1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Historical Defining Moment: Restoring Marriage To A Respectable State Globally And Permanently

Discussion in 'World Politics' started by David Jeffrey Spetch, Jan 15, 2016.

  1. David Jeffrey Spetch

    David Jeffrey Spetch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    Historical Defining Moment: Restoring Marriage To A Respectable State Globally And Permanently

    Before we dive right into the very foundation of the factual evidence proving the meaning of marriage beyond any shadow of doubt, keep in mind the fact that artificial insemination does not describe a sexual orientation.

    Before I continue on I'd also like to point out that leaving marriage in the respectable state that it was created for and in honour of for thousands of years since marriage was created wasn't hurting anyone, but homosexual activists went ahead and made this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage anyway with their every lie and deception when they could have very well accepted the fact that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions and made the wise decision to opt for civil unions in the first place thus saving allot of unneeded headaches and tax dollars.

    The factual evidence which proves that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions is quite simply the fact that thanks to heterosexual unions each and every one of us even exists as opposed to the fact that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race, we would have died off thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. A very distinct significance in difference obviously proving beyond any shadow of doubt that homosexual unions do not even come close to equal heterosexual unions and are quite obviously not even in the same ball park. That homosexual unions are relationships that are among consenting adults, as are heterosexual unions among consenting adults, obviously doesn't detract from the factual evidence proving that homosexual unions do not equal heterosexual unions as clearly demonstrated within this very paragraph.

    As I have shared on many previous occasions, thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves beyond any shadow of doubt that marriage is about honouring the significance of the one sexual unity to which we all owe our very existence and as long as we, the human race exists, that significance stands alone by honouring heterosexual unions with what we call marriage because again to make myself very clear it is "exclusively" thanks to heterosexual unions that each and every one of us even exists which is quite obviously a significance worthy of honouring with the distinction of what we call marriage above that of any other kind of sexual unity. Even test tube babies and artificial inseminations wouldn't exist without heterosexual unions existing to sustain the human race with what we call procreation in the first place.

    By making this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage, homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to degrade the meaning of marriage by trying to obviously make it be about including honouring that if it were up to homosexual unions to sustain the human race we would have died of thousands of years ago for weakly being a race of sexually defective. Even though that homosexuals may have attempted to make a mockery of marriage here and there throughout history, by referring to their relationship of same sex couples as a marriage it was always short lived, snuffed out and discontinued because again marriage was never about honouring homosexual unions. In some instances the homosexual couples were beheaded or murdered in some other way for making such false claims.

    Homosexual activist deliberate ignorance towards the meaning of marriage is both insulting and infuriating and it is all because homosexual activists refuse to accept homosexuals for what homosexuals are as well obviously refuse to accept heterosexuals for what heterosexuals are and proof of this is that here homosexuals and homosexual activists are attempting to proclaim that heterosexual unions are no more significant than homosexual unions yet that we exist factually proves otherwise.

    As humans in a democratic society, we are all equal and marriage is fair for everyone. Everyone has the right to marry a person born with the opposite sex genital that they themselves are born with because that is what marriage was created for and in honour of. There is only discrimination or inequality when it comes to marriage if someone is being denied the right to marry someone BORN with the opposite sex genital that the individual being denied is BORN with. To be clear, when I say opposite sex genital, I mean a penis is the opposite of a vagina.

    As I have shared previously, when it comes to tradition:

    It is traditional, since it was once thought that the world was flat (as opposed to before the creation of marriage) and discovered that the world is round (as opposed to marriage being created) it is traditional to refer to the world as round. If someone wants to start calling the world square and claiming that it must be put to a vote because traditions have been known to change, it is obviously a demonstration of refusing to accept the fact that the world is round (as opposed to refusing to accept the fact that marriage is about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence) and expecting that everyone should have to call it square if they win the vote even though it is all based upon an obvious lie to begin with because the world is not square just because someone refuses to accept the fact that the world is round. This is what I call abusing the democratic voting system with invalid claims based upon deliberate ignorance towards what fact already reveals.

    I have noticed that homosexual activists abused the Supreme Court of Justice in the USA by attempting to make irrelevance to do with tradition the issue by claiming that marriage was once about trading goods or live stalk for wives but that eventually changed because women were being treated as property instead of equal human beings which was an obviously lie and I will explain how that is not anything more than a homosexual activist lie in this very paragraph. It is no lie that at one time goods and live stalk were being exchanged for wives but that was never what marriage was about because the fact remains that before and after goods and live stalk were being traded for wives, marriage was always about honouring the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we owe our very existence. Even when goods were being traded for wives, the marriage itself was always about honouring the unity of heterosexual couples as it always has been for thousands of years since marriage was created.

    Personally, I couldn't believe that the USA Supreme Court of Justice was headed by a bunch of untrustworthy gullible and obviously ignorant individuals who could be so easily persuaded to succumb to an obvious lie in the form of yet another homosexual activist deception. I simply couldn't believe it because it is a fact proven by a simple demonstration of factual evidence as revealed within the previous paragraph of this very composition. I have absolutely zero respect for the USA Supreme Court of Justice after revealing themselves to be so untrustworthy and incompetent. I could only ever have respect for them when they announce recognition of the facts I share and criminalize homosexuals making a mockery of marriage, along with every single homosexual couple currently already making a mockery of marriage, their certificates and records to do with such burned and recognition of calling such a marriage voided permanently. As it stands, what kind of an example does a Supreme Court of Justice exemplify to it's citizens when it obviously supports lies and deceptions over fact?!! There is not anything worthy of respect in that for how can anyone respect a Supreme Court of Mockery as opposed to actual justice?!!

    Again thousands of years of only heterosexual unions being honoured with marriage proves beyond any shadow of doubt the fact that marriage is about honouring the significance of the one sexual unity to which we all owe our very existence with the deserved distinction above any other kind of sexual orientation unity by honouring exclusively heterosexual unions with what we call marriage. And now after thousands of years of marriage being in a respectable state it was created for and in honour of we suddenly not only have these homosexual activists using their every lie and deception to have succeeded in making this soon to be short lived mockery of marriage over such a short period of time, they are now also attempting to dictate the obvious lie that this soon to be short lived mockery that they make of marriage is irreversible. Which is like a thief robbing a museum and when caught by the police attempting to dictate that the items stolen now belong to the thief.

    Refusing to accept a fact is what is called deliberate ignorance. Refusing to accept fact does not change fact and nor does it mean that the fact does not exist. When someone refuses to acknowledge recognition of fact, this is when they, as homosexual activists compulsively and obsessively display such behaviour, reveal that they are up to trying to make their every lie and deception the issue to support an obvious bias agenda.

    continued ...
     
  2. David Jeffrey Spetch

    David Jeffrey Spetch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    So as I draw near to the end of this historical composition, this is where homosexual activists will try and make their lies and deceptions the issue once again by attempting such as to label me a hater, a bigot and a homophobe for simply sharing facts that reveal how homosexual activists have for now gotten away with abusing the public, the court systems, the media, our legislation and our elected governing officials with factually proven lies and deceptions. They will not even come close to contesting with so much as a shred of validity the facts I share which reveal homosexuals and homosexual activists / LGBT for the obsessive compulsive liars and deceivers that they prove to be on the very foundation of the issue of marriage. They will simply scramble to continue to try and make their every lie and deception the issue over and over like a broken record that became sickening to listen too so very long ago hence the term homosexual activist insanity manifestation. They make up a bunch of factually proven lies and deceptions because they refuse to accept fact and back up their lies and deceptions with not anything more than more lies and deceptions over and over again and again. Political party trade off's or an incompetent Justice system along with an obviously corrupted main stream media doesn't qualify that the majority of the public supports homosexual activist lies and deceptions no matter the lies and deceptions that homosexual activists compulsively and obsessively attempt to force upon you into attempt to try and make their obvious delusions the issue.

