"Even more posts on homosexuality...i'm curious as to why?"

Catholic Family Association of America/ Free Republic ^ | 5/1/03 | Dr. Brian Kopp, Vice President, Catholic Family Association of America

[Polycarp]

Even more posts on homosexuality...i'm curious as to why? (Click link for background.)

--Dr. Brian Kopp
Vice President, Catholic Family Association of America

5/1/03

A friend of mine is sitting in jail right now, having lived a life of severely self destructive behavior for many years. His current incarceration is for DUI.

From the time he was 13 to 15, he had a steady girlfriend, and was a quiet, well adjusted, normal kid.

At age 15 he was sexually molested by three male homosexuals, and in the process was introduced to drugs (need those whip its to open up a virginal anal sphincter, you know) and heavy alcohol abuse. He has lived a self destructive homosexual lifestyle ever since, a lifestyle induced by molestation and coerced drug and alcohol use at an early age.

I'm personally helping arrange his counseling and legal representation in the lawsuit against his homosexual molestors.

His life has been destroyed by these homosexual predators, yet many here and elsewhere have the unmitigated gall to castigate those of us battling this homosexual juggernaut, especially in regards to the efforts of the GOP to court the homosexual vote.

This type of predatory sexual abuse of young teenage boys is typical chickenhawking homosexual behavior. I've seen it so many times its enough to make me vomit.

And I guarantee if any of them ever touches one of my boys, there will be no trial, only a burial.

Furthermore, the credibility of my entire Church has been undermined by homosexuals who infiltrated its priesthood and systematically buggered its teenage altar boys for years.

And the same types who would criticize the Church for this buggering, also criticize the Church for being so "intolerant" of the homosexual agenda.

This chickenhawking is an integral part of the homosexual subculture, and tacitly and explicitly accepted by the entire movement. Thus the call for lowering the age of consent for homosexual sex across the board by the homo movement.

The homosexual juggernaut presents a clear and present danger to this Republic and the institution of the family upon which all decent societies are built.

The homosexual juggernaut presents a clear and present danger to our children, as chickenhawking is an integral part of its culture. Homosexuals do not reproduce. They are not "born that way." But they do recruit. They are actively trying to recruit your children and mine.

The homosexual juggernaut presents a clear and present danger to our health system.

Mankind has spent several millenia developing effective and sanitary methods of disposing human waste.

Mankind knows that human waste is the source of deadly diseases.

Mankind knows that highly promiscuous sexual behavior of any kind brings with it high morbidity and mortality. Homosexual behavior is inherently promiscuous, as every single sociological study on the subject has repeatedly proven.

Male homosexual behavior is essentially desirous of methods to literally and figuratively swim upstream to the sources of that human waste, with as many different partners as humanly possible.

Therefore, homosexual behavior is deadly and definitely decreases the homosexual's life expectancy, and the visceral repulsion it engenders is a natural, wholesome, and common sense response.

Public health records demonstrate that homosexuals, representing 2 percent of America's population, suffer vastly disproportionate percentages of several of America's most serious STDs, with incidences among homosexuals of diseases like gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis A and B, cytomegalovirus, shigellosis, giardiasis, amoebic bowel disease and herpes far exceeding their presence in the general population. These are due to common homosexual practices that include fellatio, anilingus, digital stimulation of the rectum and ingestion of urine and feces.

An exhaustive study in The New England Journal of Medicine, medical literature's only study reporting on homosexuals who kept sexual "diaries," indicated the average homosexual ingests the fecal material of 23 different men each year. The same study indicated the number of annual sexual partners averaged nearly 100. Homosexuals averaged, per year, fellating 106 different men and swallowing 50 of their seminal ejaculations, and 72 penile penetrations of the anus. (Corey, L, and Holmes, K.K., "Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men," New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, vol 302: 435-438; as quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

A study by McKusick, et al., of 655 San Francisco homosexuals reported that only 24 percent of the sample claimed to have been "monogamous" during the past year, and of this 24 percent, 5 percent drank urine, 7 percent engag-ed in sex involving insertion of a fist in their rectums, 33 percent ingested feces, 53 percent swallowed semen and 59 percent received semen in their rectums in the month just previous to the survey ("AIDS and Sexual Behavior Reported by Homosexual Men in San Francisco," American Journal of Public Health, December 1985, 75: 493-496; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

This is my answer to the question, "Even more posts on homosexuality...i'm curious as to why"

As long as this homosexual juggernaut looms over us, pro-family and all men of good will, desirous of defending and spreading the Culture of Life, will engage the battle and fight this integral and insidious piece of the Culture of Death.

