Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: lqclamar

Woooooah. You just opened a whole new can of worms here. Wikipedia reflects popular belief and academic research that exists out there, not the Truth in any ontological sense other than something as simple as 2+2=4. If you want to say that the work of these "revisionist homosexual 'historians'" is invalid, I really can't argue one way or the other. Wikipedia reflects that these things have been accepted by the academic community at large, not that they are considered true. If you have a work by an academic of credibility that suggests otherwise, go ahead and add it in


209 posted on 01/02/2006 2:10:48 PM PST by Tznkai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies ]


To: Tznkai
Woooooah. You just opened a whole new can of worms here

No. Not really. I simply restated and elaborated upon my original complaints with this article. Right now the Wikipedia homo list asserts that several dozen historical figures are "confirmed" homosexuals. In reality there is great debate as to whether many of these figures were homosexual, and in many cases the only evidence in favor is circumstantial innuendo that is normally promoted by persons with a pro-homosexual political agenda.

Wikipedia reflects that these things have been accepted by the academic community at large, not that they are considered true.

Bzzzzt! Wrong. Try again. There are very few if any mainstream scholarly biographies of Caesar out there that (1) assert that he was "anally penetrated" in graphic detail or (2) conclusively purport him to have been a homosexual. Yet Wikipedia's portrayal of Caesar says both of him.

If you have a work by an academic of credibility that suggests otherwise, go ahead and add it in

The simple fact that several of the historical figures on that list are NOT conclusively established to be homosexual should permit their removal from the "confirmed" list. I strongly fear, however, that if I were to do so one of the pro-homosexual Wikipedia administrators who guards that article would immediately revert me.

Do you believe otherwise? If so, why don't you try a little experiment and remove one of the historical figures for whom there is no conclusive evidence from the "confirmed" list then we'll see what happens.

212 posted on 01/02/2006 9:10:51 PM PST by lqclamar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson