The mandate of most schools is to provide the most information available on a topic to their students, so as to provide a wide range of ideas on any given subject, to ensure the student receives a well rounded and full education (or at least it should be). In practice however this usually never the case as political correctness, and liberal emotional sensibilities usually get in the way. This is even more so true when it comes to Leftist pet-projects like Homosexuality.
With the increasing influx of new information, and personal stories, emerging on the reality of homosexuality which goes against the conditioned general understandings, Leftists are finding effective ways of shutting down all debate on the subject, and further ensuring that only their emotional understanding on the concept of homosexuality can be taught or held. To ensure that no actual debate takes place, and the students aren’t allowed to have a differing opinion on this subject, they are banning books.
Visit most public school libraries and you’ll find an array of books that address the subject of homosexuality. Many include sexually explicit content, and some even include graphic images.
But if you’re looking for a book that refers to the possibility that homosexuality can be “reversed,” a Chicago-based group says your best bet is the banned books list.
Parents and Friends of Ex-Gays & Gays (PFOX) says there’s an entire community of people across the world who say that their sexual orientation changed from gay to straight. But they’re not getting their message out, the group says, because libraries across the country refuse to carry literature that describes these experiences or any studies that support them.
Despite the Left’s claim of being “liberals”, and the vanguard of a liaise fair attitude toward lifestyle choices, and free speech this is rarely the case in reality – especially when it comes to one of their pet racial, class, or gender groups.
Although only the “right-wing Christian Conservatives” get the negative press, and thus bad reputation for “attempting to control society”, and banish any “sin” from the commonplace of ideas it is often the Left who most resembles what the “right-wing” is accused of. This is simply just another example!
The same Leftists that are so set against a personal story from an actual “ex-homosexual”, have absolutely no problem with providing explicit sexual books to these same students. Even further exposing the hypocrisy of the Left, it isn’t hard to imagine what the response of the crusaders of political correctness would be if instead the situation was flipped and it was the Right which was attempting to ban books for this explicit sexual nature.
Click Here To See List of Banned Books
So much for intellectual freedom – political correctness is paramount!
Tags: Banned Books, Free Speech, Leftists, Liberal Facism
Related: The following is a link to an interesting gay-conservative website.
http://gayconservative.org/
I believe “banned book” week (month?) was recognized recently. I remember the display of titles, many of which were never actually banned, sitting in display cases both on the local college campus and the public library. I wonder if any of these titles might now join that display … doubtful.
Speaking of book banning, I wonder what CJ thinks of this.
Remember the video of the woman at a Tea Party saying something about banning some text books?
Charles posted it & said that she got wild applause.
I replied that there must have been a lot of one handed clapping, because I heard one person clap, nervous coughing & the moderator disagreeing.
Needless to say , Chuck got hysterical.
Another example of the Left doing what they will not tolerate in others. In this case, they’re only one step short of burning books; just like the Nazis!
The “free speech” Left.
ex-homosexuals – BAN
Israel Speakers at University – BAN
Israeli Scientists in Europe – BAN
Religion in School – BAN
Teaching Creation in School – BAN
…
Ah, the “liberal” Left.
The science is settled, denier.
IIRC, the operative phrase is “Once you go gay, there’s no other way.”
Sorta turns that one over on its head.
The books are pure quackery…however they shouldn’t be banned.
interesting ski lift
They want to portray homosexuality as being something normal and irreversible, all part of the corruption of America’s youth.
re: #5 by WrathofG-d
Ah, the “enlightened” left; they always know what’s better for us, don’t they?
re: #8 by Pablo Honey
and the evidence for that is?
OT – Reposted from the unplugged thread – Palin Endorsement Nets Doug Hoffman $116K – In One Day!
This is on a new blog that I (re)started today. I’m posting there as an “overflow” place for all the things that they won’t let me post on Blogmocracy because I’m a loose cannon and they’re afraid I might embarrass them and offend somebody on here. Oh wait, this isn’t Correspondence Committee. It’s actually an overflow place so that I don’t end up hogging post space on here.
re: #7 by tqcincinnatus
What I find interesting is how the Left doesn’t believe there actually exist people who used to live the homosexual lifestyle, or women who had abortions and regretted doing so. And, of course, they act as if such people do not exist. And yet, they do exist.
re: #3 by RIX
He is all for banning Opinions not his. Just like Maobama!
re: #8 by Pablo Honey
I will admit that I do not know anything in particular regarding these books. I haven’t read them, and hadn’t heard of them before this article.
However, you seem to already know they are “pure quackery”. Could you provide evidence, etc., to back up that claim?
Also, when you read the article they give reasons for why these books were banned, and describe how their system of deciding which books are acceptable works. I found it fascinating – for its complete subjectivity, and the way they twist the buzz words “acceptable”, “age appropriate” to fit their political/PC agenda.
I guess books describing overt sexual acts are “acceptable”, but books describing ones personal experiences are “not age appropriate”. Interesting how that works.
Off topic- carry over from last thread
It’s BS like this that gives Obama his views on the Constitution.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=6464
A link to Obama’s thesis (?)
http://pajamasmedia.com/michaelledeen/2009/10/21/obama-and-the-constitution-he-has-his-doubts/#
re: #8 by Pablo Honey
The books are pure quackery…however they shouldn’t be banned.
I know of several people who were gay, and left that lifestyle (usually by becoming Christians). It can be done. Homosexuality is a choice, not a hardwired option.
re: #10 by davehm
Not just normal, but admirable
re: #15 by Rodan
I watched that video three times with speakers on high & never heard the applause that CJ claimed. I heard one person with a tepid response.
He was trying to make the point that the Tea Partiers are just a bunch of book burning Nazis & insisted that everybody hear the non-existent applause. It was very weird.
re: #18 by tqcincinnatus
Same here, I know quite a few people who were “cured”.
re: #19 by mfhorn
You’re right, I stand corrected.
re: #5 by WrathofG-d
Conservative speakers at schools–ban
Eagle Scout with 2 inch knife in trunk of his car–expel
Little boy kissing cheek of little girl—expel
Roman Polanski raping + sodomizing 13 yr old–hero victim
Kevin Jennings instructing students on the joys of fisting–hero victim
Obama attends anti American Jew hate church 20 yrs–elect him potus
They aren’t “cured”, they are suppressing their desires.
It doesn’t last.
re: #23 by vagabond trader
FOX News – BAN.
I’m sensing a trend here with the “liberal” left.
…they keep using this word, but I don’t think it means what they think it means…
Liberalism: Projection Personified.
re: #24 by Pablo Honey
Where is the evidence?
re: #20 by RIX
LGF also featured a video of an ObamaCare proponent walking through the 9/12 March in DC. The hostile reaction Charlie was trying to highlight was not as hostile, however. There was a police escort, and one of the Marchers did try to take the man’s sign, but the claims Charlie brought up in that thread were exaggerated.
re: #27 by Morgan
Why worry about whom LGF bans, when actual banning as taking place in the REAL world?
re: #24 by Pablo Honey
No, they’re are cured…they became Christians,
Psalm 37:4 “Delight your self in the Lord and He will give you the desires of your heart.”
