You are misrepresenting my position. I repeated it tonight and I posted it here. Misrepresenting intentionally is a lie. Either you are a liar or you can't read some simple sentences. Now, do something honorable and call the moderator and explain that you were wrong.
To: scripter
Take notes. I pinged you so I don’t get asked the same questions and have to deal with the same BS every thread. THE AGENDA. lj thinks I support the homosexual agenda. In fact I have explained my position twice. I don’t deal with so-called agenda’s. I deal with issues on an issue by issue basis. I come to threads about gays in the military or marriage because these are issues I believe where the government should treat all citizens the same. The thread usually goes like this. Someone supports a homosexual serving in the military and one of you comes along and posts the agenda and calls the person an apologist, gaystopo member or some such propaganda label.
The problem is you are incapable of dealing with issues separately because you have dedicated yourself to fighting the agenda. So anything a homosexual wants or believes they have a right to you rail against it because it supports the agenda. You equate pedophilia with a person have sex with another adult or wanting to marry them. Because in your mind any gain or recognition of full citizenship for a homosexual is a loss to the agenda.
The agenda was developed by self-ordained leaders and extremists. I don’t have to say it, because I know some homosexuals who say the same thing. You are slamming an entire group, millions of people, because of an agenda some extremists push. In the US we believe in individual rights and responsibilities. Not excoriating people because someone like them is extreme.
Last time I looked, blacks commit an inordinate amount of murder per capita. Now we can yell all day about how violent blacks are or we can treat them as individuals so that the guy down the street can live peacefully and not have to worry about you shouting murderer when he leaves the house.
RESEARCH. You pride yourselves in your links to various studies and research. S says I can’t refute it with evidence. I mentioned a quote that lj used and the 73% child molester study you guys link to. I have asked questions about each. If you can’t answer questions about the study or the quote then it doesn’t stand up. You’re just using numbers because you can throw them on these threads and superficial people will adopt them. You are being intellectually dishonest.
In order for research to be useful it has to be reliable and valid. Reliability means that the results have been repeated in subsequent trials, preferably by other independent sources. Validity means it was executed with proper formalities, supported by objective truth, and has the power to overcome doubt. The ones I’ve seen so far do not meet either of these standards and your inability to answer simple questions does not invite the questioner to read more studies.
Let’s say that 73% of homosexuals are child molesters. That means there 4 million kids more or less who have been molested with no convictions. If this is true there is a pandemic of crime that is unaddressed. Why haven’t police groups or DAs spoken out on this most serious issue?
The obvious reason is that it’s not true. It is on its face incredible and raises doubt about the research or the researcher. When I took my masters research class, the instructor cautioned that if your results don’t seem credible, your first reaction is to question yourself, not go outside yelling the findings to everyone.
Lastly, when you see research funded by some group like American Family Values for Exiling homosexuals on the north slope of Alaska, it is easy to dismiss the research as starting from a bias point.
I have in the past posted critical analyses of various research showing the evils of homosexuality, but the owner deleted the posts. So you have the free run of the place, but don’t expect all freepers to go along and not point out what you are doing. Many have just stopped posting because they were called names, others stopped because they don’t have the patience to withstand constant barrages of propaganda, and others see these threads as a place to keep all the zealots corralled and make the other threads safe for dialogue. I choose, for now, to keep pointing out what you are doing. I know that people come here to read and learn about conservatism and I care what they see and take away about the FR. But I cannot keep up the pace of those more fanatical amongst you. So you can call it clock cleaning or whatever, but I have a short time period for staying with you.
102 posted on 12/18/2003 12:46:09 PM PST by breakem [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
I've read your replies. I gave you an F+...You said the above after I wrote the following:
You flamed out and turned out not to be a worthy opponent. I'm sadly disappointed...
Now I'm leaving so you can claim victory to your friends and continue your crusade...
Unamerican, intellectually dishonest, and fanatical. I leave you to your crusade.
And in all that:To: breakemTake notes.Thanks, but I only take notes from credible sources.
I deal with issues on an issue by issue basis.
Hey, we have something in common. What you seemed to have missed, though, is the issues all have a common theme: homosexuality. And those of us who have dealt with the issues have decided to work smarter and gather all the information we can to make informed, educated and intelligent statements on the issues.
Someone supports a homosexual serving in the military and one of you comes along and posts the agenda and calls the person an apologist, gaystopo member or some such propaganda label.
Perhaps you should stop looking like a duck.
What you never comment on is the health hazards of the homosexual lifestyle. AIDS targets homosexual behavior, tainting the blood supply with a deadly contagious virus. Knowing this, and on this issue alone, why you think homosexuals should serve in the military is baffling.
To: breakemThe problem is you are incapable of dealing with issues separately because you have dedicated yourself to fighting the agenda.You apparently don't see or don't agree with the bigger picture as we see it. That doesn't mean anything other than we disagree. Yet everything we say is supported by numerous sources and everything you say is supported by you and you alone. I prefer many sources stating the same thing over anything you say without a single supporting reference.
We see the bigger picture.
To: breakemYou are slamming an entire group, millions of people, because of an agenda some extremists push. In the US we believe in individual rights and responsibilities. Not excoriating people because someone like them is extreme.Nice try but I'm not slamming anybody. I'm stating facts from sources you don't even attempt to refute. AIDS discriminates against homosexual behavior. That's a fact.
To: breakemLast time I looked, blacks commit an inordinate amount of murder per capita. Now we can yell all day about how violent blacks are or we can treat them as individuals so that the guy down the street can live peacefully and not have to worry about you shouting murderer when he leaves the house.Last time I looked, blacks couldn't stop being blacks while thousands have left the homosexual lifestyle. You're always building then attacking a straw man argument.
To: breakemRESEARCH. You pride yourselves in your links to various studies and research. S says I can’t refute it with evidence.You haven't so far. You haven't even tried.
I mentioned a quote that lj used and the 73% child molester study you guys link to. I have asked questions about each. If you can’t answer questions about the study or the quote then it doesn’t stand up.
We've answered your questions but you either don't like the answers or stop responding.
You’re just using numbers because you can throw them on these threads and superficial people will adopt them. You are being intellectually dishonest.
I don't use numbers. I've researched the issue myself and believe what I post is accurate. You have never refuted anything. I don't know how may times I've said this: Once you've demonstrated something I've posted is incorrect I'll stop posting it.
To: breakemIn order for research to be useful it has to be reliable and valid. Reliability means that the results have been repeated in subsequent trials, preferably by other independent sources. Validity means it was executed with proper formalities, supported by objective truth, and has the power to overcome doubt. The ones I’ve seen so far do not meet either of these standards and your inability to answer simple questions does not invite the questioner to read more studies.The ones [you've] seen? Get specific. Which study?
That wasn't much of a dance - you just walked like a duck.