Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Will ex-gays bring down 'Big Sodomy'?
WorldNetDaily ^ | 7/7/07 | Donald Hank

Posted on 07/07/2007 10:16:15 AM PDT by wagglebee

 Remember how cool smoking was? If you're 45 or older, you do.

Whatever happened to that politically correct, cool, suave, debonair habit that was all the rage among college students, profs, teachers, Hollywood actors, big business and just about everyone purporting to have "intellect"?

In a nutshell, some scientists at the National Institutes of Health got together in the '60s, '70s and later and did some pioneering studies that proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that this cool habit could kill you.

Today, they're at it again. Only it isn't smoking. That's a dead issue, thanks to science and lawyers.

The activists then were Big Tobacco, supported by Hollywood, the advertising industry, the media and academe. Even politicians, like FDR, smoked and helped sell the image. But the activists were silenced by the nuclear option: lawsuits brought by the smokers, the victims themselves.

Now "alternative" sexual lifestyles are all the rage. They, too, are killing people. And again, it's the "intellectual" cool, liberal, worldly, suave thing to do. The usual suspects are involved. All the big name colleges have special programs for promoting "alternative" sex. Businesses promote the Gay Olympics. Politicians like Barney Frank think they can foist alternative sex on people through their power positions. Hollywood uses its influence to turn the Marlboro Man into a spokesman for today's popular deadly activity, and major companies like Ford contribute funds from the shareholders' meager coffers to promote same-sex marriage. It's just like the bad old days of Big Tobacco, and the Grim Reaper is having a gay old time.

Even school boards, like that in Montgomery County, Md., are urging young students to accept this deadly habit and plying them with the message that anyone who perceives himself/herself as being of a certain sexual orientation is in fact stuck with that orientation and cannot escape. That's tantamount to a group of educators telling smokers that they were born to smoke, can't quit and shouldn't even try.

Of course, the promulgation of knowledge and data concerning the link between alternative sex and disease is hampered by the bullying tactics of the elite. Thus, only a few facts are known at all to some of the public (such as the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population), and these facts aren't mainstream, thanks to the media blackout on this issue and the muzzling of opponents under color of law. And that, in turn, is thanks to the activists.

So what will turn this movement around? Again, as in the case of smoking, I believe it will be the victims themselves. As soon as they smell the money.

After all, the biggest losers aren't the Christian right or grass-roots Americans, who have voted overwhelmingly against "alternative" definitions of marriage. The biggest losers are those who gaily fling themselves into the arms of the deadly beast that devours them whole.

Note the remarkable parallels with the smoking craze: In both cases, the promoters of the respective dangerous habits had been or are withholding evidence that undoubtedly would have led people not to indulge or to quit. Today, public elementary and secondary schools are doing just that, and in addition, some are teaching, as part of "sex education," methods for carrying out harmful sexual perversions, including "fisting."

Once enough of the victims have seen how they have been duped by the universities, politicians, media, business (deep pockets), Hollywood, politicians and, yes, the gay agenda itself, to throw away their health and life expectancy, they will come out swinging, marching boldly behind their lawyers.

The reverse "coming out" of Michael Glatze is the first major chink in the ramparts of Big Sodomy. More major players will be announcing themselves in time, demonstrating the fallacy of "once gay always gay," the sandy foundation on which the gay agenda is premised.

And once science does its work, they will "win." The way the smokers "won."

Hopefully Americans aren't as slow this time to accept the findings, as we were when all we did was smoke.

If you have a friend or relative who has been persuaded by the media, big business, politicians, university programs, including courses of study, or any person or group to try this deadly lifestyle, and especially if your friend or relative is already suffering from a serious disease contracted as a result of it, talk to him or her at the first opportunity about the very real possibility of starting a class-action lawsuit against the group or groups that persuaded them to enter into the activity that did them in. If you happen to be in a care-giving profession, that is a shoe in the door.

When it comes to trend setting, money is the root of all motivation. Let's make judicious – or shall I say judicial – use of it.



TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: exgays; homosexualagenda; pufflist; riskybehavior
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
Interesting idea.
1 posted on 07/07/2007 10:16:17 AM PDT by wagglebee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: AFA-Michigan; Abathar; Agitate; AliVeritas; Antoninus; Aquinasfan; BabaOreally; Balke; BigFinn; ...
Homosexual Agenda Ping

Freepmail wagglebee or little jeremiah to subscribe or unsubscribe from the homosexual agenda ping list.

Click FreeRepublic homosexual agenda keyword search for a list of all related articles.

Add keywords homosexual agenda to flag FR articles to this ping list.

2 posted on 07/07/2007 10:16:50 AM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“Big Sodomy”. I like that.


