moonbattery logo

Mar 27 2013

Homosexual Marriage: What’s in It for Michael Bloomberg?

The authoritarian statist Michael Bloomberg has used his power to suppress guns, cigarettes, salt, trans fats, soda pop, baby formula, and even Styrofoam, but there is one thing he isn’t against: the distortion of marriage to encompass deviant same-sex relationships. His deep pockets allow him to extend his authority beyond NYC’s borders. Just as he recently dumped $12 million into television ads propagandizing against the Second Amendment, he has donated generously to political candidates who will push his sexual agenda.

Our ruling oligarchy has been laying the groundwork for the current blitzkrieg against marriage for years. The corruption crosses party lines, as made obvious in an interview with Bloomberg from 2011:

Q: I know you made some contributions to Republican senators who voted the way you wanted on gay marriage. Are there any other…

A: They didn’t vote the way I wanted. They voted the right way. They voted the way for freedom, for democracy, for equality, [quack quack quack…]

Q: Are there any other candidates — city or federal — who you’re supporting financially?

A: [Quack quack quack] Voting for somebody because they do the right thing, particularly when it’s not politically easy to do [although it certainly is now, as Obama’s and Hillary’s recent flip-flops confirm], that’s exactly the kind of support we should give and I’d like to think that I’m doing the right thing. I owe it to my children.

I should have guessed. Homosexual marriage is for the children.

Meanwhile, Democratic state Sen. Ruben Diaz, Sr. of the Bronx — a reverend and vociferous gay marriage opponent — followed the money, calling the donations a clear case of quid pro quo.

“It appears that State Senators Stephen Saland, Mark Grisanti, James Alesi and Roy McDonald sold their votes to the Mayor of New York City Michael Bloomberg for $10,300 each,” Diaz said in a statement…

In light of the lethal AIDS epidemic, it should be obvious that sodomy causes far more serious health problems than baby formula or soda pop, so Nanny Bloomberg can’t adopt his usual pose of imposing good health on his subjects. This leaves us to wonder, what is the motive of our oligarchs in pushing so aggressively for homosexual marriage? Their ability to manipulate public opinion on the issue has been impressive, but what do they hope to get out of it?

With statists like Bloomberg, the motive is always the same: more power for government. The family and Christianity are traditional bulwarks against tyranny, providing competing moral authority. Homosexual marriage undermines the first by reducing the concept of holy matrimony to a tasteless joke, and prepares the groundwork for a devastating assault on the second. Christian clerics who perform homosexual marriage are guilty of blasphemy; those who do not will be guilty of hate crimes.

Already a Christian in New Mexico has been ordered by the government to photograph a lesbian commitment ceremony in violation of her religious principles. When gay marriage is the law of land, lawsuits will be applied ferociously to tear the collar off every pastor who takes his faith seriously, leaving only hollowed-out, insincere shells where churches once stood.

Gay-Swastika
The marriage made in hell: coercion + perversion.

On a tip from DJ.




23 Responses to “Homosexual Marriage: What’s in It for Michael Bloomberg?”

  1. Flu-Bird says:

    Bloomboogers rejects the constitution ecept when it comes to gay marrage typical liberal He totaly stinks

  2. Doug says:

    Why, how exactly did you know that he is gay?

  3. StanInTexas says:

    The situation in New Mexico is where our freedoms are headed with gay marriage. No one will be allowed to say it is wrong, else they be brought up on hate speech and hate crime charges.

    The hilarious aspect of this will be with the Muslims. They seem to be the only ones these days that are granted freedom of religion, yet they hate and actively punish or kill gays. Curious to see what happens when those two Liberal ideologies collide!

  4. Comrade J says:

    For the children? As in 53% of all sexual rapes of children being done by homosexual “couples”. Segment of population that is 1-2% accounting for 53% of child sex abuse? That’s for the children?

    For the children, they don’t mean what you think they mean.

  5. Vic Kelley says:

    An accurate assessment of the undermining influences of gay marriage and why power hungry liberal control freaks want to impose it upon the rest of us. The New Mexico malarkey is particularly disturbing. People should have the right to be left alone and to avoid others they don’t want to work with or work for. It’s like those stupid be-friends-with-coloreds days they have in elementary school now to enforce “diversity.”

  6. whotothewhat says:

    Its simple and has happen before.

    Those who will stand against this tyranny that is against God will be blessed. Those that willing go along with Satan’s plan to enslave the world will be destroyed.

    So old Bloomy and the other leftist scum lapdogs can put all the lipstick on this pig they want. In the end will not matter.

