Ok, gonna try to respond to this in pieces...
Jeremiah wrote: The "filth" you mention was written by felllow homosexuals. I didn't write it.
These people do not speak for me anymore than Fred Phelps speaks for you, a point you obviously didn't see I was trying to make. Let's hope it hits a home run this time around. ;-D
Jeremiah wrote: "The fact is that roughly one third of child molestations are same sex. That is not my invention. It is factual. It is also factual that historically, and currently, homosexuals IN GENERAL have a proclivity towards pederasty - meaning men attracted to younger boys, either pre or post adolescent, for sexual pleasure. So why are my statements of fact "filth" or vitriol?"
None of the "homosexuals" I know are into children, at least that I know of, and the "facts" you're touting are the same drivel that's repeated from one anti-gay site to another. That doesn't make it fact. In fact, I've always read that the vast majority of "pederasty" is committed by adult men upon young girls. Not having personal experience in either, I'm not going to try to prove one or the other but, again, those people do not speak for ME. If you want them to represent ME, than I think it's perfectly fair for Fred Phelps to represent YOU. I see no difference in this type of debate tactic and frankly, given the intelligence exhibited by your language, it's weak and you can do better.
Jeremiah wrote: "Where is the word "Nazi" in any of my comments?"
Feigned coyness is almost as weak a tactic as comparing people to Nazis. Come off it. LOL. If you really want me to take only this thread into consideration, then no, that word is not in your comments, but how many times have I read your posts about the Pink Swastika material? Apparently, much of that has been refuted in an annotated copy online. I plan to read it when I have a chance, but again, the Nazis don't speak for ME anymore than these OTHER people you cite as my representatives. If you want to know what *I* think about my personal homosexual experience, here I am. Ask away. If, on the other hand, you want to put me in some box that makes me easy for you to categorize, then expect the same in kind.
Jeremiah wrote: "And why are you bringing Phelps into this? He's a sick nutcase and I have nothing to do with him or his ilk, nor would I ever. I would cross the street to avoid even seeing him. "
Thank you for making my point for me. I feel exactly the same way about Gay Nazis and NAMBLA people that you seem to think speak for me.
Jeremiah wrote: "You are indulging in dishonest debating tactics. I present facts, and statements by homosexual spokespeople. You start making phony connections between me (since I disagree with the homosexual agenda) and Phelps, who is a vicious madman."
And how is this not contradictory? Who gave you the supreme right to decide who is a spokesperson and who is a vicious madman? Personally, I'd throw Fred Phelps in same sinking ship with the Gay Nazis and NAMBLA people. None of them are my spokespeople. In fact, with the amount of national media exposure I seem to get these days, NOBODY is my spokesperson except ME. If I have something I want to express to large numbers of people, I have no problem getting it heard. No need to allow anyone else to do it for me.
Jeremiah wrote: "You mention a couple of friends who are devoted to each as though this anecdotal evidence in any way contradicts the factual evidence that a great number of homosexuals - especially men - are wildly promiscuous, and outdo heterosexuals in this regard."
Yes, but why on earth would anyone who preferred being promiscuous want to get married? That just doesn't even make any sense. I suppose there are promiscuous married couples, gay and straight, who "swing," or whatever the term is these days, but the gay couples I know are rather committed to one another and I've always been personally turned off by promiscuity, so, again, you're lumping me into a box with people whose views I don't share, and yet you complain when I do the same [Phelps] to you. Interesting.
Jeremiah wrote: "Then you drag in the word "Nazi" gratuitously."
Do I? If I had a nickel for everytime you've used one of these threads to link homosexuals with Nazis, I'd be on a sailboat in the Caribbean and wouldn't have time to respond to you right now. ;-D
Jeremiah wrote: "Are you next going to deny that there is a homosexual agenda to promote it in schools?"
And *that's* not a slanted, loaded question? Promote exactly *what* in schools? I don't think anything should be "promoted" as being superior, thank you, but I don't think that the child of a homosexual couple should feel ashamed to go to school and say "I have two mommies" or whatever the hell the term is these days. I don't think a homosexual 15 year old should have to hide who he or she is out of shame. You color your question with slanted language to make it sound different than it is. Do I think we should be telling people that they should go out of their way to be gay? Heavens no. God knows most of the lemmings aren't strong enough in their own persons not to be hurt by statements by people like you and I wouldn't wish that on anyone. However, the fact remains, those feelings are ingrained and they should be respected. Is it genetic? I have no idea. I'm not a geneticist and neither is anyone else on this list I imagine. I theorize that it's developmental, and I despise homosexual activists when they try to fight research into the subject because they're afraid of finding out a truth they won't like. However, my guess is that it happens in the womb. THat, of course, is neither here nor there. When I first realized my [involuntary] attractions, I could choose to do one of two things. I could listen to what people like you think or I could do it my way. I'm sure you can guess the path I took. If people choose to presume what my moral and ethical compasses are, that's their choice but I refuse to acknowledge it anymore than I absolutely have to.
Homosexual agenda in schools - Fistgate.
You are promoting the homosexual agenda on FR, and I am going to hit the abuse button now. Let's see what the moderators think about it. You do know what JimRob thinks of the homosexual agenda, don't you?
Jeremiah wrote: The "filth" you mention was written by felllow homosexuals. I didn't write it.
These people do not speak for me anymore than Fred Phelps speaks for you, a point you obviously didn't see I was trying to make. Let's hope it hits a home run this time around. ;-D
[This is child's play!] Fred Phelps is disowned by the traditional values and pro-marriage people to a man. None agree with him, none will be seen with him, all criticize him. On the other hand, all the homosexual spokespeople I quoted are mainstream, accredited in the "gay" movement people - Sullivan writes for the NYT for heaven's sake! Furthermore, NO homosexuals speak out against these spokespeople save and except for Tammy Bruce and to some degree, Camille Paglia. So the situation is entirely different. Additionally (you make this so easy) you claim that the homosexual spokespeople I quote above don't speak for you, yet you do not distance yourself from the homo-agenda one millimeter. So you are duplicitous.
Jeremiah wrote: "The fact is that roughly one third of child molestations are same sex. That is not my invention. It is factual. It is also factual that historically, and currently, homosexuals IN GENERAL have a proclivity towards pederasty - meaning men attracted to younger boys, either pre or post adolescent, for sexual pleasure. So why are my statements of fact "filth" or vitriol?"
None of the "homosexuals" I know are into children, at least that I know of, and the "facts" you're touting are the same drivel that's repeated from one anti-gay site to another.
Well, because the homosexuals you know aren't pedophiles or pederasts (you think you know every single thing about them? Or that they'd tell you if they were)? Secondly, the numbers speak for themselves. Here's just once bit of evidence:
" Almost all child sexual abuse is committed by men; and · Less than three percent of American men identify themselves as homosexual; yet · Nearly a third of all cases of child sexual abuse are homosexual in nature (that is, they involve men molesting boys). This is a rate of homosexual child abuse about ten times higher than one would expect based on the first two facts. These figures are essentially undisputed. However, pro-homosexual activists seek to explain them away by claiming that men who molest boys are not usually homosexual in their adult sexual orientation. Yet a study of convicted child molesters, published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior, found that "86 percent of offenders against males described themselves as homosexual or bisexual" (W. D. Erickson, M.D., et al., in Archives of Sexual Behavior 17:1, 1988)."
That doesn't make it fact. In fact, I've always read that the vast majority of "pederasty" is committed by adult men upon young girls.
If something is a fact, it's a fact. You denying the truth doesn't change it. Truth is not subjective or dependent on your personal approval.
Jeremiah wrote: "Where is the word "Nazi" in any of my comments?"
Feigned coyness is almost as weak a tactic as comparing people to Nazis. Come off it. LOL. If you really want me to take only this thread into consideration, then no, that word is not in your comments, but how many times have I read your posts about the Pink Swastika material? Apparently, much of that has been refuted in an annotated copy online.
I have posted many links to "The Pink Swastika" because it is a very valuable source of information about the connection between homosexuality and Nazism that is currently being revised out of existence due to homosexual revisionists. I wonder how it can be refuted, unless the refuters somehow manage to go back in time and change the past. Additionally, a book came out last year called "The Hidden Hitler" by Lothar Machtan, a German historian who teaches Modern and Current History at Bremen University. He comes to the same conclusion as Scott Lively, with even more voluminous historical evidence proving that not only was the Nazi movement and philosophy founded on homo-eroticism, but that Hitler himself was a homosexual as well.
I plan to read it when I have a chance, but again, the Nazis don't speak for ME anymore than these OTHER people you cite as my representatives.
