Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Right Can't Win This Fight
LA Times ^ | May 20, 2004 | Max Boot

Posted on 05/23/2004 5:03:35 PM PDT by neverdem

With gay marriage on a roll, it's time to move on to another battle.

For decades, social conservatives have been fighting and losing culture wars. Contraception and abortion — once taboo topics — have been enshrined into law. The rates of premarital sex, out-of-wedlock births and divorce have soared since the 1950s (though lately most of these indexes have leveled off or declined slightly). In school, prayer is out; sex education is in. On TV, characters used to say "gee whiz" and sleep in twin beds; now they curse as if they had Tourette's syndrome and flash skin as if they were Gypsy Rose Lee.

This doesn't mean that America is in cultural decline; no one who saw the response to 9/11 can think we are soft or decadent. It does mean there is little mystery about how the latest culture war — over gay marriage — will turn out. Opponents of same-sex marriages may have most of the public on their side for now, but they've already all but lost this battle.

How do I know? Simply by looking at the arguments being advanced by both sides. Advocates of same-sex marriage speak in the powerful language of civil rights and liken their cause to that of African Americans fighting anti-miscegenation laws in years past. And what do opponents say in response? Once upon a time, the case would have been open and shut: Sodomy is a sin, period. Many people may still believe that, but that's no longer a tenable argument in our secularized politics.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: California; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: culturewars; gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexuality; marriage; maxboot; prisoners; sodomy
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last
To: neverdem

Let me summarize if for you.

You guys can take care of keeping us free.

While you are out fighting our enemies, us rats will spread our filth. Don't worry though because in 20 years, we are going to be sorry we were so stupid.


41 posted on 05/23/2004 7:13:50 PM PDT by Joe_October (Saddam supported Terrorists. Al Qaeda are Terrorists. I can't find the link.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scripter
The numbers may be hard to pinpoint, but the 10% is from a very flawed Kinsey study. From what I understand, a 2.1% figure includes bisexuals. I have a link to it somehere here but don't have the time to look right now.

Let me know if you find it, but don't expect me to change my opinion, which is that no one really knows what the "real" number is. Both sides have a motive to skew the figures, and the definition itself is subject to manipulation. I can't really see that it matters very much, in honest truth. Two percent or ten percent. Whatever.

42 posted on 05/23/2004 7:15:43 PM PDT by Brandon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: *Homosexual Agenda; EdReform; scripter; GrandMoM; backhoe; Yehuda; Clint N. Suhks; saradippity; ...

Homosexual Agenda Ping - I haven't read the whole article yet, and I think I won't like it.

Moral relativism is a philosophy which will eventually destroy the civilization that it feeds on.

Let me know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.


43 posted on 05/23/2004 7:19:13 PM PDT by little jeremiah ("Gay Marriage" - a Weapon of Mass. Destruction!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vanmorrison
We ARE doomed, and at the hands of our own "better half"!!!

I've been thinking like that for quite a while now. Believing in the adherents of Karl Marx may wind up getting them Muslim husbands. And they thought Christian white males were ogres.

44 posted on 05/23/2004 7:19:45 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

So pederasty is "gay", huh? What about necrophilia? "Happy"? Bestiality? "Merry"? What's to discuss any more? Once you accept the enemy's definition of reality, you've lost the war! Read Orwell's "Politics and the English Language". (It's easily located on the net.) Who in his right mind would be against gaiety?!


45 posted on 05/23/2004 7:21:52 PM PDT by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcmuffin

In 10 years all the fags will be back in the closet, but the bulldykes will still be around because of the Home and Garden channel and abortion.


46 posted on 05/23/2004 7:23:18 PM PDT by RedwM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RedwM

Good Night.


47 posted on 05/23/2004 7:24:35 PM PDT by RedwM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: davidtalker
...Boot is correct.
The Left is relentless.

Yes. They are relentless and they are achieving their goals. The Left dominates academia at all levels (our children), most of the media (Leftist propaganda), most of the judiciary at all levels (legislating from the bench), the bureaucracy at all levels (even when the GOP controls the "front office" as they now do), labor, etc, etc, while the Right does little more than complain.

The perception, it seems, is that the Left is being all inclusive....while the Right is always trying to exclude potential voters. Every vote looks alike and every vote counts and the party with the most votes wins. In politics, wnning is everything and it extents out to and affects every other facet of our lives.

48 posted on 05/23/2004 7:28:43 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Their second argument is the slippery slope — first gay marriage gets legalized, then polygamy, pederasty, incest and who knows what. But this kind of reductio ad absurdum can be applied to just about anything. If liquor is legal for adults, why not for children? Society always draws the line somewhere.

Society does need to draw the line somewhere. The question now is where do we draw the new line in regard to marriage. As much as I'm opposed to same-gender marriage, I don't see how society can deny polygamists the right to marry since they can now use the very same reasoning to justify polygamous marriage that homosexuals used to justify same-gender marriage.

49 posted on 05/23/2004 7:38:03 PM PDT by usadave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brandon
I googled gay+cities. It's the perception of gays also.
50 posted on 05/23/2004 7:38:28 PM PDT by neverdem (Xin loi min oi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Ken H
There is simply no substitute for the traditional mom/dad family. Anything else puts the kid at much higher risk for poor school performance, delinquency, and other social pathologies.

IMO, a large share of the blame goes to Federal programs over the last few generations. We have rewarded out-of-wedlock births and subsidized sloth.

This in turn required higher taxes on traditional families making it harder to get by on a single income.

You can thank liberal contempt for the Constitution for turning the General Welfare Clause into the Santa Clause.

After the Communists took over the Russian Empire, they promoted "free love": promiscuity, easy divorce, abortion, homosexuality was legalized and there was even a serious debate about whether marriage itself should be banned. As a result, the birthrate plummeted and kids were growing up to be feral beasts. Beginning about 1927, the Communists began to backpedal: homosexuality was again outlawed and the Commies began to praise family life and denounce "free love" as a bourgeous invention. As recently as the late 80s, I read a piece in The National Review describing the Soviet Union as "the last bastion of Victorianism in the world" (probably not in the world, but certainly in Europe).

What strikes me is how quickly the godless Communists recognized the havoc caused by "free love" and reversed themselves. In the West, despite the social costs of family breakdown, the widely-held view (especially among the elite) is that people have a right to live their lives as they see fit and when things go wrong, as they frequently do, the government (with taxpayer funds) will save them and their families from the consequences of their own folly.

51 posted on 05/23/2004 7:47:51 PM PDT by Siamese Princess
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ken H

"There is simply no substitute for the traditional mom/dad family. Anything else puts the kid at much higher risk for poor school performance, delinquency, and other social pathologies."

Well said, Ken. I want so much for parents to realize what an awesome gift they have in their spouse and their children: Gifts! Grace! Real treasure from God!


52 posted on 05/23/2004 7:58:17 PM PDT by avenir (Jesus is the Way, and every other way is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: usadave

or how about brother marring brothers, sisters marring brothers, people marring pets etc. so where do we draw the line???


53 posted on 05/23/2004 8:07:47 PM PDT by markman46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Brandon
And in any case, lesbians are still completely off the radar screen, so if your only concern is public health, they should be completely exempt from any concern.

See the highlighted areas below:


Published by Centre Daily Times, Friday, June 2, 2000

Homosexual behavior increases risk of AIDS

by Brian J. Kopp, DPM

Parental warning: The following "My View" contains graphic medical terminology about sexual activities that may not be suitable for younger readers.


In her May 12 "My View," Mina Yindra makes many errors, but I would like to correct her statements regarding AIDS and "bigotry."


Promiscuous heterosexual sex carries with it a much higher risk for AIDS, primarily because of the sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) associated with it, causing a breakdown in the natural barriers of both male and female reproductive tracts. AIDS is primarily concentrated among heterosexuals in Africa because of the high rate of female genital mutilation, leading to much higher than average rates of anal and oral intercourse, and culturally-accepted extramarital sexual activity, including widespread prostitution. Rates of STDs are quite high in these populations.


However, AIDS is by far most common among the homosexual population in the United States, primarily because the type and frequency of sexual contact, combined with STDs, is the perfect method of spreading a body-fluid borne virus.


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).


