by your reductive analogy, priests and nuns are selfish.”
    I am not Catholic so I really can not speak for their doctrine, but I am a Christian and from the scripture I can not find a commandment that asks the Levites or a priest or nun for that matter, to exclude their genetics from the pool; that is a doctrinal issue. However, the celibacy of a nun or priest is given by he or/she as an offering to God as a measure of the fullest measure of unselfishness of a carnal man. These people forgo the three most pleasurable and rewarding things an earthly being can achieve; relationship with a mate, relationship with a child and sex. They do this not for wealth or power but for the advancement of the Kingdom of Heaven so that others may escape the torments of Hell. To me that is not selfish.
    Does your average homosexual have an unselfish motive?
    You also said, “We are more than just our genomes.” YES!!!! We, are animals are not. A duck can not fly west for the winter; their imprint does not allow it. A dog can not jump off a cliff to end his miserable life; the survival instinct disallows. Man, however is aware and can change his course. We can drink battery acid and end our life; we can travel to the arctic in the dead of winter, restraining our senses. We can choose our life’s path, either success or failure (in absence of a tyrant). We can be reasoned with and because of that we can be mislead. Considering homosexuality anything other than abnormal and selfish is a result of the misleading.

    Like

    Reply
  24. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    Come on Dan…What is all this, the mother of all ambush question or something? Sure in the ideal world the kid could be gay, okay…I don’t care. But, I don’t get that choice and neither does the kid which is something that is left out of the equation. (BYW – I wasn’t attacking you. The position you seem to forward is one that could make someone’s life more difficult and that was the point.)

    Like

    Reply
  25. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    Well walt, thats the liberal for ya. Their only consistency is being inconsistent.
    They’ll quote jesus and the bible to us…when it suits their purposes and agenda.
    But tellem what their idol darwin would think using their own “we are just animals” ideology and suddenly thats a foul.

    Like

    Reply
  26. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    And a 3rd time. You refuse to answer the question out of fear of being exposed. By doing so (or rather, not doing so) You have proven both my points.
    #1 that you liberals will always refuse the question because of #2. And answering the question will do will either expose you for your hypocrisy, or show your insanity.
    #2 Even for homosexuals and those that spew the agenda, homosexuality is unacceptable, not normal, and undesirable.
    Such is the design of the question. A liberal who spews the gay agenda need not answer it at all to be exposed, could they somehow muster the courage to do so. A liberal not answering the question is just as damning and telling as answering it. But don’t blame me and accuse me of trying to trick you or the question for your cowardice. Blame your flawed and hypocritical stance on an issue.
    Since you refused to answer my question. I wont be giving you the answer to yours that would have blown your mind.

    Like

    Reply
  27. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    Dan,
    Okay…I get it. You want to know if I would “advocate” for my child to be gay. Well…Heck yes I would!
    I’d hope that he would be so queer, that in comparison Rupal would look like a poster boy for Naval Special Warfare. I would not only advocate that he be queer; I’d insist on it. I’d even play Judy Garland records and the soundtrack from Rent for him in vitro. I’ll take him to see the Birdcage and buy him a collection of Broadway show tunes the very moment he learns to swish.
    Dan, I want this kid to be as fruity as a Glenn Beck UTube video. Eventually, I’d move to South Beach so that he could have the best role models in the country. I’d enroll him in Catholic school and find out if Selwyn would give him tennis lessons in between his time at the ballet academy. He couldn’t be queer enough for me.
    I’d make sure he grew upon to be a genuine, first rate, Ted Haggard, toe tapping, restroom cruising, bathhouse, Log Cabin Republican fag. And when he was ready to go off to college, I’d make sure he went to the best fashion design school in New York City. I’d want him to be so gay that the very sight of him would make folks in Wyoming want to hang him from a snow fence.
    Yes, yes, yes…I’d advocate that he be queer! In fact, if he didn’t turn out that way, I’d consider him an abomination and never speak his name.
    (Go ahead now, “Blow” my mind, but I think that was a bad choice of words considering…)