3 posted on 07/07/2007 10:20:05 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta
wasnt that the name of the clinton administration?
4 posted on 07/07/2007 10:27:27 AM PDT by Yorlik803 ( When are we going to draw a line a say"this far and no farther")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; blue-duncan

Trial lawyers could go after those who advocate deadly behavior, couldn’t they?

This article is thought provoking.


5 posted on 07/07/2007 10:29:33 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

Mine is still smarting from that eight year debacle


6 posted on 07/07/2007 10:30:31 AM PDT by stm (Fred Thompson in 08! Return our country to the era of Reagan Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

LOL- yes, among hundreds of others!!


7 posted on 07/07/2007 10:31:28 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

If the image of Big Sodomy won’t stop you dead in your tracks, nothing will


8 posted on 07/07/2007 10:32:03 AM PDT by rbg81 (DRAIN THE SWAMP!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: rbg81

Thanks for the visual!! :)


9 posted on 07/07/2007 10:33:34 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
The reverse "coming out" of Michael Glatze is the first major chink in the ramparts of Big Sodomy.

Would that be a "going in?"

Who imagined sodomites had chinked ramparts.

10 posted on 07/07/2007 10:42:13 AM PDT by TN4Liberty (Ask any farmer... Good fences make good neighbors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stm

Big Sodomy.....as opposed to small Sodomy?


11 posted on 07/07/2007 10:43:55 AM PDT by Yorlik803 ( When are we going to draw a line a say"this far and no farther")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: GiovannaNicoletta

It’s the drop dead argument against homosexuality.


12 posted on 07/07/2007 10:44:08 AM PDT by ClaireSolt (Have you have gotten mixed up in a mish-masher?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

Comment #13 Removed by Moderator

To: TN4Liberty

Perhaps chapped ram-parts?


14 posted on 07/07/2007 10:48:08 AM PDT by stm (Fred Thompson in 08! Return our country to the era of Reagan Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: xzins
> Trial lawyers could go after those who advocate deadly behavior, couldn’t they?

Hopefully not. You're allowed to "advocate" anything you want except overthrow of the government. Merely advocating a dangerous activity is, and should be, protected speech, subject of course to the usual limits (yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, libel/slander, etc.).

Selling a product that enables a dangerous activity (e.g. cigarettes) can get you in trouble in some cases. So maybe these folks can go after the manufacturers of gay paraphernalia. But that's not going to be very effective, and it invites the Nanny State mentality.

Worse, the same argument could be used about fireworks, liquor, guns, and a host of other items that can result in death, which we would rather not have banned by the Nanny State.

I sense a slippery slope.

15 posted on 07/07/2007 10:48:13 AM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
Anne Heche came out big time with Ellen DeGeneres, split, then married a man and had a baby.

Obviously gays can opt out of the lifestyle but the activists have to minimize or deny it to further the argument that homosexualty is natural and immutable.

16 posted on 07/07/2007 10:48:37 AM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I’ll always check out what Our Heavenly Father says about the matter first....the scriptures teach us how to live and how NOT to live.


17 posted on 07/07/2007 10:48:44 AM PDT by shield (A wise man's heart is at his RIGHT hand; but a fool's heart at his LEFT. Ecc 10:2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt
And possibly a quite effective one.

There's nothing like taking the pretty, shiny wrapping paper off of death and calling it by it's true name to completely destroy the fun and glamour that the militant homosexuals have attached to it.

"If a lie is repeated often enough, it becomes the truth"... well if the truth is repeated often enough, it might save some lives. Including those of elementary-school children.

18 posted on 07/07/2007 11:00:40 AM PDT by GiovannaNicoletta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
I guess it's too late to work "Big Sodomy" into "Thank You for Smoking."

Though it may play a role in "Big Love."

19 posted on 07/07/2007 11:19:21 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

“Big Sodomy.....as opposed to small Sodomy?”

Dung Punchers, all.


20 posted on 07/07/2007 11:20:20 AM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (t)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: dayglored; P-Marlowe; jude24

If it is possible to go after a diocese because a priest engaged in sexual misbehavior, why couldn’t one go after a diocese because that misbehavior led a victim to act out gay behavior up to their illness and eventual death?

For example, why couldn’t the employer of Rock Hudson (or his estate) be sued for negligently turning a blind eye to sexual predation leading to the infection of the preyed upon?

Why couldn’t my United Methodist denomination be sued for it’s bishop turning a negligent, blind eye to the sexual predation that accompanies gathering those with histories of same and turning them loose amidst potential prey?


21 posted on 07/07/2007 11:39:43 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

“the results of a study in Scandinavia showing that men in same-sex marriages die 24 years earlier than their counterparts in the general population”

I’ve always been amazed at how the liberal media assists the homosexuals in hiding the sickening facts about their ‘lifestyle’. Thankfully the tide is turning and more and more people are standing up to these freaks.


22 posted on 07/07/2007 11:41:56 AM PDT by stellarfreedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
In a nutshell, some scientists at the National Institutes of Health got together in the '60s, '70s and later and did some pioneering studies that proved beyond the shadow of a doubt that this cool habit could kill you.

Yeah, that second hand smoke.

This only proves that the global warming nuts will win.

23 posted on 07/07/2007 12:02:17 PM PDT by donna (They hand off my culture & citizenship to criminals & then call me racist for objecting?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

It’s a travesty on “Big Government”, “Big Tobacco”, etc.


24 posted on 07/07/2007 12:07:26 PM PDT by ROTB (Our Constitution...only for a [Christian] people...it is wholly inadequate for any other.-J.Q.Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: stm

Oh my! That image within a post of “Big Sodomy” should bring back all of the laws of our past.


25 posted on 07/07/2007 12:10:00 PM PDT by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Leftist Liberal moonbats can promote ass sex all they like, but one thing they can’t do, is prevent nature from developing ways to correct abominations that defy her intended design, and her ability to eventually correct abominations, one way or another. If aids didn’t do the job and correct behavior, butt rot, dick cancer or some other poop chute violator’s disease will eventually be successful


26 posted on 07/07/2007 12:11:54 PM PDT by Nathan Zachary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe; jude24
> If it is possible to go after a diocese because a priest engaged in sexual misbehavior, why couldn’t one go after a diocese because that misbehavior led a victim to act out gay behavior up to their illness and eventual death? For example, why couldn’t the employer of Rock Hudson (or his estate) be sued for negligently turning a blind eye to sexual predation leading to the infection of the preyed upon? Why couldn’t my United Methodist denomination be sued for it’s bishop turning a negligent, blind eye to the sexual predation that accompanies gathering those with histories of same and turning them loose amidst potential prey?

Don't confuse illegal acts with legal ones. Most of the things you mention are ALREADY illegal and can be prosecuted as such.

Granted, you can sue anybody you want for anything you want. The question is whether the suit will succeed, and produce the result you want.

The approach this article suggests, smacks of the "hate crime" nonsense, in which an already illegal activity (say, killing somebody) is made somehow "more" illegal because it was done with "Thought Crime" too. Sorry, won't wash. Any argument that talking about homosexual activity should be illegal because the activity is dangerous is just doomed.

If the particular activity is illegal, it can be prosecuted as such. Advocating legal-but-dangerous activities is legal, and should remain so, just as advocating sky-jumping and other dangerous activities is legal. For that matter, advocating illegal activities is generally considered protected speech under the First Amendment. I guarantee you that you don't want the Government deciding that you can be sued for talking about an action just because the action is illegal -- that's one of the marks of tyranny, FRiend.

27 posted on 07/07/2007 12:21:29 PM PDT by dayglored (Listen, strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: stellarfreedom

Yes, their lifespan, for male homosexuals, is 39 for those with AIDS and 41 for those NOT with AIDS. I had one person challenge my statistics because the every-day newspaper obituaries do NOT list cause of death. But these statistics came from their OWN HOMOSEXUAL MAGAZINES where they trumpeted the sadness of their colleagues’ deaths and denounced our government’s dragging its feet in finding a cure.

These facts were THEIRS, not mine. So, smokers live another 30 or more years. Now, whose lifestyle is a disgrace?


28 posted on 07/07/2007 1:03:29 PM PDT by laweeks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

Comment #29 Removed by Moderator

To: everyone

I’m sympathetic to the writer’s point, but politically he doesn’t know what he’s talking about.


30 posted on 07/07/2007 1:46:26 PM PDT by California Patriot ("That's not Charley the Tuna out there. It's Jaws." -- Richard Nixon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: xzins; P-Marlowe
Trial lawyers could go after those who advocate deadly behavior, couldn’t they?

On what theory? Cigarettes were actionable because of products liability. Sexuality is not usually a product.

31 posted on 07/07/2007 2:06:24 PM PDT by jude24 (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: jude24; P-Marlowe

See post #21. Help me make this into a theory. I’ve got gobs of cash, and you’ll get $350 per hour during the brainstorming, and a 50% cut of the take with a guaranteed minimum.

I want you to help me get there.

How do we do it, counselor?


32 posted on 07/07/2007 2:18:36 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: xzins; jude24
Why couldn’t my United Methodist denomination be sued for it’s bishop turning a negligent, blind eye to the sexual predation that accompanies gathering those with histories of same and turning them loose amidst potential prey?

Just find a plaintiff.

33 posted on 07/07/2007 2:21:31 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Love it. Fight vermin with greedy vermin. Play on greed to silence them.

Absolutely love it.


34 posted on 07/07/2007 2:22:46 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TN4Liberty
"Who imagined sodomites had chinked ramparts."

Silly me. Thought that was referring to a Chinese fortress.

35 posted on 07/07/2007 2:24:05 PM PDT by RightOnline
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; jude24

What if the bishop encouraged an atmosphere “welcoming” to unrepentant predatory gays?


36 posted on 07/07/2007 2:28:37 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: xzins; jude24
What if the bishop encouraged an atmosphere “welcoming” to unrepentant predatory gays?

If he was authorized by the denomination to do that and someone was injured as a result, then both the Bishop and the denomination could be held liable.

But first you need to find an injured party.

37 posted on 07/07/2007 2:37:55 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: eyedigress

I figured the image would not last, but I had to give it a shot. LOL


38 posted on 07/07/2007 2:39:51 PM PDT by stm (Fred Thompson in 08! Return our country to the era of Reagan Conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Physical injury better than psych injury?


39 posted on 07/07/2007 2:42:02 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: stm

God told Satan, this is your Earth, Please God help us!


40 posted on 07/07/2007 2:44:07 PM PDT by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: jude24; xzins
On what theory? Cigarettes were actionable because of products liability. Sexuality is not usually a product.

Negligence. Sexuality can damage a person as much as cigarettes. Indeed, if a parishoner were to get herpes or AIDS or Hepatitis C after being seduced by a sexual predator who had been encouraged to practice his lifestyle with other members of the congregation, then liability could attach.

I'm sure there is a fact pattern that could produce a viable lawsuit. Let's find a damaged parishoner and then see if we can find a legal theory. Generally where there are damages, there is a remedy.

41 posted on 07/07/2007 2:56:50 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe
Negligence. Sexuality can damage a person as much as cigarettes.

Negligence won't work - that requires some sort of duty, and breach. Cigarettes, being products, are subject to strict liability - a much easier case.

42 posted on 07/07/2007 3:07:56 PM PDT by jude24 (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: jude24; xzins
Negligence won't work - that requires some sort of duty, and breach. Cigarettes, being products, are subject to strict liability - a much easier case.

You are thinking inside the box.

Who would have thought you could get a million dollars from McDonalds by spilling coffee in your own lap?

We're not looking for an easy case.

We are looking to strike fear into the insurance carrier for the Methodist Church. It's called trickle down responsibility.

43 posted on 07/07/2007 3:14:09 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; xzins
We are looking to strike fear into the insurance carrier for the Methodist Church. It's called trickle down responsibility.

I don't do shakedowns.

Then there's the little problem of the prohibition of going to court to settle church disputes (1Co. 6).

44 posted on 07/07/2007 3:20:13 PM PDT by jude24 (Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; jude24

What would make an aggrieved party likely is that the church that makes allowances for “bi” is actually encouraging, at a minimum, a menage a trois.


45 posted on 07/07/2007 3:47:22 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: jude24; P-Marlowe
It's not really a church dispute. Those who advocate homosexuality (or any sexual immorality) are outside of the historic Christian faith, and outside the historic Methodist faith. In other words, although they are within the organization, they have violated the constituting principles.

That aside, the Catholic church has been found liable for similar negligence.

46 posted on 07/07/2007 3:50:48 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain And Proud of It! Those who support the troops will pray for them to WIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
When it comes to trend setting, money is the root of all motivation. Let's make judicious – or shall I say judicial – use of it.

This entire article strongly gives me the impression that the author wants to make homosexuality illegal. Do we really need more laws that say what consenting adults do in their own homes?

47 posted on 07/07/2007 5:44:04 PM PDT by burzum (None shall see me, though my battlecry may give me away -Minsc)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jude24
Then there's the little problem of the prohibition of going to court to settle church disputes (1Co. 6).

Don't be a party pooper.

48 posted on 07/07/2007 6:48:04 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (LPFOKETT GAHCOEEP-w/o*)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Great title - big business, big sodomy - that’s what it is!

I’ll have to read this one tomorrow....


49 posted on 07/07/2007 8:02:42 PM PDT by Lauren BaRecall (Illegal aliens do not have Constitutional rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I think many of the posters missed the point. No one is going to be able to sue a friend for suggesting a homo-romp. But a school that forces kids to listen to gay propaganda and even expels kids who wear clothing that protests the gay “Day of Silence,” now that school needs to watch their back. The author talks about Montgomery County, and he could well have mentioned California and Mass. schools as well. It’s when the government pushes a viewpoint that is potentially harmful that legal options can be available.


50 posted on 07/07/2007 8:21:04 PM PDT by found_one
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson