Proof That Gay Marriage Causes Steamy Heterosexual Affrairs

[KMG365]

I have to say, I was a little bothered by the immature statement made to ridicule the person in question. I have no idea who she is, I don't want to know who she is but for the gay community to decide they will rise up and take advantage of this situation by making fun of her is just distasteful.

This is the full text of the "apology" letter at the centre of all of this:

An Open Apology to Amy Koch on Behalf of All Gay and Lesbian Minnesotans

Dear Ms. Koch,

On behalf of all gays and lesbians living in Minnesota, I would like to wholeheartedly apologize for our community's successful efforts to threaten your traditional marriage. We are ashamed of ourselves for causing you to have what the media refers to as an "illicit affair" with your staffer, and we also extend our deepest apologies to him and to his wife. These recent events have made it quite clear that our gay and lesbian tactics have gone too far, affecting even the most respectful of our society.

We apologize that our selfish requests to marry those we love have cheapened and degraded traditional marriage so much that we caused you to stray from your own holy union for something more cheap and tawdry. And we are doubly remorseful in knowing that many will see this as a form of sexual harassment of a subordinate.

It is now clear to us that if we were not so self-focused and myopic, we would have been able to see that the time you wasted diligently writing legislation that would forever seal the definition of marriage as being between one man and one woman, could have been more usefully spent reshaping the legal definition of "adultery."

Forgive us. As you know, we are not church-going people, so we are unable to fully appreciate that "gay marriage" is incompatible with Christian values, despite the fact that those values carry a biblical tradition of adultery such as yours. We applaud you for keeping that tradition going.

And finally, shame on us for thinking that marriage is a private affair, and that our marriage would have little impact on anyone's family. We now see that marriage is more than that. It is an agreement with society. We should listen to the Minnesota Family Council when it tells us that marriage is about being public, which explains why marriages are public ceremonies. Never did we realize that it is exactly because of this societal agreement that the entire world is looking at you in shame and disappointment instead of minding its own business.

From the bottom of our hearts, we ask that you please accept our apology.

Thank you.
John Medeiros
Minneapolis MN

Amy Koch has used her position as a state senator to promote her agenda - an agenda that denies loving couples the right to get married - because she views such marriages as a threat to traditional values. Now that Ms. Koch has been exposed as a fraud, however, it is only fair that she be subjected to the consequences of her actions. People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

The apology letter I quoted above merely illustrates the absurd arguments used against same-sex marriage. Ms. Koch essentially made herself a target and that's why it's directed at her, but it could honestly be addressed to any number of politicians who don't practice what they preach.

Incidentally, on more than one occasion, the United States Supreme Court has ruled that marriage is a basic civil right. As such, it should be open to all adult couples who freely choose to enter into such a union. Gay marriage is a threat only to the values of the ignorant and the bigoted.

 

[KMG365]

On another note, you seem to be poisoned and biased if you think that Republicans consider gays to be an evil influence. Get over yourself. I am a Republican and some of my dearest friends are gay and married to each other and I couldn't care less. It isn't for me to judge so do me the favor of doing the same. Your poisonous stance makes me positively sick.

In all fairness, the Republican party has chosen to take up a rather anti-gay mantle. In at least one or two states where gay marriage is currently legal, Republicans are looking to repeal the legislation - even though most citizens polled in those states support gay marriage. So, this is not a condemnation of individual Republicans, like yourself, because you may be very open-minded and accepting of diversity, but the Republican party, in general, has earned its anti-gay reputation.

 

[jennifervb]

On another note, you seem to be poisoned and biased if you think that Republicans consider gays to be an evil influence. Get over yourself. I am a Republican and some of my dearest friends are gay and married to each other and I couldn't care less. It isn't for me to judge so do me the favor of doing the same. Your poisonous stance makes me positively sick.

In all fairness, the Republican party has chosen to take up a rather anti-gay mantle. In at least one or two states where gay marriage is currently legal, Republicans are looking to repeal the legislation - even though most citizens polled in those states support gay marriage. So, this is not a condemnation of individual Republicans, like yourself, because you may be very open-minded and accepting of diversity, but the Republican party, in general, has earned its anti-gay reputation.

Most Republicans I know, in the United States, are Republicans because of their views on the Economy. It has in many cases little or nothing to do with their religious views. And while we are on the subject... I have a LOT of friends and acquaintances who are gay AND Republican!

I find it amazing that Canadians seem to think that they know everything based on what they hear and read in America's "liberal" media. It would be just as insulting if I were to sit here...perched in the United States....thinking that I am in any position to judge Canadians and/or Canada's problems. Sorry...it doesn't work that way.

