Posted on 12/02/2004 11:17:15 AM PST by madprof98
There is no telling how many people that simple window has saved from Aids.
This normally illegal activity seems to be considred part of the 'gay' lifestyle.
Even if we had unisex public restrooms, somehow I can't imagine a man and a woman eyeing one another while washing their hands then just jumping in the stall for a go.
Yup, I just thought I'd underline the omission.
SHOCKING???
Paraphilic disorders like homosexuality incites compulsive risk taking. You see it in ever paraphilia out there.
A contemporary version of ancient Greece bath houses.
I think this was very well written. He is writing for the audience of radical homosexuals as one, so I have trouble twisting my thoughts enough to get his point of view, but I still think the writing is good.
< But trying to impose conservative decisions in that regard on the entire community only duplicates the right wing's demand for compliance and invisibility. >
Nuttin' wrong with that. I wish they'd all go back into their closets with four walls and no windows...or just SHUDDUP! I am so tired of this "issue".
Homosexual Agenda Ping.
Hmm, this one covers a lot of ground. Notice how clearly the writer states that the "gay" outlook on sex is completely different that normal; not just in what they do or what orifice is used, but the very foundation of what they consider "moral" or good.
IOW, the "gay" life is not just that men use other men for gratification instead of man+woman (or two women, same thing) but the very concept of modesty, commitment, fidelity, responsibility, respect for self and others - all the virtues which make humans different from animals - are rejected by "gay" spokespeople and radicals.
Let me and ItsOurTimeNow know if anyone wants on/off this pinglist.
Well said.
http://atlanta.creativeloafing.com/2001-01-20/paradigms.html
The fantasy of progress
Things do not always go forward
BY CLIFF BOSTOCK
If you are gay, you might be engaging in some nostalgic reminiscence as George Bush ascends to the White House eight years after Bill Clinton was installed in that office.
For gay men and lesbians, Clinton's election was a milestone in our civil rights struggle. Clinton, the first candidate to court what remains America's most openly bashed minority, promised to end the military's exclusion of gays and lesbians. He invited gay people into the White House for meetings and appointed an openly gay man, James Hormel, to an ambassadorship. Psychologically, Clinton's openhearted efforts were linked to all those earlier efforts in our national history when people of principle took unpopular positions against racism and other forms of prejudice.
Of course, he was immediately bashed. Sen. Sam Nunn and others engaged in military policy-making fought the proposal. The wrongly idealized Colin Powell, whose color lent credibility to the wave of bigotry, was most implemental in this battle. Clinton buckled. The result was the silly "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy, which supposedly admits gays to the military as long as they remain in the closet. During the years the policy has been in effect, more gay people than ever have been booted out of the military. (And, of course, we saw how Clinton lived his own failed version of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" in Monicagate.)
Nevertheless, Clinton's effort signified new possibilities. Gay people in their early 20s probably take very much for granted that powerful people will take positive stands for them now. The mainstreaming of homosexuality as public discourse -- in politics, in popular media -- has really occurred during the Clinton years.
Ironically, this is so taken for granted now that many gay people relativize the significance of their civil rights struggle. The best evidence of that is the gay Republican movement. To gay Republicans, gay people have come so far in their civil rights battle that we can now turn our attention to other issues, like the economy. Gay Republicans, like conservative African-Americans, are convinced it's just a matter of time before they are accepted by their party (even though Bush refused for months to even meet with them). To put civil rights agendas above economic ones is to engage in "gay rights myopia" in their view.
Such people subscribe to a popular fiction that progress is inevitable. History tells us just the opposite. Mankind moves forward and often falls back into barbaric prejudice. The capacity for cruelty is always present. We have already seen this begin to emerge in the Bush administration. True, Dubya canned the nomination of Dan Coats as secretary of defense when he threatened to roll back "accommodations" to gays in the military. But I suspect Coats' error was to be outspoken. He needs a little more "Don't Tell" in his rhetoric.
The appointment and departure of Linda Chavez as labor secretary designate bears witness to the way gay-bashing really remains irrelevant to the Republican Party. Chavez withdrew her nomination because of revelations that she gave shelter in her home to an illegal immigrant 10 years ago. In her bitter departure, she excoriated her critics for their "politics of personal destruction ... the game of search and destroy."
I guess Chavez has forgotten her own notorious 1986 campaign for the Senate seat from Maryland. She accused her opponent, Barbara Mikulski, of being a lesbian. In public debates, she accused her of supporting the ERA in order to legitimize gay marriage, etc., hinting that she was in a relationship with another woman. When, the media criticized Chavez for her personal attacks, she fell silent for a while. But when her polls dropped, she returned with a campaign of gay-baiting and bashing that we rarely see in America.
Happily, then-Rep. Mikulski won (and retains) the Senate seat, but Chavez effectively silenced her on this civil rights issue by attempting to exploit hatred of gay people, by using the very "politics of personal destruction" she claims to stand against.
Sen. John Ashcroft, a virtual religious fanatic with a notorious record of acting against gays, African-Americans and women, remains Dubya's choice for attorney general. "The Democratic Party has an agenda of providing a special setting and special rights for homosexuals," he has said. Can you imagine his saying the same thing about black people? Come to think of it, it's pretty easy to imagine, since that's the same tactic used to oppose affirmative action.
Do men of character really appoint people like Chavez and Ashcroft to high positions? This is coalition building? This is acknowledgement that he was given no mandate to reverse the direction taken by Clinton? Hardly. Yes, I imagine we'll have four years without Monica-style embarrassments. But it's foolish to think people like John Ashcroft can't do plenty of harm in four years.
Do we wonder how Bill Clinton survived in office, watching hypocritical enemies like Newt Gingrich fall, and how he continues to lead every poll as the most popular man in the world? Do we wonder how Hillary, so loathed because of her effort to legislate national health care, ends up a senator and being talked about as the first viable female candidate for president?
Well, it's probably not because they attempted to impose phony family values on America or marginalize gay people and other minorities, is it? It's not because they attempted to dumb down America or squelch controversy.
Cliff Bostock, M.A., is a doctoral candidate in depth psychology. Contact him at 404-525-4774 or through his website, www.soulworks.net.
01.20.01
They are not going to go away, they are going to get louder, and as nauseating as it is and as dirty as it feels to have to read this garbage, the battle does need to be fought, you can not grow weary in fighting evil, you have to stay on the front line, where it is filthy dirty and keep fighting as much as you hate it till the enemy is defeated.
The least we can do is continue to read this bile and pass it on to others who have grown weary of battling the enemy and encourage them to keep fighting.
Remember always to read His Word and pray constantly.
Whine, whine, whine. Get a room, for crying out loud. It sounds like even gay men are getting sick of the constant sex circus.
Talk about refusing to get it.
The worst thing I could wish on him is the achievement of his heart's desire.
"The worst thing I could wish on him is the achievement of his heart's desire."
Or "May you get what you are asking for!"
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.