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

To: lentulusgracchus
>>Read your homepage. Hi there, liberal. Welcome to FR.<<

Thank you for the welcome.
Since when did one have to believe that that the right of the individual to live his life as he chooses stops at the bedroom door in order to be a conservative?


>>Really? Let me link you to some drive-by posts by gay "seminar" posters on FR.....oh, wait, they usually get zotted. Well, they say things like "you people are so negative" and "you people are so small and mean and obsessed with homosexuality" (translation: back off, stupid, we're doing our propaganda and we don't need your comments, and if you stick around I'm going to make sure everyone suspects you're a closet case).<<

First, I'm sorry you have so many trolls here and I really do understand that it keeps the place on edge about new posters. But if the trolls get Freepers to lower themselves then the trolls win.


>>So I had to post one of their attacks for them, since they get spotted and zotted pretty quickly as seminar disruptors usually do.<<

I had not considered your post in this light. I want to apologize for making a snap, sweeping judgment. I will try to be more careful in the future.


>>But then, I'm just repeating what bad old Bob Novak said a few years ago, and everyone knows how dyspeptic he is. <<

I like Bob Novak. And if he said the words you did, I'm disappointed. No matter what spin you put on it, it's wrong to be mean to people who aren't hurting you.... and thinking they set a bad example, is not enough to justify meaness in my opinion.

I'm not suggesting that people need to change their beliefs, I'm only talking about how we treat each other. There is a lot of depersonalization going on around this issue on both sides and that's bad because it makes the next step of treating each other badly that much easier.

There was a lot of sin in Jesus' time too and he wanted us to love and forgive back then...I don't imagine he would feel any different today.

But anyway, thanks for the welcome and thanks for the civil reply in spite of our difference around this issue.
118 posted on 05/14/2005 10:15:00 AM PDT by paul_fromatlanta (Paul from Atlanta)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]


To: paul_fromatlanta
Since when did one have to believe that that the right of the individual to live his life as he chooses stops at the bedroom door in order to be a conservative?

That's a gay-propaganda chestnut whose hollowness is revealed by reflecting for moment on whether I'd get a knock on my door if I were, in the sanctum sanctorum of my bedroom:

1. Buggering little boys,
2. Producing perfect copies of $20 bills,
3. Having a perfectly civil conversation about killing the President of the United States,
4. Disciplining my wife with my fists,
5. Converting my CAR-15 carbine to a suppressed ("silenced") and fully automatic weapon (to be stored not used, of course),
6. Storing 500 pounds of Composition B, RDX, Semtex, dexedrine, morphine, rohypnol, heroin, and other fun chemical compounds, or
7. Xeroxing -- for my own use, of course -- copies of the Defense Intelligence Agency's "NOFORN News", with all the latest inside scuttlebutt classified SECRET - LIMITED DISTRIBUTION - NOFORN.

Now, lest you conclude that I'm in favor of legislating on "just anything", thus invading the spirit of the Ninth Amendment (which can in fact be invaded at liberty by the Congress and the local municipal council whenever they make new laws for public purposes; the force of the Ninth is that there is a presumption in favor of liberty to make or do any thing whenever the law is silent), the point is that deviant sexuality

a) is deviant because there's something wrong with the individual -- he is not normal -- and so a concern arises immediately, whether (or not, it may not be the case) that person is also sociopathic; and

b) has consequences beyond the bedroom in the form of

i) transmissible diseases,

ii) transmissible beliefs and attitudes that are harmful to the partner (we don't need a condom, I don't have a disease, we're young and bulletproof and can't get sick, you're a confused teenager but my gaydar says you're gay, go forth and love all mankind as I loved you, etc. etc.), and

iii) the demoralization (literally) or jading of the public on a subject that touches on family formation, the education of the young, public policy on AIDS, and the ability of a society to defend itself against pathological alien memes (Fabian socialism and its ghastly sibling, liberalism).

And then there's the whole issue of liberal judicial activism and the processual argument that gays are trying to use courtrooms and liberal judges (their lawsuits are all carefully forum-shopped: that is what Lambda Legal, of-counsel and no doubt primary instigator in the case under discussion, exists for) to find a way around the Constitution, viz., the legislative process, in order to impose their 2% will on the nonconsenting 98% whom they -- tactically playing the bleating victim all the way -- hate, despise, and eagerly look forward to trampling underfoot.

But that's a separate issue.

119 posted on 05/14/2005 4:32:38 PM PDT by lentulusgracchus ("Whatever." -- sinkspur)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies ]

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