    Like

    Reply
  28. yoyo Avatar
    yoyo

    Walt, it’s like you take a few steps to the door but just refuse to turn the handle. Leaving aside homosexuality and altruistic celibacy in non humans, neither of which is rare, we are more than our breading potential. Yes the woman who chooses to spend her life with a man who has already had a vasectomy, the older couple past child rearing, the committed foster parents who raise many children not of their own genetics, the special teachers who change the life of children not their own, the non child abusing religious, all these people have placed greater things above their genetic tranference. Who are you to be so very sure that a relationship between two men or two women may not also be a greater thing? Leaving aside that many gay couples i know have children, how can you be so very sure that the societal acknowledgement of their love is a bad thing.
    For a non theist like myself the major redeming feature of christianity is the emphasis it puts on love, not “rightousness” not doctrinal purity, love. A human emotional that is hard to define but also impossible to wipeout. There’s a mystery we should support.

    Like

    Reply
  29. Shaun Avatar
    Shaun

    I have to admit that was a funny post.

    Like

    Reply
  30. Shaun Avatar
    Shaun

    On a serious note, this is something I found in a recent article concerning Obamas Safe school Czar Kevin Jennings. Yet another testimony to the sick twisted perversion that somehow passes for human life. Here is a link depicting some of Jenning’s program for grade school children…gotta warn you though its pretty graphic.
    Link:http: //gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2009/12/breaking-obamas-safe-schools-czar-is-promoting-porn-in-the-classroom-kevin-jennings-and-the-glsen-reading-list/
    Amongst other things he brags about sexual adventures in the first grade, child-adult relations, public masturbation etc.
    To think that Obama would appoint such vermin to a position. This is what the Obama administration stands for. Cheers Homo lovers.
    Shaun

    Like

    Reply
  31. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    You only continue to prove my point and reveal your hypocrisy. You spew the gay agenda, but clearly wouldn’t want your child to be gay. As evidenced by your mocking of how flaming you would want your child to be.
    And as for your request. No. Because you didn’t answer my question seriously. This is post #4 and you still cant answer it. Seriously, stop with the whining, stalling, and misdirection and just answer it already. Its not an “ambush question”. Its more like Erin Brockovich telling PG&E reps to drink the water they claim is fine. The very opposite of an ambush. A direct and open challenge.
    One that you are clearly too scared to even in THEORY, take. Whats the matter? Afraid of a little gay chromium VI?

    Like

    Reply
  32. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    DAN – “In your ideal world. Given the choice, would you actively choose for your child to be gay?
    Answer me that and I swear I will answer your question.”
    LARRY – Yes.
    (Okay Dan, I worked hard for this one…Now let’s see what you come up with. And please don’t be predictable. I’m assuming you’ve been setting this up for some dramatic disclosure like your son is gay; or you were gay, but faith turned you around; or some other Jerry Springer moment. Don’t let me down after giving your oath and all…)

    Like

    Reply
  33. Dan Avatar
    Dan

    So you are insane. You would actively subject your child to the hardships of being a homosexual. First, having to find a suitable “partner”. Less than 10% of the population is gay. That greatly narrows the choices of a “partner”. Second, if they did want to have kids, if it were a female it would be as simple as getting a turkey baster and a visit to a sperm bank. But for a man it would require great cost of finding and financing a surrogate. But in both cases it would only ever be, half of one of thems child, and the other would be nothing more than an adopted child. And there is more but I grow weary of dealing with you and wasting words on you.
    But of course, this is on top of the fact that I don’t really think you would actively choose for a child of yours to be gay. If you would have, it would not have taken you 4 posts to say “yes”. You are merely choosing to be insane, rather than contradicting your own ideology.
    And I guess I wont be answering your question then since you have said you don’t want to hear the only answer that could possibly have been a response to the question “If your child were gay, would you want them to have to deal with someone like you?” So, I would want to “disappoint” you by answering it. So I wont risk it. You really shouldn’t ask a question you don’t want to hear the potential answer to. But thanks for letting me off the hook.

    Like

    Reply
  34. Larry Rivera Avatar
    Larry Rivera

    DAN #1 – “Answer me that and I swear I will answer your question.”
    LARRY #1 – “Yes.”
    DAN #2 – “And I guess I wont be answering your question then…”
    LARRY #2 – Liar…Liar, pants on fire!

    (Yes sir Dan, despite your being “weary”…that really blew my mind!)

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to Steven Hewitt Cancel reply