A liberal society might, then, find it prudent to ignore homosexuality, It might well deem it unwise to peer into private bedrooms. However, this is not the issue before us. Today the demand is that homosexuality be endorsed and promoted with the full power of the law. This would require us to abandon the standard of nature, the one standard that can teach us the difference between freedom and slavery, between right and wrong. (Source)
On Thursday’s The View show, during a discussion of reports that gay Olympic skater Adam Rippon had turned down the opportunity to meet with Vice President Mike Pence because of his views on gay rights, co-host Whoopi Goldberg at one point defended the decision by suggesting that meeting with Pence would be like a Jew having a meeting with a Nazi.
She then asked: “But should they have a sit-down — should they sit down to talk with this gentleman who doesn’t even sort of recognize him as a person?”
After co-host Joy Behar joked about gay conversion therapy, Goldberg got back in and likened Vice President Pence to Nazis as she added: “I think it would be like asking a Jewish person to sit down and understand where the Nazi is coming from. I think that would be a difficult thing.”
This is just a reminder to THE VIEW…. same-sex attraction is a complicated thing. And many gays do reject the attraction by changing orientation, or rejecting the orientation to serve Christ in a more meaningful way (see more HERE). I wish to tackle this in two ways here. FIRST, sexuality is fluid when persons are young. It is a surge of hormones and environment that account for the following:
…One study followed approximately 10,800 adolescents between the ages of 16 and 22 years old. Of the 16 year-old males who had exclusively SSA, 61% had opposite-sex attraction at age 17. For same-sex attracted females, 81% changed to opposite attraction in just one year.
The study also compared sexual attraction at ages 17 and 22, with similar results. For example, 75% of adolescent males with SSA at age 17 had opposite-sex attraction at age 22….
Recent studies indicate the same thing. An article published in Psychological Reports in 2000 investigated 882 dissatisfied homosexuals. After pursuing some form of therapy, 34% of the participants reported shifting their orientation to an exclusively or almost exclusively heterosexual orientation. They experienced statistically significant reductions in “homosexual thoughts and fantasies” and improvements in their “psychological, interpersonal, and spiritual well-being.”
Which is why we can really say there are more ex-gays alive today than gays. Is this “anti-science”? Another avenue in dealing with this is to show how the gay agenda is warping a proper understanding of nature presented to our children. Here is an example from another post of mine, “Gay Animals.”
Before I get to a continuing conversation, I wanted to talk about an example I heard of a long time ago, and it has to do with the “famous” gay penguins, Roy and Silo. So popular was this pair of “gay” penguins that children’s books were produced to explain that homosexuality should be acceptable, based on this male pair of penguins. (One being “And Tango Makes Three.”) As we will see, using arguments like these often backfires on the person who thinks behaviors rooted in nature should be applauded in the Homosapien world.
Conservapedia notes that in July of 2009, the alleged homosexual penguin pair in a California zoo crumbled under the weight of nature. Peter LaBarbera reported:
San Francisco’s Fox affiliate KTVU reports: “The San Francisco Zoo’s popular same-sex penguin couple has broken up.
“Male Magellan penguins Harry and Pepper have been together since 2003. The pair nested together and even incubated an egg laid by another penguin in 2008, but their relationship hit the rocks earlier this year when a female penguin, Linda, befriended Harry after her long-time companion died.
“Zookeepers say Harry and Linda are happy and were able to successfully nest this year,” reported KTVU.
But not everyone is celebrating Harry and Linda’s newfound love. Some believe there can be no such a thing as an “ex-gay” penguin. Upon news of Harry’s decision to fly the same-sex-coop, outspoken pro-homosexual activist and anti-ex-gay crusader Wayne Besen cried fowl:
“Attempts to change sexual orientation are patently offensive, discriminatory by definition, theologically shaky, uniformly unsuccessful and medically unsound!” exclaimed a visibly angry Besen. “There is no ‘ex-gay’ sexual orientation. Harry is simply in denial. He’s living what I call the ‘big lie.’”
