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


1 posted on 12/29/2010 11:03:30 AM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: Kaslin

Dump the word *gay* = call it homosexual.

It’s deviant, sinful and abnormal.


2 posted on 12/29/2010 11:14:29 AM PST by onyx (If you truly support Sarah Palin and want on her busy ping list, let me know!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Goldberg doesn’t usually miss the point so completely. Homosexual conduct is morally reprehensible under every conceivable set of circumstances, so why should we be trying to find either “gay” marriage, or any alternative, to be acceptable?

Colonel, USAFR


4 posted on 12/29/2010 11:16:50 AM PST by jagusafr ("We hold these truths to be self-evident...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

hahaha, Goldberg is always fun to read.


5 posted on 12/29/2010 11:18:06 AM PST by americanophile
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
By the way, according to a recent study, "Modern Family" is the No. 1 sitcom among Republicans

Only because of the Latin Chick (extremely hot) and the Blonde Babe (also hot)....the rest of it I speed through - thanks to DVR.....

9 posted on 12/29/2010 11:19:52 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Fascinating piece, thanks for posting. It is exceedingly ironic that such "liberation" movements have devolved into a desperate, government-backed effort to join the bourgeoisie, but it isn't unprecedented. I've made the argument elsewhere that it's what happened to the entirety of the proletariat since Marx printed Capital.

There is something left of this aggressive tendency, however, and although it might be categorized as violent revolution reduced to juvenile whining, it's still there in those gay activists who don't really want to marry, have children, or join the military, neither do they want their friends to, but insist on forcing the issue only because it pisses the straight world off. That may be cultural subversion but it certainly isn't revolution.

10 posted on 12/29/2010 11:20:22 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
This may boomerang on the gays - they can no longer - as commanders have reported - join the service just for the benefits - and then, if facing deployment to combat, ‘confess’ they are gay and get out.

I've a suspicion there will be a drop off in gay enlistees.

12 posted on 12/29/2010 11:22:07 AM PST by maine-iac7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Frantic efforts have been made over the past 30 years to accommodate women and gays in the military. If the draft was ever re-instituted, think of the mad rush by many to suddenly be “unaccommodated.”


13 posted on 12/29/2010 11:25:51 AM PST by JennysCool (My hypocrisy goes only so far)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

> I also find it cruel and absurd to tell gays that living
> the free-love lifestyle is abominable while at the same
> time telling them that their committed relationships are
> illegitimate too.

Jonah, does your finding apply also to polygamy, polyamory, pedophilia, incest, and bestiality?

If not, why not?


21 posted on 12/29/2010 11:33:39 AM PST by Westbrook (Having children does not divide your love, it multiplies it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
I tell the homos where I work they will rue the day they get “Gay Marriage”. To give one flamboyant, psychotic male the power to sue and win money for life from another is asking for disaster, and considering the American Gay Male is the most promiscuous mammal on the planet, inevitable.
23 posted on 12/29/2010 11:36:44 AM PST by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Goldberg makes an interesting point.

I think he is right that government-recognized gay relationships are an inevitability. In some respects, I don’t care — tax benefits, health insurance, hospital visitation, blah, blah. I’m fine with all of that. In other respects, it may be a good thing for society that homosexuals are embracing homosexual monogamy as opposed to homosexual promiscuity.

But — however it may be structured, whatever benefits it may entail, and whatever it may be called ... a gay union will never be a “marriage”. The one thing gay couples truly want is the one thing they can never recieve — moral equivalence ... no matter what legal and linguistic hoops you try to jump through a gay “marriage” will never be morally equivalent to a true marriage.

SnakeDoc


25 posted on 12/29/2010 11:37:40 AM PST by SnakeDoctor ("They made it evident to every man [...] that human beings are many, but men are few." -- Herodotus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin; 185JHP; AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; Albion Wilde; AliVeritas; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Be sure to click the FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search link for a list of all related articles. We don't ping you to all related articles so be sure to click the previous link to see the latest articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

30 posted on 12/29/2010 11:41:25 AM PST by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
But I also find it cruel and absurd to tell gays that living the free-love lifestyle is abominable while at the same time telling them that their committed relationships are illegitimate too.

