Skip to comments.MSNBC's David Shuster: "Maybe some Americans want to return to the days of slavery"
Posted on 11/07/2004 9:52:19 PM PST by Dont Mention the War
On Tuesday, eleven different states outlawed gay marriage.
The basic argument I heard was not about marriage (more on that below) but about being gay. And a majority of voters seem to believe that homosexuality is an "immoral lifestyle choice."
Hmmmm. The problem is that anybody who has a relative or friend who is gay also knows it is not a "choice." It is something wired into the genes of approximately 3 or 4 percent of the human population in every single culture on the planet. Secondly, when it comes to morality, consider this: While the Bible does suggest homosexuality is an abomination (Leviticus 18:22), The Bible also says in Leviticus 25:44 that we may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighboring nations; Exodus 35:2 says that my neighbor who works on the Sabbath should be put to death; Lev. 19:27 expressly forbids men from getting their hair trimmed; Lev. 11:6-9 states that touching a dead pig makes us unclean (Are you ready for some football?) and Lev. 19:19 forbids us from planting two different crops in the same field or wearing garments made of two different kinds of threat. The penalty? Lev. 24:10-16 suggests we stone people to death.
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Remember, this guy is blogging for Hardball on MSNBC's website. And he reports for MSNBC every day.
Bias? What media bias?
(And yes, I know the headline doesn't match, sorry. If I had used the proper headline nobody would have recognized the point of the post, so I changed it. There's only so much you can do with 100 characters.)
The website gives Shuster's email as DShuster@msnbc.com, but that's the "dump box" for the little people. His true email address, which he actually reads and uses for his daily work, is firstname.lastname@example.org.
Let's start with him. Smarmy arse snot.
It is a choice, period. Having said that, I will leave them alone with their choice and they should leave me alone with it also.
How does this statement keep gettng repeated without any proof to support it? It assumes no difference between those that are supposedly "wired" and those that are led into a bad choice and, of course, does not allow for the reality of so many who have tried homosexuality and then left it behind. The number of those who are "wired" is not established at any such percentage by any proof that anyone ever cites who asserts this claim which proof will stand up to examination.
No, the question being addressed is whether a basic building block of society must be fundamentally altered because it is deemed by a few people to be unfair. It has nothing whatsoever to do with hatred toward anyone's lifestyle.
Dems are historically illiterate. The Republican Party has its roots in the Abolition movement, and the Abolition movement has its roots in the church.
The Dems, on the other hand, historically are the party of slavery, and the Ku Klux Klan, and Jim Crow racial repression, and continue to be the party of ethnic division, while the Republicans continue to be where they always were, the party of color-blind citizenship.
What a dumba$$ remark.
devout observance to the Sabbath, long hair, all cotton clothes, and stoning people...
What the heck is this guy talking about? Return to observing Sunday? God, that would be awful, wouldn't it?
They are called Democrats.
Heterosexuals, homosexuals -- Last I checked, there's no sign hanging around their neck. They choose who they wish to have relationships with. That's a choice.
We choose not to legalize their relationships with the term 'marriage.' Life sucks, move on to something else.. The continued whining makes bigger and bigger backlashes.
How many times do we have to hear this claim that the Bible only speaks to homosexuality in the Old Testament? Check out Romans 1.
"is something wired into the genes of approximately 3 or 4 percent of the human population in every single culture on the planet."
Repeat a lie often enough and it is said it becomes the truth. There is not a study that supports this. Liberals repeat nonsense as facts and expect us to believe it.
Reminds me of the "old media" and their lies. We don't believe those eithers.
On the question of choice, it must be noted that all sex but rape is voluntary and thus every sexual act involves a conscious choice. A person's inclination toward a form of sexual conduct may not, for any number of reasons, be consciously chosen, but the mere existence of desire does not justify the act. To accept otherwise would be to validate adultery and pedophilia. Society has the right to require people to suppress harmful desires, even if it is difficult for them to do so.
It is something wired into the genes of approximately 3 or 4 percent of the human population in every single culture on the planet.
There is plenty of evidence that homosexuality is not innate. There is a very considerable body of testimony from tens of thousands of men and women who once lived as homosexuals. These ex-"gays" have renounced their former lifestyles and many have become heterosexual in self-identification and desire, while others have stopped at the point of comfort with their own gender and freedom from same-sex desires.
The "gay" movement's challenge to former homosexuals to, in essence, prove they aren't still innately "gay" is the height of absurdity since homosexual immutability was never proven in the first place.
Why is the question of immutability so important? Because if homosexuality is not innate, it must be acquired. And if it can be acquired, we dare not allow homosexuality to be legitimized to our children. If there remains any shadow of doubt as to the cause of homosexuality, we must err on the side of protecting our children. Indeed we must actively discourage them from viewing homosexuality as safe and normal, when in fact it is demonstrably neither safe nor normal. It bears noting here that normalcy is functioning according to nature or design. Normalcy is not based on popular opinion.
But speciousness is the measure of the day and fools people -- tickles their ears.
Didn't he once work for Fox News Channel?
I think he was involved in a "parking lot incident" a few years ago. Might have been covering Florida 2000.
Didn't see him after that.
What a stupid statement .. ROTFLOL!! But .. I can't stop laughing long enough to get mad!!
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.