The 'gay' truth: Kevin McCullough on homosexuality dominating American politics

WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, May 30, 2003 | Kevin McCullough

[tdadams]

I could get your attention if I walked up and punched you in the face. Doing so would be criminal. You may want to refrain from libel to get someone's attention. Despite your smug rationale for posting that, doing so was completely unjustified and dispicable. You've shown yourself to be a genuinely dispicable and wretched person.

[scripter]

I've shown your arguments to be nothing but obfuscation and you continue to refuse to answer the simplest of questions.

[tdadams]

You've shown that you're a vile liar who will resort to libelous defamation when you can't make your case by reason. Don't ping me and don't post to me again.

[scripter]

I didn't lie, but as an example I simply made a statement and then said I don't really think it was true. Which is more than what you've done with your statement that the summary of After the Ball is biased. It obviously got your attention and perhaps made your blood boil. That's how I feel about gays telling our school kids it's okay to be gay - it makes my blood boil and you don't seem to have an issue about gays in the schools.

So, does this mean you're not going to answer my question?

[First Amendment]

We're talking about a pluralistic society in which the 2 to 5 percent of the population that is homosexual is allowed to live in peaceful coexistance with the rest of society.

Do you think that homosexuals just want to be left in peace, or do you think that homosexuals want to indoctrinate children in schools, infiltrate religious organizations, political life, get more and more media attention, have huge municipal-funded "Gay Pride" parades, tax funded "Gay neighborhoods" replete with rainbow flags, change laws so that homosexuals of various stripes can come to work in full regalia and not be fired, change laws so that if a homosexual is assaulted or killed the punishment for the perp is more severe than if the perp had assaulted or killed a "regular" person, etc etc??? Please anwswer this.

[tdadams]

B.S. You cannot and will not justify what you posted. It was criminal defamation. If I slugged you in the jaw and then said I was only kidding, you'd be no less injured. I expect an apology you slime. And that better be the last post I ever get from you. You disgust me.

[tdadams]

Do you not see that that's a very broad brush? Would you accept the premise of a similar question such as, "Do you not agree that people with guns kill people?"

You wouldn't accept the premise or the insinuation of that question nor should you. It's no different with this subject. Yes, there are some who have a radical agenda to pass hate crimes laws and present themelves in schools as an equally viable alternative lifestyle and those who want to force themselves into the Boy Scouts. Those things are all wrong and should be opposed.

But that's not to say that it's not possible to peacefully coexist with the average homosexual who lives a quiet life and harms no one, which I believe is the vast majority.

[cinFLA]

I do sincerely believe it to be a genetic abnormality, which probably accounts for the bulk of cases,

What do you base your belief on since there is a multitude of research that shows sexual preferences are formed during early childhood.

Would you also believe that the bulk of those that are into beastiality are genetically inclined?

[First Amendment]

I and probably others here would not have any problem with homosexuals who peacefully keep to themselves and do not push school indoctrination, "gay pride" parades, law changes, public park and bathroom sodomy acceptance, etc.
But how do you propose dealing with the minority (according to you) who DO loudly and aggressively push the "gay agenda"?

[scripter]

It was an example you didn't like which I said I didn't think was true and hoped it wasn't true. You cannot slug someone and pull back before you hit them, which is exactly what my example did.

To stop my posts to you, you need to stop posting to me.

[tdadams]

The mere insinuation, for demonstrative purposes or not, is beyond the pale and completely out of bounds.

I expect an apology.

[scripter]

Okay. I won't say I apologize, I'll say: I'm sorry. Truly. Actually I thought I apologized in an earlier post but must have re-written that part. It really isn't my intent to divide fellow freepers as we have enough to contend with. This issue is near and dear to my heart.

For what it's worth, I've used the exact same example on another heated thread and the guy had no problem with it and I even used his real name, not his screen name. He knew it was an example. Now, I'm not saying anything about you or him, just that the last time I got somebody's attention with that example it worked as expected and he responded as I was hoping.

[tdadams]

I hate to get into a point by point discussion of policy for every situation. That could get very tiring. But I think common sense is a pretty good guide. Serve on your school board to keep it out of the schools. If you know of a place that attracts gay cruising, ask your police chief or mayor if the local public indecency laws are being enforced.

If you live in a large city like I do, you probably have gay pride events. That's part of living in a big, diverse city. I accept that. But those events are usually announced publicly in advance. If you have kids and don't want them to see that, just plan a weekend getaway or be sure to steer clear of the place where it's being held. I don't have the right to demand the public parks be clear of anyone I disapprove of, but if they're having some event one day or one weekend a year, I can live with not going to the park that day.

It just doesn't seem that contentious to me.

[inaperfectworld]

After plowing through 150 of these back-and-forths the best that I can say for you is that you are the most brilliant and persistent idiot that I have ever encountered. You have been perfectly dismantled at every turn, yet still you flap hopelessly for a lifesaver.

Here's a thought- you know that homoeroticism is wrong and bad. Just admit it and say that you'll still do it anyway. We all do things that are wrong. It doesn't make you any worse than the rest of us. It would make it so much easier to take you seriously. Just say what we all know and be done with it.

[tdadams]

You have been perfectly dismantled at every turn, yet still you flap hopelessly for a lifesaver.

Oh, really? I guess I shouldn't expect you to be anymore introspective and honest than those I've been debating with.

you know that homoeroticism is wrong and bad. Just admit it and say that you'll still do it anyway.

I'm straight, dumbass.

[tdadams]

But thanks for the compliment. At least you acknowledge my brilliance and persistence. LOL!

[First Amendment]

Serve on your school board to keep it out of the schools.

How does one do that in CA when there is a state law mandating that homosexuality be taught in a positive manner K-12, parental notification is a sham, and even if a parent is able to take their own kid out of the homo-fest, all the other kids are being indoctrinated? Being on the school board will do no good at all, other than being a lone voice that gets drowned out to no avail. There are many other examples but how about this one?

[tdadams]

Move out of California!

[First Amendment]

That was a snide and sarcastic answer, I was hoping for a sincere one. It isn't practical, and many other states are or will be mandating the same type of laws. The point is when homo activists are infiltrating schools to indoctrinate children, what is your answer, since trying to get voted onto the school board won't make any difference when there is a state law mandating homosexualist education?

[scripter]

Nobody is saying you're not intelligent. I said something similar yesterday. But some have confused you with being a homosexual due to how your posts come across. Your arguments aren't much different from what we see coming from homosexuals and the homosexual agenda.