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

Skip to comments.

Pushy homosexuality: Joseph Farah on growing backlash of public opinion against sodomy
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, July 30, 2003 | Joseph Farah

Posted on 07/29/2003 11:03:15 PM PDT by JohnHuang2

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 next last
Comment #81 Removed by Moderator

To: Emmylou
Define "child" and who are you to say they aren't mature enough to make sexual decisions?
82 posted on 07/30/2003 1:58:00 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
People who want to be left alone, should be left alone. People who become a public nuisance must understand they will be treated as a public nuisance.
83 posted on 07/30/2003 1:58:08 PM PDT by Tribune7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #84 Removed by Moderator

Comment #85 Removed by Moderator

To: Emmylou
Still is.

Comparatively speaking...I'm sure it is.

86 posted on 07/30/2003 2:00:12 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

Comment #87 Removed by Moderator

To: jlogajan
You're born gay. There are homosexual animals.

Hehehe...show me one "homosexual" animal in nature that allows itself to be sodomized. What a kook. In nature the dynamics of a herd forces the males to be segregated and masterbating on each other is no different to your dog masterbating on your leg. None are bending over and taking it in the @$$.

BTW save the Bonobo's in the zoo bit, they neither prefer the same sex nor have males ever committed sodomy, plus they’re in jail and we already know what happens to long term inmates.

88 posted on 07/30/2003 2:03:21 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
The smear tactic I was referring to was your attempt to equate gays with child molesters.

Science does, kinda a no-brainer if you can read.


89 posted on 07/30/2003 2:05:56 PM PDT by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
I wasn't refering to the decision, I was refering to the case itself. Griswold, like Lawrence, was a set-up to make an assault on local statute.

Is it a smear tactic to call someone who steals, a criminal? Assuming the validity of your accusatiion doesn't support that accusation.

90 posted on 07/30/2003 2:08:19 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
And the state defined homosexual activity as contrary to public good, but you didn't have any problem disputing that point.
91 posted on 07/30/2003 2:12:29 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

Comment #92 Removed by Moderator

To: jlogajan
"Yeah, the fundies are always minding everyone elses business."

Whereas everyone else doesn't care what others do, no matter what it does to society. I see.

93 posted on 07/30/2003 2:16:29 PM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
"Most gays could care less what you or anyone other than their friends and families think."

Then what the heck are you whining about?

94 posted on 07/30/2003 2:20:48 PM PDT by MEGoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
But the fact that the law (the Texas one) was so rarely enforced that it required these sorts of tactics, to me, indicates that it wasn't (a) a popular one and (b) a high priority.

You will please note how far "the right to privacy" has come from an ostensible question of the use of contraception among married couples.

95 posted on 07/30/2003 2:35:14 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
But the fact that the law (the Texas one) was so rarely enforced that it required these sorts of tactics

required for what?

96 posted on 07/30/2003 2:37:09 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Emmylou
No, my biggest worry is that this gay marriage thing is going to pass. Then we'll have to pay that marriage penalty tax.

Well, actually, I support removing all legal benefits from marraige of any sort.

The current system is discriminatory against the involuntarily celibate.

97 posted on 07/30/2003 2:43:14 PM PDT by Chemist_Geek ("Drill, R&D, and conserve" should be our watchwords! Energy independence for America!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Woahhs
How is it you can't comprehend the inherent threat to liberty represented by a legally binding proposition that peoples behavior is predicated on something beyond their control?
98 posted on 07/30/2003 2:50:49 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Chemist_Geek
The current system is discriminatory against the involuntarily celibate.

I suggest you change your handle to Chemist_Tripod!

99 posted on 07/30/2003 2:53:05 PM PDT by Woahhs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

Comment #100 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-125 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