The 'gay' truth: Kevin McCullough on homosexuality dominating American politics

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, May 30, 2003 | Kevin McCullough

[Woahhs]

Congratulations! You're a success!

Your overall opinion, undilluted by any kind of specific detail, is exactly what the leftist media culture was going for.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Prenatal or neonatal exposure to estrogen results in masculinization...

Exactly right, it's the presence of androgens or MIS that differentiate the internal ducts and external genitalia. What our "scientist" mysterio doesn't understand is if there is abnormal androgen or MIS production it would affect the gonadal ridges causing ambiguous genitalia and abnormal sex differentiation which has NOTHING to do with the brain (hypothalamus).

[Clint N. Suhks]

This is one of the most brilliant essays I’ve ever read. Can you book mark it for future reference?

[tdadams]

How many canards can this author fit into 15 paragraphs?

[Clint N. Suhks]

Name one

[scripter]

Name one

As tdadams continues to demonstrate, he's not interested in the truth around anything homosexual. Sadly, he's most comfortable when folks treat him like a mushroom. That is, keep him in the dark and feed him "manure".

I'm still waiting for a number from tdadmas, a number from 2-63 but he just won't provide it, which re-inforces his obvious bias on this matter.

[scripter]

Thanks for the pings. I'm trying to catch up with my pings after being gone for a couple of days.

[tdadams]

Maybe you should look up the definition of canard then re-read the article. Repeat as many times as necessary.

[Skywalk]

Anyone find it odd that the spokesman for the Concerned Women of America is named ROBERT?

[scripter]

In other words, you're going to say whatever you want without ever supporting it. That continues to fit your style... apparently to you the ends justify the means.

[Clint N. Suhks]

That’s the tdadams we all know and love. I would have been surprised if you actually had a reasoned argument rather than your usual juvenile drive-by slanders. Thanks for not disappointing.

See ya later pipsqueak.

[Clint N. Suhks]

That is, keep him in the dark and feed him "manure".

We knew he was full of something, it goes with being a hypocrite Liberaltarian.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Anyone find it odd that the spokesman for the Concerned Women of America is named ROBERT?

No why? There's lots of female leaders in the Boy Scouts, do you find that "odd" too?

[Skywalk]

Come on, if you had a white spokesman for the Black Press of America you wouldn't raise an eyebrow?

I didn't say it was wrong, heck I was Co-Pres of the Vietnamese Students Association once upon a time.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Well if you’re not Vietnamese I wouldn’t find it any different than Robert Knight representing CWA. Either way I don’t see the concern.

[Skywalk]

It's not a CONCERN, I was just observing that it's incongruous. Forgive me if I stepped on toes by making a comment.

[Clint N. Suhks]

OK

[tdadams]

Ever heard the phrase "We hold these truths to be self-evident"?

Some things are, in the words of our Founders, self-evident. Presumably you would make the same denigrations of the Founders as you do of me. Do you read the Constitution and say "prove it", assuming you've read the Consitution at all?

[tdadams]

I would have been surprised if you actually had a reasoned argument rather than your usual juvenile drive-by slanders. Thanks for not disappointing. See ya later pipsqueak.

What a way to lead by example!

[tdadams]

it goes with being a hypocrite Liberaltarian.

I challenge you to demonstrate a single example where I have ever been hypocritical. You can't, so you won't. We already know that.