IS NH CIVIL UNION LEGISLATION BASED ON LIES?

Is NH Civil Union Legislation Based on Lies?

AND, IF YOU BELIEVE IN GOVERNMENT BY AND FOR THE PEOPLE, WE NEED TO ACT BEFORE IT’S TOO LATE, EVEN IF IT’S JUST POSTING YOUR COMMENT HERE. I SINCERELY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

That’s right New Hampshire; our Governor signed the Civil Union bill, click here, based on a pack of lies that it’s “discrimination” against homosexuals if it’s not adopted into law. It was also propounded to be a “civil rights issue” as well by the Democratic Party. Is this true? Read on to see if you agree or disagree based on the latest scientific research.

As I’ve said before, (click here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here for other relevant posts from me and other Groksters) there is no scientific consensus that homosexuals are “born that way.” Homosexuality is not the equivalent of being born black which is unchangeable…well, unless perhaps you’re Michael Jackson, ha! Again, Are Civil Unions really a “civil rights” issue? Can homosexuals choose not to practice homosexuality?

Quoting Douglas A. Abbott Ph.D., in his July 2007, Myths and Misconceptions About Behavioral Genetics and Homosexuality, click http://www.narth.com/, and you’ll easily find his article under Top Stories, currently sixth from the top, he concludes:

“I believe that the genetic evidence for homosexuality is just not there. It’s the values and politics of homosexuals and their supporters that is driving the gay gene agenda, not good science.”

Then from the “Born that Way” theory, A. Dean Byrd, Ph.D., MBA, MPH, one of the world’s leading scientists who works at the cutting edge of DNA and Head of the Human Genome Project, he states:

Dr. Abbott goes on to say:

“There is clear evidence that many men and women are at the helm controlling their sexual behavior and making choices regarding sexual preference.

I believe that the hypothetical evidence for genetic determinism of homosexuality is overstated and overrated. Most people do not have the knowledge to understand the research and are simply hoodwinked by the pro-gay activists. It is obvious to me, and to many others, that environmental factors play the major role in same-sex behavior, if this were not so how does one explain the thousands of men and women who have left homosexuality.

Consider the recent example of Michael Glatze, founder of Young Gay American Magazine, film producer, pro-gay lecturer and author, and well-recognized leader in the gay movement. At age 14 he believed himself to be “gay,” but at age 30 he “seriously began to doubt” what he was doing (Moore, 2007, available online at www.worldnetdaily.com and also on the narth site under Top Stories). He explains:

“Knowing no one who I could approach with my questions and my doubts, I turned to God…It became clear to me that homosexuality prevents us from finding our true selves…I was leading a movement of sin and corruption…Now I know that homosexuality is lust and pornography wrapped into one. I’ll never let anybody try to convince me otherwise…Healing from the wounds caused by homosexuality is not easy—there’s little support. In my experience, coming out from under the influence of the homosexual mindset was the most liberating, beautiful and astonishing things I’ve ever experienced…I believe that all people, intrinsically know the truth. I believe that is why Christianity scares people so much. It reminds them of their conscience, which we all possess. Conscience tell us right from wrong and is a guide by which we can grow and become stronger and freer human beings” (in Moore, 2007, p. 3-5).

(Godincidentally, I have only listened to the G. Gordon Liddy radio program once. Mr. Glatze happened to be the guest that day, several months ago, and spoke very openly and honestly about himself and the “truth” he had found once he not only sought the truth, but was willing to accept “truth.” I called in to thank him for his courage in speaking the truth as I’m sure it was very difficult for him. Mr. Liddy and I continued to have a very nice discussion about homosexuality and the many myths that surround the issue.

Thank goodness, some churches are now providing “transition” ministries for homosexuals. Our ministry, from 1988-1998, did guide many homosexuals into finding their “true self” and finding their own peace within. It is a remarkable, miraculous experience to witness the freedom that comes when someone faces their particular truth about themselves and their upbringing and its influences, etc….only possible with God’s unconditional love and guidance. As Mr. Glatze mentioned, much of it has to do with a “mindset” and some homosexuals are not willing to let go of the “mindset”…it does not make them “bad” people…many heterosexuals aren’t terribly willing to let go of certain “mindsets” either.

Unfortunately, many (not all) homosexuals were abused as children. Lesbians many times were victims of male sexual abuse as children.  Is it any wonder they turn to other woman to express their sexuality? Many men had weak male role-models, or no male role model, or perhaps alcoholic mothers who did not meet their needs.)

