Outrage: How Gay Activists and Liberal Judges Are Trashing Democracy to Redefine Marriage

Rating:
Summary: Well written and eye opening
Review:
Makes the case that same-sex marriage will change the definition of marriage, affecting our entire culture, not just gays. This has been proven in France. A weaker alternative will replace traditional marriage.

To address some misconceptions about the book:

Citing past abuses that were legal in the past and comparing them to the position the author takes on same-sex marriage is ludicrous. And contrary to the claim of an "evolving definition of marriage", every culture throughout history in every part of the world has understood marriage to be between men and women. Until recent days, no society has accepted that it could be between persons of the same sex.

People who disagree with changing the definition of marriage are not all "homophobes", a hateful term frequently applied to anyone who disagrees for any reason with the radical gay agenda.

It is unfortunate that people who disagree with the book must respond with the same hateful language and misinformation that they accuse the author of (which he doesn't do, by the way).

I can understand that this book (or probably any book that takes a position against same-sex marriage for that matter) would not be accepted by those who support the gay agenda. For those who are truly open to an objective and kind discussion of the issue, I recommend Erwin Lutzer's book, "The Truth About Same-Sex Marriage".

One reviewer held up the opinion of the AMA as having more weight than the word of God. Consider the case with the APA. The reason the American Psychological Association removed homosexuality from its list of psychiatric illnesses and reclassified it as normal behavior in 1973 was not because of any scientific data, but because gay activists planned a systematic effort to disrupt the annual meetings of the APA.

This book helps expose aspects of the gay movement that the radical gay activists would rather you notknow. Couple their desire to keep their true goals beneath the public's radar screen with their efforts to have any disagreement with same-sex marriage or the gay agenda labeled as hate speech, as well as getting the media to portray homosexuality in a positive light, without any of the negatives, and this 2% of the population has devised an effective strategy for rapidly advancing their agenda.

I agree with the author that conservatives have been on the defense on this issue. Despite claims by the liberals that conservatives have "divided" America with these types of issues, it is those who are trying to change traditional American values, values embraced by the vast majority of the population, who are causing the division.

Rating:
Summary: Anybody can get published today
Review: Defying all political, historical reasonability, Sprigg insists that myself and other heterosexuals are victimized through expansion of GLBT equality.

Supposedly calls for same-sex marriage will invalidate our freedom to enter into 'traditional' unions.

That marriage itself has evolved over many centuries into the current-day incarnation convieniently escapes the frenzied text, I suspect that few of the most conservative women who currently back Sprigg would actually like a real 'old time' wedding where they are infact property and can be raped at will.

Because I do not have to worry if my boyfriend and I are in a safe area/state to enjoy our civil rights, his argument has deep holes for the intended target audience of heterosexuals in general.

Ironically homophobes (who are so insecure with themselves that they have to pick on other groups) do much more to destroy the meaning of marriage than GLBT people recognizing their life committment.

Like the now-discredited movement against nation-wide recognition of interacial marriages, Sprigg and his kind will be relegated to the sewers of history.

Rating:
Summary: Great Book! Nice Conservative Overview of Same Sex Marriage
Review: Here's another good book about the threat of homosexual marriage in America, and how the atheist, immoral minority is trying to overthrow the democratic process by taking the issue out of the hands of the People of the USA (who would have to live with enforced immorality), and have it decided by a precious, dastardly few of the "intelligentsia" elite, sneaky, and illegal troublemakers.

This book comes at the topic by way of showing how different types of people should be considering this issue. It does a good job of providing an overview of the current situation and political climate on the topic of homosexual marriage.

I have read a few other books about this topic, but Peter Sprigg's book presents a new insight to me: it should be the HOMOSEXUAL activists that should be fighting to get a Constitutional Amendment to enshrine their Right to marry. Whenever people have had to fight for their rights in the past, (such as the 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments for racial minorities and getting women the vote), it has been the minority group that has petitioned and rightfully won the amendment to the US Constitution! That's how this bogus fight for homosexual marriage differs in the public debate.

The homosexual activists know they could never get a Constitutional amendment, so their calculated, immoral activism has focused on getting a few liberal, rogue judges who are willing to invent new laws and "rights" in court. Though this is a function that the court system was never designed to do under the US Constitution.

