[BibChr]

That's certainly a good question. Let me offer a thought, though, and do ponder this.

Suppose NAMBLA approached Racicot? Should he meet with them? How about the KKK?

Now, someone here (I hope not you) just brushed aside that question. But logic demands that we not. Pederasty is repellant, immoral, destructive. Racism is repellant, immoral, destructive. Likewise, homosexuality is repellant, immoral, destructive.

So if (as I trust you'll say) Racicot should not (here comes the important word) LEGITIMATIZE the NAMBLA nor the KKK by meeting with them, neither should he LEGITIMATIZE any other group who chooses to identify themselves SOLELY by a sexual perversion, as the LCR's do.

If (as they argue) they're just conservatives like anyone else, then just let them join the other coalitions -- pro-life, pro-tax-relief, and the like. Stop trying to force approval of the unapprovable.

Legitimate points?

Dan

[tdadams]

Trying to reason on this subject is pointless with someone who simply refuses to draw any distinction between homosexuals and NAMBLA or the KKK.

[Dataman]

Legitimate points?

Indubitably.

[McGavin999]

That's an excellent point Dan, and I agree with you that forming a group is probably more destructive to them then they realize. I just think that the only way you can change things is to talk to people.