After an emotional debate, Methodists at a national legislative meeting Thursday upheld the denomination’s policy that same-sex relationships are “incompatible with Christian teaching.’”
Delegates at the General Conference voted by about 60 percent to 40 percent against softening the language on homosexuality in their Book of Discipline, which contains church laws and doctrine. The meeting is held once every four years, which means the policy won’t come up for a conference vote again until 2016.
... With just under 8 million U.S. members, the United Methodist Church is the largest mainline Protestant denomination in the country, with a significant and growing membership of more than 4 million overseas.
68 Comments
So for every 2 people who are for equality, there was only 3 people against it. These numbers will flip in a few years.
Or not........
That's what they said a few years ago, Pete. Like the controvercy surrounding abortion, traditional sexual ethics are not the kind of values that can be outdated.
Okay, question for all the religious freedom supporters: Does that support go both ways? Should churches who want to marry same-sex couples be allowed to do so?
There are several denominations that *do* accept same-sex relationships: Unitarian Universalists, Episcopalians, Lutherans just off the top of my head. Or are those not "real" churches in your eyes?
Wanting to do something whether it is right or wrong does not make it right. the homosexuals have initiated so much hatred and venom and violence against anyone who does not subscribe to the absurd notion that two men having sex equals marriage, until many people are afraid to speak out so they swallow their tongue and support ssm. It makes me wonder who are they more afraid of, God or the gays? Because i can tell you this, gays don't have a heaven or hell to put you in. God does.
That means that polygamy should be forced on secular society as well, Katie, since there are denominations that accept that practice too.
"Traditional sexual ethics" you better call the thought police and the bedroom police in for that. This is why NOM can't be taken seriously, all babble and nothing that will stand up in court.
@Son of Adam: Where did I say anything about "forcing" same-sex marriage about anyone? I merely think that just as churches who do not support same-sex marriage should not be forced to perform ceremonies, so should churches that do support same-sex marriages be allowed to perform them.
Katie,
First show us a Church, or fellowship, whose historic doctrine mandates marriage corruption. The U.S. Constitution was written to protect future generations from tranistory popular culture, so said doctrine must have a firm basis.
Doing the bums rush -as with the APA- will not be enough to carry the day on this one.
Katie:
You can start the Church of the Great Big New Idea tomorrow.
You can have marriages between men and men, women and women,m tomato plants and German shepherds.
No one is stopping you.
You can be Great Big New Idea Married, and have all of the believers call you husband, or wife, or spouse, or whatever Great Big New Idea name you come up with.
Just don't impose your religion on the rest of us
Pete - No one's telling people how to think; you can disagree all you want in your mind. It's behavior that's at issue here. And that's what police do: enforce behavioral restrictions.
Randy,
I'm not sure why you are framing this as a mandate or forcing this on anyone. Unitarian Universalists, several Lutheran churches, and several Episcopalian churches *support* same-sex marriage, but it is hardly "mandated."
Katie,
You are demanding public recognition of the acceptability of your depravity. The very definition of mandating acceptance of that which my conscience dictates must be opposed.
The Episcopalian church in the U.S. has rebelled against its official doctrine; losing half of its congregation in the process while receiving admonishment from the head of its religion in England.
Katie, yours was an excellent question, and let's add the Reform Judaism. If you call for religious liberties, then we must respect all religions.
Question for all NOMulans:
Is it possible for there to be another way other than your way? Is your way the only way and any other way that doesn't agree with your way is wrong?
Randy,
My depravity? I *support* heterosexual marriage and one day will have one of my own. I am a heterosexual who supports both same-sex and opposite-sex marriage, believe it or not. We do exist.
Rick,
No thanks, I don't need to start my own church. I already belong to one that supports same-sex marriage.
And now I am off to a heterosexual wedding where 99% of the guests, including bride and groom, also support same-sex marriage. Ta-ta!
Bye Katie:
Apparently you are nowhere near North Carolina
@elias: Other way for what????
We live in a pluralistic society, elias.
We will not allow our most accent and important institutions to be redefined at the whim of an identity politics movement.
If you want to fight politically, then fight politically.
We will.
The mere fact that we have won thirty one consecutive times (thirty two after next Tuesday) ought to suggest that your approach is not working.
But then again, maybe your goal is entirely different........
Rick DeLano,
Why do NOMulans seem to have an aversion to answering questions?
