Posted on 10/12/2004 7:15:12 AM PDT by ConservativeMajority
Conrad Brean : What's the thing people remember about the Gulf War? A bomb falling down a chimney. Let me tell you something: I was in the building where we filmed that with a 10-inch model made out of Legos.
Stanley Motss : Is that true?
Conrad Brean : Who the hell's to say?
Sodomy ping!
lunchtime bump for later read
New Anti-Dem Portal...
SEE ---> http://www.noDNC.com/
Hmm…more post mortem posthumously pronounced “gaydom”? Since Abe Lincoln was “gay” too, i.e. The Log Cabin “Republicans” as well as Leonardo Da Vinci, Christ, Socrates and Aristotle are also claimed by the Sodomites too, do you usually buy into other conspiracy theories where “the dead” can’t defend themselves?
It is intersting to look at the subtle "like me" appeals used by both candidates. What I mean by this is, when a group of supporters are posed near the podium (and don't think this is not engineered, it is) observe their make up. The posed Kerry supporters are Grey Panthers and younger folks who look gay (e.g. haircuts, clothing, etc). The posed Bush supporters are simply the bourgeosie, a true and correct American cross section. Just something I noticed .....
Got history? LOL ..... ;)
Its estimated that 5-10% of the public is gay. For arguments sake, let's just say 5%. You take any group of 100 people, say a college classroom and approximately 5 of them are gay.
42 men have been president. 5% of of 42 is 2. Approximately, 2 of the 42 are/were gay. Its not out of the realm of possibility. So, out of the 42, who would I pick; logically, the guy who never married. Now, granted, that's not proof that James Buchanan was gay, but its not a "conspiracy theory" either. I've seen historical documentaries that have suggested that he may have been gay, siting rumors of the time that floated around DC that he was and may even had a boyfriend while he was president. Whether or not that's true, we'll never know, but its not entirely out of the question.
If he indeed was gay, so what? Why get all bent out of shape? As a history buff, I find the story interesting. Sue me.
Thats assuming the percentage of the population that are gay has remained constant over time. In this case, 150+ years.
I would argue that the percentage has increased from a few percent to your 5% number in the last 30 years or so (the time that "gay culture" has been "out" in the mainstream).
You further perpetuate homosexual myth. Just like your assumptions to posthumously to prove the existence of Sodomites in the White House. Starting with wrong premise to prove your pathetic speculation is nothing less than “garbage in…garbage out”.
"Richard G. Howe, Homosexuality in America: Exposing the Myths (found on the American Family Association website at http://www.afa.net) gives this citation: "Knight lists the following sources in support of the 1%-3% figures: J. Gordon Muir, "Homosexuals and the 10% Fallacy," Wall Street Journal, March 31, 1993; Tom W. Smith, "Adult Sexual Behavior in 1989: Number of Partners, Frequency of Intercourse and Risk of AIDS," Family Planning Perspectives (May/June 1991): 102; John O.G. Billy, Koray Tanfer, William R. Grady, and Daniel H. Klepinger, "The Sexual Behavior of Men in the United States," Family Planning Perspectives, The Alan Guttmacher Institute, vol. 25, no. 2 (March/April 1993)."
Look scripter, FR has a new homo-propaganda dupe.
Jedi Jake said: Its estimated that 5-10% of the public is gay.
The only folks still pushing that old lie are either misinformed or pushing the homosexual agenda. Homosexual Advocacy Groups Admit 10% Fallacy.
The real number is 2.1% of the population and that includes bisexuals. It's slightly higher for males and slightly lower for females.
1%, 2%, 5%, 10% I don't care what the number is. Just because I'm a conservative doesn't make me hate someone who is gay.
If you're implying it's a common conservative position to hate homosexuals you are very confused. But don't let that distract you from posting the 10% myth.
Let me see if I got this right. First you claim with certitude that “Buchanan was the first gay president”. When challenged you had to admit you were just making it up and it was unprovable. Then you claimed that Sodomites are 5%-10% of the population and when challenged on that you said, “I don't care what the number is”. Then you accuse us of “hating gays”? I don’t know what part of that makes you a “conservative” but misleading people and buying into homosexual propaganda certainly doesn’t come to mind.
Geez! Lighten up. THERE IS AGENDA HERE!
I just pulled out a number "for arguements sake." I never challenged the number you stated. I really don't care what the number is. You say 2%, fine, I'm not arguing that! I'm not pushing any "myth."
Its a theory by some that James Buchanan might have been gay. Who cares!
Its just a silly comment in the "blogosphere."
Stop being so serious!
He will be the first President breakfast food.
Family hearsay for years, way back before the gay agenda, was that Cousin Jimmy didn't care much for women. He was never married. His niece acted as his "First Lady". There had been rumors, but in those days people of his ilk were discrete.
Only until Jimmy Carter busts out of the closet.
While that may very well be true, it's a very strange number to use being that it just so happens to be the bogus percentage used by homosexual activists. And when corrected you use misdirection in an attack against conservatives. We've seen this before...
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.