[jwalsh07]

All laws are rooted in morality.

[Torie]

Morality comes from a priori assumptions at bottom. What you think is moral or immoral may not be co-extensive with someone elses. To suggest that those with different a priori assumptions are nutters is really quite intolerant, at least up to a point.

[breakem]

I don't propose a law for everything I don't like. You don't get it, yet? Don't you really know the difference between disagreeing with something and outlawing it?

The law doesn't stop many who want to engage in such behavior. So now what, prison at $25,000+ of tax money per year, for what.

Here's a tangent, notice how the drug laws have dissuaded people, LOL! Get serious.

[jwalsh07]

It doesn't happen like that. What happens is that these laws fall by the wayside as evidenced by the fact that 37 of 50 states have jettisoned same.

Some areas of Nevada have prostitution, some don't.

My beef is with the "freedom lovers" who want 9 justices in the SCOTUS to sit as the arbiters of how I and everybody else must live.

[breakem]

I understand now. The law doesn't stop the behavior, but it makes us feel righteous. What a relief.

I have a busy day tomorrow, good night. Going to see if the police are looking through the window and hitting the sack.

[jwalsh07]

I don't propose a law for everything I don't like. You don't get it, yet? Don't you really know the difference between disagreeing with something and outlawing it?

Nor do I. What you can't seem to get your arms around is the fact that being against peeking in bedrooms and being against judicial activism from on high are not mutually exclusive.

would it be possible for you to try and stop laughing long enough to wrap your arms around that?

[Torie]

Ya, but if your solution of if you don't like it, don't bitch, just get out, will cause less of this give and take between states as they experiment. Folks with totally different views will be congregated in different states to the point, that a stone wall is constructed, ala the slavery issue. As I say, I agree that it probably won't happen, in considerable part because the feds are there to step in if things get out of hand, and sometimes of course when they don't, because with power comes the temptation to use it more than necessary. Yet again, one of those two edged swords. I see so many of those puppies. They are everywhere.

[capitan_refugio]

Let me guess. Plaid shirts. Levis or khakis. Short hair.

Am I 3 out of 3?

[jwalsh07]

OK, perhaps after a good nights rest you'll be able to answer 219 lucidly.

[jwalsh07]

You mean like that blue and red Bush/Gore map? :-}

Adios amigo.

[Salvation]

So sorry about your brother. Through his penitence I know that he has received God's blessing.

God bless you and your family.

In dealing with the grief that such encounters inevitably perpetuate, click on my name and the check out the hotlink provided for Beginning Experience. You will find a group fairly close in your area.

[MilspecRob]

I guess its just who you know. A number of lesbians I know here in L.A. look a lot more like babes than most of the ( female) member photo posts here?

[Salvation]

Could it possibly be that he is a medical doctor? Duh?

[Salvation]

**Churches must unambiguously present the biblical moral standards and point people to repentance and redemption.**

Churches of all denominations!

[Salvation]

**Churches must unambiguously present the biblical moral standards and point people to repentance and redemption.**

Churches of all denominations!

[Jorge]

"The idea that the right to privacy protects any criminal activity is idiotic."

Jorge, you lost the argument when you failed to answer the question.

I answered the question. You just didn't like the answer.

It is nevertheless true.

Of course if you are free to show where it is wrong if you can. But you haven't even attempted to.

[breakem]

223 was my reponse. Do you want me to speak or type more slowly?

[breakem]

You refer to judicial activism. What recourse does a citizen have when a legislature or city council retricts a fundamental human right. If that's judicial activism, which is a buzz word I don't agree with, then let's have more of it. You can understand why legislature lobbied by people who believe as you do would attempt to restrict that which we have a right to do. It is the role of the court to stop such tyranny and to protect the rights.

[JoshGray]

"judicial activism" = "my side lost".

[MrLeRoy]

I'll let the readers decide. I'm cool with that.

This reader (who is repelled by homosexuality and opposed to "gay marriage") thinks you cherry-picked the weakest of Trace's many points, and suspects you can't refute them all.