Posted on 02/21/2005 12:54:12 AM PST by JohnHuang2
I don't agree with you. Not saying anything about it is promoting acceptance of it.
Certainly it is. financial value. Christian talk radio couldn't survive without it. In many faiths, homosexuals and abortion are the ties that bind. Again it does have Christian value,........money in someones pockets.
This "explanation" of course, is mindless and is of the smarty pants set in the worst way. [I refused to use the noble term "elite" for them]
It is precisely that these letist "outers" wish to embarrrass the right wing people who are homosexual or associated with homosexuals in a witting or unwitting manner, that exposes their fundamental bad faith. They do not even grant to homosexuals the right to have their own mind and take non-leftist positions. They seek to punish the horrible transgression of not being a leftist by causing these individuals harm which they won't inflict on left wing closeted homosexuals.
I have often felt that the left often appears to have the moral compass of your sterotypical labor union thug. The dirty tricks of the left and the democrat party always have that character. Look at how they argue on TV. That blatant attempt to talk over the right wing represenative and never concede a fact or answer a direct question. If you have ever met this spirit in your daily life, you will not forget it. It is foolish to deal with them with ordinary means.
GG, it 's the Axis of Ugly. Can nothing be done?
Exactly. This tactic is part of a strategy reeling from the 2004 elections.
The 60's -70's "ardent feminists" have caused enormous damage to our country. Their influence has been felt in the MSM, the schools, the universities and also the corporate culture. The critical bad actors in this whole story are the generation of men of the 50's and 60's who responded so poorly--i.e. fecklessly-- to the feminst movement. General co-education for women inevitably led to the push against previous barriers and predispositions as to the general capacities of women. Change was inevitable and appropriate.
But the institutionalization of affirmative action for women--where preference for women was deemed to be a moral as well as political virtue, was a collapse of culure on such a scale that we are still suffering its effects. [This collapse was enacted by the men of the 1950's and 1960's] The whole notion of affirmative action, that preference is OK as long as you favor the right people, is inherently destructive of the need that merit be the ultimate standard.
Gawd, they are quite the terrifying trio, though, eh? Albright's so fat that when she goes to the restaurant, instead of a menu, they give her an estimate. I'm pretty sure Thomas's parents are dead...since if you look at her, you can't imagine them wanting to live much after the birth anyway. And Hillary...well, what does one say about the smartest woman in the world? /sarcasm
I do think our society is unraveling. I do think it is to be expected. I do think we could do better, but that's not the direction we're headed.
I don't think it's necessary to panic over it. I think we should keep our wits about us and take prudent measures to minimize any downside from it.
In due time this will be remedied by a power greater than our own.
I'll be honest in that I have mixed emotions about your premise. I'm with you 100% when it comes to persecution or trying to eliminate anyone from society. I'm not so sure that voicing the opinion that homosexuality is wrong, if done in the right way, is wrong. Personally, I wouldn't do it. And if people are yelling unsavory epitaths at the homosexuals, I think that would be wrong. Jesus didn't condemn the harlot in mean terms, but he did ask her to go and sin no more. I don't think homosexuals should go through life without anyone ever saying that they think what they are doing is wrong.
Yes, I'm sure it does grate them.
Humans on both sides of the isle are going to do shadey things. I agree. Is it RNC policy to out homosexuals? I don't think so.
I think these Republican figures who are so targeted should sue. It may set a precedent that could protect others. The actions of these Demopuke activists are unethical and scandalous.
Well, they could out Bush's daughter Barbara who likes to go to gay bars and loves gay men.
Conservatives have never asked for anything other than being against normalizing homosexual conduct PARTICULARLY when it touches on ANYTHING even loosly related to children.
Private lives stay PRIVATE. Esecially when it comes to sexual behavior. This is true of swingers, or any other fetish behavior similar to homsexual conduct.
In roman times they would be the eunachs around the politicians daughters.
I'm in agreement with that.
Why yes, I am. Governor Reagan had a homosexual cabal among his staff in Sacremento, and he fired them. Read Cannon's book, among others. He also implemented the "We Ask, Don't Join" policy within the military in 1981: it worked well and was the right thing to do.
It's Joe Farah. I'm afraid the condition is chronic. I quit taking him seriously years ago.
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.