Sick:Columbia Professor Equates His Incest With 24-Year old Daughter to Homosexual Sex – states Gays Can do what they want in their house
If you thought that the push for marriage equality for homosexuals was acceptable, then you might want to reconsider where it could lead. This story might shock you, Columbia Professor Equates His Incest With 24-Year old Daughter to Homosexual Sex – states Gays Can do what they want in their house:
"The lawyer representing a professor charged with incest with his 24-year-old daughter has questioned why the alleged affair has been made public.
David Epstein was charged last week with one count of incest for what was allegedly a consensual three-year sexual relationship with his daughter.
The political science professor at Columbia University, 46, allegedly slept with her between 2006 and 2009. Epstein, who specializes in American politics and voting rights, is also said to have exchanged twisted text messages with the woman during their relationship.
He told ABCNews.com: ‘Academically, we are obviously all morally opposed to incest and rightfully so.
‘At the same time, there is an argument to be made in the Swiss case to let go what goes on privately in bedrooms. ‘It’s ok for homosexuals to do whatever they want in their own home. How is this so different?"
Once you open the door for one form of unnatural and deviant behavior you will end up having to open the door for other groups who see nothing wrong with incest, polygamy, pedophilia and other unnatural and unacceptable behaviors and relationships. Some legislatures in California and some psychiatrists are already trying to normalize pedophilia and label it as a sexual orientation rather than a disorder, just like they did with homosexuality.
In the 1970's and prior homosexuality was seen as a mental/behavior disorder. However, since the 1970's the homosexual lobby pushed to have it removed from the DSM book of mental disorders. Now the homosexual lobby is pushing to normalize homosexual behavior so much they want the right to marry and want it taught in schools as if it is a sexual orientation and a normal behavior. However, homosexuality is not a genetic disorder nor is it normal behavior. It is against natural law and religious teaching, which has led to the debate against legalizing homosexual marriage. Those who want to normalize homosexuality and live like a heterosexual couple are already causing businesses and individuals and some religious organizations to face lawsuits based on discrimination even though it violates these businesses or institutes religious rights.
The right to marry is not a Constitutionally protected right, but the right to practice our religion is protected. In result, we have a right to protect our religious freedoms and faith against frivolous lawsuits. If a religious institution or individual doesn't want to recognize same sex marriage or provide a service to them they should not be forced to under the threat of a lawsuit.
In addition, even if homosexuality was genetic, the behavior of fornication between same sex couples is an act that is chosen and like any other behavior can be stopped or prevented by not acting on that temptation. We don't have to act on our temptations nor desires, we can remain celibate or chaste. This includes heterosexual couples and individuals as well. The thing I have found most homosexuals care more about is the financial benefits that come with marriage through inheritance or tax breaks. If that is all they care about then that is not a marriage based on love but money. Marriage should be based on love, but not lust and money. Fornication between those of the same sex is lust and not love. Marriage itself is a religious sacrament that the government should have no involvement in and should not redefine. The sacrament of marriage was defined by God in the Bible when it says a man shall leave his parents to become one with a woman. This defines the meaning of a marriage which also allows for the recreation of the species. If God intended us to marry the same sex He likely would not have made a male and a female.
Love comes in many forms, but it is not the unnatural act of sex with the same gender and it is not marriage or sex between parents and children nor sex between adults and children or any other species. We were created in the image of Him and as two genders so that we may go forth and multiply.
In addition, as Dough Mainwaring, an openly gay man, says to redefine marriage is to undefine the importance of marriage in providing children with a mom and a dad. It reduces the value of marriage and reduces their worth to a group of surrogates, donors, and attorney's in genderless marriages. He writes:
Same-sex marriage will not expand rights and freedoms in our nation. It will not redefine marriage. It will undefine it.
This isn’t the first time our society has undefined marriage. No-fault divorce, instituted all across our country, sounded like a good idea at the time. Its unintended consequence was that it changed forever the definition of marriage from a permanent relationship between spouses to a temporary one. Sadly, children became collateral damage in the selfish pursuits of adults.
Same-sex marriage will do the same, depriving children of their right to either a mom or a dad. This is not a small deal. Children are being reduced to chattel-like sources of fulfillment. On one side, their family tree consists not of ancestors, but of a small army of anonymous surrogates, donors, and attorneys who pinch-hit for the absent gender in genderless marriages. Gays and lesbians demand that they have a “right” to have children to complete their sense of personal fulfillment, and in so doing, are trumping the right that children have to both a mother and a father—a right that same-sex marriage tramples over.
Same-sex marriage will undefine marriage and unravel it, and in so doing, it will undefine children. It will ultimately lead to undefining humanity. This is neither “progressive” nor “conservative” legislation. It is “regressive” legislation.
Nowhere on any marriage license application in any state are the applicants asked, “Do you love each other?” Yet this is the basis on which same-sex marriage proponents seek to change our laws. Is the state really in the business of celebrating our romantic lives?
The mantra I heard repeatedly in Minnesota was that “marriage is about love, commitment, and responsibility.” But these three things are not the state’s interests in marriage. Marriage, from the state’s perspective, is about kids. Period. That’s the reason the institution exists. We should tremble at and fear the notion of undoing it.
For a nation that has no trouble selfishly creating a seventeen-trillion-dollar (and growing) deficit it will soon hand off to its children and grandchildren, perhaps this is asking too much. But for the sake of all children and those yet to be born, we need to slow down and seriously consider the unintended consequences of undefining marriage. Otherwise, we risk treating our progeny as expendable pawns, sacrificed in the name of self-fulfillment. We can do better than that.
In conclusion, marriage isn't just about who you love,but creating and raising children in a stable and loving home, and children deserve to be raised by a Mom and Dad...that's equality.
©2008-2013 Patricia Garza blog comments powered by Disqus