God knows you personally and loves you more than you can comprehend. He wants you to be happy now and always. To accomplish this purpose, Heavenly Father has provided a plan called the gospel of Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ is the Son of God; His teachings are the way to peace in life and joy for eternity.

As part of His plan, God has followed a simple pattern from the beginning of the world. He chooses a prophet (like Noah or Moses) to teach the gospel and lead the people. Sadly, most of God’s children have disregarded, disobeyed, and rejected His prophets.

As promised, Heavenly Father sent His Son, Jesus Christ, to earth. Jesus Christ lived a perfect, sinless life. He established His Church, taught His gospel, and performed many miracles. Incredibly, even Jesus Christ was rejected. Following His death, many people began to drift away from or distort Christ’s true teachings. As a result, God withdrew His authority to direct the Church that Christ had established.

Our loving Father in Heaven is the “same yesterday, and to day, and for ever” (see Hebrews 13:8). As in ancient times, He has followed His simple pattern in our day. He has again established the gospel of Jesus Christ on the earth through a prophet. This prophet whom the Lord called to restore God’s truth is named Joseph Smith. The evidence of this Restoration is found in the Book of Mormon, which you can read, ponder, and pray about.

God continues to speak His words and reveal His truth in our day through a living prophet. If you ask your Heavenly Father in prayer, He can confirm the truth of this to you.

(It’s still legal - and always God-honoring - to air messages like the following. See Ezekiel 3:18-19. In light of government backing of raunchy behavior (such offenders were even executed in early America!), maybe the separation we really need is the “separation of raunch and state”!)

In Luke 17 in the New Testament, Jesus said that one of the big “signs” that will happen shortly before His return to earth as Judge will be a repeat of the “days of Lot” (see Genesis 19 for details). So gays are actually helping to fulfill this same worldwide “sign” (and making the Bible even more believable!) and thus hurrying up the return of the Judge! They are accomplishing what many preachers haven’t accomplished! Gays couldn’t have accomplished this by just coming out of closets into bedrooms. Instead, they invented new architecture - you know, closets opening on to Main Streets where little kids would be able to watch naked men having sex with each other at festivals in places like San Francisco (where their underground saint - San Andreas - may soon get a big jolt out of what’s going on over his head!). Thanks, gays, for figuring out how to bring back our resurrected Saviour even quicker!

If you would care to learn about the depraved human “pigpen” that regularly occurs in Nancy Pelosi’s district in California, Google “Zombietime” and click on “Up Your Alley Fair” in the left column. And to think - horrors - that she is only two levels away from being President!

“As for Catholics, Baptists, Mormons, and other politically motivated religious extremists, their two-thousand years of bullying, coercion, persecution of others, inability to get along peacefully with other religions of the world, and eagerness to gain money, power, and political influence are adequately documented. And one only need reflect for a few hours to discover that their homophobia and hatred are driven by antagonism against a community over whom they have no control — a community of people (humans, in fact) who are not afraid of their Christian god-fueled hatred, bigotry, and fearmongering.

Stick to dispensing pills, Ms. Nancy Reyes (if medicine really is what you practice): it is painfully obvious that when it comes to complex social issues your devotion to mindless cults automatically pulls the plug on your ability to reason. In doing so you make yourself an embarrassment to your profession.”

Mr Flattop… you sound just like those you describe. Full of hate and bigotry.

As a result of her grammatical handicaps she can’t even formulate “arguments” using the correct terminology. Never mind that her “arguments” are fatally flawed to begin with:
“Passing a law that allows two promiscuous gay men who live together to be ‘married’…”? …that’s a pretty bold generalization coming from someone who styles herself a physician. That claim also bluntly reveals a startling lack of observational skills: there are more real people in the real world than Ms. Reyes is apparently aware of.

As for Catholics, Baptists, Mormons, and other politically motivated religious extremists, their two-thousand years of bullying, coercion, persecution of others, inability to get along peacefully with other religions of the world, and eagerness to gain money, power, and political influence are adequately documented. And one only need reflect for a few hours to discover that their homophobia and hatred are driven by antagonism against a community over whom they have no control — a community of people (humans, in fact) who are not afraid of their Christian god-fueled hatred, bigotry, and fearmongering.

Stick to dispensing pills, Ms. Nancy Reyes (if medicine really is what you practice): it is painfully obvious that when it comes to complex social issues your devotion to mindless cults automatically pulls the plug on your ability to reason. In doing so you make yourself an embarrassment to your profession.

Good luck with that.

For more on “traditional marriages” go to youtube and do a search on “the license keithhartman1″. Nancy, I hope you have a “traditional marriage” as defined by the prophets of the LDS church, or by the traditions of the past.

“Opposing gay marriage in Utah (as the church did in 2004) is one thing, but taking a lead public role in a national campaign to deprive a persecuted minority of a right shared by all other Americans is another. It would be seen as a sign that the days of low-key tactics are over, and that the current Mormon leaders are prepared to give, and get, the political bruising that occurs when religion mixes with politics in America.”

Claiming religious persecution in light of the facts rings hollow.

I personally do not have a dog in this fight, other than the manipulation of the American legislative process by the Mormon Church. They have the money and organization to be a significant influence in the legislative process. As someone who grew up a Mormon, I find their growing political presence and willingness to spend time and money to exert disproportionate influence disturbing. To me it does not matter if it is woman’s rights from the 1970s, the legal work around the Bob Jones University test case in the late 1970s on racial discrimination or Gay rights.