My ex-husband also considers it his divine right to judge Americans and America while his butt is parked in Germany. I did him the same favor of questioning Germany in the political arena and he blew his stack. Whoops...guess he didn't like that too well. I rest my case.

Unless you are in the country in question... living the life of the average American... don't try lording it from outside the United States. 99.9% of the time you will be wrong in your assumptions and catering to the political agenda of the Liberal backed media bent on killing the reputation of the Republicans. Don't go there. Like any media outlet... they are pathological liars promoting their own beliefs and agenda. It doesn't matter if they are liberal or conservative. Ask an American. Don't ask the press Thanks.

 

[ruthlessbliss]

My interpretation of the use of the word "Republican" in this thread seems to be almost entirely revolving around Republican politicians, but not Republican voters. I have big issues with Republican politicians, especially the most recent batch, but I reserve my judgment on individual Republican voters until they show their colors. This may be a moot point, since one of the offended parties has vowed not to respond, but I don't believe this had anything to do with attacking individuals but rather a group of politicians who make hypocritical choices but still hold themselves to be better people.

The Republican party as it exists today is not one I could vote for, no matter whether or not I believe their economic policies are best for this country, because of their gross negligence when it comes to matters of human and civil rights. While we all have biases, I try not to let my distaste for the party cloud my judgment as an individual.

As for the matter of crassness in the letter, as jorats said "I feel that 'minority' groups tend to fight their battles with sarcasm, cursing and crudeness", the thing is that minority groups frequently have to shout to be heard. They come from a disenfranchised group of society, and they wish to be heard, so they do what they think will make people listen. Coming from one such disenfranchised group, where there is plenty of debate about whether or not we should make a splash or whether we should all just listen to Phil Plait and "don't be a dick". You can feel however you want about this, and that is perfectly fine, but the fact of the matter is that the world that many of us live in is one where sometimes there isn't anything for us to do scream our heads off or make light about the situation.

With this post, I did not mean to single anyone out or take sides; I just meant to share my point of view. I apologize if anyone felt unduly criticized, as it was not my intention.

 

[jennifervb]

My interpretation of the use of the word "Republican" in this thread seems to be almost entirely revolving around Republican politicians, but not Republican voters. I have big issues with Republican politicians, especially the most recent batch, but I reserve my judgment on individual Republican voters until they show their colors. This may be a moot point, since one of the offended parties has vowed not to respond, but I don't believe this had anything to do with attacking individuals but rather a group of politicians who make hypocritical choices but still hold themselves to be better people.

The Republican party as it exists today is not one I could vote for, no matter whether or not I believe their economic policies are best for this country, because of their gross negligence when it comes to matters of human and civil rights. While we all have biases, I try not to let my distaste for the party cloud my judgment as an individual.

As for the matter of crassness in the letter, as jorats said "I feel that 'minority' groups tend to fight their battles with sarcasm, cursing and crudeness", the thing is that minority groups frequently have to shout to be heard. They come from a disenfranchised group of society, and they wish to be heard, so they do what they think will make people listen. Coming from one such disenfranchised group, where there is plenty of debate about whether or not we should make a splash or whether we should all just listen to Phil Plait and "don't be a dick". You can feel however you want about this, and that is perfectly fine, but the fact of the matter is that the world that many of us live in is one where sometimes there isn't anything for us to do scream our heads off or make light about the situation.

With this post, I did not mean to single anyone out or take sides; I just meant to share my point of view. I apologize if anyone felt unduly criticized, as it was not my intention.

Right now I wouldn't vote for them either. This has to be the sorriest lot of politicians I have ever encountered. The Tea-Party didn't help with their refusal to acknowledge anything that was important to helping the people of this country. I appreciate that the deficit is spiraling out of control but there has got to be a better way to iron out the differences! It was just embarrassing. They were all newcomers who refused to even LISTEN to the advice of their fellow Senators and Congressmen. No wonder things are so deeply divided and allergic.

If you were referring to me in your post... don't worry about it. I am used to this kind of arguing, debating and bantering. I've been at it for over 30 years and this too shall pass. Don't make yourself responsible. You can't know how people will react so there was no harm done, in my view, on your part. Roller Coaster rides can initiate out of anything. :hugs:

 

[Dazzle87]

KMG365 wasn't attacking republican voters as homophobes, just stating that the republican party is in general opposed to gay marriage. This is very much true.

From the republican party's website:

Preserving Traditional Marriage

Because our children’s future is best preserved within the traditional understanding of marriage, we call for a constitutional amendment that fully protects marriage as a union of a man and a woman, so that judges cannot make other arrangements equivalent to it. In the absence of a national amendment, we support the right of the people of the various states to affirm traditional marriage through state initiatives.