Also read the portion of Dr. Abbott’s findings where he states:

“A heritability quotient cannot be used to predict who may become gay or lesbian.

Another limitation of these studies is the authorship. Most of this research (meaning that which supports the “born that way” theory) has been done by gays that have a vested interest in the outcome.”

Is it Nature and Nurture Together? Dr. Abbott says:

“At the present time, there is no evidence of a direct causative link between a single gene and complex psycho-social behavior such as sexual preference (Collins, 2006). This is not my mere idiosyncratic opinion but read any book on behavior genetics or molecular biology and the authors will unanimously agree that, at present, there is no gay gene.”

Quoting from Dr. Francis S. Collins (MD and PhD) in the same article:

“There is an inescapable component of heritability to many human behavioral traits. For virtually none of them is heredity ever close to predictive…An area of particularly strong public interest is influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations.”

At the same NARTH website, I encourage you to read The Case Against Same Sex Marriage by Margaret Somerville (you’ll find it on the top left under “Top Archives”).

Pay particular attention to “Attributing Homophobia” (and also the Section on Discrimination) in which Ms. Somerville comments:

“Being against same sex marriage is frequently alleged by proponents of same-sex marriage to be proof of homophobia. The strategy adopted is to shame those who are against same-sex marriage into silence.”

Also, read “Tradition-based convictions are not “homophobia,” say recent peer-reviewed research, click http://www.narth.com/docs/bias.html

Ms. Somerville also makes this statement:

“There are certainly elements within religious conservatism that have treated the difficult circumstances faced by lesbians and gay men without proper compassion and in doing so brought disgrace to their faith. However, it is not at all clear that these excesses should best be remedied by engraving in conceptual stone an ideological position that deprecates by definition traditional religious beliefs about sexual morality and the natural order. Such issues deserve to be discussed openly and on their own terms within the field of psychology, thereby promoting rather than inhibiting the expression of diverse perspectives. In the search for workable solutions to the clinical and social dilemmas over homosexuality that respect the beliefs of both religious conservatives and gay men and lesbians, the discipline of psychology will need to exercise heightened circumspection and restraint in the use of the language of homophobia as presently defined.”

I have previously argued that just because I am against civil unions, it does not necessarily make me, or anyone else who’s against CUs, a “homophobe.” I’ve taken a lot of heat and been called many derogatory names including a racist since I do not believe civil unions to be a civil rights issue either. It doesn’t bother me to be called a bigoted homophobe, intolerant, or racist because they’re simply not true. I do have a spiritual conviction about homosexuality, and I don’t make any apologies for it. So, save your breath because name calling won’t “get to me.” I prefer open, honest, respectful discussion about the subject matter no matter how uncomfortable it makes many people.

However, what does bother me is being hoodwinked and deceived by politicians. I strongly believe that this is exactly what has happened here in NH, particularly with the civil union issue, since the democrats started “controlling” our State. Not one democrat campaigned on the CU issue, but they quickly ran with it to make it into law
and under a veil of secrecy and hastily called public sessions. Even at the hastily called public sessions, 2/3 of the public who were allowed to testify before being shut off were against civil unions; but our State government elected to ignore the public. What was the agenda?

Well, according to State Democratic Party Chairman, Ray Buckley, here’s a previous post where he tells all citizens of NH what the NUMBER ONE priority at the time was in NH.

Ask yourself: Was this the NUMBER ONE priority for you for NH? Perhaps you were more concerned about school funding and rising property taxes, etc.

Now, you may also be interested in Buckley’s recent comments directed at me and published in the Union Leader recently, Polarizing Pelosi: The speaker and her NH twins:

“Judy, Wow. Your gay obsession is coming through loud and clear. The editorial was regarding how angry the far right is with Representatives Shea-Porter and Hodes with their votes representing the mainstream values of NH’s families and you went off on some wild irrelevant tangent. Perhaps you are unaware but your views on homosexuality are in the distinct minority. Few people still hold on to such absurd positions as yours. I have yet to see a single poll in NH where your position has any substantive support. You need to stop obsessing about other people’s families because you can’t do anything about it anyway. But, hey, why let facts confuse your right wing talking points right? The voters of NH tossed out the Republicans in 2006 because you and your buddies were too wrong for too long that you lost touch with NH’s families. The people of NH are fed up with the “so wrong for so long gang.” I suspect you are going to have a tough fifteen months ahead of you.”

