[behzinlea]

Cool. And I agree with you. We should be examining groups that claim to be conservative based on more than just what they do in their private lives.

Unfortunately, with homosexuals there is nothing more public than their "private" lives. They have aggressively pushed their sexuality into the open. DADT is a great example. They are demanding that government grant them the right to flaunt their "private" sexuality openly in the ranks.

[NotSoModerate]

They have aggressively pushed their sexuality into the open. DADT is a great example.

I agree, but using that as the ONLY reason to oppose them when there are huge issues concerning their support of wealth redistribution gives them cover (making us seem like bigots) to actively promote legislation that is destroying our nation financially.

[muawiyah]

You'll not find the homosexuals arguing on behalf of psychopathic sexual sadists ~ like the ones who turned up involved in the Abu Ghraib situation.

Unfortunately you won't find them admitting that the military MUST inquire into sexual inclinations for everyone lest the sexual sadists get in and do what they do.

Not that all the sexual sadists are homosexual, or vice versa, but both orientations must be viewed as pathologies and not as normal conditions when it comes to military duty. After all, the "tests" for both conditions are the same and it's really difficult to tell them apart until the dead and mutilated bodies start showing up.