Sprigg writes on page 26, "Such 'judicial activism' is undoing the will of the people and democratic government." Page 28 says, "Indeed, homosexual activists are fighting AGAINST the right of the states to determine their own laws and social policies THROUGH THE DEMOCRATIC MEANS when it comes to homosexual marriage."

Scientifically speaking, on page 37 he writes, "The notion that people are 'born gay' is nothing less than The Big Lie of the entire homosexual movement." Sprigg points out the three major studies that have been sited to support the claim of being born gay: Simon LeVay's Brain Study of a mere 16 brains studied; the Twins Study, which showed that half of identical twins were both homosexual, (though 100% of identical twins should be homosexual if it were truly a genetic trait); and the Gay Gene Study, which supposedly found and named a Gay Gene in DNA, Xq28, but not surprisingly, nobody else has been able to confirm the bogus Gay Gene study.

All three of these studies made interesting and enthusiastic headlines, though all three have failed to prove anything conclusive about homosexuality, even by admission of the researchers involved themselves, and the results have not been able to be reproduced or proven by other researchers in separate studies. These three studies fail as scientific research, yet these bogus results have been used often for pro-homosexual propaganda--propogating lies.

Another unique point in Sprigg's book comes on page 50, where the author proves how the American Founding Fathers and signers of the US Constitution would NEVER have dreamed that the Constitiution would be used as a way to justify a right to homosexuality. Sodomy was ILLEGAL at the time of the founding of our country! Thomas Jefferson wrote that sodomy should be punished by castration, and George Washington called sodomy an "infamous crime."

In chapter 4, "Outrage" explains how Same Sex Marriage is an oxymoron. The author also points out how the "gay rights" movement came out of the "free love" movement of the 1960's, which wrongly separated sexual relations from responsiblity, raising children, and lifelong commitment.

The author explains how Same Sex Marriage benefits can easily be obtained without marriage, through the use of Wills and Power of Attorney, without overturning the morals of the entire country; that few homosexuals actually DO get married where it is legal to do so--thus this entire topic of homosexual marriage is not about marriage so much as it is about a desperate desire to legitimize immoral homosexuality by force of law, against the will and vote of the American people.

Chapter 6 shows that homosexuals ARE ALREADY allowed to marry, like everyone else does, and MANY homosexuals have ALREADY BEEN married, in the normal way. In America we have a few stipulations that disqualify any couple from marrying, such as being too closely related by blood, being too young to legally marry, only being married to ONE person at a time, and marrying someone of the opposite gender.

Other good books about this topic have also been written. I recommend reading Mathew Staver, Alan Sears, and James Dobson, also available at amazon.com.

Rating:
Summary: Pure Ignorance
Review: I am a happily married father of two. Despite Sprigg's hateful diatribe, I do not understand how gay people getting married is supposed to affect my union one way or another. Will I suddenly stop loving my wife? Will my commitment to her suddenly vanish? No. This book just tries to scare people into fearing gay marriage by predicting all these horrible outcomes that are pretty far fetched.

I hope my kids create a better world where bigots like this are laughed at and ignored. That's why I send them to good schools.

Rating:
Summary: Straight Married Christian Lady Has A Comment
Review: I am a heterosexual woman married to a white heterosexual man. I am the epitomy of everything "decent" the right wing holds dear. The only man I have ever slept with is my husband. I was married loooong before our son was born. I live in the South, I am a Catholic, and my parents have been married almost fifty years. I am the woman married to the man this author and all the Christian right want to protect and I am asking you to please knock it off already! I don't care if two men or two women want to be married. I don't give a damn. My life and my marriage are NOT in dire peril because of this. Good Lord, get a friggin' life and knock off the crap already. Anybody who wants to buy this book, listen up: If you want to be a real Christian, donate that money to a hospice instead. Idiots.

Rating:
Summary: Right Wing Lies
Review: I'd like to clear up some things that 1witness wrote. Many cultures throughout history have embraced homosexuality. Many Native American tribe historically blessed same sex union. Not to mention, ancient Greeks and Romans were very open to homosexual relations.

In response to the APA removing homosexuality from its list of abnormal behaviors, politics were a part of it, yes, however, there wasn't a sufficient amount of scientific evidence to say that homosexuality is abnormal if the client is not in distress about their sexuality. That said, when the DSM III-TR came out( I believe it was in 1983 or 1984) the APA completely removed homosexuality from the list of abnormal behavior due to political pressure. Opponents of its listing said that it wouldn't cause distress if society treated them better. Here, the APA saw the logic in this arguement and had no choice but to remove this from the DSM, but it is technically due to politics. The APA doesn't just do things to stop hurting people's feelings. Your arguement is outrageous because it would be like saying the American Heart and Lung Association disapproves of smoking because they have nothing better to do.

That said, the book itself is infuriating to logical thinkers and people who know how to interpret science.

Rating:
Summary: Does Peter Sprigg see any room for compromise?
Review: In all of Peter Sprigg's wailing and gnashing of teeth over the prospect of Gay couples getting married, there was something missing: A willingness to compromise, even a willingness to understand why this issue is important to Gay Americans.

There is admittedly some disagreement within the Gay community over what's more important, the word "marriage" or the benefits and responsibilities that are connected with it. As someone who prides himself as being nothing if not diplomatic, I would take simple legal equality under the law, even if the operative term is "civil unions." If Sprigg simply wishes to reserve the term "marriage" for heterosexual couples, he can have it, as long as Gay couples are treated fairly.

Here's an example of how the current system is not fair:
This past June 29 my partner, Greg, and I celebrated five years together, which is longer than most heterosexual marriages last. We made a solemn commitment to each other's well-being, and as law-abiding, taxpaying citizens, we have contributed our fair share into Social Security.

Last year I contacted the Social Security Administration (SSA) to see if there was any paperwork or other arrangements I could make to designate Greg for survivorship benefits in the event of my untimely death. I was told I was unable to do, since we are not married.

More recently I visited the SSA Web site and did some calculations concerning what survivorship benefits my spouse might be entitled to. Assuming I did the calculations correctly, I found out my married spouse would be eligible for over $800 per month (after retirement) in the event of my death.

I think anyone would agree that $800 per month is a pretty hefty chunk of change. However, it is money that my significant other is not eligible for, because we are not married, nor are we allowed to get married. I would like to provide for the financial well-being of my spouse, just as I'm sure Peter Sprigg would, but in essence I'm throwing away money on a fund that my partner cannot take advantage to in the event of my death.

At the very least, the federal government should allow Gay spouses to designate each other for survivorship benefits under Social Security. If a "civil union" would allow us to do this, I'm all for it. If not, then nothing but full marriage equality will suffice.



Rating:
Summary: Disturbing
Review: It is frightening to read this book and realize just how much hate can be directed at one group of people. Sprigg foams at the mouth then tries to catch himself and support what he's saying with "science." It's not science, it's garbage. How in the world does something like this get published in the first place?

The pathetically homophobic Peter Sprigg needs a hug - preferably from a hot, sexy man.

Rating:
Summary: Deserves negative stars
Review: Let's take this tripe he presents one at a time:

*Who started and aggressively pursues the "culture war"-not conservatives, who are continually playing defense, but homosexual activists and radical judges
- There are conservatives, such as Judge Moore, who have advocated the imprisonment and execution of gays. The FRC (to which Sprigg belongs) still would have homosexuality a punishable offense and are pushing for this once the FMA is passed. They are even pressuring private companies to refrain from offering domestic partner benefits. Who's on the offense?

* The shocking medical and scientific data on homosexual behavior
- Fact: AIDS is primarily a heterosexual disease worldwide. Sprigg ignores this fact.

* How federal and state law has acted in the past to preserve traditional marriage (including requiring Utah to ban polygamy in exchange for statehood)
- State laws have also banned interracial marriage. His point is irrelevant.

* How children could pay the price for "gay marriage"
- (...) Two men are raising HIV positive minority children (a disease contracted from their heterosexual parents), yet the state says they are "unfit" and would take these children away from them. Who is really making the children suffer?

* Why religion-that is, morality-has a legitimate role in the debate
- Interestingly enough, the same "religious conservatives" who back these measures such as the FMA often have multiple and nasty divorces, such as Ryan Dobson, son of Focus on the Family's James Dobson and a couple members of the Christian Coalition (...).
These stories are not all that unusual.


Rating:
Summary: Awesome Information Everyone Needs to Know
Review: This is a well written, easy to read documentation of how our democracy is currently working. It reveals the undermining of a special interest group and judges that have gone outside the law.

This book will not be appreciated for those who fall within these groups and are not open to hear about what is going on in society or who don't care.

If you are not up to date on this issue and how it affects society and our current election... pick up a copy, and read now!