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

Skip to comments.

Acting Up
Baltimore City Paper Online ^ | April 23 - April 29, 2003 | Bret McCabe

Posted on 06/01/2003 9:39:23 PM PDT by scripter

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 last
To: FourtySeven

explain the details man. C'mon.....you've put so much thought into the ethical theory behind

Last attempt:

The entire argument about sexual behavior is so simple it can be reduced to the following: Should there be any social rules about what sexual activity a human being engages in?

If the answer is no then everyone should just shut up...hetero is okay, cousins are okay, polygamy is okay, bi is okay; gay is okay, 13-year olds are okay, and one or one-hundred-at-a-time are okay, et. al.

However, if a society decides that certain rules about who does whom when and where is functional and perhaps even necessary, all that is left is to decide is WHAT are the rules of sexual behavior and WHO shall make them...simple. Those who follow the 'rules' are then NORMAL and all the rest are PERVERTS... so very, very simple...you decide.

Van & Katherine Jenerette www.jenerette.com � 242 posted on 04/26/2003 9:22 PM EDT by Van Jenerette (Our Republic...If We Can Keep It!)

41 posted on 06/03/2003 10:44:38 AM PDT by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Remedy
Man, I quit.

I've said already forty-BILLION times that you don't need to convince me of the immorality of homosexuality. My only point all along has been that it's an impractical goal to hope that you can ever make a law against homosexuality and hope that it'll have a significant impact!

It's like saying, "Lying is morally wrong, so we should make a law against telling a lie at any time!" Obviously that could never even hope to prevent lying, or even significantly reduce it, no matter HOW many laws you make.

Not everything that's morally repugnant can be stopped! It's a waste of human time and talent (yours, mine, everyone's) to try otherwise!

But if you REALLY WANT to waste your time and talent on this fine, I can't stop you.

Like I said, I quit. I think I've made my case anyway; anyone who's been lurking in this conversation can see that.

Enjoy! (and now you'll probably HAVE to post something else, JUST to get the last word in, and that's fine too. Knock yourself out.)
42 posted on 06/03/2003 11:40:21 AM PDT by FourtySeven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: scripter
"Yes it is. Some folks just can't control themselves, yet I don't know any heterosexuals that are bug chasers."

Bug chasing isn't exactly a huge movement. What would you have said BEFORE the almost completely trashed Rolling Stone article?

43 posted on 06/04/2003 2:18:03 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
Some folks can't control themselves, but no matter what they do, no heterosexuals are so confused as to actually chase after a deadly disease as are the homosexuals in the film. The Rolling Stone article was probably wrong on the 25% figure but not the fact that some homosexuals chase after a deadly disease.

Bug chasing may not be huge but it surely shows some homosexuals are just that much more confused. They are so caught up in their sexual behavior they appear to be mentally unstable.

44 posted on 06/04/2003 7:59:30 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: scripter
"no heterosexuals are so confused as to actually chase after a deadly disease as are the homosexuals in the film."

You mean, that you know of.

I find it quite bizarre as well that anyone would seek out such a disease.

"The Rolling Stone article was probably wrong on the 25% figure but not the fact that some homosexuals chase after a deadly disease."

Not probably. Definitely wrong, even as a ballpark figure.

"Bug chasing may not be huge but it surely shows some homosexuals are just that much more confused."

Well, I have to half agree with you. I think anyone who attempts to contract such a thing is delusional.

"They are so caught up in their sexual behavior they appear to be mentally unstable."

Well keeping in mind that this only applies to a small number of gays, I think the question is why they seek it. I haven't seen the documentary, but I suspect it has something to do with the politicization of AIDS since it is mainly known as a "gay disease".

45 posted on 06/04/2003 8:22:02 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
Do you know of any reports of heterosexuals chasing after any deadly diseases and who in their right mind would?

Not every report I've read states the 25% figure is definitely wrong, but probably wrong, which is why I used it that way.

From the article:

"And that's the whole intent, especially for gay men, because they don't discuss it at all," Hogarth says. "The HIV rates in this country are way up. It's way up in the black community. It's a waiting avalanche that's waiting to come down. A lot of people don't test anymore, so you need for them to get sick [for the infection to be discovered], which takes about 10 years. And that's not the truth. We have to start telling the truth. And that would be the best thing that could come of [the documentary]--that people would start talking again and become aware of the risk."

And that's why I want GLSEN and other groups out of the schools. Not even the gay community is talking about the severe health hazards of the gay lifestyle, yet we have GLSEN in the schools and gay groups saying it's okay to be gay without a single reference to the severe health hazards.

46 posted on 06/04/2003 8:37:29 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: scripter
"Do you know of any reports of heterosexuals chasing after any deadly diseases"

No I don't, but until extremely recently we didn't know of any reports saying that gay men chased HIV. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

"Not every report I've read states the 25% figure is definitely wrong, but probably wrong, which is why I used it that way."

Ok, well my anecdotal experience is telling me that 25% is completely out of the park. That article makes Jayson Blair look like a credible journalist.

"And that's why I want GLSEN and other groups out of the schools."

You want them out of the schools for not telling people that promiscuous, unprotected sex is dangerous? That's true for everyone.

"Not even the gay community is talking about the severe health hazards of the gay lifestyle"

You mean, the severe health hazards of promiscuous, unprotected sex.

"have GLSEN in the schools"

First of all, show where GLSEN is "in the schools".

47 posted on 06/04/2003 9:19:07 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
No I don't

And you won't find any mentally stable person chasing after a deadly disease.

Ok, well my anecdotal experience is telling me that 25% is completely out of the park.

You're probably right. The 25% figure is probably wrong, but the main story line of the Rolling Stones article and the Acting Up article is that there are some homosexuals chasing after a deadly disease. The film documents this tragedy.

We don't have heterosexual groups in the schools telling kids to try dangerous sex acts or that it's okay to try dangerous sex acts without discussing the severe health hazards. We don't have heterosexual pride parades. Heterosexuals don't base their identity on their sexual behavior.

AIDS is a gay disease, and one of the goals of the film is to get the gay community, and perhaps others, talking about it.

You're being intellectually dishonest here. GLSEN is definitely in the schools and you know it. Did you even try looking at the GLSEN site? Click here for a Google search, if you dare.

48 posted on 06/04/2003 9:47:11 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
The GLSEN site has a gif stating:
creating safe schools for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people
But no, they're not in the schools. </sarcasm>
49 posted on 06/04/2003 9:51:35 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
Here's one for the bookmarks:
GLSEN Encourages Teens In Anal SEX "Don't give up."

50 posted on 06/04/2003 9:57:55 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: scripter
"And you won't find any mentally stable person chasing after a deadly disease."

That goes without saying.

"We don't have heterosexual groups in the schools telling kids to try dangerous sex acts or that it's okay to try dangerous sex acts without discussing the severe health hazards."

I had sex ed not THAT long ago, in hyper liberal NJ. It was hardly a homosexual indoctrination effort. In fact, they mentioned that some people were homosexual... and that was IT.

"We don't have heterosexual pride parades."

Of course not. Heterosexuals don't have a history of being discriminated against.

"Heterosexuals don't base their identity on their sexual behavior."

Why would they? They are the majority. Still, people who base their ENTIRE identity on anything are boring. Most gay people don't do that.

51 posted on 06/04/2003 10:01:08 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: scripter
I checked a bunch of the GLSEN links.. and as I said, they're not in the schools.

What exactly are you including to mean "IN" a school?

52 posted on 06/04/2003 10:03:14 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
I'm not going to waste my time with you and let the lurkers decide, from the links, if GLSEN is in the schools. Even their gif states it.
53 posted on 06/04/2003 10:12:18 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Qwerty
Yes, it goes without saying that no mentally stable person would purposely seek a deadly disease, yet some homosexuals are doing just that.

Those pushing the gay agenda base their identity on their sexual behavior. That's really sad. And I want it out of the schools.

54 posted on 06/04/2003 10:15:51 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: scripter
{We don't have heterosexual groups in the schools telling kids to try dangerous sex acts or that it's okay to try dangerous sex acts without discussing the severe health hazards}

Actually we do. Some school districts allow representatives of Planned Parenthood to come in and lecture the students on so-called "safe sex". Planned Parenthood is a scumbag organization that needs to be at the very least defunded by federal and state governments. Planned Parenthood makes a living poisoning the minds of children.
55 posted on 06/04/2003 9:19:44 PM PDT by Kuksool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: scripter
"The GLSEN site has a gif stating: creating safe schools for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people"

What part are you objecting to? Safe?

Anyway, READ the site... GLSEN itself is not involved with schools. They have recommendations on reading material and information about how students can start gay/straight alliances.

How does that make them part of any particular school?

56 posted on 06/05/2003 3:29:49 AM PDT by Qwerty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Kuksool
I agree Planned Parenthood needs to go as well. My point was GLSEN encouraging dangerous sex acts without even a hint of discussing the severe health consequences.
57 posted on 06/05/2003 7:28:12 AM PDT by scripter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: All

I just was made aware of this thread via:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1495739/posts

I generally don't post to old threads, but I'll make an exception here, to place something in the record:

Anyone who thinks GLSEN is benign can put "fistgate" in a search and have their eyes opened.


58 posted on 10/03/2005 7:49:15 PM PDT by JoJo Gunn (Help control the Leftist population. Have them spayed or neutered. ©)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-58 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