WRONG. It isn't cruel...as amazing as it might seem, Jonah, telling gays they are wrong is love. To enable gays to live in the perverse addiction of homosexuality is evil.

Goldberg's cracked.

32 posted on 12/29/2010 11:43:27 AM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

The abomination of homosexual conduct, is against nature itself as well as Gods Law, and has no room in a foxhole.

So if you want to promote the agenda, its on your soul.
You decide!


69 posted on 12/29/2010 12:09:41 PM PST by OPS4 (Ops4 God Bless America!Jesus is Lord!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin; All

How does this person KNOW it is popular among republicans and it is popular because two sexual fetishists are attempting to raise a little girl without a mother?

There are two leaps in that article that can not be supported.

Besides who watches the ghetto of the broadcast channels? Last time they were complaining men 25-55 had abandoned television. Best guess then it is predominently women watching that show.


73 posted on 12/29/2010 12:11:39 PM PST by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin

Interesting article save the concessions near the end.


104 posted on 12/29/2010 12:44:21 PM PST by Gene Eric (Your Hope has been redistributed. Here's your Change.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
often act as if there's some grand alternative lifestyle for gays. But there isn't

There is a grand lifestyle and it has been documented from Andrew Sullivan all the way down. The gay couples idea of a "monogamous" relationship has nothing to do with a straight couples. The average heterosexual person has less than 10 sexual contacts over a lifetime, while the average homosexual male thinks that 10 sexual contacts is an unsuccessful date.
164 posted on 12/29/2010 1:42:38 PM PST by wbarmy (I chose to be a sheepdog once I saw what happens to the sheep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
Jonah, this kind of weak, equivocating claptrap is why I can't stand beside you milquetoast Republicans any more.

Sodomy is wrong. Those who practice it are doing harm to themselves and their sex partners.

But you can't say that without getting kicked off the cocktail circuit?
177 posted on 12/29/2010 2:01:26 PM PST by Antoninus (Fair warning: If Romney's the GOP nominee in 2012, I'm looking for a new party.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
the homosexual bourgeoisie -- strikes me as good news.

Goldberg is just a pro-war liberal.

217 posted on 12/29/2010 3:39:31 PM PST by mas cerveza por favor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin; onyx; Sherman Logan; americanophile; JudgemAll; Billthedrill; AEMILIUS PAULUS; ...
I am becoming more an more convinced that homosexuality is actually a disease caused by a virus. Before you laugh, PLEASE read this, written by Gregory Cochran, a physicist at the University of Utah. Here is an excerpt:

"So if a disease is common (> a tenth of one percent), hits in early life, has been around a long time (so we know it's not caused by some new industrial chemical or whatever), and it's not restricted to people from the malaria zone - it's probably caused by some bug.

But what about homosexuality? Well, from this biological perspective, it's surely a disease. Disinterest in the opposite sex reduces reproduction quite a bit - around 80% in American conditions. Does it hit in early life? Sure. Has it been around a long time? Certainly. Do you find it in non-African populations, people who never lived with malaria? Yes.

So it's a bug.

Now that we know that human male homosexuality looks like a disease caused by some infectious organism, the next question is how that could happen - how could some virus change sexual interest?

I don't think that anyone can be sure of the exact mechanism at this point. I think we can be fairly confident that it is caused by an infectious organism, from the information we have and general evolutionary considerations, but infectious organisms can cause harm in many different ways. Malaria colonizes and uses up red blood cells, diphtheria and cholera manufacture toxins, HIV slowly knocks out a key subpopulation of the immune system, leaving you defenseless against many other pathogens, while certain papillomavirus strains deregulates cell division and thus cause cervical cancer. And those are just samples: there are many pathogenic mechanisms involved in infectious disease, some not well understood.

What do we know? We have a lot of indications that there has been some change in the brain. After, all that's the most logical location for the cause of a change in behavior. Simon LeVay and others see differences in hypothalamic nuclei (similar to those seen in sheep). There are associated changes - the lisp, increased neuroticism and depression, etc. Somehow the cause is affecting the brain.