When a person does that God gives them new desires, not suppressed, but new.
Also notice how the left places gays into their own collectivist victim mindset, much as they treat blacks;they must ALL think the same about gay marriage, promotion of the gay lifestyle through childhood indoctrination,etc.My best guy friend is a macho gay and I got news for you, even gays are individuals. My friend believes gay marriage is an abomination and have heard him defend this belief to other gay men.
re: #28 by WrathofG-d
I’m not worried. I intended to bring up another example of Charlie making exaggerated claims about the Tea Partiers and 9/12′ers.
Do you remember the old guy that got his finger chomped off by an SEIU thug?
The thug got threateningly in the old guys face so the guy popped the him
Guess who Charlie defended, yup the SEIU thug.
re: #18 by tqcincinnatus
I strongly suspect that nobody’s right on this issue, and that the truth will someday turn out that homosexuality is a symptom, and not a condition; i.e. it may have several independent causes, and some are reversible, and others aren’t. So if you’re going to ban these books for being wrong, you have to ban all others on the subject for also being wrong.
Now we’re back in the “science is settled” dilemma again; the science is almost never settled, any scientific book published about a subject that’s not decades old is probably full of nonsense, and who are librarians to know the good stuff from the junk? I used to have a lot of respect for librarians as a group until they went totally batshit over the Patriot act. Now, I see them as some of the more insane moonbats out there as a group.
If the scientists can’t even sort it out, the librarians most certainly don’t have the foggiest clue how to go about doing that.
And btw, if you read A J Strata’s sledgehammer on Von Quacksalot, He made a very important point that Steve McIntyre has also made, which is that pee review is appropriate for arcane and generally inconsequential scientific fact finding missions like that primate fossil, but totally inadequate for important findings of fact necessary for public policy. Amen to that. They should shut the IPCC as we know it down, and hire a major international engineering consulting firm, with principals with licenses on the line, to do a real professional study, and not this Mickey-Mouse bilge that the IPCC puts out.
re: #24 by Pablo Honey
It doesn’t last.
Funny, I’ve never heard of any of them going back.
Would you advise your daughter or sister to marry a “converted” gay man?
Advise starting a family?
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
Still no evidence?
(dang this is a pet peeve of mine)
re: #17 by mfhorn
Apparently the 2nd link is satire. Kind of surprising, given the way Obama acts…
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
re: #34 by tqcincinnatus
I don’t know what happened to my post but here it goes again.
One person that I know has been married for over ten years and has 6 kids.
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
A homosexual is not “converted” they are changed by the effective working of God in their lives.
re: #38 by davehm
I have known quite a few gay people that are married to the opposite sex and have kids. But they’re still gay.
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
Would you advise your daughter or sister to marry a “converted” gay man?
Advise starting a family?
If he was saved, and had a good testimony for the Lord, then yes. There are a lot of former gays who now are loving husbands and fathers, and who are active and faithful Christians.
Uncle Ben’s converted gay men?
re: #38 by davehm
I don’t know what happened to my post but here it goes again.
Rodan forgot to feed the postie monster this morning.
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
What exactly is wrong with someone you describe as a “converted gay man”?
Anyone who’s really paid attention knows it’s the so called “progressives” who are into book banning, boycotts and getting people off the air who disagree with their brain dead bullshit.
I’m so thankful that Liberal’s don’t force their agenda on people like those radical right wingers that the hippie hates so much.///
OT| Comedian Soupy Sales Dead At 83
Slapstick TV comedy pioneer Soupy Sales dead at 83
OT:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/6409721/Barack-Obama-sees-worst-poll-rating-drop-in-50-years.html#
It’s funny how one has to go across the Pond to get anything near approaching truthful reporting on Obie.
Also note how Corzine is described. He is the epitome of who Obama has railed against for the last two years: A rich, white Wall Street type. But I guess being a Pal of Obie (POO), anything goes.
Speaking of not quite gay, and not quite straight, I saw this in person yesterday:
http://www.joe-ks.com/archives_apr2005/HighHeelCycleA.jpg
It’s now part of the LeMay collection in Spanaway, WA. They have some un-freeking-believable cars there.
re: #30 by vagabond trader
My best friend (also gay) is against gay marriage too. He’ll tell you flat out it isn’t about equality, it’s about forced acceptance.
re: #35 by Pablo Honey
I sure wouldn’t. Heartache in the making…
Not that it couldn’t happen, just that sometimes it’s not really happening.
Wrath – I can’t link to a study, but I can tell you about an old friend of mine. (I have quite a few gay friends).
He’s gay, and he believes that you’re not born gay and claimed he wasn’t going to be gay any more.
And he hasn’t. Now he’s just celibate (over 10 yrs). But turn on anything with Patrick Swayze or Richard Gere in it and watch him drool.
He’s gay.
re: #40 by m
Well….it appears that they are living a lie.
I’ve never got into the gay thing but my testimony could fall on similar lines, a person who would say that there is no cure for homosexuality would probably think that there is no cure for drug addiction and alcoholism, well I’m cured! I have no desire to go back to my old lifestyle.
*Disclaimer*
Before anyone takes my “my best friend is gay” comment to mean I think these books should be banned.
Don’t.
Because I most certainly don’t.
re: #53 by m
The thought never entered my mind.
re: #52 by davehm
Drug and alcohol addictions are chemical induced addictions, and not something you are born with. Crack babies being the exception. You can, however, be born with blue eyes, dark hair, dark skin, etc.. . Can you be “cured” of those things?
OT:
Obama – The Anti-Constitution President
http://jumpinginpools.blogspot.com/2009/08/obama-college-thesis-constitution-is.html
Thank you, Wrath of G-d, for posting this.
I was pretty much telling another blog admin in private recently that I like to see topics of concern to social conservatives placed on this blog.
Other than abortion, this (that is, the attempt to main stream homosexuality) would be another major one.
re: #46 by Sarah the Elder
I do disagree with homosexuality, but I do not “hate” homosexuals. I get so tired of how some people equate disagreement with hate.
I’ve worked with and been friends with homosexuals, and they were nice people, but I cannot support their sexual lifestyle/desire.
Another aspect that bothers me the most is that some on the left try to cram homosexuality down the throats of everyone. They politicize it.
I don’t know if I’m for or against banning books from libraries, whatever the topic.
However, I do get annoyed at how people with a pro-homosexual agenda use various propaganda techniques to promote homosexuality, such as placing pro-homosexuality books into public school libraries.
re: #50 by m
Which brings me to the one itsy bitsy teeny weeny thing that I agree with Sunstein on: get the government out of marriage. Problem solved.
Related news story:
Matthew Shepard
was not murdered for being homosexual, so I wish the homosexual groups would stop misusing his name. Anyway.