  7. MicahStone says:

    Lunatic-left d-cRAT socialist extremists ALWAYS claim that EVERYTHING THEY WANT in their perverse, warped ideology is a “basic human right” that MUST be supported by all without question or debate and MUST be funded from “other peoples’ money” like
    -“FREE” contraceptives
    -a college degree for everybody
    -unlimited taxpayer funded abortions
    -“FREE” diapers (I’m not making this up !)
    -gay marriage (next up: human-animal “marriage”)
    -a house (regardless of whether you can afford it)
    -unlimited left-wing extremist propaganda radio and tv from pbs and npr
    -an eco-nut extremism car for everyone
    -all slugs, slackers, deadbeats, liars, freeloaders, losers, taxpayer-leeches, cheats, ILLEGALS and potheads are entitled – as a “right” – to wealth and income re-distributed from people who work hard
    -“free” healthcare (under BIG GOVERNMENT/DEATH PANEL control)

    etc.

    FACT: these absurd, BOGUS “RIGHTS” are invented from the depraved, vile, warped minds of leftist ideological extremsists and have no real basis in the natural world.

  8. Clingtomyguns says:

    Dave – you nailed it, nothing else can be said, other than each American must make a personal choice, whether they want to be slaves to sin like Bloomberg et al, or slaves to righteousness in Christ – and reject homosexual debauchery and refuse to defile marriage by sanctioning it for homosexuals. Supreme Court justices and politicians must make the same choice. Ultimately, they will all be held accountable and receive the wages they justly deserve.

    “Now concerning the matters about which you wrote: “It is good for a man not to have sexual relations with a woman.” But because of the temptation to sexual immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband. [Not a man to have a man, and a woman to have a woman in marriage].”

    1 Cor. 7:1

    “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.”

    Hebrews 13:4

    “Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.”

    Genesis 2:24; Ephesians 5:41

    “Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body so that you obey its lusts, and do not go on presenting the members of your body to sin as instruments of unrighteousness; but present yourselves to God as those alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God. For sin shall not be master over you, for you are not under law but under grace.

    Do you not know that when you present yourselves to someone as slaves for obedience, you are slaves of the one whom you obey, either of sin resulting in death, or of obedience resulting in righteousness? But thanks be to God that though you were slaves of sin, you became obedient from the heart to that form of teaching to which you were committed, and having been freed from sin, you became slaves of righteousness. I am speaking in human terms because of the weakness of your flesh. For just as you presented your members as slaves to impurity and to lawlessness, resulting in further lawlessness, so now present your members as slaves to righteousness, resulting in sanctification.

    For when you were slaves of sin, you were free in regard to righteousness. Therefore what benefit were you then deriving from the things of which you are now ashamed? For the outcome of those things is death. But now having been freed from sin and enslaved to God, you derive your benefit, resulting in sanctification, and the outcome, eternal life. For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.”

    Romans 6:23.

  9. Clingtomyguns says:

    DOMA UNDER ATTACK BY OBAMA’S DYKE JUSTICE:

    “The motivation behind the 1996 federal law, passed by large majorities in Congress and signed by President Bill Clinton, was questioned repeatedly by Justice Elena Kagan. She read from a House of Representatives report explaining that the reason for the law was “to express moral disapproval of homosexuality.” The quote produced an audible reaction in the courtroom.

    Paul Clement, representing the House Republican leadership in defending the law, said the more relevant question is whether Congress had “any rational basis for the statute.” He supplied one, the federal government’s interest in treating same-sex couples the same no matter where they live.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/03/27/supreme-court-to-hear-arguments-over-challenge-to-federal-law-in-second-gay/#ixzz2Oldf1a9S

    Here are two better rational bases for the preservation of DOMA: prevention of disproportinate instances of child rape and the transmission of AIDS.

    Comrade J says:
    March 27, 2013 at 8:39 am

    “As in 53% of all sexual rapes of children being done by homosexual “couples”. Segment of population that is 1-2% accounting for 53% of child sex abuse?”

    http://moonbattery.com/?p=27543#comments

  10. Wilberforce says:

    Maybe this is what Bloomberg has in mind for NYC? Nevermind what the two represent, this is what the hipsters think is really edgy, man.

    http://visiblefriends.net/getreal/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/VFN_Liberty-and-justice-01.jpg

  11. RKae says:

    I’m sick of these idiots acting like it’s “self-evident” that gay marriage is a basic human right. Really? It is? Why wasn’t it self-evident to you 20 years ago? Why wasn’t it self-evident to ANYONE 30 years ago?

    This is the ugliest bandwagon I’ve ever seen people jumping on.

  12. KHarn says:

    Years ago, the “liberals” were saying that marrage was SLAVERY. Do they now want to ENSLAVE gays?

    Ask them this: “Are you doing this for POLITICAL reasons, to ‘make a statement’, or just to piss off people who didn’t give a S**T before you started whining?”.