To spend the money and time to influence legislation then claim that they are being persecuted shows the level of their self delusion. They mobilized to defeat the ERA and attempted to influence the courts over racism in their private universities. They were caught by the Boston Globe in active support of Romney for his bid for the presidency. It is the Mormon program of legislative interference to which I object.

David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop,
(Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1984).
. A.
P. Bell and M. S. Weinberg, Homosexualities: A Study of Diversity Among Men and Women (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1978), 308-309;
See also A. P. Bell, M. S. Weinberg, and S. K. Hammersmith, Sexual
Preference (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1981).

David P. McWhirter and Andrew M. Mattison, The Male Couple: How Relationships Develop (Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice-Hall, 1984), 252-253.

, “Male Homosexuality in Western Sexuality:
Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times,” edited by P. Aries and A. Bejin, pp. 40-61, cited by Joseph Nicolosi in Reparative Therapy of Male Homosexuality (Northvale: Jason Aronson Inc., 1991), 124-125.
Paul Van de Ven et al., “A Comparative Demographic and Sexual Profile of Older Homosexually Active Men,”

Sorry, Jim Huston, the facts do not support your hypothesis.
————-
details taken out by editor. NR

What Pitirim Sonokin wrote about was increased promiscuity and the decline of civilization due to hedonism as the third phase of natural progression of society. There is nothing in his work that says it was due to the acceptance of homosexuality. Don’t misquote your sources as people who are educated will generally catch you and discredit you. Pitirim Sonokin wrote and taught in the late 1950s and early 1960s, or during the beginning of the world wide sexual revolution. Because of the advent of social diseases, the promiscuity has declined since the 1960s.

Nancy Reyes - Quote
“Passing a law that allows two promiscuous gay men who live together to be “married” is not going to go down well in some neighborhoods, not because unmarried sex is unknown in the neighborhoods, but because those raising children have a daily job protecting their children against the sexual predators that are destroying their own neighborhoods.”

Why do you assume the men are promiscuous? Why would gay men be any more promiscuous than straight men? If the men want to be married, does that not indicate that they wish to commit and are therefore not promiscuous? Where is the data that says adult Gay men have a penchance for young boys? Your arguments rely on tired stereotypes that are inaccurate in your depiction of the helpless Mormons and the evil homosexuals.

Analyzing studies of cultures spanning several thousands of years on several continents, Harvard sociologist Pitirim Sorokin found that virtually all political revolutions that brought about societal collapse were preceded by a sexual revolution in which marriage and family were devalued by the culture’s acceptance of homosexuality.

When will Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, or Glen Beck publicize these studies?

The problem people have with Mormons over Prop 8 is the same problem people had with the Mormon work to defeat the ERA in the 1970s. A minority group of Mormons organized and ended up creating influence much greater than their numbers. This caused the defeat of the ERA in at least 4 states, including Virginia, which has a minuscule Mormon population. The following year “The Year of the Woman” was a national program to promote women and equality. Mormons again organized. The Mormon Relief Society women were issued walkie talkies and sat as groups within the conferences and rallies with male leaders on the outside giving them instructions on how to disrupt the conferences. This was all managed directly by the old men in bad suits that head the Mormon Church. Yes I was there and remember it well.

With Prop 8 money was requested nationally by Mormon leadership to be sent to California. Phone banks were set up in Utah to provide blanket calling of California residents. Mormon leadership traveled from Utah to California and oversaw many parts of the operation personally. The objective was to have a disproportionate influence on the legislation.

I really don’t know how you call it religious bigotry when the religion did in fact do exactly what it is being accused of. Mormons, as a group spent a great deal of money and time to have a disproportionate amount of influence over the legislation, exactly as they have done before. They are now seeing the consequences of their collective action and calling foul and religious persecution. Calling natural consequences for behavior persecution is really quite laughable.

Thank you for speaking out and standing up against this terrible movement.

Ed: thank you for your correction. I have changed it in the article.NR.

What is missing is an understanding of the roll of marriage in traditional societies. In the US, thirty years of propaganda and no fault divorce laws have weakened marriage into “two people who love each other”.

This is not true of most societies, except for the modern welfare state where big government has to take over much of the social aspects that in the past were done by families.

1) tradition.
Tradition is the way that societies codify what works and what doesn’t work to make a strong society.

Marriage in traditional societies is about limiting male freedom in order to protect women and children, and care for the sick and weak. It is about sacrificing your own desires so that the family can survive. And it is about transmitting customs to the next generation.

Gay marriage is about two equal people who love each other living together with society’s approval, which is not quite the same thing.

2)Neurobiology.
A lot of the unspoken arguments behind the push is the idea that men and women are the same, and that gender is a social construct.

But science shows men and women differ, no matter how much a feminist like myself would wish otherwise.

So a lot of the arguments about “discrimination” are not about homosexual behavior per se, but are based on gender theory that has a limited basis in reality.

Destroying marriage is part of the feminist agenda to make women “free” but in the real world, it translates as making women free to act like men, not free to be mothers.

3)Evolution.
Humans are limited pair bonding societies. So without law, most men will stay with their wives, but some won’t. Societies with strong marriage customs help to protect women and children and help men to stay faithful.

4) promiscuity versus self control.
Andrew Sullivan once said that gay marriage would loosen the puritans to be more tolerant to “open marriage” where partners have outside relationships.
My point exactly. It destroys the idea of fidelity as part of marriage.

5)it makes the “enemy” those who are the hardest working and most stable citizens.

Let’s face it. If society falls apart, it is areas with strong traditional families that will survive.

Which are ….? It’s interesting how people always says things like this, but leave it open-ended, and never give any “good” reasons in favor of retaining “traditional” marriage as the norm. Please enlighten me, and tell us what these “good” reasons are!