Republicans recognize the importance of having in the home a father and a mother who are married. The two-parent family still provides the best environment of stability, discipline, responsibility, and character. Children in homes without fathers are more likely to commit a crime, drop out of school, become violent, become teen parents, use illegal drugs, become mired in poverty, or have emotional or behavioral problems. We support the courageous efforts of single-parent families to provide a stable home for their children. Children are our nation’s most precious resource. We also salute and support the efforts of foster and adoptive families.

Republicans have been at the forefront of protecting traditional marriage laws, both in the states and in Congress. A Republican Congress enacted the Defense of Marriage Act, affirming the right of states not to recognize same-sex “marriages” licensed in other states. Unbelievably, the Democratic Party has now pledged to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act, which would subject every state to the redefinition of marriage by a judge without ever allowing the people to vote on the matter. We also urge Congress to use its Article III, Section 2 power to prevent activist federal judges from imposing upon the rest of the nation the judicial activism in Massachusetts and California. We also encourage states to review their marriage and divorce laws in order to strengthen marriage.

As the family is our basic unit of society, we oppose initiatives to erode parental rights.

http://gop.com/2008Platform/Values.htm#6

 

[Brax]

Gay Community Apologizes For Republican Marriage-Crusader's Extra-Marital Affair

A dedicated, family-oriented wholesome Republican woman who happens to be on the front lines saving marriage in the name of God and the sacred tradition of Opposite Sex Reproduction cheats on her husband... how can it not be our fault? I also admit responsibility for this. Just the fact that I live in Canada where gay marriage is fully legalized and recognized must have had such an impact on this poor, poor woman's immortal soul. May God help these poor, strange and confused heterosexuals who fall prey to our evil influence.

I don't see anywhere in the article that Mrs. Koch had an affair with another woman so it escapes me that the Gay community would issue an apology.

On another note, you seem to be poisoned and biased if you think that Republicans consider gays to be an evil influence. Get over yourself. I am a Republican and some of my dearest friends are gay and married to each other and I couldn't care less. It isn't for me to judge so do me the favor of doing the same. Your poisonous stance makes me positively sick.

Jen, I'm the most ideologically Republican person on this forum, more so than most Republicans unless you consider the idiot fact of that special idiotic brand of social conservatism most have going and that particular person is against same-sex marriage. I may be from Canada, queer and pro-same-sex-marriage, but that doesn't mean you can't stop kissing your fellow Republican's backsides for a moment and read what I actually wrote. I was criticizing her and her anti-marriage Conservative crowd.

And it's a joke. Humour isn't always literal. If you can't understand humour then don't even bother. I don't think I'm the one who needs to get over myself here.

 

[jennifervb]

Gay Community Apologizes For Republican Marriage-Crusader's Extra-Marital Affair

A dedicated, family-oriented wholesome Republican woman who happens to be on the front lines saving marriage in the name of God and the sacred tradition of Opposite Sex Reproduction cheats on her husband... how can it not be our fault? I also admit responsibility for this. Just the fact that I live in Canada where gay marriage is fully legalized and recognized must have had such an impact on this poor, poor woman's immortal soul. May God help these poor, strange and confused heterosexuals who fall prey to our evil influence.

I don't see anywhere in the article that Mrs. Koch had an affair with another woman so it escapes me that the Gay community would issue an apology.

On another note, you seem to be poisoned and biased if you think that Republicans consider gays to be an evil influence. Get over yourself. I am a Republican and some of my dearest friends are gay and married to each other and I couldn't care less. It isn't for me to judge so do me the favor of doing the same. Your poisonous stance makes me positively sick.

Jen, I'm the most ideologically Republican person on this forum, more so than most Republicans unless you consider the idiot fact of that special idiotic brand of social conservatism most have going and that particular person is against same-sex marriage. I may be from Canada, queer and pro-same-sex-marriage, but that doesn't mean you can't stop kissing your fellow Republican's backsides for a moment and read what I actually wrote. I was criticizing her and her anti-marriage Conservative crowd.

And it's a joke. Humour isn't always literal. If you can't understand humour then don't even bother. I don't think I'm the one who needs to get over myself here.

If I can't understand humor? Whoops...sorry... I actually do have a sense of humor. Guess you only see and acknowledge the form you understand. Thanks for understanding that others may be different to you. I'm not going to see things the way everyone thinks I should. Sorry to have stepped on your toes. My bad.

 

[jorats]

We opened this thread up again so people can comment about the original post. About the article made.