When will we see a book on penguin sexual behavior showing that reparative therapy works, and there can be ex-gays? And that one can choose by volition over his or her nature, when is this kids book coming? The Telegraph expounds upon this behavior in penguins more as more is known:
The homosexual behaviour of male king penguins has already been noted in zoos.
Now in a new study, scientists have found the evidence of male pairs in the wild. The research found that more than a quarter of the colony in Antarctica were in same sex partners, mostly two males.
In the past, it was claimed that penguins could not discern between the sexes because they looked alike. Male pairs in zoos in the US and Germany have hatched and reared ‘adopted’ chicks.
However the new study by the Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology in Montpellier, France found that the penguins are only pairing up with other males because they are “lonely”.
There are not enough females in the colony and the males have high levels of testosterone, which drives them to engage in mating displays – even if it is with other males.
During the mating season king penguins “flirt” with potential partners by closing their eyes, stretching their heads skyward and moving them in a half-circle to “take peeks” at one another.
The male pairs engaged in the displays for short periods of time but did not bond in the same way as a heterosexual pair would, by learning each other’s calls or caring for eggs.
Professor F. Stephen Dobson, one of the authors of the study published in the journal Ethology, said the number of same sex pairs was actually lower than expected. When the colony was studied over time he found all the ‘gay’ penguins chose a heterosexual partner. A female pair also ‘split up’ to raise an egg with male partner. (Emphasis added)
This “loneliness,” really high testosterone levels, is a great description the N.Y. Times gives to the Roy/Silo conundrum:
The two male chinstrap penguins had found each other in the big city. They had remained faithful. They had even raised a child. But then, not too long ago, they lost their home. Silo’s eye began to wander, and last spring he forsook his partner of six years at the Central Park Zoo and took up with a female from California named Scrappy. Of late, Roy has been seen alone, in a corner, staring at a wall.
This tale of betrayal, sexual identity and penguin lust set in Manhattan has reverberated around the world. IT HAS “ROCKED THE GAY SCENE,” AS THE POPULAR BLOGGER ANDREW SULLIVAN, WHO IS GAY, WROTE IN THE SUNDAY TIMES OF LONDON THIS WEEK.
No one was more disappointed than Rob Gramzay, the senior penguin keeper at the zoo, who said simply in an interview yesterday, “They seemed to be a good pair together.”…. (emphasis added)
“Heartbreaking!” I am sure Andrew Sullivan was beside himself… weeping and gnashing of teeth was worldwide I am sure. Okay, a “pop-culture” example removed, lets move to my discussion via Facebook. Again, to be clear, since Dr. Antonio Pardo makes it known that there isn’t an animal that’s exclusively “gay,” and we have a popular example of this in Silo “switching teams,” I see two things:
1) this can at the most be an argument for bisexuality, and
The “Sage” r-e-a-l-l-y got into his role as the “whinny liberal 3rd-person actor this episode. Very funny! The topic is Ben Carson and his comments about slavery, and slaves being immigrants that has caused all of the MSM and Hollywood into a dither. There is one problem with this however… NONE of this “outrage” was present during the 11-times Obama said essentially the same thing. What this does however is offer a stark example of the hatred by the Left… dare I say “selective racism/bigotry”… of conservative black persons.
FIRSTLY, why do they say they will move to Canada or Europe? If they so dislike Trump’s position on immigration… move to MEXICO and put your money where your mouth is! The two places to go to match these celebrities and media acolytes are at BREITBART and TOWNHALL:
Glenn played some of Carly Fiorinas interview on The View and brought up the happy topic of abortion. When Fiorina shot down Whoopis point, they of course abruptly ended the interview. Whoopi couldnt believe that a large majority of people are against late term abortions. Perhaps thats because shes never seen one how horrific are they? Glenn finds out.
Here’s how the conversation went down on The View:
WHOOPI: I’m sorry. I got to ask this question.
The first part of it is: You’re running. I assume you’re a person who is very sort of pro-life and believes it. So are you going to run as a person who is going to govern for everyone, or are you running on your Christian beliefs? Because I — you said some wonderful things, and it made me ask the question: If you feel that women should have the choice, have the choices, why do you think choice is not a good thing?
CARLY: Well, look, I think that abortion is obviously a very delicate subject. I happen to believe that science is proving us right. I mean, the zygote in — the DNA in a zygote is the same as the DNA the day you die. But I understand respectfully — we don’t all agree. We do have common ground on this issue now. The majority of women, the majority of young people, the majority of Americans now think that late-term abortion for any reason at all is a problem. So what I say is, let’s go find that common ground.
The segment turned the conversation on radio towards partial birth abortion, and Glenn said that if people really understood what that was, no one would support it. After an off-air conversation, Glenn watched a video of a partial birth abortion during the show. Needless to say, he was horrified.
“I know what it is intellectually, but when you see the body of a baby moving from the shoulders down, out, and then the doctor sticking the scissors into the head and then moving. And you see the blood rush all over his hands. And then he has to pull the head out, and the head comes off the baby. My God, what monsters are we. Oh, my gosh. What monsters are we. Holy cow,” he said.
“That’s a murder. I just witnessed murder. Oh, my gosh. And you know why you won’t watch it? The reason why people won’t watch it, you won’t get Whoopi Goldberg to watch it. Whoopi Goldberg won’t say that because Whoopi Goldberg is afraid to look at it because there’s no way you can look at it and say it’s anything but murder. Why do they keep the head in the baby? So it’s still a woman’s right to choose. Two seconds later, and that baby is out, and you can’t kill it. It is — this is obscene. I know what it is. I’ve known what it is. In theory, I’ve never seen it. When you see it, it is — it is — it’s Mengele,” he said.
Watch the same video Glenn watched HERE. Warning, it is incredibly graphic….
Here is the fuller radio show segment ~ CAUTION! This includes the video:
What I posted on Glenn’s YouTube:
Thank You! This was my upload and I rarely get people to read/see this stuff… and this is exactly the response E-V-E-R-Y-O-N-E should have. I cried watching your description/reaction. I try to give secular responses to many of our issues, which is why I quote Kathy Ireland’s response to Bill Maher. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT! Whoopie (and others) won’t watch this because it will change their mind… and they don’t want their mind changed.
“…that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Choose life so that… your children may live” ~ Deuteronomy 30:19 (See: This Day Choose Life)
But back to the video… people have no idea… and this was the first (or one of the first) executive orders by Bill Clinton… to legalize this. It was one of Bush’s first as well, to stop it. I am about to quote some REALLY wild stuff:
➤ On the 4th day of the Clinton presidency, Jan. 23, the 20th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, Bill Clinton signed, in a televised Oval Office ceremony, a series of executive orders undoing the draconian policies of the Reagan-Bush era relating to abortion, contraception, and family planning. ~ Hillary had pushed unequivocally for the orders, but Bill’s pollster argued that she was dead wrong on the timing of such a hot-button issue; by acting on abortion policy as one of the administration’s first pieces of business, the president and, worse, Hillary, would be perceived as governing from the left. But Hillary regarded the prohibitions in question as a powerful symbol of Reagan-era policies, and an opportunity to declare boldly that the Clinton era had begun. There was an additional appeal: it was fiscally neutral, monetarily cost-free, and not subject to a drawn-out legislative process. (Source: A Woman in Charge, by Carl Bernstein, p.256 , Jun 5, 2007)
➤ Opponents of a ban on partial birth abortions claimed that it was used only when necessary to protect the mother’s life. Unfortunately for that argument, the physician who is the best-known practitioner of these abortions stated in 1993 that 80% of them are “purely elective,” not necessary to save the mother’s life or health. Partial birth understates the matter. The baby is outside the mother except for its head, which is kept in the mother only to avoid a charge of infanticide. Full birth is inches away and could easily be accomplished. ~ President Clinton did, in fact, veto the bill banning partial birth abortion, demanding a vague exception for health that would have amounted to a ratification of almost all such abortions. His veto and the feminist demand for what is, in truth, infanticide underscore the casual brutality born of nihilism that is an ever more prominent feature of our culture. (Source: Slouching Towards Gomorrah, by Robert Bork, p.182-183 , Dec 16, 2003)
I am happy Glenn watched it and talked about it… selfish pride/notoriety… etc. All the stuff a fallen individual can muster to “aggrandize” one-self. But, at the same time it is sad that I have to post on and upload stuff like this.
In-other-words, I am glad more people saw this, at the same exact time I am sad more people had to see this.
This was a photo posted by a loving boyfriend of his girlfriend… out… experiencing life, and this is what was said by some:
“Jessa, of all the things you can be representing, please consider this … with all the horrific and senseless killings that have been occurring in our society lately, it’s not the wisest thing in the world to be casually holding a machine gun in a photo for all to see,” one individual wrote in a comment.
“No human needs a machine gun,” another added.
“While I believe in the right to bare arms, I can’t believe a Christian would send out this photo because it’s fun. if you want to be an adult act like one. I doubt her parents are proud of that picture,” echoed yet another person.
As this American culture is battered with the hyper-sensitivity of political correctness in even “trigger words” ~ even a picture sends some into a tizzy.
Welcome to the world of cultural Marxism. I noticed as well, over at The View, when WIll Cain showed with simple facts how liberals say over-arching statements to support a specific that the previous statement does not address:
Whoopi argued that shootings/crime with gun was going up, Will Cain said no, it is going down (see previous post):
“I don’t think it is the 74th,” Cain said. “That’s a stat put out by this group called Everytown USA, who is for gun control. We know a couple stats, these are by Pew and the FBI. Gun violence is down drastically over the last 20 years. I mean, drastically. What I will tell you is, every time these terrible things happen, we want to learn a lesson. And it’s understandable — we want to grab sanity. … What can we do to ensure this doesn’t happen? I don’t know. Crazy people exist.”
“I will suggest this,” Cain continued. “I think when the media reports so breathlessly and salaciously on these things, these guys copycat each other.”
BTW, it looks — to me — like Will Cain was holding back. He has an image to uphold with the entertainment world, the Views pop-culture. It seems like he could have unloaded (pun intended) much more than he did… but was aware of whom he was talking to.
Whoopi says: “If it’s ten a week, or five a week, it’s too many man… it’s too many kids… it’s too many…”
Will Cain responds, almost facetiously [but politely with a sarcastic smile on his face] says: “I can’t disagree with that. It’s Always too many.”
If you cannot win an argument on the specifics, make up a meta-narrative to win. I wish to also point out a similarity between people posting on Jessa Duggar’s pic posted by Ben Seewald, and the above video. At one point the co-host, Sherri Shepherd — bless her little heart — said that you can take a semi-automatic and spray the crowd in 5-seconds:
“If you have a semi-automatic – I’m not talkin’ about a regular ‘pow-pow’ ….”
Will Cain responds to her diatribe, and then we get this convoluted non-response to tug on uneducated heart strings:
“In five-seconds a semi-automatic can spray this entire audience.”
This is like someone on the shot of Jesse Duggar saying: “No human needs a machine gun.” DUMB! And frustrating. No one had machine guns in any of the shootings so enamored in the press by the Left.
The Left has no idea about guns. Remember this statement from Democratic Rep. Diana DeGette who has been the lead in two Congresses by sponsoring a bill for a federal ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines:
Another example comes from California State Senator Kevin de Leon (D-Los Angeles) who made a fool of himself as he attempted to explain the capacity of an automatic rifle — HERE. Jesse’s pic was just another example for the trolls of the Left to show their devolution in interacting with the world around them… creating a more secluded world where they dream of lollipops and unicorns farting rainbows.
May I also note the “legalism” many people put on the Christian faith. When someone says basically that a Christian shouldn’t own or take pictures holding a gun… they are applying a layer of legalism only found in the most fundamentalist churches. However, this is the point of the illiberal egalitarianism found on the left (cultural Marxism via political correctness). It is legalistic. And Galatians rejects this type of Phariseism, clearly, and resolutely.