    I saw a sign durring a rally that said “marrage is a Constitutional right”. Is that clause BEFORE or AFTER the ones about ABORTION and WELFARE?

  13. Marylou says:

    “When gay marriage is the law of land, lawsuits will be applied ferociously to tear the collar off every pastor who takes his faith seriously, leaving only hollowed-out, insincere shells where churches once stood.” – Dave Blount, Moonbattery

    So few words, such profound insight. In my quote collection now. Thank you.

  14. Stephan the Original says:

    Easy to shut down these ‘equal rights’ people by asking them why they don’t support the equal rights of the unborn to LIVE.

    Seems like some equal rights are more equal than others.

    btw, KHarn, that’s another contradiction you’ve identified – years ago it was ‘just a piece of paper’, now apparently that piece of paper is so valuable it’s a ‘civil rights issue’ to define marriage a certain way. Consistency is not the strong point of moonbats.

  15. Flu-Bird says:

    MICHEAL BLOOMBERG YOU UGLY TOAD,GO AWAY JUST HIT THE ROAD,GO BACK TO YOUR HUANTED PLACE,HEAD BACK INTO OUTER SPACE,GO BACK TO THE PLANET OF FREAKOS FOUR,AND DONT COME BACK HERE ANYMORE

  16. Jerry Falwell's Biggest Fan says:

    As disgusting as gay marriage may be, it is unconstitutional to outlaw it. There are many churches that are willing to perform marriages for homosexuals, and prohibiting that goes against the whole “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” part of the first amendment.

  17. […] Homosexual Marriage: What’s in It for Michael Bloomberg? […]

  18. Clingtomyguns says:

    Jerry Falwell’s Biggest Fan says:
    March 27, 2013 at 6:40 pm As disgusting as gay marriage may be, it is unconstitutional to outlaw it.

    Your wrong, and obviously know very little about American Consitutional law. Gay is not a protected class, like race, age and gender. All the government has to show in order to ban gay marriage is that a law like DOMA has a rational basis in order to outlaw aberrant behavior. How else do you think kiddie porn is banned, prostitution is banned (except in Nevada), bigamy is banned, etc.? (although each of these will be next on the slippery slope to being overturned, just like the attack on DOMA). In my earlier post I provided two rational bases for the preservation of DOMA: prevention of disproportinate instances of child rape and the transmission of AIDS. That Justice Lez Kagan would ignore and mock those very rational bases for DOMA proves that this whole circus to her is to settle a political score for empowering her gays, rather than a jurist examining a constitutional issue.

  19. Tim from TK says:

    “Jerry Falwell’s Biggest Fan says:
    March 27, 2013 at 6:40 pm

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” part of the first amendment.”

    Homosexuality is a religion – what a country.

  20. Jerry Falwell's Biggest Fan says:

    I’m not saying homosexuality is a religion. I’m saying that there are religious organizations, like the Unitarian Christian church, Episcopalians, Angilicans, Evangelical Lutherans, most Jewish churches, and and pretty much every non-Abrahamic religion. Prohibiting these churches – all of which want to perform marriages for homosexuals- from performing homosexual marriages is a clear “prohibition of the free exercise thereof.”

    I don’t think you guys even read my post.

  21. Clingtomyguns says:

    Jerry Falwell’s Biggest Fan says:
    March 27, 2013 at 10:27 pm

    We’re just taking you at your own words. What you said was “As disgusting as gay marriage may be, it is unconstitutional to outlaw it.” For the reasons I stated above, that’s not correct, it is not unconstitutional. Now what 5 justices may decide about DOMA, 2 of whom Obama appointed and are openly gay decide, does not make this any less a fact that the government has a right to ban gay marriage if Congress had a rational basis to pass DOMA, which it had plenty. The Obama Administration, and the Department of Social Justice, after Obama “evolved” his position on gay marriage, refused to enforce DOMA, abrogating its constitutional duty in an unprecedented step of picking and choosing which duly enacted laws of the US it cared to enforce. Therefore the House of Reps. counsel had to step in.

    If the point you wanted to make is that DOMA somehow prohibits “churches” that choose to ignore the Holy Word from performing the blasphemy of gay marriage ceremonies, it does not. The same churches can analagously draw pentograms on their walls and have seances to Satan too without regard to the Bible. They can blaspheme all they want to their own detriment, but the State has a right constitutionally to ban recognizing gay marriages under the law if it has a rational basis, which it has plenty.

  22. Michael says:

    If Dave Blount wants to live in a theocracy, he can go and live in Iran. He lives in a secular republic with a rule of law and a Constitution, which he is a traitor to in tacitly calling for theocracy.

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy