Posted on 04/29/2003 12:37:19 PM PDT by presidio9
Edited on 05/07/2004 5:21:14 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
Let me translate into "bigotspeak" what Sen. Rick Santorum meant when he compared gays to bigamists, polygamists and practitioners of incest and adultery.
Translated: Hey, I place you in the same category as all those scummy people I just mentioned. Oh, and if you act on who you are, you're also a criminal.
(Excerpt) Read more at azcentral.com ...
These heterophobes are the irrational ones.
If I said, "If you allow (gay) consensual behavior based on privacy then you allow eatiing, sleaping, showering, or watching T.V." would people howl? Of cours not, because there is nothing immoral about any of those things.
Santorum picked four well recognized immoral acts. The homosexual community, which seems to not understand the concept of immorality, got mad to have their act lumped in with those others. Why? Show me one moral code practiced anywhere in the world that doesn't make homosexuality as immoral as bigamy, polygamy, adultery, and incest? There isn't one, which means that it was perfectly reasonable to lump homosexual behavior in with the other four.
The homosexuals are ticked off because it reminds everyone that homosexuality is immoral.
Shalom.
I fear no man, so I can't possibly be homophobic.
This is not a thread about who you love. It's a thread about who you have sex with.
Shalom.
It means someone is trying to say the reason you speak out against homosexuality is that you are afraid of it. In other words, they can't refute your position, so they assign one to you that they can knock down.
Have you ever met anyone that was afraid of a homosexual? Where do they come up with this stupidity. Homophobe. Like, I have a phobia. Give me a break.
Thank God!
Democrats will get some initial mileage out of this...but it will not have the legs for any long-haul criticism.
Because most Americans are still repulsed by homosexuality.
Mankind has spent several millenia developing effective and sanitary methods of disposing human waste.
Mankind knows that human waste is the source of deadly diseases.
Mankind knows that highly promiscuous sexual behavior of any kind brings with it high morbidity and mortality.
Male homosexual behavior is essentially desirous of methods to literally and figuratively swim upstream to the sources of that human waste, with as many different partners as humanly possible.
Therefore, homosexual behavior is deadly and definitely decreases the homosexual's life expectancy, and the visceral repulsion it engenders is a natural, wholesome, and common sense response.
Unfortunately, homophobia continues to enjoy a disturbing degree of public acceptance.
Translation: some Americans still enjoy a certain degree of common sense, and have not bought into the homo agenda propaganda.
Please, spare me the scripture readings. I know many take refuge in religion for their beliefs about gays. Religions evolve, however. We're not quite there on this issue, which is part of the reason Santorum will likely hold on to his leadership spot.
The moment we are there will be the moment this Republic fails. If it has not already.
You see, when it comes to gays, we are, in many respects, still knee-deep in the dark ages.
Of course, in many respects, the "dark ages" were much more enlightened than this idiot.
Copy the article and paste it. I would post what comes back but it would probably be deleted.
Some gays thought the new line of demarcation and the disease it created — homophobia — was wonderful. It was touted by some as a major victory for gay liberation. The National Gay Rights Task Force, in the US, called homophobia “a flawed personality trait” which “mental health professionals have identified.” At a conference sponsored by gay groups, one speaker announced: “Homophobia is the problem, not homosexuality. Homophobia is the pathology, not homosexuality.”
Now, by making bigotry a "mental illness," one thereby removes the bigot from the realm of morality and places him in the medical realm instead. This reclassification of bigotry establishes a foundation for the exoneration of the bigot. Such a theory of bigotry would, for example, serve well the interests of past perpetrators of apartheid. They could defend their crimes by claiming “diminished mental capacity” due to “the disease of negrophobia.” Instead of a Truth Commission we could create a commission of psychiatrists to treat the poor victims of this new disease.
This is virtually what happened in the case of Dan White, the assassin of San Francisco Mayor George Moscone and gay city Supervisor Harvey Milk. White couldn’t be inflicted with the disease of homophobia and be responsible for his crime at the same time. By medicalizing White’s actions the court was saying that the assassinations were actually a symptom of his disease. The trial of White ended with him being found to suffer from “diminished capacity” and he received a slap-on-the-wrist sentence. The city’s gay population was shocked; but large segments of their own leadership had established the foundation on which this exoneration was based by accepting the existence of a phony disease called “homophobia”.
If da Supreme Court says dat ya gots da right ta consensual sex within yo' home, then ya gots da right ta bigamy, ya gots da right ta polygamy, ya gots da right ta incest, ya gots da right ta adultery. You gots da right ta anythin'. Does dat undermine da fabric o' our society? I would argue yeea , it do. sho 'nuff!
If only that was all there was to it.
They also want the ability to marry and adopt/raise kids.
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.