I hope you will have a lovely time, but why do you think that 99% of the guests support gay marriage? Was there a survey included in the invitation?
""Traditional sexual ethics" you better call the thought police and the bedroom police in for that. This is why NOM can't be taken seriously, all babble and nothing that will stand up in court."
Nice strawman, Pete. How about a real argument next time?
"I merely think that just as churches who do not support same-sex marriage should not be forced to perform ceremonies, so should churches that do support same-sex marriages be allowed to perform them."
Just like fundamentalist mormons perform polygamous ceremonies. But that does not mean that they HAVE to be recognized by secular society.
"Is it possible for there to be another way other than your way? Is your way the only way and any other way that doesn't agree with your way is wrong?"
I wasn't aware that there was any other way to procreate and raise a family with a mother and father other than uniting men and women.
Seriously, though, the reason why marriage is generally defined as it always has throughout the millenia is because that is the family setting that suits the best interests for the needs and upbringing of children. Even if it is redefined to better suit the sexual desires of adults by either big government or some cult, time will always reset the definition of marriage to its commonly recognized meaning.
For instance, when the Mormon religion started out, they were all about polygamy. Now, its official doctrine has shifted to man/woman unions. Time will reset things into their appropriate places.
Son,
You are absolutely correct and secular gay-marriages do not have to be recognized by the religious community and no one is forceing you to do so.
And in France, pro-SSM Hollande wins, anti-SSM Sarkozy looses. The people have spoken. I know this about the economy, but in NOM-world where everything is a spin, I'll make this about marriage. Let the rationalizing begin.
Son#22,
Where on EARTH do you NOMulans come up with this stuff? Seriously. And you are diverting the issue.
Who has ever said that there are other ways to procreate other than through uniting sperm and egg? Really? And who says that children raised by their biological parents is not the ultimate situation? Really? And you make no sense when you say that marriage has had one definition for millenia (not true, research it) and yet time will reset the right definition. What? And you clearly have no idea of the whole story pertaining to polygamy and mormons. You NOMulans are not dealing with reality and you'll just attack me for saying that rather than trying to have an understanding of why I would say that, which proves the point.
Son, the Mormons were strong armed to give up polygamy due to US laws, they did not change their doctrine they just decided to follow the law. Find out why they changed their stance on african Americans, it's very revealing.
eliasasm, I just pop the extra large bag of popcorn and take this as pure entertainment. We see what's tested in the court, NOMers like to rehash points that the SCOTUS has already dealt with. Such as procreation in not a requirement of marriage.
To further the point that NOMulans aren't dealing with reality, I was on another blog this morning and there were over 25,000 comments on just one story. There are only a couple of dozen or so people posting here on all the stories. Ya gots nothin'.
Pete,
I agree it's intertaining, I just don't like to see people being made the fool and being used.
eliasasm,
You got nothing, You keep getting prodded to provide a single valid rational for your position and all you ever come up with is "not it isn't" and "so what."
You are just the left over residue of the 2008 Obama misinformation campaign. 2010 was not very good for you and it is starting to look like 2012 will be much worse.
"Son, the Mormons were strong armed to give up polygamy due to US laws, they did not change their doctrine they just decided to follow the law. Find out why they changed their stance on african Americans, it's very revealing."
That's your interpretation, Pete. And its the wrong one. Their change in their definition of marriage and stance on AAs was due to the pressure Mormon religious leaders recieved by the people within their church. The Mormon religion started out as a small group of kooks, but as it grew to admit more and more level headed people in, they changed their stances to reflect their values. In other words, governments and religions develop to reflect the values of their own people.
So your take is just as absurd as your claim that France elected Hallande because they are hell bent to get marriage redefined, not because they feel he can do a better job with the economy. And Hallande wouldn't be supporting SS"M" if it weren't so financially profitable.
@Son of Adam#31,
Sorry, you are wrong on the mormons. I used to be one and I live in Utah. Wanna debate it?
Waiting for your reply to my #25.
I already replied to #25. It just won't register in your feverish brian. And your conversion from the Mormon religion to the cult beliefs of homosexuality is your business.
Actually, my reply to #25 hasn't shown up on this blog yet. I'm not sure it ever will. I HATE that when that happens.
Son,
Well isn't that convenient for you. Why not just reanswer?