Lesbians show similar patterns of high venereal disease incidence relative to the general population. They are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis, twice as likely to have had genital warts, four times as likely to have had scabies, seven times more likely to have had infection from vaginal contact, 29 times more likely to have had oral infection from vaginal contact and 12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact ("Medical Aspects of Homosexuality," Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality, 1985, Jaffe and Keewhan, et al.; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

AIDS research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that the typical homosexual interviewed claimed to have had more than 500 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Considered by themselves, the AIDS victims in this study averaged more than 1,100 lifetime sexual partners. Some reported as many as 20,000. Studies reported by A-P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg and S.K. Hammersmith in the book "Sexual Preference" (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1981) indicated that only 3 percent of homosexuals had fewer than 10 lifetime sexual partners. Only about 2 percent could be classified as either monogamous or semi-monogamous (from "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

To the present time, 75 to 85 percent of AIDS cases reported are related to homosexual activity, promiscuous heterosexual sex and IV drug abuse. AIDS stubbornly refuses to spread into the population in general, even 20 years after its discovery, despite dire warnings to the contrary.

These diseases are acquired directly through the sexual behavior homosexual activists are asking Americans to legally endorse and protect. Yet, as professor Jerome Lejeune of Descartes University, Paris, says of AIDS: "Only God can truly pardon the one who violates His laws; man pardons at times; Nature never pardons at all: She is not a person." The brutal consequences of attempting to break the natural law are not bigoted or hateful, nor are those, like Dr. Laura, Cal Thomas or Gary Morella, who try to point out the dangers and simple truths.

We are seeing the natural consequences of violating nature's laws now. They are also a warning to prevent the ultimate eternal consequences. How many will ignore that warning and continue to call the messenger a bigot and continue to shake their fist at God? How many will heed that warning of a loving Father, ready to forgive and reconcile His prodigal children?

Go to Dr. Kopp's Main Page

54 posted on 05/23/2004 8:12:28 PM PDT by Polycarp IV (PRO-LIFE orthodox Catholic--without exception, without compromise, without apology. Any questions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Huntingtonian

But does it necessarily follow that those who cannot procreate are to be denied marriage licenses? Where does that leave infertile heterosexual couples? Or elderly people who want to marry?


55 posted on 05/23/2004 8:15:20 PM PDT by ellery (Was Abe Lincoln a "chickenhawk?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
This is one battle in a long-coming war. A second civil war is coming, and we will win it.
56 posted on 05/23/2004 8:22:53 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vanmorrison

So by your lights Ann Coulter and Condi Rice shouldn't be allowed to vote, but Teddy Kennedy and Michael Moore should be. Excellent.


57 posted on 05/23/2004 8:25:50 PM PDT by ellery (Was Abe Lincoln a "chickenhawk?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Bunko. This "move on the fight is lost and its not so bad, is it?" piece is the equivalent of someone criminal smothering you with pillow while whispering "shhh, its for the best" in your ear.

I am sorry, but this Max Boot guy is a POS. Currently there are 38 states that have bans on homo marraige and more in the works. That is enough for a Constitutional Amendment. The only thing we lack is courage from the administration and the RNC to really take this fight the democrats.

58 posted on 05/23/2004 8:33:42 PM PDT by KC_Conspirator (This space outsourced to India)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John W
How about the long island New Yorkers who booed the speaker at the college graduation. The speaker trashed Bush and the audience trashed the speaker.

It is one thing for that to happen in South Carolina, it is quite anohter for that to happen in Long Island New York.

Like many people you decry the media bias and then procede to buy their spin. The media depends on you buying their spin. It is foolish to buy the spin. It is almost always wrong

I remember 1980. For weeks before and even on election day the media said the Reagan-Carter race was too close to call. At 6:30Pm EST on election day all 3 networks said the race was too close to call. At 6:40Pm EST on election day 1980 Jimmy Carter conceded to Reagan. If the race was too close to call, why did Carter concede 10 minutes after the first polls in the nation closed. They had not counted even 1 percent of the East cost votes when Carter conceded.

Carter's internal polls said it was a Reagan blow out. Reagans internal polls said it was a Reagan blow out. The medias polls all said it was too close to call. It was too close to call... for everyone in the media.

59 posted on 05/23/2004 8:35:27 PM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Who knows what will be legalized next . . . or where.

Maybe soon in Massachusetts:

The lefties want us to be 'tolerant' of everything!

60 posted on 05/23/2004 8:46:24 PM PDT by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-111 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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