If they don't speak for you (the spokespeople I quoted above, not Nazis), then you need to say (although you can't now, too bad) exactly in what way you disagree with them and the homosexual agenda they proudly support.
If you want to know what *I* think about my personal homosexual experience, here I am.
Actually, I don't need or want to know about it.
Iif,...you want to put me in some box that makes me easy for you to categorize, then expect the same in kind.
I'm just taking what you yourself state and commenting on it. If someone supports the normalization and promotion of homosexuality, and I call them on it, is that "categorizing"?
Jeremiah wrote: "And why are you bringing Phelps into this? He's a sick nutcase and I have nothing to do with him or his ilk, nor would I ever. I would cross the street to avoid even seeing him. "
Thank you for making my point for me. I feel exactly the same way about Gay Nazis and NAMBLA people that you seem to think speak for me.
You can't sneak out of this one. The homosexual spokespeople I quoted above are neither Nazis nor members of NAMBLA, unless secretly. They're merely mainstream promoters of the "gay" agenda, and you can't weasel out of being lumped together with them unless and until (which you can't now anyway, unless you get a new screen name and computer) you disavow their goals and plans.
Jeremiah wrote: "You are indulging in dishonest debating tactics. I present facts, and statements by homosexual spokespeople. You start making phony connections between me (since I disagree with the homosexual agenda) and Phelps, who is a vicious madman."
And how is this not contradictory? Who gave you the supreme right to decide who is a spokesperson and who is a vicious madman?
Well, for one thing, Phelps doesn't write for the NYT, nor do people fawningly interview him for the LA Times. Nor is he considered a mainstream representative for pro-family advocates (in fact, he is universally loathed), in the way that the above quoted homosexual advocates are embraced by the "gay" rights movement in general.
Jeremiah wrote: "You mention a couple of friends who are devoted to each as though this anecdotal evidence in any way contradicts the factual evidence that a great number of homosexuals - especially men - are wildly promiscuous, and outdo heterosexuals in this regard."
...the gay couples I know are rather committed to one another and I've always been personally turned off by promiscuity, so, again, you're lumping me into a box with people whose views I don't share, and yet you complain when I do the same [Phelps] to you. Interesting.
Facts and figures tell the story here. It's an undeniable fact that homosexuals - especially men - are many times more promiscuous than normal ("straight") men. So even if some aren't, that doesn't change a thing. I'm not talking about you, I'm talking about homosexuals as a group being wildly promiscuous. It's a fact. And if you decry such promiscuity, good for you. Note - bringing Phelps into this again. Odd.
Jeremiah wrote: "Are you next going to deny that there is a homosexual agenda to promote it in schools?"
And *that's* not a slanted, loaded question? Promote exactly *what* in schools? I don't think anything should be "promoted" as being superior, thank you, but I don't think that the child of a homosexual couple should feel ashamed to go to school and say "I have two mommies" or whatever the hell the term is these days. I don't think a homosexual 15 year old should have to hide who he or she is out of shame. You color your question with slanted language to make it sound different than it is.
Hmm. So you do support the homosexual agenda in schools. Like GLSEN's "Gay Straight Alliance" Clubs - with homosexual counsellors ready willing and able to convince the "questioning" kids that they are, indeed, gay for life. So you do think that little kids - as young as 5 and 6 - should be told that two men or two women can be "married". Ok, so we're clear on this one.
...those feelings are ingrained and they should be respected.
By "respected" do you mean as in everyone has free will and we should respect that people have a right to be wrong? Or as in we must change laws to allow two homosexuals to get "married" and force feed the promotion of homosexuality in schools against the parents' wishes? So in your world all "feelings" should be respected? This nonsense doesn't even need me to defeat it. It defeats itself.
Is it genetic? I have no idea. I'm not a geneticist and neither is anyone else on this list I imagine. I theorize that it's developmental, and I despise homosexual activists when they try to fight research into the subject because they're afraid of finding out a truth they won't like. However, my guess is that it happens in the womb.
Well, your guess is worthy exactly what you put into it. Research says otherwise.
If people choose to presume what my moral and ethical compasses are, that's their choice but I refuse to acknowledge it anymore than I absolutely have to.
This last statement has English words, but means nothing.
I rest my case.
So here's your goddamned pat on the ass and a hearty "gee, aren't you special".
That's what you came here for, isn't it?