STAY ON TOPIC! :cop:

 

[hopefloats]

I see why they sent the apology letter, sarcasm at it's best. I hear how the unity of marriage needs to be protected and that by allowing gay marriages, we will ruin the marriage vows. It is quite horrible for the individual who will not pass these laws to be in the news constantly over how they cheated on their spouse. The sex of the individual is not in question...The fact that they say they cannot pass these laws, or they stand behind not passing them... Few months later, they are plaster over the news for cheating.

I personally think we have a double standard. I hate how we claim to be so equal and have so many opportunities yet we deny people things that others are allowed. Which I cannot fathom how we think that is proper to do. Especially since most of the arguments I see are on a religious background. Man should marry woman... I think they need to stick to their keep the religion out of the state and stop picking who can marry who. We are to advanced as a society to allow differences to dictate who can marry.

They want to fight a war they should go towards what is killing society....drugs and poverty...Not marriages.

 

[jorats]

For me, I don't even believe in the sanctity of marriage anymore. The celebrities have clearly turned it into one big joke. They get divorced within months of getting married. Why are they trying to protect that? Really stupid if you ask me.
I'm really glad that in Canada everyone can marry, and be allowed to get tied down, frustrated and hurt like the rest of us. LOL

 

[hopefloats]

I think it is more for rights as a couple. Marriage allows insurance, it allows a safety net to your spouse. It also allows for parents to be "covered" in child custody. When your spouse gets sick you have the say in what happens, gay couples dont have that right to chose what happens to their loved ones during a accident. It is deeper than just saying "We are married" it is being allowed the same rights that a man/woman couple share.

 

[Petunia]

I think it is more for rights as a couple. Marriage allows insurance, it allows a safety net to your spouse. It also allows for parents to be "covered" in child custody. When your spouse gets sick you have the say in what happens, gay couples dont have that right to chose what happens to their loved ones during a accident. It is deeper than just saying "We are married" it is being allowed the same rights that a man/woman couple share.

yep so one could understand an argument against marriage for non traditional couples based on the financial aspect.... but that's one argument I rarely hear. It's all about "destroying marriage".

To be honest, I've thought that civil unions or some other name should be applied to non traditional marriages, but my reasoning involved the needs of children. Psychologically they are very conservative in their thinking, and I thought it would cause unnecessary confusion for them when they are just learning about "where babies come from" etc, to have to also handle learning that there are other couplings that can have/produce children and all the many new options there are for ways to "make a family".

I think I've probably not given children enough credit, but I think I may be on to what these folks who are trying to "defend" the traditional marriage are worried about-
they will have to come up with new ways to discuss what moms and dads are, how families come to be, along with the "man and women fall in love, marry and have babies" story.
It's more work, I think it can be confusing, and on this score, I agree, as a mother myself, it can be challenging.
They will have to talk more about REAL values and respecting other people, and less about respecting "institutions" and "ideas".
I preferred the nice neat two people of opposite genders meet, fall in love and make babies- it is, undeniably, the way that "nature" intended for children to come into the picture.
It's easier to explain, but it's just a jumping off point for discussing relationships between people and becoming parents.

It's not a reason to deny others the benefits of a legal marriage, but it's understandable and I sympathize with them on this score.

My mental compromise was to call non traditional marriages something else, but really, with the sky high divorce rate, people living together without being married, and whatnot (there's another group of people, I forget what they call themselves? that live together and share their mates- know what I"m talking about? I first heard it talked about on Goosemoose forum) does traditional marriage even exist any more?

Change is hard and painful, for everyone concerned. I hope we all learn to be more kind to each other in this process.

 

[jorats]

I wonder if in Canada, the same rule applies for same sex non married couples as with hetero couples... after 3 years of living together, you have all the same rights as a married couple.

 

[Petunia]

I wonder if in Canada, the same rule applies for same sex non married couples as with hetero couples... after 3 years of living together, you have all the same rights as a married couple.

that would be interesting to know. different states here have different rules about this, they are usually referred to as "common law" marriages, but not every state allows this.

and each of our states have different rules about who gets what in a divorce, too.

I really wish we had more unified rules/laws on these things. :roll:

 

[KMG365]

Personally, I think it's the parents that would have a far harder time accepting gay marriage than their kids. Kids, for the most part, don't need or want details - at least in the beginning. If they grow up believing something is normal, chances are they won't have an issue with it at all.

Separate but equal is not equal. That's why I have an issue with calling gay marriage anything but marriage. Calling a gay marriage a civil union, for instance, still implies that they're different - even if they come with the same legal and financial benefits. Unfortunately, using different terms would still allow the ignorant and the bigoted to look down upon gay relationships and treat them as substandard relationships.

 

[jennifervb]

In my book, if people love each other (or not) and want to marry then they should have that right.

Everyone has different sets of moral and ethical standards and they are, by all means, entitled to do what constitutes their own happiness without reference to anyone else.

Homosexual marriages do not hurt anyone. They don't stop other people from breathing or carrying on with their own lives.

I've heard people say that homosexuals are "sick" or that they "choose" to be gay. You can't help how you feel. I had a crush on a girl once, when I was a kid, and I didn't think there was anything wrong with it. She was a wonderful human being and gave people every reason in the world to love her.

I love my homosexual friends. They are witty and can laugh at themselves. They suffer the same heartache that heterosexuals suffer in their relationships. They feel the same joys... the same pain.... the same anger.

I know homosexual families with heterosexual children so people don't need to try impressing upon me that gay unions constitute a threat to the moral integrity of their kids. If any one of these people knew my girlfriends, Sharon and Trish, they would have to dream up a new reason to be offended at homosexuality. It doesn't get more classy than those two ladies. :love6:

 

[Petunia]

Personally, I think it's the parents that would have a far harder time accepting gay marriage than their kids. Kids, for the most part, don't need or want details - at least in the beginning. If they grow up believing something is normal, chances are they won't have an issue with it at all.

Separate but equal is not equal. That's why I have an issue with calling gay marriage anything but marriage. Calling a gay marriage a civil union, for instance, still implies that they're different - even if they come with the same legal and financial benefits. Unfortunately, using different terms would still allow the ignorant and the bigoted to look down upon gay relationships and treat them as substandard relationships.

I wasn't talking about acceptance, I was talking about understanding it. Children pick up on the attitudes and prejudices of their parents. But as far as what they are able to understand, lets say you've got a five year old child to whom you've just explained, in answer to their questions, that it takes a man and a woman together to "make a baby"
and then they see the Sue and Mary are married and they have a baby- there could very well be questions about how did Sue and Mary make that baby.......
that's where things get tricky.
I don't know what I"d tell my own child.
She knew long before I told her that I'm a lesbian (having not fully come to realize it myself til 1999!!) and I'd had a very brief very horrible "traditional" marriage so I was never faced with explaining anything more complicated than divorce and domestic and sexual abuse and incest :roll: when she was young.
Hmm, I did ok there, so I guess I'm not giving myself enough credit, I probably could have found ways to discuss more pleasant things like other options for making a family. :giggle:

You have to admit, that non traditional couples *are* different. Otherwise this discussion wouldn't even be taking place.
How they are treated is what is at issue here. Differences shouldn't mean different treatment.

I have since changed my ideas of what a "gay" marriage should be called, but I just wanted to say, as a lesbian, even I had some trouble wrapping my head around the idea of trying to explain to a young child how a same gender couple had children.

I'm older and my brain isn't as flexible as it should be I guess :lol: (mostly kidding) I'm just trying to see both sides of this issue.
I think that's the only way that people are going to able to resolve it, to be understanding of the fears and concerns of everyone involved.

 

[KMG365]

I have since changed my ideas of what a "gay" marriage should be called, but I just wanted to say, as a lesbian, even I had some trouble wrapping my head around the idea of trying to explain to a young child how a same gender couple had children.

To be honest, while this is an issue that we, as adults, seem to dwell quite a bit on, I really don't think it would be much of an issue for kids. I remember finding out where babies came from after reading a library book when I was in grade one or two. Despite being grossed out, I really didn't give it a lot of thought. I think being as honest as possible with a child, taking into account the child's age and comprehension level, of course, is probably the best way to approach this subject.

I think that's the only way that people are going to able to resolve it, to be understanding of the fears and concerns of everyone involved.

Unfortunately, some people's fears and concerns are rooted in ignorance and bigotry and no amount of appeasement will suffice. The only way to adequately deal with things like that is to move forward despite their objections. I don't mean to sound harsh, but some people will stand in the way of progress simply because they're afraid of or determined not to face change.

 

[Petunia]

Unfortunately, some people's fears and concerns are rooted in ignorance and bigotry and no amount of appeasement will suffice. The only way to adequately deal with things like that is to move forward despite their objections. I don't mean to sound harsh, but some people will stand in the way of progress simply because they're afraid of or determined not to face change.

well, we have some hope that ignorance can be overcome with education. Bigotry, however.... :roll:

reminds me of one of those old Salada tea tag lines, do you remember those? witty little sayings on the tag for their tea bags?

one read: "some people's minds are like cement: all mixed up and permanently set"