Since you are too afraid to face reality and would rather just attack and divert cause it's easier, I'll educate you on mormons. The church stopped overtly practicing polygamy because of the law of the land (country first in America) and if they didn't obey the law of the land, Utah wouldn't be granted statehood. (There are an estimated 40,000 polygamists in the Salt Lake Valley, so much for the law) On the issue of African Americans, the church changed it's postion because if they didn't, they would lose their tax exempt statis. All this came from without the church, not within. I know, I was there. So much for truth in religion. How much do you want to bet the church changes it's stance on gays in the near future? We already have a pot going here in SLC.
Religion fits the definition of a cult. A cult is something that one can join, like a church. You can't join homosexuality and besides, no one is keeping track of membership.
The government is run by the power of the people. And it is We The People that has rejected polygamy and segregation. It was the power of the people that compelled Mormons to change their stances. That, and the fact that there were not enough people in the Mormon church that considered polygamy and segregation worth keeping.
Though I shouldn't be surprised that you would interpret it as government strongarming since that is the tactic the homosexual lobby is using to impose their moral standards onto society through the legalization of SS"M" regardless of how many times it has been rejected and will continue to be rejected in referendum after referendum.
And the church hasn't changed their stance on abortion and adultery even though they were expected to by the year 2000. So don't hold your breath on homosexuality, especially considering how many people it kills every year.
Hopefuly, my response to #25 will show up by tomorrow. If not, know that it basically points out that your post is just a strawman combined with unfounded claims in order to support a useless and dangerous sexual activity.
Lastly, you don't have to be gay to be taken in by cult homosexual beliefs. There is no more scientific evidence that homosexuality is inborn, genetic, normal, or healthy than Jesus Christ's resurection.
True equality is subjecting everyone to the same moral code. And for over a thousand years, our moral tradition has taught that marriage is one man and one woman. That tradition applied and applies equally to all.
Son,
I'm sorry that you are unable to see the point I'm just trying to share with you all which ironically, or sadly, kinda proves the point I'm trying to make. And I'm not even being rude about it, like you.
Son,
And it's obvious that a point can't be made to some who actually thinks that homosexuality kills people. Mercy me.
Pete (comment #1), I suspect 100% of the voters were for equality. The question is how many support homorrhage vs. how many support marriage. (Of course, the fact that they took a vote in the first place—and that they proceeded without a nanimous decision—shows just how far that sect has fallen.
*unanimous. Yes, I can spell.
The Word of God prevails.
"Their change in their definition of marriage and stance on AAs was due to the pressure Mormon religious leaders recieved by the people within their church. The Mormon religion started out as a small group of kooks, but as it grew to admit more and more level headed people in, they changed their stances to reflect their values. In other words, governments and religions develop to reflect the values of their own people."
Respectfully, this is incorrect information, as are the reasons Mr. Eliasasm has shared for the policy changes the LDS Church made regarding plural marriage. Anyone practicing polygamy today is not LDS, and anyone who is LDS and chooses to practice polygamy is excommunicated and is not identified as "Mormon," whether they so label themselves, or not.
A true religion follows the council of God, as shared through His mouthpiece, aka. a prophet. That has always been His pattern of interaction with His children. Changes in marriage policy were made as revelations were received, as dictated by God, to His prophet. That has always been LDS policy. Values regarding marriage have never changed, in that it is always only between a man and a woman, and that marriage and family are the fundamental unit of society. Policy changes are not made based on popular opinion, current trends or fads, political machinations, or by vote, though a count is made as to whether or not a policy change will be sustained by the people. A negative count still does not affect policy. Christ's Church doesn't make policy decisions in which mortals dictate to Christ, how to govern His Church. Christ makes policy, dictates it to His prophet, and we follow it (remember Moses and the 10 commandments?). Those who do not wish to, are not forced to, as Mr. Eliasasm knows from experience.
For correct information on LDS beliefs, I suggest visiting either LDS.org, or mormon.org. If one wants the truth, one must go to a credible, legitimate source.
Enjoy the rest of the Sabbath.
I see everyone going off subjects, so i will too. Here's a link about how the civil unions for same-sex partnerships has gradually created a backwave which is caused by more voters being energized to vote, and some gain against Democrats has been achieved just through that.
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/3222/Churchbased-voter-drive-brings-15000-to-polls-powers-GOP-House-gains.aspx
Consider the following: The current Hawaii Governor (an executive elected officer) says he will NOT defend the Hawaii Marriage Constitutional Amendment. What kind of executive is that? Why do we have a Legislature, and a Constitution, if that is the case? Hawaii is a land of rainbows, and those who like rainbows are trying to move into the islands. Moving to Hawaii is a right, but not going against the State's Constitution.
As an agnostic, I tend to see things differently DoE. While I respect religion, I see it as being motivated by the moral convictions of its people. I guess you can say that God is acting through them.
And yes, eliasasm, homosexuality does kill thousands each year with the diseases it spreads. But that's the price you are willing to pay, isn't it?
And if polygamy can be defeated, so can SS"M".
When a marriage does not require fidelity then the marriage is a sham. Survey results indicate nearly half of SSM couples approve of multiple sex partners even after marriage. With no core value in kind with marriage then there is no qualification for equal rights protection and so the American justice system cannot rightly set aside the will of the voters to define marriage as between 1 man and 1 woman. Gay states get gay foster parents. Children deserve an upbringing according to social norms. Vote against SSM every chance you get.
Son,
Just wondering if you could supply some evidence where homosexuality has killed anyone. Hasn't killed me, btw. Oh yeah, and could you show any evidence that aids killed anyone, because, if you understand aids, it isn't what kills, it's the repercussions from aids, not aids itself.
John M,
Your comment seems a bit lacking in thought. You seem to think that heterosexual marriages are free of infidelity and that herterosexual marriages show no signs of shamness and are in accordance with core values. Really? Why do you want to focus on one group and disregard another?
Nobody disagrees that children deserve the perfect upbring, but it is not realistic to think that everychild can have a biological mother and father. That's an impossibility and gay marriage has nothing to do with any of this.
I would be behind you all if what you are afraid of was real, but everywhere that gay marriage is legal, nothing has changed, nothing has happened even remotely close to substantiate anything that you claim. Nothing.
@eliasasm:
Not quite. It's the Human Immunodeficiency Virus itself that was long thought not to "directly" kill. AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome) is the group of characteristic diseases that develop in persons infected with HIV after the loss of normal immune system function: this group of diseases -- conceptualized as AIDS -- does of course kill people.
However, HIV might have some direct effects of its own after all. Its presence within brain tissue appears to be the cause of HIV encephalopathy, which is a progressive, lethal condition that can occur in infected persons who have not developed AIDS.
@ Lefty,
Thank you. I'm always open to new information and aternative points of view, unlike NOMulans who have made up their minds, period. Now how about helping me and Son of Adam out on if homosexuality kills people.
The 60% of Methodists who are Christians support marriage while the 40% who are not support marriage corruption.
The Obamadrones and their allies in the media call people of traditonal values all types of names yet we have the basic views of marriage embraced by Americans for the past 200 years of our country's existence. What we are seeing is that the Obama Administration represents only the extreme fringe left wing of the Democrat party.
@Private Joker,
I guess that makes it ok for all the name calling here?
Just about everybody in this country share the basic views of marriage embraced by Americans. Why do you think that anyone who shares the same views about marriage should not be allowed to share in it? And incase you are not aware, nowhere in our constitution is marriage mentioned. Nobody is redefining anything. How do you redefine what isn't defined?
The only way for the Obama Admin. to appear as the extreme fringe left wing of the Dem party would be to be viewing it from the extreme fringe right of the Rep party. If you think Obama is extreme left, you are not paying attention. He's quite centrist.
@eliasasm
Homosexuality and AIDS brings about death and kills people every day, no matter what kind of nonsense you come up with to wriggle out of that observation. It is just as ridiculous as saying that guns have nothing to do with killing people since it is the bullets that do the actuall killing.
@Son of Adam,
You NOMulans seem to think that no one is more astute than yourselves. Equating guns with homosexuality is what is ridiculous. And I guess you think that I am not smart enough to notice how you have now changed your verbage. Nice try but failed. To blame the homosexual community for aids is pathologically ridiculous. Straight people also carry and spread the disease. One would have to have no concept of reality or what is actually going on in the World to think that there is so much difference between gays and straights. There ain't. Most all of us live our lives pretty much the same as everyone else. Are there bad apples out there? Of course, and they exist in every community. Nom for example.
The gay lifestyle is immoral, unhealthy, and destructive. It is a relationship anchored in a sexual addiction. Numerous studies have shown the debilitating effects of the lifestyle. Legalizing SS union will only harm children that are raised in this dysfunctionally environment. The gay agenda is being aggressively promoted in our schools by groups like LGSEN. Troubled and confused youth are entrapped in this lifestyle through their efforts.
The life and death of Bob Bergeron speaks volumes about deception and destructiveness of the gay lifestyle. BOB BERGERON was so relentlessly cheery that people sometimes found it off-putting. If you ran into him at the David Barton Gym on West 23rd Street, where he worked out nearly ever morning at 7, and you complained about the rain, he would smile and say you’d be better off focusing on a problem you could fix.
That’s how Mr. Bergeron was as a therapist as well, always upbeat, somewhat less focused on getting to the root of his clients’ feelings than altering behavior patterns that were detrimental to them: therapy from the outside-in.
Over the last decade, he built a thriving private practice, treating well-to-do gay men for everything from anxiety to coping with H.I.V. Mr. Bergeron had also begun work as a motivational speaker, giving talks at gay and lesbian centers in Los Angeles and Chicago. In February, Magnus Books, a publisher specializing in gay literature, was scheduled to print a self-help guide he had written, “The Right Side of Forty: The Complete Guide to Happiness for Gay Men at Midlife and Beyond.”
In a suicide note, he summed up the homosexual lifestyle in a single damning sentence:
“It’s a lie based on bad information.”, he wrote. Ironically, the New York Times posted the article “The life and death of Bob Bergeron” in the “fashion and style” section.
Even our liberal neighbor,Canada, has come to realization of the debilitating effects of the gay lifestyle.The negative health consequences of alternative sexuality are made more understandable by first recognizing the nature of the sexual practices at issue. A 1979 survey in the book The Gay Report revealed the percentage of gay men who engaged in the following practices: 99% oral sex, 91% anal sex, 82% rimming (analingus), 22% fisting, 23% golden showers (urination on another), 4% scat (defecation on another).8 The book’s two authors were of same-sex sexual attraction. A May 2011 medical journal article found that felching (“sucking or eating semen out of someone's anus”) was a sought-after practice in one-sixth of men’s profiles in “one of the largest Internet websites specifically targeting MSM looking for partners for unprotected sex.”9
The Gay Lesbian Medical Association (GLMA) web site describes the following detrimental effects associated with same-sex sexual practice: higher rates of HIV/AIDS, substance abuse, depression/anxiety, hepatitis, sexually transmitted illnesses (anal papilloma/HPV, gonorrhea, syphilis, and chlamydia), certain cancers, alcohol abuse, tobacco use, eating disorders, and (in subsets) obesity.10
In February 2009 a Canadian GLBT group filed a human rights complaint against the Canadian government and Health Canada asserting that the Canadian GLBT population had poor statistics for life expectancy (twenty years short of standard), suicide, alcohol and illicit drug/substance abuse, cancer, infectious disease, HIV/AIDS, and depression. This is noteworthy in that it challenges the assertion of those claiming the negative health statistics attributed to individuals of GLBT orientation are merely a function of the lack of acceptance of such individuals, and that said statistics would improve with their increased acceptance. Canada provides a highly supportive government, celebration from liberal churches, and a public coerced into silence by hate speech codes, yet the poor health indicators for the GLBT populace remains. This demonstrates that acceptance and affirmation of same-sex sexuality is not the promised antidote for the problems inherent in GLBT sexuality.
To reiterate, The Gay Report, the Gay Lesbian Medical Association, and the Canadian GLBT coalition’s human rights complaint are sources from within the GLBT population.
REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY
Dr. J. Satinover documents that homosexuals lose twenty-five to thirty years of their lifespan. Gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, herpes, HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections, enteric infections and disease, cancers, alcoholism, suicide, and numerous other causes are listed.11
A 1997 Canadian study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology noted that in urban gay areas, homosexual men had a life expectancy comparable to that in Canada in the 1870's.
Even our liberal neighbor, Canada, has come to some realization of the debiitating effects of the gay lifestyle.In February 2009 a Canadian GLBT group filed a human rights complaint against the Canadian government and Health Canada asserting that the Canadian GLBT population had poor statistics for life expectancy (twenty years short of standard), suicide, alcohol and illicit drug/substance abuse, cancer, infectious disease, HIV/AIDS, and depression. This is noteworthy in that it challenges the assertion of those claiming the negative health statistics attributed to individuals of GLBT orientation are merely a function of the lack of acceptance of such individuals, and that said statistics would improve with their increased acceptance. Canada provides a highly supportive government, celebration from liberal churches, and a public coerced into silence by hate speech codes, yet the poor health indicators for the GLBT populace remains. This demonstrates that acceptance and affirmation of same-sex sexuality is not the promised antidote for the problems inherent in GLBT sexuality.