FRC’s Tony Perkins Denounces Senate Vote on ‘Hate Crimes’ Legislation
Homosexual Hate Crimes Law Poised to Become Law after Passing US House
Expansion of Hate-Crime Law [to include homosexuals] Gets Final Congressional Approval
Senate passes measure that would protect gays
# 53 m
My best friend, now deceased, was gay. He once told me of being a pre-schooler, and knowing he was attracted, not in a sexual way but in an undefinable way, to the mailman. He could have no more been ‘cured’ straight as I could look good in a dress and high heels. Being gay is genetic. Sure, one might abstain, be celebate, but like you say, one is still gay.
re: #57 by CloudyDay
No problem. I like social conservative issues as well. Since this is YOUR Blogmocracy as well, feel free to create a social conservative Thread that is thread worthy, and if appropriate and timely we’ll post it.
That being said, I personally have no issue with Homosexuality. The thing that bothered me when I read the above article is the actual steps being taken to ensure that only one side of the story gets heard, so as to push forth their liberal ideals. The case here is NOT closed (obviously), but the teachers are attempting to close it prematurely, and unfairly in my eyes.
I’m not exactly sure why schools have to get into homosexuality, or sexuality for that matter, at all….but if they are going to they need to be balanced and honest about it.
if valid information comes out that is “unpopular” to their liberal ideals (or to a conservatives ideas) but is TRUE, they need to present that point of view.
Society should not be propagandized to believe untruths just because they are politically correct.
re: #55 by Cheesehead
Behaviour and appearances are two different things.
When pigs fly. I don’t need no stinkin Vista, and I sure as he-double-hockeystick don’t need no stinkin’ 7.
My opinion:
There are homosexuals that cannot ever be turned to heterosexual orientation. That is what they are. So be it.
There are individuals that have adopted homosexual orientation. It’s a lifestyle choice for them.
re: #60 by RickMZ
And, aren’t we told that a “cured” drug addict or alcoholic, is always going to be an alcoholic or addict? They’re simply in remission? By following that logic a “cured gay is still gay.
re: #60 by RickMZ
Sounds like my friend,though I am not convinced it is purely genetic. Perhaps there is a dormant genetic factor but I believe there may be a precipitator. Just mho.
Oh, someone let me know when THE BLOG gets accused of being anti Homosexual.
Thanks!
The whole ‘hate crimes’ push bothers me.
IMHO, a crime is a crime, and should be punished equally, regardless of the color, gender, orientation, sex, race, religion or whatever of the victim AND the perpetrator.
‘Hate crimes’ means that someone who assaults or murders someone of the same skin color gets off easier for a crime than someone who ‘hates’ the victim.
Is the victim any less worthy of protection because their attacker didn’t ‘hate’ whatever protected group they belonged to? Apparently.
Matthew Shepherd and James Bird were murdered by people who deserve to face the full consequences of the law. Not because of their sexual orientation or their skin color, but becuase they were human beings.
Aren’t we supposed to be equal in the eyes of the law? Apparently not.
re: #53 by m
Same here and my best friend would not agree either.I’ve taught him well.
The lie is in believing that “homosexuality” is something which stands apart from “heterosexuality,” rather than viewing both as aspects of human desire that exist on a continuum. Kinsey’s research may have been flawed in many ways, but he was spot on in this observation.
It is well to remember that the invention—yes, invention—of “homosexuality” as a separate phenomenon is of very recent creation, going back only to the late 19th century. Some other pseudoscientific ideas from back then include the belief in phrenology, the belief in “ether” in space, and the invention of the term “antisemitism” to provide a scientific-sounding word for “Jew-hate.”
Prior to the invention of “homosexuality”—the term which won out over competing terms such as “urnings” and “third sex”—homosexual acts were condemned, but there was no condemnation of a “condition” as such.
That said, while homosexual orientation is “solid” for some practitioners of homosexual acts, for a great many practitioners it is a matter of volition and opportunity. Thus, what society will or won’t tolerate does make a difference as far as some people’s willingness to give way to a particular desire. Just as a married partner may feel the desire to sleep with any number of partners outside the marriage, that does not mean the person has to; whether they act on the desire is a matter of will. By the same token, someone who experiences both homosexual and heterosexual desire may choose to act on one or the other, or both—but how that person chooses is partly a matter of the relative strength of the two urges, partly a matter of the person’s own moral convictions and self-control, and partly a matter of what society will permit.
re: #68 by mfhorn
Well said.
re: #65 by Cheesehead
There’s a huge difference, one person is free (no chance of “remission”) and the other is still struggling with the issue.
btw remission is a poor choice of words, cancer patients go into “remission”.
Opposed to the book banning and equally opposed to the books in question.
# 66 vagabond trader
There have been gays recorded in ancient Greek and Roman times, when men were men and sheep were scared. Some cultures deem(ed) gays a third sex. I have no problem with gays shacking up, living together, getting hitched in civil ceremonies (everybody should have the pleasure of laywers when breaking up). Just please keep the PDA at home. I don’t like PDA much from straights groping on benches like teenagers in the backseat at a drive-in, why would I like it from gays?
re: #62 by davehm
It is physiological though. As a straight man, could you “perform” on a man? That’s how my male gay friends describe thinking about sex with a woman. If they can’t physically “do it” is it a choice?
re: #66 by vagabond trader
People who present nature/nuture as an either/or between genetics and child rearing are missing an important third possibility, particularly wrt sexual orientation: gestation. Most of the other sexual attributes are influenced by hormone levels in-utero, why should the brain be any different? I think it’s most likely that in many if not most cases, it’s simply brain development zigging instead of zagginy due to hormones.
Nature, but not genetic, and with an element of nurture to it.
re: #68 by mfhorn
I must run, but the best explanation I heard FOR hate crime laws is that a “hate crime” attacks more than just the subject individual, or property.
For example, when you paint a Swastika on a Synagogue it really isn’t only a property crime, where damages apply solely to the building and repair – it is an attack on the entire Jewish community. This would even apply to the perpetrators intent -which is most likely to attack Jews in general and not just the specific Jews that do to that synagogue, or the building owners themselves.
re: #75 by m
I can only perform with Women!
re: #68 by mfhorn
Exactly! Why is it worse for someone to kill my best friend than me.
PC-ness gone nutz!
re: #72 by davehm
My apologies for offending anyone with my poor choice of the word remission.
re: #78 by Rodan
What’s your vaudeville act like?
re: #1 by WrathofG-d
That is an interesting web site.
Interested to see that one of the bloggers admitted that it was harder to come out as a conservative than as gay.
Ditto for my experience as an atheist.
What do liberals make of conservative gays?
That they are “not true” to themselves, just as conservative blacks are Uncle Toms?
I have known homosexuals across the spectrum:
militant queers, queens, men who desire other men but never have sex, men who have sex with women bu who desire men, men who have sex with both, men who have claimed “cure”, men who have decide to live by religious taboos despite their desire.
There are books covering all these experiences. That librarians should set themselves up moral gatekeepers at all is outrageous.
That they should allow “how to” be gay books for children and not “how not to” be gay books for adults is perverse.
The culture war is over norms: why should sexual deviancy be promoted to the “norm” because it is “natural” (in the sense that people do it). I prefer the convention where sex happens in private, between consenting adults, and children the only evidence that it happens at all.
