'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause

Culture and Family Institute/ Concerned Women for America ^ | 12/5/02 | Allyson Smith

[bourbon]

Sincere Christian rebuke is a powerful thing.

Should it strike us as odd that the rebuked would lash out in their shame? or that those who might be similarly rebuked would wish to make excuses for their comrades who do lash out?

[Frapster]

Curious - do you criticize Freepers for freeping various political and social events?

[Frapster]

The reason I ask is that while I find the extreme anit-gay opinions often expressed on this forum as counter-productive it seems to me that Christian witnessing seems to fall under your opinion of something morally repulsive. Am I wrong?

[anniegetyourgun]

1. CWA never suggested that it is the duty of those organizations to respond to every crime committed by a gay person. However, since CWA is an organization that is distinctly Christian, perhaps it's reasonable to assume that they might question the silence of those organizations, in light of this woman's faith.

2. No one expects organizations of those who choose homosexuality, lesbianism, bi-sexualism, etc. to openly advocate the murder of Christians. At least not any more than one would expect Hollywood types to suggest the public stoning of Republican elected officials and their family members.

[bourbon]

I'm glad you share my misgivings about that word, "pro-homosexualist." I hate it when conservatives participate in the debasement of our language and coin neologisms at the drop of a hat.

[Polycarp]

Don't expect a "straight' (so to speak) answer from this Freeper. Their comments on previous threads about this poor woman martyr were repulsive.

[FreeTally]

Now, is it enough that I think that persecution of gays is evil,

Please elaborate on you definition of "persecution" if you will.

[UbIwerks]

Speak of the devil... I see a couple of the homo activists have already showed up on this thread that I was referring to from the previous one. Predictable.

I see them too but from a thread from an earlier thread. It will only be a matter of time before they smear me by saying I'm with Fred Phelps or some sort of nonsense again.

[Skooz]

Get ready Christians, if they get their way, you will be locked up for believing that homosexuality is wrong.

Yes, we will. I have no doubt of that.

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"Sometime O'reilly is right and other times he is a moron. "

You're right. He comes across a lot like many righteous liberals on most issues involving morality. He keeps his "faith" in a neat little box on the shelf, because that is "personal" and we shouldn't offend anyone else with our beliefs. He was ranting along those lines last night regarding a hospital technician who was fired because he tried to counsel a woman about to have an abortion on the Biblical view of the matter. "He should have been fired...that is highly personal and I wouldn't want that." He's a total ignoramous about such things, but that sure doesn't keep him quiet.

I have to agree with many of the comments I read on this forum last night about his becoming tiresome.

[UbIwerks]

I'm glad you share my misgivings about that word, "pro-homosexualist." I hate it when conservatives participate in the debasement of our language and coin neologisms at the drop of a hat.

I believe the term homosexualist was coined by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams and it sounds pretty good to me; however, the term pro homosexualist seems redundant.

[Polycarp]

In their minds "persecution" = simple Christian charity in sharing the Gospel Truth, no matter how benign the messenger or gentle the message.

[Right Wing Professor]

I'm don't like 'pro-homosexualist', but 'homosexualist' is no neologism. Auberon Waugh was using it over 20 years ago to describe what we might otherwise call homosexual activists or people who were pro-homosexuality. And even if it were a true neologism, it's reasonable to coin a new word to describe a new phenomenon.

[MoGalahad]

"That's the sort of dishonest analysis that promotes closed-minded extremism and prevents honest discussion. No credible person asserts that hate crimes apply only to gay people, not even us 'pro-homosexualists'"

Well that is certainly the kind of response I would expect from a person like yourself. The analysis is in essence correct and it seems to me that you are the extremist here. Honest discussion must start with the truth and the truth is that homosexual behavior is detrimental to society as well as being fundamentally immoral. You are not interested in honest discussion only in promulgating your warped sense of right and wrong. Whenever someone accuses me of being closed-minded it automatically sends up a red flag that that person is less than honest and has an agenda.

By the way, you aren't credible to me either so take your invective elsewhere because it is wasted on me. I could care less what someone who openly promotes behavior that is damaging to society, not to mention wrong, thinks. Have a lousy day, Jack.