To reiterate, The Gay Report, the Gay Lesbian Medical Association, and the Canadian GLBT coalition’s human rights complaint are sources from within the GLBT population.
REDUCED LIFE EXPECTANCY
Dr. J. Satinover documents that homosexuals lose twenty-five to thirty years of their lifespan. Gonorrhea, chlamydia, syphilis, herpes, HIV/AIDS, other sexually transmitted infections, enteric infections and disease, cancers, alcoholism, suicide, and numerous other causes are listed.11
A 1997 Canadian study published in the International Journal of Epidemiology noted that in urban gay areas, homosexual men had a life expectancy comparable to that in Canada in the 1870s.This is one of many studies that present obvious effects of the lifestyle.
@Craig Humdelt#57,
Dude, you need to be called out here and I hope I can get some support. You copied this story and added your own words at the top (The life and death of Bob Bergeron speaks volumes about deception and destructiveness of the gay lifestyle.). You deliberately set up the narrative to deceive to make this be something it is not. This story is not about Mr. Bergeron's sexual orientation as you try to make it be.
Is this allowed at NOM?
Son of Adam, AIDS does not discriminate, it can infect straights or gays. Worldwide, straights with aids outnumber the gays, but your mean spirited attempts just illustrate how low you'll go. Thanks for doing our work for us.
"As an agnostic, I tend to see things differently DoE. While I respect religion, I see it as being motivated by the moral convictions of its people."
I can live with that.
Carry on!
(actually, it was the use of the word "kooks," referencing the founders of the LDS faith, that caught my attention. One of those individuals was Jesus Christ. Just a thought).
And, SofA, for what it's worth, I appreciate your defending marriage. All hands on deck.
Hey there DoE:
As a Catholic, it is safe to say that you and I would differ on many things.
That being said, I will never forget the incredible strength and witness of our Mormon friends in the Prop 8 fight.
Quick story- the night before the Prop 8 vote, a group of Catholic and Mormon activists met to split up our precinct sheets.
I noticed someone at the meeting who looked very familiar.
Turned out he was a Mormon guy I had publicly debated a couple of years before
We shook hands.
I said to him:
"Won't it be great when we can get back to debating theology again?"
His response:
"Won;t happen in our lifetime".
We owe our Prop 8 victory to you guys.
Won't ever forget it.
Thanks.
God be with you.
Awesome, Rick! Deepest thanks!!!
"Son of Adam, AIDS does not discriminate, it can infect straights or gays. Worldwide, straights with aids outnumber the gays,"
I guess that the Center of Disease Control is lying then when it reports that the majority of AIDS cases belong to homosexuals. And don't be fooles by the worldwide statistics. Many come from third world countries who lack proper blood testing equipment. And since AIDS attacks the immune system, a huge number of people with a bad case of pnemonia or malaria are misdiagnosed with AIDS.
They encounter other health problems colon like rectal cancer, and hepatitis. They also make up sixy percent of all syphilis cases.
@Son of Adam,
Do you really think it is fair to comdemn one group even though all groups are involved? Have you ever thought about why aids affects that one group more than others? Sycle cell anemia affects the Black community more than others. Shall we not allow then to marry because of that? This is why you guys points don't hold up. Just because one group is affected more than another is not a reason to not allow gay marriage. Whether gay marriage is allowed or not is not going to change anything. Aids rates are not going to change just because gays aren't allowed to marry.
"Aids rates are not going to change just because gays aren't allowed to marry."
Not true. Since homosexual marriage became legal the rates of HIV / AIDS have gone up considerably in Massachusetts. Public funding to deal with HIV/AIDS has risen by $500,000. As the homosexual lobby group MassEquality wrote to their supporters after successfully persuading the Legislature to spend that money: "With the rate of HIV infections rising dramatically in Massachusetts, it's clear the fight against AIDS is far from over."
This is what happens when the government supports and encourages this dangerous and unhealthy lifestyle. And sycle cell anemia has nothing to do with sexual promiscuity.