In the end, it will be only sex that is free under liberal policies . Sex is the only open, free and unregulated activity. Public copulation with the living thing(s) of your choice will soon be acceptable – if not de rigeur.
re: #80 by Cheesehead
no problem…..the word you’re looking for is “recovery”
re: #77 by WrathofG-d
To a degree, I can see that. The whole Jewish community (in your example) is understandably concerned about possibly being attacked themselves.
But if you’re looking at things like assault, then you’re putting fear into the entire community. Or a rapist gives rise, completely understandably, to ALL women, whether his attacks are motivated by ‘hate’ or not.
re: #81 by buzzsawmonkey
Only the women I get involved with know!
re: #75 by m
A lot of times they have to in prison, if they want to continue living.
For the people who think homosexuality is a choice, would you care to tell your tale about the day you chose to be heterosexual…and how you came about your decision.
re: #86 by snork
Taking it? Or giving it?
re: #83 by IslandLibertarian
Is a gay who is “cured” a recovering gay?
re: #78 by Rodan
Well there is a stripper pole in the corner! Have at it! (dollah-dollah bill y’all)
Those guys tend to be the “female” in those situation…don’t really have to perform to be raped.
Nice to see a thread here with some balanced opinion.
re: #82 by Overlook
A large part of the promotion of the Gay agenda is done by Progressives. They believe in Population Control so it’s not just Abortions they promote. They figure if they can make Homosexuality a cool lifestyle they can get a large percentage of the population to turn Gay. That means less children and less population.
It’s part of their agenda.
That being said, what people do behind close doors I don’ care. There has and will always be Gay people and they should have the same rights we all do. However, the promotion of that lifestyle as a movement or agenda I stand opposed to because it is a Progressive idea.
re: #74 by RickMZ
Also disagree with school indoctrination. It has become way overboard with people like the “safe schools czar” Kevin Jennings instructing kids on techniques. NOT a topic for school on my tax dime.
re: #78 by Rodan
What other species have you tried?
re: #88 by m
Wait – that could go so many different ways…
n’ermind!
re: #90 by m
I like backroom action!!!!!
Ha ha ha!
re: #95 by Moe Katz
Only Women, I don’t go any other way.
Oh boy, we’ve started something now.
re: #87 by Pablo Honey
I’ll buy into ‘homosexual by nature’ the day there’s a ‘gay gene’ found.
re: #75 by m
M it’s biblical
I had to explain to my aunt why my cousin is gay, it’s a result of the fall of man (Gen 3). We are born into a sin nature and because of that people gravitate towards sin, some gay, some drunk, some mass murderers etc..
Jesus said he who sins is a slave to sin.
Jesus also came to set the captives free.
I was in slaved by drugs and alcohol I’m now set free, I know people who used to be gay, they are now set free.
re: #98 by Rodan
That was a joke that didn’t work. I said other species, not genders.
re: #89 by Cheesehead
I don’t think there is a “cure” for homosexuality.
And no one should try to “cure” them.
I might equate a recovering drug addict/alcoholic to someone recovering from a lifestyle that results in destructive behavior.
# 94 vagabond trader
I agree with one caveat. Mom and Dad will tell little Janey and Johnny about the birds and the bees. Gays need someplace to learn about the birds and the birds, as most parents are in denial, if they even know. That one I don’t have an answer for, but it is important that some sort of human sexuality class takes place sometime before the drinking in bars stage.
re: #102 by Moe Katz
You forgot the
/
Man you Cannucks!
re: #87 by Pablo Honey
Probably when I was about 10..before that, girl germs.
re: #87 by Pablo Honey
Let’s see…..I was about 9 and was watching Jerry West play in a Laker game. Pretty much did it for me there, I thought he was soooooo cute. After that came a succession of surfers, and rock stars, curiously, none of them female.
But, yes, nice to see moderates unafraid to speak here on this topic. I had told myself if this thread turned into total loonbat consensus I was outta here.
re: #105 by Rodan
Yeah, I should have used a slash.
re: #101 by davehm
I love me some Jesus too, but ALL have sinned and come short of the glory of God.
Plus, I’m having shrimp tonight!
# 100 mfhorn
I understand, but by the same token, show me a heterosexual gene. Or are you saying heterosexuality is instinct? Because I always knew I was straight, just as my friend always knew he was gay. I can’t explain that any other way than genetics.
re: #102 by Moe Katz
Eh? You’re doing it with suspenders?
re: #89 by Cheesehead
LOL recover to what? the person that they were before?
re: #110 by m
Ordering or making it yourself?
I look at it like this. I don’t care what straight people do in their bedrooms so why should I care what gay people do.
I’m not their judge.
re: #110 by m
So you know how He delivers, enjoy your shrimp I had pork chops yesterday.
re: #98 by Rodan
Oh yeah? Prove it.
Jump Sharmuta’s bones.
re: #115 by m
“Does it really matter what these affectionate people do — so long as they don’t do it in the streets and frighten the horses!”
-Beatrice Stella Tanner Campbell (9 February 1865 – 10 April 1940)
re: #111 by RickMZ
I’d have to go with the ‘heterosexual is instinct’ or ‘norm’ if you like.
The primary reason for s-x is procreation.
re: #100 by mfhorn
I don’t think it is necessarily a “gene”, it could be pheromones or other factors.
I don’t think it is a conscience choice for the majority of them.
As for prisoner’s they aren’t gay, they are just sick animals.
re: #112 by snork
Jokes seem to be fizzling all over today. Like, huh?
re: #115 by m
100% agreement
re: #114 by Rodan
Making it myself~ mmmmmm mmmm mmmmmmmmm
re: #118 by Moe Katz
ha! There is that!
re: #115 by m
There’s one little fly in that ointment: when gay men practice promiscuous unprotected sex (i.e. the bathhouses), they create a public health nuisance.
If they can keep the latex on, and leave Limmiwinks out, I agree.
There’s also the small matter of how much it drives health insurance costs up every time some guy shows up in an ER with a light bulb up his butt.
Better to come short of the glory of God than not to come at all.
re: #120 by Pablo Honey
No argument on the ‘prisoners’ comment!
re: #123 by m
Barrack Hussein Obama? Mmmmmm mmmmm mmmmm…
hallowed be thy name…
And lead us not into temptation,
but deliver us TO evil….
Mmmmmm mmmmm mmmmmm…..
Gosh, people have had to read this from me for years over at the other place, but I’m repeating it here…
My best-gay ~:) is raising his straight sisters 3 kids. He’s one of the most loving, caring, giving people that I have ever met in my life.
Wouldn’t hurt a fly (ok, maybe flies) but still!
We need more of him. Gay or not.
re: #117 by Foghorn Leghorn
Shit, motherfucker, I wouldn’t fuck her with your dick…
re: #129 by m
Agreed. A good human being is a good human being. I don’t give a *** about someone eles sexuality.
re: #125 by snork
Hahahaha!
Point taken.
But 2 consenting adults (with proper health insurance) … *shrug*.
re: #128 by Iron Fist
Authored by Jimmah/iceweasel?
What really concerns me is when people use the excuse that they were born that way to justify their actions. If people continue to get away with that then whose to say the paedophile, mass murder or wife beater couldn’t use that as an excuse as well.
otoh, I do not believe that decent people who do not “celebrate” the gay life are haters.
re: #93 by Rodan
Any rationale of homosexuality based on population control post-dates the “sexual revolution”.
