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

He tirelessly advocates for "gay marriage" - an oxymoron if there ever was one.

And he regularly posits a moral equivalence between normal male-female relationships and unnatural homosexual couplings.

Worse, he claims to do so as a practicing Catholic.

 It appears that his "gayness" has trumped his "conservatism" once again.

wrongly assumes that his homosexual "orientation" is natural and criticizes the Church's age-old Biblical stance that homosexual behavior is sinful

Sullivan - who has AIDS and who was discovered last year to have posted a solicitation on a homosexual "barebacking" (condomless sodomy)

The last thing we need is for a self-described "family" newspaper - "America's newspaper" - to lend its respected pages to his immoral crusade.


1 posted on 12/19/2002 1:56:27 PM PST by Remedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Remedy
It's a sad commentary on our times that today a person is probably more likely to be fired or disciplined at his job for opposing homosexuality than for being homosexual.

So why all the hub-bub over the need for special protections? Not long ago, the Oregonian ran a Lifestyles Section front page story on a couple that was having a great deal of trouble finding housing...because they had two cats. The photos and text made it abundantly clear that they were homosexuals, but their biggest problem in finding housing was the two cats.

2 posted on 12/19/2002 2:03:57 PM PST by gundog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
Thanks for pulling together such a wealth of information . I find myself growing quite intolerant---not of gays, but of their constant PR machine that attempts to convert all of our thinking and gain our acceptance. They are wasting their breath on me. If they convince the entire society that their lifestyle is normal and acceptable---indeed honorable, they will still not have changed one iota of the real truth---the Word of God.
3 posted on 12/19/2002 2:16:57 PM PST by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
I canceled my subscription over it. I can get that kind of junk online for free. I bought the WTimes actually just to support a conservative paper. I'll still read it online. They've got some great stuff. But I feel no obligation any more to buy a subscription. There are many other talented columnists that could have chosen. It's their right to choose Sulli, but it's my right to disagree.

If the Washington Times were not a conservative publication then I would feel they SHOULD carry someone with Sullivan's liberal social views. It's only right to have balance. But this is different.

5 posted on 12/19/2002 2:23:44 PM PST by RAT Patrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
Your position apparently is that the Times must be totally monolithic in its approach, apparently because those of us who read it are too gullible and naive to be able to deal with Mr. Sullivan's advocacy of homosexual rights. Sorry Mommy, those old apron strings are just a LITTLE TOO CONFINING. I think I can read Mr. Sullivan's column (or choose not to read it) without feeling an uncontrollable impulse to wrap myself in pink ribbon.
7 posted on 12/19/2002 2:33:58 PM PST by blau993
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
Some of what is said here makes sense. But there is a problem. What Sullivan did was take a job at the Washington Times. Who among you want to deny him this? If so what writing jobs are you going to permit to do and why.

IMHO, this is an employment issue. No question about it, biologically and statistically homosexuality is not normal and the gays and the lesbians dispute this. Even my own professional association, American Psychiatric Association, disagrees with my convictions. But is preventing Sullivan from writing for a newspaper a way to solve the argument? I think not.

I think the homosexuals want to be accepted as they are in society. Unfortunately, their in-your-face-I-am-as normal are has resulted in an identity "politics" war. In the meantime, homosexuals are going to need jobs, places to live, religious institutions and everything else we desire and need. Neither the Constitution or common sense leaves much of an alternative

9 posted on 12/19/2002 2:47:12 PM PST by shrinkermd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
So about post #19 of #20, madg will appear to tell us that the emperor in fact has really great clothes, and we really needn't pay any attention to the man behind the curtain.

Dan
12 posted on 12/19/2002 2:59:54 PM PST by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
The fact is, they're not running their newspaper for your enjoyment. It's an on-going enterprise operating in a free market. They can hire anybody they choose and you can choose to spend your money on it or on another newspaper. Your choice to buy is just like the channel selector on your TV. If you don't like what they do, don't support them with your purchase.

It might be just as simple to buy the newspaper and choose not to read the column you don't like. I don't agree totally with anybody I have yet met and certainly not with any newspaper.

Of course if you ask my wife and kids they'll tell you that I am a bit hard to get along with now and then

15 posted on 12/19/2002 3:04:55 PM PST by muir_redwoods
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
The Wash Times is a conspiracy by the Moonies to destroy America < /sarcasm>
26 posted on 12/19/2002 3:20:34 PM PST by LO_IQ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
Re: Why a 'Gay' Activist Columnist at The Washington Times?

Well, it is the Season to don our gay apparel...

31 posted on 12/19/2002 3:44:42 PM PST by sonofatpatcher2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
I got the message that you feel strongly about this issue and have gathered a lot of data on the subject. I am not pro-gay, nor do I support the gay community's efforts to impose their life style on others. Regardless, I have a question. How is this rant different than the gay's effort to keep Dr. Laura off TV. Were we against the program to silence that voice?
32 posted on 12/19/2002 3:53:54 PM PST by JonH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
It's a sad commentary on our times that today a person is probably more likely to be fired or disciplined at his job for opposing homosexuality than for being homosexual.

Seems more like a way of increasing the Times's circulation by appealing to gay readers.

34 posted on 12/19/2002 4:19:34 PM PST by cruiserman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Remedy
The Washington Times also runs editorials by Deroy Murdock, another gay conservative...or at least they did in yesterday's edition.
55 posted on 04/25/2003 9:38:29 PM PDT by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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