Hmmm…”you can’t do anything about it anyway!” Oh boy, I’m calling you out, Mr. Buckley. Your idea of “values” and that Shea-Pompous and Hodes represent “mainstream values of NH’s families” is simply not the case. You may think “values” are the same thing as “morals” but I completely disagree with you…not to mention your tactics to attempt to silence me with threats, if you knew me, you’d know they won’t work. You don’t even know that I’m not a Republican but an Independent. You are right, however, that I do have some Republican “buddies.”

You, and others in the Democratic Party, have attempted to forever change New Hampshire for the worse, in my opinion, and rob citizens of their constitutional right to government by and for the people. As another commenter published in the same UL article, you are a “marginalized politician!” You have attempted to deceive NH, and personally, I’m sick and tired of your very personal gay agenda dictating what’s best for NH, without asking NH, and I’m also tired of you telling me what the mainstream values of NH’s family’s means. Your “values” are not my “morals” nor are your family values my family morals.

While I could be wrong, I do not think the majority of NH citizens agree with many of your distortions of the truth, and outright lies, especially since they greatly benefit you personally.

In a sincere desire to hear your side of the story and where you get your “proof” on your position, I invite you to debate this issue with me on Meet The New Press (you may recall you’ve been invited before, but for some reason you didn’t respond to the invitation) on an upcoming Saturday broadcast. I’m sure we can work out a mutually convenient date.

I also invite any citizen in NH who cares about our State and its future, to comment here and let me know your thoughts. Are you also tired of being hoodwinked by those who are supposed to be representing the majority of NH citizens, yet don’t ask us for our opinion, and instead represent their own self-serving political and other interests?

Out of the 50 states, NH is the only state who has the Right of Rebellion under our State Constitution Bill of Rights, Article 10 which follows:

“Examples of Constitutions including the right of rebellion

Although many declarations of independence seek legitimacy by appealing to the right of revolution, far fewer constitutions mention this right or guarantee this right to citizens because of the destabilizing effect such a guarantee would likely produce. In the United States, for example, out of fifty state constitutions and one national constitution, only New Hampshire’s guarantees its citizens the right to rebellion, in Article 10 of the constitution’s bill of rights:”

Are you tired of being hoodwinked by pro-gay activists and NH’s democrats?
If you’re upset about recent laws that have been passed, like civil union legislation based on lies, parental notification rights being taken away from you as a parent (you know, you’re 12 year old daughter can now go get an abortion without your consent) and other recently passed legislation here in NH, join me in doing something about it. Post a comment at the very least. Of course, dissenting opinions are always posted, too, here at the ‘grok if they contain no foul language. We’re interested in both sides of adult issues but they need to stay family friendly. And don’t forget to back up your “opinion” with some proof.

I vehemently disagree with you, Mr. Buckley, when you say: “you can’t do anything about it anyway!” I think it’s high time we let the democrats know that we have the RIGHT OF REVOLUTION here in NH. If things don’t change at the State House, and we’re willing to exercise our constitutional rights as citizens of NH, we can vote these dictators out of office at the next election. Are you with me or against me? Yes or no? Or should we just exercise our Right of Rebellion before the next election?

Please re-read Right of Rebellion and pay attention…Are the ends of our current government perverted and do they benefit more a “class of men” or a “private interest” (NH’s homosexual population is approx. 4%…did our government succumb to a very small special interest group?) or are they for the “common benefit” of the “whole community?” What do you think?

Perhaps it’s you, Ray, who is “going to have a tough fifteen months ahead of you.” But then maybe I’m just having another “wild irrelevant tangent.
” According to you my position is “absurd” anyway…although mine IS backed up with documentation from scientists who possibly know more than you do about homosexuality.

And have you run a “poll” of every citizen in NH that shows support for your position? No! That’s because you and other democrats aren’t interested in our chance to vote on the very important civil union issue…we just had them shoved down our throats (no pun intended). But, we can go for repeal, can’t we?

If you agree and think Civil Union legislation should be repealed and taken to a vote of all of the people of NH, please go to nhconserve.com, click here, and sign the petition. Let our politicians know you’re not going to be hoodwinked anymore.

If you care about keeping NH…well, New Hampshire instead of a nanny state, I think you’ll agree that even if you were okay with civil unions legislation previously, now that you have some education on the matter, you can help repeal civil unions and stop this extremely slippery slope issue from potentially further destroying our beautiful State.