Homosexuality became the love that dared to say its name once gender politics had been established by the leftist feminists. The phallocentric nature of society was discovered (all sex is rape) and women could take their place as victims alongside all those who suffered under Western Man. Heterosexuality for leftist gay politics is an extension of phallocentricity for feminists: an oppressive norm that must be destroyed.
Insidious tosh.
re: #133 by vagabond trader
Or the Charlesanator himself. They pretty much all believe something along those lines over there now. Obama may not be God, but He is probably as close as any of them will recognize, at least in public…
re: #136 by Overlook
Interesting point. I agree with your analysis!
re: #75 by m
“It is physiological though. As a straight man, could you “perform” on a man? That’s how my male gay friends describe thinking about sex with a woman. If they can’t physically “do it” is it a choice?”
I have to phrase this carefully so I am not misunderstood. I am as straight as an arrow but if I had to “do” another man, I mean if my life absolutely positively depended upon it and there was no way out – it would be the young Jimmy Page. LOL
re: #134 by davehm
That’s not between consenting adults. Big difference.
(in the case the wife stays, she’s somewhat consenting – I’d live on the streets before I’d let a man hit me)
re: #134 by davehm
I think it likely that all these behaviors you mention may reflect biological predispositions. The difference, however, is that the rights of others are infringed by wife beating, pedophily,
and mass murder. Homosexuality between consenting adults violates no one’s rights. Therefore your comparison is specious.
Hey for the first time in months I have not gone over to the cesspool at all. Not that difficult!.
re: #137 by Iron Fist
LOL!!
stan is licking his chops observing the residents of Bedlam fer certain..
re: #137 by Iron Fist
That’s why selrahC supports Obama trying to silence Fox News. He’s trying to do the same on the web.
re: #132 by m
But what about poor Lemmiwinks?
re: #140 by m
Women are to kissed and caressed, not beaten.
re: #142 by Speranza
12 step program: one day at a time. Cheers!
re: #140 by m
Murder is always an option. I think “Motherfucker deserved to die” should be a legal alternative to simple manslaughter or murder (I or II).
re: #134 by davehm
Who was the governor of NJ? That was ridiculous.
re: #135 by vagabond trader
Agreed!
——
A short story.
My grams HATED the fact that my best friend was gay. I know she looked down at him. She’s old school and very religious.
Well, he’s been my bestie for about 10 years now and he won her over bigtime!
Now, she’d go off on someone that treated him the way she used to.
~:)
When I was growing up there was this guy in the neighborhood who was a cross dresser. In a way we just assumed he was gay but he wasn’t. It was weird though seeing him all rouged up with a wig and when we stared at him he would fly off the handle.
re: #139 by Speranza
re: #151 by Speranza
LOL!
re: #147 by vagabond trader
I used to over there obviously for the train wreck experience and also to pick out juicy posts by the lunatics.
re: #151 by Speranza
Yeah, crossdressing is primarily a kink of hetero men. And it’s mentioned in the Bible.
re: #100 by mfhorn
Certain physical differences in the brain have been found between straight and gay men, straight and gay women.
Cannot link. But google and thou shalt find.
It still remains the case that sex – with whomever and however – is a choice. It is not a reflex.
re: #134 by davehm
Let’s try that again:
Like that governor of NJ.
re: #140 by m
You have to bear in mind that there is a religion out there whose leader was married to a 9 year old.
re: #148 by Iron Fist
Hear, hear this eloquent speaker!
re: #119 by mfhorn
I would say it is pleasure.
Snork! You’re right… gay or straigh – leave the po’animals out of it!
Sex is best if your sexual activity is congruent with what you’re wired for. If what you’re wired for does not violate the rights of others, there’s no moral justification for asking people to forgo the joy of true sexual fulfillment.
re: #159 by m
I like IFs bluntness, cut to the chase baby!
My 162 replies to Overlook’s 156.
re: #149 by snork
I don’t to much about the Gov. of N.J. let me guess..democrat?
re: #24 by Pablo Honey
Having a desire does not necessarily make that desire morally acceptable in the sight of God.
In the Old Testament, for example, King David had the hots for a naked Bathsheba, and he had an affair with her. God frowned on that desire.
re: #150 by m
Back after my first (so far, only) marriage I had a good friend who was gay. He’d bitch about his boyfriends to me, I’d bitch about my girlfriends to him. It was a good wholesome friendship. Two stories about it. One, he had a preacher that he really respected give him the hellfire and brimstone speach. He called me, very upset, and I told him that while I neither understood or condoned what he did, I was not the person to stand in judgement between him and God.
Not my place, ever.
We worked together and one unfortunate made the mistake of referring to him as my “boyfriend”. He was appalled (naturally), because it was meant as disrrespect to me. I explained to the manager that she could go home (the woman who said it), or he could try and interfer, but I was going to cut off her head and run it through the dish machine.
They sent her home.
re: #166 by CloudyDay
What if they worship Thor?
re: #158 by davehm
That’s a whole batch of crazy… Cover-to-cover.
*&$$^#@&&$^$&!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Progressives just use Gays like they do every other group they create.
Gotta run, Guys and Dolls! Today sucked, but it was a real pleasure to be here with you fine folks.
I’ll be back…
re: #162 by Moe Katz
Yes. Quite.
But my boggles at the “joy of true sexual fulfillment” in certain circumstances and with some pairings…
re: #33 by snork
re: #167 by Iron Fist
My friend and I are in the same field and we were the talk of the area because of our many business appearances together.Not knowing he was gay people thought we were lovers and he was my boy toy, lololol.
re: #171 by Iron Fist
See ya IF!
re: #141 by Moe Katz
“may reflect biological predispositions.”
there in lies the excuse.
re: #172 by Overlook
Fixed now (I was out of my “mind” in the last)
re: #162 by Moe Katz
Yes. Quite.
But my mind boggles at the “joy of true sexual fulfillment” in certain circumstances and with some pairings…
re: #165 by davehm
You remember that whole deal don’t you? Was cheating on his wife, and went into a sob whinefest about how it’s all because he’s gay?
re: #169 by m
Yes it is crazy I agree and disgusting, I for one will not give a green light to sexual immorality on any level.
re: #178 by snork
That’s right now I remember.
re: #170 by Rodan
Exactly. They use them as a bludgeon on Conservatives.
re: #173 by CloudyDay
Actually, I’d like peer review to be more like pee review. IMO, they’re way, way too polite and collegial, and need to be far more aggressive in tearing each other’s research apart.
re: #167 by Iron Fist
Funny, isn’t it? Women talk about having lunch or an evening with their ‘girlfriends’, but it’s gonna be a cold day in h-ll before I get together with my ‘boyfriends’!
Good afternoon, y’all.
re: #170 by Rodan
Yup,another special group to imbue with victimhood.
# 178 snork
And she was a hot, very sexy looking lady.
