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

Skip to comments.

Why homosexuals should not adopt or teach children
Townhall ^ | 08/25/2006 | Mike S. Adams

Posted on 08/25/2006 9:53:42 AM PDT by BJClinton

Ever since I announced my bid for the United States Presidency, I’ve been questioned about some of my more radical political opinions. Most of those questions have dealt with my proposed economic policies – for example, the abolition of the IRS and the implementation of the Fair Tax. Today, I offer an answer to questions about why I am opposed to the idea of gays adopting or teaching children.

Several years ago, I began writing columns questioning the so-called gay rights movement. I prefer to call it the “gay privileges” movement because gays are not presently deprived of anything that is rightfully theirs. A gay man has the same right I have to marry a woman. His waiver of that actual right does not allow him to substitute another “right” he deems more suitable to his needs.

At the time I decided to express such criticism of the gay agenda, I was not fully opposed to gay adoption. Nor was I absolutely opposed to hiring gay grammar school teachers. My criticism of the gay agenda was narrower than it is today and the tone of my criticism was far more subdued. That all changed when the homosexual rights crowd started to circulate some of my early columns.

Frequently, the criticism would come en masse from gay groups who would post my columns on PRIDE websites or chat rooms at universities like UNC-Greensboro, which is also known as UNC-Gonorrhea. They would work themselves into a fury over my well-reasoned essays and then respond with a flurry of obscenities unfit for reproduction in this column.

Before long, readers identifying themselves as “gay” were threatening to cut off my genitalia, burn my children, rape my wife, and, just to top it all off, kill me, too. Good thing these readers were all “gay.” Otherwise, they might not be so happy.

So, of course, I took the time to survey a number of other conservative columnists to find out where most of their profane and threatening hate mail comes from. The answer is always the same: Without hesitation, they all say it comes from the “gay” community.

Despite the volume and intensity of this gay vitriol, I have always refused to reciprocate with threats of violence or strings of profanity. Instead, I have relied on the far more powerful tool of heavy sarcasm. And that refusal to respond with profanity or violence has had a predictable effect on the gay activists. It has made them much less gay (less happy, that is) and also much more active.

One of their more recent stunts was to get together on a gay website to hatch a plan to destroy my marriage. Actually, they started their plan on one of the Transgendered websites. Since the Transgendered people are so angry, I suppose they are technically classified as “gay,” too.

The first step of their plan to destroy my marriage was to concoct a false story that I once committed adultery. For the record, I have never cheated on my wife. I did, however, attempt to cheat on my wife one time. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get past Ms. Coulter’s bodyguard.

1 2

| Full Article & Comments | Next >


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: 11th; circuit; fma; gay; glsen; godless; gsa; homasectschuells; homosexualagenda; pflag
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101 next last
I did, however, attempt to cheat on my wife one time. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get past Ms. Coulter’s bodyguard.

OMG! The exast same thing happened to me! Small world.
1 posted on 08/25/2006 9:53:42 AM PDT by BJClinton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

You'd think it was commons sense NOT to have homos as role models or near kids. GEESH!


2 posted on 08/25/2006 9:55:04 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
I now realize that the American Psychological Association was right when it previously classified homosexuality as a mental illness in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual.

Adams is great. His further point that there is nothing wrong with discriminating against people with a mental illness is right on. Crazy people can (perhaps) hold a lot of different jobs. Teaching children is not one of them.

3 posted on 08/25/2006 9:59:39 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy ( “I'm the Emperor, and I want dumplings!” (German: Ich bin der Kaiser und will Knödel.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Does anyone have a cite to the 11th Distric Court opinion regarding upholding the ban on homosexuals adopting children?


4 posted on 08/25/2006 9:59:45 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
"There is nothing wrong with discriminating against a class of people who are afflicted with an emotional or mental illness that is relevant to the completion of a given task – especially if that task is crucial to the well-being of the society at large. That is why I am opposed to the idea of gays adopting or teaching our children."

They are very EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED and ACT out this EMOTIONAL CONFUSION through SEX and their relationships. To be "gay" is to be VERY ANGRY, TOUCHY and UNHAPPY. They are vicious people to an extreme when criticized in any form.
5 posted on 08/25/2006 10:00:07 AM PDT by nmh (Intelligent people recognize Intelligent Design (God) .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Hmmm,

Should schools be LEGALLY REQUIRED to disclose if their child is being exposed to homosexuals?


6 posted on 08/25/2006 10:01:04 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

Who is this that has announced their bid for the U.S. Presidency?


7 posted on 08/25/2006 10:01:54 AM PDT by Free Baptist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
...And now you realize why I am opposed to gays adopting or teaching our children.

Umm... because some of them made foul threats against you? Because they used to be considered mentally ill?

If I wrote essays opposing Judaism, or stating that black people should not be allowed to adopt white children, or that women aren't fit to serve on juries, I would most likely get some pretty vicious hate mail from Jewish, black and female readers, respectively. That wouldn't prove much, even though various authorities have stated in the past that Jews are evil, blacks are violent and women are hysterical.

You'll have to come up with a better argument than "because I've succeeded in pissing them off".
8 posted on 08/25/2006 10:09:52 AM PDT by xenophiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

Almost the same thing happened to me...fortunately, Ann's bodyguard stopped her from getting too close, while I told her, "sorry Ann...I can't accept your offers. Stay in touch, though...we can still be friends."


9 posted on 08/25/2006 10:14:49 AM PDT by JRios1968 (This kid knows how to wallop a baseball!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

I have been reading Mike Adams for a couple of years...he is great!


10 posted on 08/25/2006 10:19:13 AM PDT by LiteKeeper (Beware the secularization of America; the Islamization of Eurabia)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton
Excellent column. Anyone who has criticized the homo-promo movement in a public way knows exactly what this guy is talking about. They'll try to ruin your life any way they can and have absolutely no compunction about it.

Regardless of what APA has to say, same-sex attraction is a mental disorder--and a symptom of a cluster of other conditions. Such individuals should be absolutely disqualified from teaching children and/or adopting.
11 posted on 08/25/2006 10:27:15 AM PDT by Antoninus (I don't vote for liberals, regardless of party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xenophiles

...And now you realize why I am opposed to gays adopting or teaching our children.

Umm... because some of them made foul threats against you? Because they used to be considered mentally ill?

If I wrote essays opposing Judaism, or stating that black people should not be allowed to adopt white children, or that women aren't fit to serve on juries, I would most likely get some pretty vicious hate mail from Jewish, black and female readers, respectively. That wouldn't prove much, even though various authorities have stated in the past that Jews are evil, blacks are violent and women are hysterical.

You'll have to come up with a better argument than "because I've succeeded in pissing them off".




See, you are using a fallacy of logic to justify your position. Being of Jewish decent is NOT an option. Being black is NOT an option. Being gay IS an option. I can prove it by showing many examples of gay people going back to healthy relationships. Other than Michael Jackson, have you ever seen a black man change colors? A jewish person can denounce his religion, but by blood they are still Jewish, like it or not.

Next in line....sex with animals because they truely love thier dog and they are being denied the RIGHT to enjoy their dog sexually.

Go ahead, bring on the "I was born this way" and "God made me this way" tripe. Every person has their crosses to bear. God made everyone, but their choices to follow their "Free Will Sins" move them closer or further from him. It is CLEAR from every society known to mankind...this is a filthy position to try to justify all in the name of being PC.

All that is their choice, just don't expect special consideration and exceptions because of their unhealthy faults. The sexual disease rate among gays is much, much higher than general population. The casual sex, multiple partners is also way out of whack with the norm.

Flame away


12 posted on 08/25/2006 10:29:40 AM PDT by MadeInAmerica (- If ILLEGAL means Undocumented - Then Breaking and Entering means Unannounced Visit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy; nmh
I do not agree with this article. In particular, I don't think gays should be banned from teaching. Let me first state that I am not gay. It is wrong to consider all gay persons as pedophiles. Also, many pedophiles are not gay.
I had teachers in High School and College that never came out and said they were gay, but they were not married, and all appearances were pointing in that direction. These were excellent teachers, and I doubt seriously if they ever tried to abuse any child.

Ban pedophiles, not gays.

As for adoption, that is more complicated. I would be more concerned about that, but in my state, only one person would be able to adopt (no gay couple). In some cases, it might be better than the foster home shuffle.
13 posted on 08/25/2006 10:33:32 AM PDT by GeorgefromGeorgia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Comment #14 Removed by Moderator

To: xenophiles

While what you said is technically correct, you're equivocating a religion, ethnicity and gender with where one wants to stick their willie. Hardly the same.


15 posted on 08/25/2006 10:42:47 AM PDT by BJClinton (What happens on Free Republic, stays on Google.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: MadeInAmerica

No.. you're using a fallacy of logic. His point had nothing to do with the level of mutability of the attributes involved. It also had nothing to do with whether being gay is just an "unhealthy fault."

His point was that the author makes no real arguments in favor of his position, except "because I've succeeded in pissing them off."

Whether or not you agree with his arguments, you can still call him on his stunted writing and juvenile reasoning.


16 posted on 08/25/2006 10:46:26 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ivyleaguebrat

For clarity.. in my first and second paragraphs the pronoun "his" refers to xenophiles, in the third it refers to the author of the column.


17 posted on 08/25/2006 10:48:50 AM PDT by ivyleaguebrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton

UNC-Greensboro is very gay. Literally something like 50% of the male students are homosexual.

However, if you're a straight young man, you can be ugly and dumb and still have a harem, since 70% of the student population is female. Even after accounting for lesbians, you've got about 4:1 odds. I used to know a smoking hot young lady from my hometown who went there who always complained about not having a boyfriend.


18 posted on 08/25/2006 10:54:02 AM PDT by jack_napier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BJClinton; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; AggieCPA; Agitate; AliVeritas; AllTheRage; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping!

Freepmail DBeers, little jeremiah or scripter to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search
[ Add keyword homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list ]


19 posted on 08/25/2006 10:57:21 AM PDT by scripter ("You don't have a soul. You are a soul. You have a body." - C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ivyleaguebrat

No.. you're using a fallacy of logic. His point had nothing to do with the level of mutability of the attributes involved. It also had nothing to do with whether being gay is just an "unhealthy fault."

His point was that the author makes no real arguments in favor of his position, except "because I've succeeded in pissing them off."

Whether or not you agree with his arguments, you can still call him on his stunted writing and juvenile reasoning.




Mike Adams is a very sarcastic writer. Look a little deeper into what he wrote please. The "because I've succeeded in pissing them off." is a good place to start.

Oh yeah, just a minor thing to think about. Everyone knows when you "piss off" a liberal....you're on to something good.


20 posted on 08/25/2006 10:58:45 AM PDT by MadeInAmerica (- If ILLEGAL means Undocumented - Then Breaking and Entering means Unannounced Visit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


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