Just as important are all the things we don't see. We don't see IQ depression, we don't see epilepsy, we don't see convulsions, and we don't see aphasia. Clearly there is no gross trauma - somehow, the brain has been damaged, but in a very limited and focused way. A key function has been messed up, which gravely impacts reproductive fitness, but homosexual men can still hold down jobs, including very complex jobs. The overwhelming majority of mental functions are perfectly intact, or at most subtly changed. The damaged neural subsystem could be male-specific.

Do we know of diseases in which there are very specific targets - in which certain cell types are damaged or destroyed while neighboring cells are left intact? Sure. In some cases, a pathogen targets a particular cell type and has little effect on anything else. Human parvovirus (also known as fifth disease) hits erythroid precursor cells (the cells that manufacture red cells) and temporarily inhibits red cell production. In type-I diabetes, it seems likely that Coxsackie virus infections (in people with a genetic predisposition, in which HLA type plays a major role) trigger an autoimmune disease that gradually (over a year or so) destroys the islet cells which produce insulin. Other cells are not much affected.

We know of a similar, very specific damage pattern in the brain - Narcolepsy.

In Narcolepsy, most of the neurons that produce hypocretins (neurotransmitters) have somehow disappeared. There are only 30,000 of these neurons in the first place, all in a small hypothalamic nucleus. This loss leaves one pathologically sleepy, subject to cataplexy and in some cases hypnagogic hallucinations. Narcolepsy hits about 1 in 2000 people: identical twin concordance is around 25%. Almost all narcoleptics have a particular HLA type, one shared by about a third of the general population. Narcolepsy (almost always) is not present at birth but manifests in early adulthood.

Narcoleptics are pathologically sleepy, but most mental functions are unaffected.

There is at present a strong suspicion that narcolepsy is an autoimmune disease, possibly triggered by a viral infection. The HLA association points in this direction, but as yet the exact cause of the destruction of the neurons that make hypocretin is unknown. Narcolepsy does, however, show that there exists some mechanism that can destroy a particular hypothalamic neuron subpopulation without causing general brain trauma.

...Preferential homosexuality, sexual interest in males, rather than females, is very rare. The only two species known to exhibit this behavior, at the-few-percent level, are men and sheep. It may be worth noting that men and sheep have often been found in close association.

Another point worth mentioning is that the prevalence of homosexuality probably varies a lot. It seems to be considerably more common in young men who grew up in urban areas than in rural areas, something like a factor of three, which is also true of Schizophrenia. This is a much bigger effect than the birth order stuff. If you look out in the real sticks, say among the Kalahari Bushmen, there doesn't seem to be any at all. Typically, hunter-gatherers have trouble believing that homosexuality actually exists.

All this is speculative, of course: but the idea that male homosexuality is caused by a pathogen makes good evolutionary sense, unlike every other explanation ever proposed. This particular form of pathogen explanation of homosexuality, inspired by the recent breakthroughs in narcolepsy research, is consistent with the low identical twin concordance for homosexuality, with geographical variation in its incidence, with some observations of volume changes in a particular hypothalamic nucleus in homosexual men, and most importantly, with the dog that didn't bark - the fact that homosexual men do not suffer from general brain damage, do not show symptoms like IQ depression...."

Hank

221 posted on 12/29/2010 4:07:55 PM PST by County Agent Hank Kimball (DeMint/Christie 2012...The Y'all and the Ball!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Kaslin
For instance, when Michael Lerner, a member of the anti-Vietnam War "Seattle Seven," did marry, in 1971, the couple exchanged rings made from the fuselage of a U.S. aircraft downed over Vietnam and cut into a cake inscribed in icing with a Weatherman catchphrase, "Smash Monogamy."

Michael Lerner. There's a name we haven't heard in a while. He was Hillary Clinton's "Politics of Meaning" Rabbi-Guru, remember?

It's interesting that Lerner was affilated with that group of violent activists, the Weather Underground, which included the infamous William Ayers, who was and still is close to none other than Barack Obama. Also, Hillary, Ayers, and Obama each have at some point called Chicago home. Small world, isn't it.

241 posted on 12/29/2010 4:51:17 PM PST by arasina (So there.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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