Gays out Of The Closet; The Rest Of Us In Pandora's Box

Radiofree West Hartford ^ | August 18, 2003 | Doug Wrenn

[NutmegGuy]

It used to be said, before gays "came out," that they were in "the closet." I wish they would go back into it. The rest of us have been in "Pandora's Box ever since.

Not that long ago, in kinder, gentler times, when grown adults actually kept their private business private, and fringe rebels did not get in everyone's face to make their point, what is now considered to be an alternative lifestyle" was in fact, a deviancy. The only thing that has changed is that in 1973, (the same notorious year that also gave us Roe vs. Wade) the American Psychiatry Association (APA) removed the category of homosexuality from it's Diagnostic and Statistical Manuel of Mental Disorders (DSM), under politically correct pressure from gay activist groups. The end result: Enter "alternate lifestyle"!

Since then, we have been continually (and not too gently) reminded by those "reformed deviates" that they are a victim class (one of many) and need special rights. (i.e.: Hate crime legislation which is only redundant of already existing laws against assault, harassment, discrimination, etc., but with stiffer penalties for these "special" citizens needing "equal" rights.) In addition, we are to now "tolerate" homosexuality, which is secret code for "embrace" it, in liberal lingo. That "tolerance" seems to need to only flow in only one direction. As with anyone disagreeing with affirmative action quotas is a "racist," anyone not embracing the gay agenda is a "homophobe." One regular columnist in the New Haven Register who writes about gay issues (ad nauseum) recently accused Pat Robertson of conducting a 21 day "prayer assault" against the Supreme Court after it's recent Lawrence vs. Texas decision, which struck down state sodomy laws. In fact, it would not at all hurt that bitterly angry gay columnist to be so assaulted "with prayer." (Heaven forbid!) This is but a microcosm of the absolute vile contempt that many in the so called gay movement have for anyone who dares to disagree with their agenda.

Lunacy such as pretending to be "open minded" and "main stream" about what is in fact a deviancy is as ludicrous as pretending that the Emperor is in fact, wearing clothes in the famed children's fairy tale. We do not need to know anyone's sexual preferences, be they heterosexual, or homosexual. We don't need the word "gay men" applied to the name of a chorus, and we don't need marchers in drag with gay banners in the New York St. Patrick's Day Parade. Last I heard, the only prerequisite for those two activities was that you be a good singer, and Irish, respectfully. These are but two of countless examples of gays making a needless statement, irrelevant to whatever task they are otherwise trying to carry out.

Paging Senator Santorum....paging Senator Rick Santorum... Oh, yes, another "homophobe"! Remember a few months back when "Santorum" was a dirty word? The conservative, Republican practicing Catholic (For you northeast Democrat "Catholics," that means a Catholic who really means it!) US Senator from Pennsylvania was persona non-grata a few months back among gay groups, opportunistic Democrats and cowardly Republicans for stating his opposition to the banning of state sodomy laws just before the Lawrence vs. Texas decision. Adding to the dismay was that Santorum never expressed the subsequent obligatory Mia coppa for saying what he truly believes, a sad recent trend among most "leaders" nowadays. Santorum stated, and correctly so, that striking down such laws will only further open the door to legalizing bestiality, incest, etc. For the nay sayers, I only need refer you to current gun control laws. The national liberal agenda to strip law abiding citizens of their legal right to defend themselves has been eroded, incrementally. The old riddle reminds us of this as well; "How do you eat an elephant?" Answer: "One bite at a time."

>>>Continued<<<

[I_Love_My_Husband]

ping

[Desdemona]

ping

[Only1choice____Freedom]

I heard a joke on the radio the other day.

Did you hear about the gay midget?

He came out of the cupboard!

[King Prout]

oh, the naughtiness one could perpetrate with that title.

[Old Professer]

The real problem is that is just too easy to be gay now; you don't even have to prove it or anything - just up and say, I'm gay and everybody writes it down like it was on the billboard in front of the local Episcopal church.

I mean, shouldn't there be some kind of pedigree or a diploma or something?

[Michael Barnes]

Homo's (homosexual, bi..blah) bother me, no matter their stripe. It's a mental illness that I no longer afford any trespass. I've seen the dikes, with herpes of the mouth, clap and what it does to the mouth and throat. Anal sex is nasty, purely from a medical stand point. I feel nothing for the deviant. Quite honestly, they deserve everything they get. Unfortunately, they are becomming a special class.

America sleeps, the diseases' spread. Thank GOD I am married.

[Only1choice____Freedom]

I mean, shouldn't there be some kind of pedigree or a diploma or something?

I don't want to be the one who certifies them as gay.

[Ford Fairlane]

I don't have any problems with queers, er.. gays - as long as they STAY IN THE F%^&*NG CLOST WHERE THEY BELONG!!!!

Just my opinion

[thegreatbeast]

A good read.
I have been meaning to do it for a long time but deviance is in many ways a quantitative description. A statistician will tell you the real value of deviance is a number, x% of a the thing being studied. Deviance in psychology wasn't so much a value judgement either so much as a small segment of a group that acted differently from the rest of the group. Again, it was more of a quantifiable description than anything else.

[thegreatbeast]

I mean, shouldn't there be some kind of pedigree or a diploma or something? I feel the same way about people declaring themselves republicans or democrats. Why was Jeffords of VT ever allowed to say he was a republican? How exactly was he a republican? It made no sense at all. And to hear someone like Ed Asner, Tim Robbins or Charles Rangel from NY proclaim themselves patriots makes me want to hurl. There should be qualifications that need to be met before one can claim to be this or that. I can tell you I am a beautiful woman but that doesn't make me one, does it?

[King Prout]

In this PC climate?
Care to cast wagers on that?

[RedneckRampage]

Is there a country we could export all the gays too? Call it: Gayberia. Capital: Clintonrovia.

Redneck
- If you don't agree with us, you ain't no American

[weegee]

(Re: deviance) Again, it was more of a quantifiable description than anything else.

But it wasn't politically correct to the liberal mindthink.

[weegee]

Even the word "sodomite" is verboten now.

[Marauder]

I have a question on this subject, and I promise not to flame any answers: You don't see straight people running up and down the street shouting their sexual preference to the rooftops. Why, then do homosexuals insist on publicly flaunting what we think of as sickening perversions?
I mean, I have no problem with the existence of homosexuals, and even according them basic human rights, as long as they keep the specific nature of their tumbling to themselves. Why in the name of sanity can't they do that?

[boycott]

It's a mental illness

I think it's more of a perversion.

[Republic]

If more people would speak as you type, openly, publically and often, the homosexuals would shrink back into the closet, and keep their sexual tastes to themselves, just as others do.

We can love the sinner and hate the sin, most of us know a homosexual or two or more. They want the 'HATE THE SIN' part dropped.

We are not only supposed to tolerate their behavior, we are to turn away from our beliefs and EMBRACE their disease. Even to the point of allowing CHILDREN, our most precious of citizens, to be indoctrinated by what I believe it a truly satanic movement.

Stating the obvious is what the homosexuals HATE THE MOST. And stating the obvious is what you did in your post.

It is simple, it is loaded with common sense and it is the truth.

Refusing to go along with the homosexual agenda to normalize their sexual inclination is the right thing to do.

Embracing this very corrupt lifestyle is RIDICULOUS and into the realm of dangerous.

Example of the silliness, the ridiculousness of embracing the pathetic fornication of two human begins of the same sex ( Oh gross!!!): If we are homophobes, lol, then are the intolerant homosexuals 'heterophobes'?

[At _War_With_Liberals]

In 1973, the APA became irrelevant.

[Marauder]

pathetic fornication of two human begins of the same sex

I never thought of using the word "fornication" for this; it seems somehow to legitimize, or normalize, the act.

are the intolerant homosexuals 'heterophobes'?

Exactamundo. Am I homophobic? No, because there's a big difference between fear and repulsion, and many people seem unable or unwilling to point this out to the "shrieking sweeties," or in some cases even to realize it.

But beyond all this, remember the agenda of the socialist left, to destroy our moral values. This is not only part and parcel of that agenda, but it's an excellent tool to help them achieve that goal, by virtue of its demoralizing effect on us.