    I am not a hater, a bigot or a homophobe. I love and care about the well being and sanity of current and future generations which is why it is my pleasure to play a key role in assuring the restoration of marriage to a respectable state permanently and globally while also putting to rest this modern day homosexual activist insanity manifestation permanently and globally for the well being of the future of the life on this planet. There is so much more lies and deceptions coming from homosexuals and homosexual activists on the foundation of other primary issues but I'll keep the subject for now on marriage to avoid including too many issues into this composition.

    I can understand that some people are factually sexually active with one or those born with the same sex genital that they themselves are born with. In some instances this factually does lead them to want to spend their lives with one another as a couple. I can understand that homosexuals as tax payers, they see heterosexuals getting benefits due to legislation that cover their life time partners with such things as medical coverage due to legislation allowing this and I can understand that homosexuals want the same benefit to cover their life time partner because they are every bit as much of a tax payer as every other citizen and rightfully so since they are in a relationship among consenting adults who are not biological siblings.

    Same sex civil partnerships is a logical way to accomplish that homosexuals can cover their significant other with such things as medical benefits for example without making a mockery of marriage.

    I look forward to seeing marriage inevitably being restored to a respectable state permanently and globally. Have a wonderful day everyone and enjoy the year 2016. I do mean everyone [​IMG]

    love

    Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
    David Jeffrey Spetch
    Ps. Be good, be strong!
    Hamilton Ontario Canada

    [​IMG]
     
  3. cashmcall

    cashmcall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,594
    Likes Received:
    386
    Trophy Points:
    83
    I wrote this awhile back, but it's relevant..

    Awhile back, someone emailed and asked me to write about the gay marriage case in Virginia. Then a woman from Wisconsin asked if I would blog about the gay marriage case in her state .A few readers in Utah have also requested that I chime in on the gay marriage fight there.

    And so I was going to do just that. I sat down to type a scathing rant about gay marriage. I sat down to tell the world that gay marriage is the greatest threat to the sanctity of marriage.

    But then I remembered this:

    A sign I saw on the side of the road a little while back. Divorce for sale! Only 129 dollars! Get ’em while they’re hot!

    And then I remembered an article I read last week about the new phenomenon of "divorce parties". Divorced is the new single, the divorce party planner tells us.

    And then I remembered another article claiming that the divorce rate is climbing because the economy is recovering. Now that things are getting a little better, we can finally splurge on that divorce we’ve always wanted!

    And then I remembered that — ebbs and flows notwithstanding — there is one divorce every 13 seconds, or over 46,000 divorces a week in this country. And then I remembered that, although the “50 percent of marriages end in divorce” statistic can be misleading, we’re still in a situation where there are half as many divorces as there are marriages in a single year.

    And then I remembered no-fault divorce. I remembered that marriage is the ONLY LEGAL CONTRACT A PERSON CAN BREAK WITHOUT THE OTHER PARTY’S CONSENT AND WITHOUT FACING ANY LEGAL REPERCUSSIONS.Sorry to scream at you

    But I remembered that marriage has for decades been, from a legal perspective, the least meaningful, least stable, and least protected contract in existence, and I think this fact should be emphasized.


    And then I remembered how many Christian churches gave up on marriage long ago, allowing their flock to divorce and remarry and divorce and remarry and divorce and remarry, and each time permitting the charade of “vows” to take place on their altars. And then I remembered that churchesCANlower the divorce rate simply by taking a consistent positionon it — which is why practicing Catholics are significantly less likelyto break up — but many refuse because they are cowards begging for the world’s approval.

    And then I remembered that over 40 percent of America’s children are growing up without a father in the home. And then I remembered that close to half of all children will witness the breakdown of their parent’s marriage. Half of that half will also have the pleasure of watching a second marriage fall apart.

    And then I remembered that more and more young people areopting out of marriage because the previous generation was so bad at it that they’ve scared their kids away from the institution entirely.

    I remembered all of these things, and I decided to instead write about the most urgent threat to the sanctity of marriage.

    Divorce.

    Divorces are as common as flat tires, and they often happen for reasons nearly as frivolous.

    The institution of marriage is crumbling beneath us; it’s under attack, it’s mortally wounded, it’s sprawled out on the pavement with bullet wounds in its back, coughing up blood and gasping for breath. And guess who did this? It wasn’t Perez Hilton or Elton John, I can tell you that.

    This is the work of divorce.

    I am an opponent of gay marriage, but we here in the “sanctity of marriage” camp are tragically too afraid to approach the thing that is destroying marriage faster than anything else ever could. Gay marriage removes from marriage its procreative characteristic, but rampant divorce takes away its permanent characteristic. It makes no sense to concentrate all of our energy on the former while all but ignoring the latter.

    To make matters worse, some of the loudest mouth pieces for “traditional marriage” in media and politics are bigamists, adulterers, and men with two, three, or four ex-wives. It’s not that youcan’t defend the sanctity of marriage when you have been divorced multiple times, it’s just that you have zero credibility on the subject.

    If you beat and abuse your children so badly that they have to be removed from you, you could, I suppose, still complain if you found out that your kids are also being mistreated in their foster home. But your anger must first be directed at yourself, because it is YOUR FAULT that they are suffering in this way.

    So whose fault is it that the institution of marriage is beaten and broken? I don’t think we want to contemplate that question, for fear that we might see ourselves in the answer.
    Should laws be written to “defend marriage”? Sure, and let’s start with legislation to make divorces at least somewhat harder to obtain than a magazine subscription. How serious are we about this? Anyone up for a law to criminalize adultery? What about putting some restrictions on re-marriage?

    There are certainly times when a couple has no choice but to go their separate ways. What else can you do in cases of serial abuse or serial adultery, or when one party simply abandons the other? But infidelity and abuse do not explain the majority of divorces in this country, and they are not the leading causes of break-ups. According to “exports,” the top causes of divorce are a lack of individual identity, “getting into it for the wrong reasons,” and “becoming lost in the roles.” A survey done by theNational Fatherhood Institute found lack of communication, and finances to be the leading culprits. An article inThe Examiner also cites finances as the most potent divorce-fuel.

    In other words, these days marriages can be blown apart by the slightest gust of wind, coming from any direction, and for any reason. Noticeably absent from all of these polls about the reasons for divorce: gay marriage.

    That’s because gay marriage is not the biggest threat to marriage.

    We are.

    We are, when we vow on our very souls to stand by someone for the rest of our lives, until death do us part, only to let financial troubles and communication difficulties dissolve that union we forged before God. We are, when we forget about those Biblical readings we picked out for our wedding service:

    When we marry, we die. Our old selves die, and we are born anew into each other; into the unbreakable marital bond.

    We are a threat to the sanctity of marriage when we let our selfishness fool us into thinking that our wedding vows weren’t that serious.


    Indeed, despite popular sentiment, theywereserious.


    Theyareserious. They’re as serious as death.

    The struggle to protect marriage is also serious. It’s an important battle.

    So maybe it’s time we actually start fighting it.
     
  4. David Jeffrey Spetch

    David Jeffrey Spetch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    69
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    6
    All that and yet the fact remains that divorce doesn't disrespect the fact that marriage was created for and in honour of the significance of the unity of the one sexual orientation to which we all owe our very existence and such a distinction well above the unity of any other sexual unity are quite obviously heterosexual unions of which thousands of years since created proves is what marriage was created for and in honour of.

    All that divorce signifies is the end of a heterosexual couples unity in marriage but even that still doesn't disrespect that marriage is about honouring heterosexual unions.

    love

    Primary Factual Fundamentalist World Class Activist
    David Jeffrey Spetch
    Ps. Be good, be strong!
    Hamilton Ontario Canada
     
  5. cashmcall

    cashmcall Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,594
    Likes Received:
    386
    Trophy Points:
    83
    All that? Did you read your post? Divorce doesn't disrespect marriage.. you think way to highly of yourself, Divorce is more relevant than Gay marriage period...
     
Loading...

Share This Page