/Not that that’s important mind you. Ah hell, who am I kidding?
re: #176 by davehm
You miss the point. If the rights of others are not violated no excuse is required.
re: #181 by Foghorn Leghorn
Yup Gays are part of the Progressive arsenal. They created a group out of them and have created an agenda around it.
re: #177 by Overlook
Well there was the guy in Scotland who was put on the sex offenders’ register for being observed having carnal knowledge of a bicycle….
re: #184 by goddessoftheclassroom
Good afternoon!
re: #189 by Moe Katz
Not California huh?
Hi Goddess, we’re having a gay old time.
re: #189 by Moe Katz
He was in transports of ecstasy.
re: #24 by Pablo Honey
It’s a choice – its not a gene. The years long study of identical twins (one gay one not) has conclusively proved this as twins are genetic clones of one another.
re: #192 by vagabond trader
So I see.
re: #191 by Rodan
Heh. Don’t want to give him any ideas.
re: #193 by Overlook
A true story. The gender of the bicycle was never reported, however. And God forbid it should have been a kids’ bike
re: #196 by Moe Katz
Ha ha ha ha ha!!!!!!!!!!!!!
re: #197 by Moe Katz
The cycle was obviously “bi”.
re: #192 by vagabond trader
LOL proper use of the word.
re: #146 by Rodan
“Women are to kissed and caressed, not beaten.”
Amen. Anyone who lays a hand in anger on a woman, child, old or weak person deserves every bad thing that comes to them.
re: #189 by Moe Katz
There was a guy around here who tried to be the ‘girl’ in a relationship with a horse. He was DOA @ the ER.
If that isn’t enough to give you anal nighmares (pun not intended).
re: #202 by snork
Horsing around can be dangerous.
re: #202 by snork
You should see what arrives through the doors of a big city ER.
re: #194 by vapig
Those studies also blow holes through astrology.
(born at the same time yada yada..)
re: #13 by tqcincinnatus
Will there be a place for comments, etc., TQ? I’ll have to put it on my favorites list and give you some hits every day!
re: #201 by Speranza
I’d have to throw ‘animal’ in that list, too.
re: #63 by snork
Dear Chaz – my sister works for the Prince of Darkness up in Redmond.
I can have it for free.
Bye Now!!
re: #204 by vagabond trader
I don’t think I’d want to.
IT IS TIME FOR BECK.
WILL WE SEE WHAT IS BEHIND THE BLUE CURTAIN?
WILL THE RED PHONE RING?
Au revoir…
True story
One of my coworkers is gay and back in 1998 he joined this online gay dating service called “Edwina” – anyway they give you a questionnaire to fill out and one of the queations is “How big are you?” (and they do not mean how tall you are) and the choices were:
1. small
2. medium
3. large
4. Yikes!
I asked him what does “yikes” mean – like a Reticulated Python?
re: #209 by mfhorn
Too much for me nowadays, back in the day quite an education. Yikes!
re: #211 by Speranza
lol, same choice of words, see 212.
Too funny, Hussein is here in true blue CT, signs observed “Commander in Thief” “Wheres the Transparency?” Also numerous “Dump Dodd”
re: #68 by mfhorn
I don’t see this passing the smell test at SCOTUS. We don’t enhance a crime based on a person’s thoughts at the time.
It reminds me of this piece of the transcript from the Chicago 7 trial (and trust me when I say I can’t believe I’m quoting Abbie Hoffman):
PROSECUTOR: Now Mr. Hoffman, what were you wondering when you wrote this passage?
DEFENDANT: Does wondering mean dreaming, Mr. Schultz?
PROSECUTOR: Yes, that’s right. (waves book)
DEFENDANT: I’ve never been on trial for my dreams before.
re: #212 by vagabond trader
I can imagine
re: #214 by Carolina Girl
Have ‘hate crime’ laws been challenged in the courts?
my .02
content of school libraries should be up to the school boards and parents. <18 yr old's education is up to the parents.
homosexuals can do whatever they like, within the law course. two consenting adults, et cetera, und zo weite…
as for genetics versus choice…i dont care, but an answer to that would probably be very interesting, is it one or the other, is it a combination of both? could be good scientific process.
i wonder how the genetics v choice argument would beak down when applied to political affiliation of the gays in question. liberal gays v conservative gays.
re: #213 by vagabond trader
Quite the coincidence! (Yikes!)
55 Cheesehead
I’d be careful of using these “born that way” arguments to defend or excuse behavior.
What if pedophiles begin to argue that they were born that way, that they were born feeling attracted to kids?
Or if bank robbers said they’ve felt urges since their childhoods to hold up a Wells Fargo?
Some famous serial killers got the urge to murder at young ages. Some of them started out by killing animals before working their way up to human victims.
I’m sure some of them would like not to be held responsible for their actions because they were ‘born that way.’
One lady I read about last week seems to be arguing that incest is genetic in nature and so should be accepted by society at large (if I understand these articles correctly):
Woman claims child-parent sex not always incest
Even if HETERO-sexuality is a trait people are “born with,” God still tells people in the Bible that He demands certain limitations on heterosexual behavior.
As far as hetero-sexuality is concerned, God does not approve of sex outside of marriage (adultery or fornication), or lust / dirty thought life.
.
my .02
content of school libraries should be up to the school boards and parents. <18 yr old's education is up to the parents.
homosexuals can do whatever they like, within the law course. two consenting adults, et cetera, und zo weite…
as for genetics versus choice…i dont care, but an answer to that would probably be very interesting, is it one or the other, is it a combination of both? could be good scientific process.
i wonder how the genetics v choice argument would beak down when applied to political affiliation of the gays in question. liberal gays v conservative gays.
re: #216 by mfhorn
When exactly is murder not an act of hate…shouldn’t all murders be hate crimes?
70. buzzsawmonkey
I dunno. The Bible was written thousands of years ago, and it sort of has homosexuality listed as another category apart from heterosexuality. Homosexuality in the Bible, is not seen as being the, or “a,” norm of human sexuality.
Also, there is a passage, I think, in the NT, which sort of depicts it as a “condition” of sorts, or a preference that is regularly practiced and carried out by some individuals, where the passage says God allowed those who practice homosexual acts to be given over to their desires, e.g. Romans 1: 18-32
Excerpt from that passage:
re: #219 by Sarah the Elder
Hate is not a crime it’s a motive.
re: #216 by mfhorn
I’m not quite sure. It would be interesting. I believe a lot of these hate crimes bills have been vetoed by the states’ governors on the grounds that it was against their own states’ constitutions.
I will certainly investigate.
re: #217 by Speranza
Just because its Friday don’t start!
Keep gritting my teeth and telling myself it’s a big tent….
re: #211 by Speranza
Yikes is what the seats in this thing are made of.
Moby Dick dick?
re: #223 by vagabond trader
I’m sorry, it’s pay day!!
re: #220 by CloudyDay
Before God gave them over, they suppressed the truth in unrighteousness Romans 1:18 then they sign over to the lie Romans 1:25
re: #225 by snork
Saw that the other day! You have to admit, the Russians just don’t give a **** what anyone else thinks.
re: #220 by CloudyDay
knowing that passage and the context in which is was written, I’ve often wondered how anyone could possibly think the Bible didn’t address homosexuality.
at the same time…I’m often ashamed of how the church has turned their back on the homosexual community.
re: #225 by snork
Good grief!
re: #230 by Sarah the Elder
I wouldn’t say anyone turned their back, just look up thread, you see these things around church not in the grocery store.
re: #227 by Speranza
See??? Thats what I mean!
re: #221 by davehm
But you don’t punish the motive, just the crime.
You look at motive as to whether somone had a reason to do something, and that’s more than legitimate. But ‘hate crimes’ are doing nothing but punishing someome more severly for their motive.
re: #232 by davehm
sorry…I should have said some in the church…I didn’t mean to make a gross generalization about Christians or the church in a “washed up musician, pony tail, hippie” sort of way. I am a Christian and part of that church.
re: #234 by mfhorn
“But ‘hate crimes’ are doing nothing but punishing someome more severly for their motive.”
Nothing wrong with that. Sentencing guidelines are an established fact, and they take motive into account—for example, financial gain.
75 m
That’s an interesting point, but I’m not sure if that proves anything, or if it does prove something, I’m not sure what, exactly.
That argument would be kind of like me, a straight, conservative female, saying to another straight, conservative female,
“Does the idea of cuddling/kissing obese, slobbish, liberal loud mouth Michael Moore turn you on?” (The answer would likely be “No way!,” but I don’t think that would make her a lesbian.)
There are some straight men who claim they cannot have sex with their wives unless they pretend during the act that she is some famous female model or movie actress.
That a guy would feel the need to be with another guy to be able to “perform” is just sort of begging the question to the whole matter, I think.
re: #168 by Pablo Honey
It’s still wrong. There’s only one God.
re: #5 by WrathofG-d
Yep, nothing liberal about the liberal left, it’s all progressive tyranny from this point now.
re: #235 by Sarah the Elder
LOL no offence taken, real churches have an open door policy imo
re: #140 by m
Sorry, but I feel compelled to get up on my soapbox when this subject is raised. To sum it up: No one, M or F, should be hitting anyone else, M or F.
I think I came across a slogan to that effect: “Lovers don’t hit one another.”
/getting off my soapbox, now. I would also exit the relationship if any G/F hit me. I am only human, and would tolerate only so much before I would retaliate in kind, and it would be better to leave the situation before one loses ones’ temper.
re: #59 by CloudyDay
Our nation was founded upon the principle that all adults are equal before the law. “Hate Crimes” sounds too much like some activists are setting up the situation where an individual can be a member of a protected, or “special” class of citizen. Our nation was founded by individuals who wanted nothing to do with that sort of thing because “Protected,” or “Special” classes of citizens sounded then, and continues to sound, like one was setting up an aristocracy. They were declaring independence from an aristocracy. I think people should be punished on the basis that they are harming another person, another human being.
If one desires to have special social classes and special segments of the population, I have suggested that these folks go somewhere where the local legal, political, and social traditions are more amenable to such a concept. Perhaps Russia. I don’t know.
re: #206 by Carolina Girl
Will there be a place for comments, etc., TQ? I’ll have to put it on my favorites list and give you some hits every day!
Hi CG, thanks! Yes, comments should be open on TBSC, though nothing as advanced as we see here on the Blogmocracy!
re: #242 by Canoe Convoy
Your glorious nation was founded on slavery.
re: #244 by Moe Katz
It was founded on rebellion against a tyrant.
re: #245 by davehm
CRAP
re: #246 by Moe Katz
:^p KING GEORGE WAS A TYYYYYYRRRRRRRANNNNT!!!!
yep deal with it
American law did recognized classes and groups of people from the beginning, that’s the basis of how blacks could be slaves and whites couldn’t.
197. Moe Katz
There was a news story a few years ago of a guy who had sex with cars.
Man admits having sex with 1,000 cars
187. Moe Katz
I don’t think I can agree with an “anything goes” sort of mentality regarding sex because there are, allegedly, no victims involved.
There are emotional and physical ramifications from sex to the individual, and I think an attitude of “anything goes” negatively impacts the society at large.
I think a free wheeling view about sex that has been in place for the last few decades in the United States is what has given rise to out of wedlock births; the increase in sexually transmitted diseases; the vulgarity we see even on prime time television shows; and other unfortunate phenomenon.
Teen age girls (or young ladies), especially, wind up emotionally scarred from having sex, which many of them do only because they’re afraid of being dumped by their boyfriends if they don’t “put out.”
Girls have been lied to and told that having premarital sex is a form of feminism, and they are entitled to this sort of lifestyle, but it’s given rise to all sorts of problems.
Here are some of the results of this ‘anything goes’ attitude:
Rise in Sexually Transmitted Diseases Poses Biggest Risk to Young Women
Risky sexual behavior cited in rise of 3 diseases – A federal report shows that new cases of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis rose for the second year in a row
AIDS, pregnancy up among young
Pregnancy, STDs on the Rise Again Among US Teens
Oklahoma Officials Confirm Teen Syphilis Outbreak, Officials Cite Group Sexual Activity At Parties
Unmarried Childbirths in U.S. Reach Record Levels
I once read the book He’s Just Not That Into You, and there were true stories of young women (in their 20s, 30s) who thought the way to get love, to get a man, and to get a man to stay, was to have sex with the man with no strings attached.
Many of these women could not get a commitment (e.g. marriage proposal) out of the men in question, and in some cases, they were coldly dumped after being used sexually. These women were heart broken.
Here’s a page which discusses it a little more: “He’s Just Not That Into You,” Postmodern Secular Romance
When I was a teen, I had a few female teen friends that experienced the same thing (being used for sex), and they would confide in me about it, and they were heart broken.
In the United States (and other nations are having the same problem), we now have a culture that sexualizes childhood (e.g, High-heeled knee-high leather boots for toddlers launched,
Outrage over risque slogans).
I’ve read papers by homosexuals who are disillusioned with the homosexual lifestyle.
See, for instance, this homosexual guy’s paper:
The Books were a Front
for the Porn, by Ronald G. Lee
There are a lot of diseases associated with all this unbridled sex, sex without rules or limits.
Homosexual, Bisexual Men 50 Times More Likely to Have HIV: CDC
The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS: A Nine-Year Retrospective of Fear and (Mostly) Loathing
HIV Rate in D.C. Soars, Now ‘On Par With Uganda’
[Homosexual /BiSexual] Group Sex, Trysts Without Condoms Fuel Raging HIV in Asian Men
W.H.O. Warns Against Rising AIDS Threat Among Asian Gays
CDC report says HIV infection most common among young gay black men
Blacks and Gays Face Most H.I.V. Risk, Study Finds
WHO Official Admits No Pandemic of AIDS amongst Heterosexuals
New MRSA Superbug More Prevalent Among Sexually Active Gay Men
Drug-resistant staph passed in gay sex -US study
re: #247 by davehm
Bullshit. King George was a constitutional monarch and the colonists’ beef was with the British Parliament. They wanted the same rights as colonists that Englishmen had at home. You people learn the most pathetically mythologized versions of your own history.
re: #249 by CloudyDay
There are consequences.
re: #250 by Moe Katz
taxation without representation…case closed!
re: #252 by davehm
Exactly. In England they had taxation WITH representation. Colonists did not have the same rights as domestic British subjects. It had nothing to do with the monarchy; their beef was with the British Parliament. The king was already a figurehead by this point in history.
re: #253 by Moe Katz
Perhaps, in the Declaration of Independence the beef was against the king.
Incidentally, there were successful rebellions in Canada in 1837 for the same right of ‘taxation with representation,’ otherwise called responsible government.
taxation without representation is tyranny
re: #255 by Moe Katz
My history is fuzzie but if I remember correctly we almost had Canada, at least the eastern part.
re: #254 by davehm
The king is only a figurehead in all this. The laws are all the doing of the English Parliament. Britain at this point had been a constitutional monarchy run by a parliamentary system for about 80 years.
You will also find if you research the question that the American system of government was founded on a great admiration for the British system and tried to reproduce its best points. The major issue was that it was to be THEIR OWN.
Thank you WrathofG-d for this great thread. I have taken the time to read the comments, and for the most part, am impressed that we are able to have a discussion like this without being rude to one another and taking things personally. It is time for these things to be said. The left makes you feel , dirty, out of touch, full of prejudice and worse still – bigoted if you even consider discussing this subject.
As someone up-thread kind-of said: the left thinks nothing of forcing pro-homosexual materials on school children, but deems it unacceptable to make books that cover the subject of people leaving the gay lifestyle accessible to adults. That is the real issue here – no matter what one thinks about homosexuality – it is the temerity on the left these days.
Again – thank you all for your thoughtful comments
And the President was a kind of substitute king, who was chosen by an appointed electoral college. The House was the Parliament and the Senate was the House of Lords.
re: #249 by CloudyDay
Well … you can’t legislate people’s sexual choices. That’s for the Taliban.
re: #261 by Moe Katz
re: #259 by Moe Katz
re: #258 by Moe Katz
LOL so not on slavery, gimme your money and don’t gripe about it is a fundamental form of tyranny
re: #263 by davehm
That was the British colonial system. Colonists didn’t have the same rights as domestic Englishmen. Colonies existed to enrich a select group of British merchants and the national coffers of Britain itself. That was gradually done away with in the 19th century.
re: #242 by Canoe Convoy
There have been incidents of Christians being attacked or harassed by homosexual rights activists.
Gay rights protesters disrupt Sunday service
Sparks fly as ‘gay’ activist mob swarms Christians – Residents of homosexual district: ‘We’re going to kill you. We know who you are’
Gay anarchist ‘action’ hits church
I wonder why those in the House and Senate don’t try to pass laws protecting Christians (or secular conservatives or whomever) who are attacked for being Christian/ conservative?
What if a homosexual man rapes or kills another homosexual man (and it does happen), or hurts someone else? e.g.,
Former Mr Gay UK ’slit lover’s throat then marinated his diced flesh with fresh herbs’
Gay Activist From Georgia Busted for Kiddie Porn
Lesbian murderers to be separated in jail
First day of testimony in Rios murder retrial wraps up [homosexual guy killed his boyfriend]
N.Y. woman convicted of killing lesbian partner (scroll down page, story is at bottom)
The tragic story of Jesse Dirkhising
Female fire chief accused of sex harassment – 3 women file suits against official in Minneapolis
The Murder of Adam Walsh: A 27-Year Mystery Solved
Now it’s EX-’gays’ getting pummeled – Verbal to violent, attacks rise against former homosexuals
re: #244 by Moe Katz
You mean the USA? If so, no, the USA was founded by free men, some of whom owned slaves.
I don’t think the impetus for the foundation of the USA was slavery, it seemed mostly to be a quest for religious freedom and other matters not related primarily to slavery.
re: #265 by CloudyDay
I’m glad someone does their homework
re: #262 by Moe Katz
Moe, I don’t recall saying anything about legislating people’s sexual choices.
I was just pointing out that the view “sex without rules, if it’s between consenting adults, is fine and dandy because it hurts nobody” isn’t really true.
Even adults who engage in consensual sex experience ramifications from it, both physically (through sexually transmitted diseases, for example) and psychologically (women being emotionally scarred from being used for sex).
That “sex without boundaries is okay as long as it’s between consenting adults” mantra also filters down to society at large, where we have 12 year old girls wearing T-shirts to school emblazoned with disturbing phrases such as ‘Porn Star.’
re: #266 by CloudyDay
Sorry, I was addressing #242’s claim that that the US system is not based on recognizing classes of people. In fact early US law recognizes many classes of people, such as men, women, Negroes, property holders, etc., etc.
Off to the gym, have a good evening!
re: #268 by CloudyDay
I wouldn’t argue that it’s without risks, including sexually transmitted diseases, HPV-related cancers in both sexes, unplanned pregnancies, etc. When I say it’s okay between consenting adults I’m just speaking in terms of people’s right to choose. Are we on the same page?
re: #267 by davehm
I keep lists of links to various news stories precisely for times like these.
Religion and the Founding of the American Republic
Religion and the Congress of the Confederation, 1774-89
re: #269 by Moe Katz
Oh, okay.:)
270, Moe
I guess people have a “right to choose,” but I can’t say I always agree with their choices.
Have a good work out at the gym, Moe!
I need to get off here in a moment and go jogging myself. (I have an elliptical machine I jog on five days a week.)
I should’ve gone jogging a few hours ago, but I usually dread it and so I sometimes put it off ’til late in the day.
I just saw Sally Quinn on O’Reilly, I must say I am impressed by her. She thinks that Obama’s Administration is acting like a bunch of children.
re: #272 by CloudyDay
I’m back, Cloudy, in case you revisit this. Know what you mean about putting it off, which can result in missed days
^ Neglecting the body and eating badly are probably the sins I’m sternest and most sanctimonious about 
re: #222 by CloudyDay
Hey CloudyDay. I am sure that you also do not eat (1) cheeseburgers, (2) bacon, (3) shrimp, oysters, lobster, (4) steak with bernaise sauce, (5) icecream after dinner (usually prohibited, but depends on the meal).
I am always a bit surprised when someone singles out two passages (nearly identicial) in Leviticus (Vayikra) but pays no attention to the restrictions elsewhere in that book.
Oh, and of course I don’t support banning books. We’re talking about five (5) books here, though.
re: #222 by CloudyDay
I dunno. The Bible was written thousands of years ago, and it sort of has homosexuality listed as another category apart from heterosexuality. Homosexuality in the Bible, is not seen as being the, or “a,” norm of human sexuality.
I do not claim to be an authority on the New Testament, but in the Torah—i.e., the Five Books of Moses which are the center of what Christians refer to as the Old Testament, and what Jews refer to as the Tanach—there is no such thing as “homosexuality” and there is no “separate category” which puts homosexual acts “apart,” nor is there any claptrap about homosexual acts not being “a norm,” whatever that is supposed to mean.
Too many people make the mistake of confusing the “immoral” with the “unnatural,” not realizing that the entire purpose of morality is to curb and circumscribe natural desires. G-d did not forbid engaging in homosexual acts because they are “unnatural,” but because they are “natural.”