Jesse Jackson says "Stay Out o'da Duck"
Posted on 01/01/2005 3:36:30 AM PST by Lindykim
In a recent debate between myself and some radical homosexuals, one of them asked me, by way of refutation whose implicit intentions were to convince me that I am a 'hateful homophobe' and also to persuade me that homosexual behavior is a 'natural orientation," if and when I had 'chosen' to be heterosexual. "Was it at age 3, 6, 13, 19?" he asked, "Or did you (a female) just 'naturally' gravitate towards boys or men without any outside pressure or force?"
My response:
There was no 'choice'........there was never any question........it simply occured as naturally as breathing air. Now for yourself, 'something' occured that interfered with your natural progression towards manhood that, in effect, stunted this natural process in much the same way as a baby duck can have its natural progression towards becoming a mature duck interfered with. This usually occurs when a human causes the chick to imprint upon the human rather than upon an adult duck. So does the 'interference' with natural progression make the baby duck into something other than a duck? That the chick seems to believe itself to be, and even tries to be human make it human in fact? Of course not. It's still a duck in every sense of what it means to be a duck. Just as you are still a heterosexual despite that you believe you are 'something else'.
Should duck society and the laws of nature by which that society exists be overturned and forced to become upside-down in order to accomodate improperly imprinted ducks? Of course not. That would be insane. Just as it is dangerously insane for "improperly imprinted" human beings to demand that heterosexual society and the laws of nature by which it needs to exist should be turned upside-down in order to accomodate them.
What happened to the duck was wrong. What happened to you was not just wrong, but horribly tragic. However, for the greater good of our civilization, you and others like you should not be advocating that society and the innocence of childhood be swept aside and made to accept that "improper imprintation" is somehow a 'good' thing. Although you ardently wish to pretend otherwise, you do know deep down inside yourself that it isn't.
What you should be doing.......for the GOOD of all mankind and most especially for children........is learning {gaining wisdom} from your suffering in order that you can PREVENT what happened to you from happening to other children. That would be not just love, but agape, the highest form of love........love that calls for self-denial and self-sacrifice for the good of others
The love that will not Quack its name!
"...why wouldn't a homosexual man be attracted to a naked, voluptuous woman?"
I have often wondered that myself. My conclusion is, after many years of contemplation of the riddle and some familiarity with friends who were queer, that such folks are completely self absorbed. A relationship with a woman requires some effort and consideration. The queer guy would rather make love to himself or something very close to that, such as an equally self-centered superficial man. Loving a woman would take him too far afield and require an effort directed toward the woman.
My wife agrees with this analysis.
Wow! That is a brilliant deduction, and one which I've never considered.
That would explain the whole realm of homosexual mistreatment of each other, the extreme jealousy and the the casual sexual encounters in bathrooms, under stairwells or wherever.
This might very well be a form of self absorbed male masturbation.
May I see your wife's credentials?
I recently found out that my lesbian niece (in her 30s) had been sexually abused by her older step-brother when she was a pre-teen. I realize this represents just one data point, but I am coming to believe more and more that your viewpoint is correct.
"The baby ducks were imprinted by the chicken and were being raised as chickens but they still knew they were ducks."
That's a great story and a perfect example of how you can't fool Mother Nature. I'm a chicken farmer myself and I have yet to notice any of my hens "doin' it" or even attempting to "do it" with one another. They know what the rooster is for, and some readily submit and some fight him off, but they still know they need him for something, LOL!
I tend to agree with you.
This obsession with perversion of the flesh now is elevated to a level of its own. Consider that 'if' homosexuality is result of harm during childhood, that very harm is now lawfully presented to children in mass by flooding children's minds of special status only because of perverted behavior.
Amazing the speed with which the obsession with this perversion, has been translated into a normal behavior. Imagine a child being harmed by another and yet being taught that the 'act' is normal and the wrong is to speak against it.
One thing they try to use as an argument is that animals try to have same-sex sex all the time. I've never seen this. I have seen cows try to mount cows and the same with dogs but anybody that knows animals know that it's a way of showing and establishing dominance and the "pecking order". It's not really about sex. Homosexuals are desperately trying to justify their perverted behavior.
Jesse Jackson says "Stay Out o'da Duck"
"it's a way of showing and establishing dominance and the "pecking order". It's not really about sex"
And that is precisely the point. Here is a link to an essay by Dennis Prager that argues that Jewish culture's transition from the classical view of sex as dominance to sex as a sanctified gift from God is one of the most significant events in the history of civilization. Without question the best writing I have ever seen on the subject.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/homosexuality/ho0003.html
Astute observations.
If you want on/off the list let me know.
That was in Rotterdam,so it doesnt count.
I never understood that either TC!
By that logic why wouldn't a homosexual man be attracted to a naked, voluptuous woman?
Overt bisexuals aside, what many homosexuals would experience in the presence of a "naked, voluptuous woman" is not idifference, but intense anxiety. The plain fact is, homosexuals are the real phobics. Their underlying developmental pathology generates an aversion or even fear of women as sexual creatures.
snip....How can you tell if a duck's gay?
Easy. If it has an off-odor.... a queer smell.... after defrosting
then you'll know.
{awful humor huh?)
Interesting analysis!
You've come to the right place to hone your skills.
;^)
5.56mm
Excellent response. One question. What was the response to your response? I am sure we all would like to know that.
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.