Posted on 06/22/2005 3:59:50 PM PDT by aculeus
Why do you have to be heterosexual before you can be called a conservative, and for that matter, why should a gay man or woman be automatically considered a knee-jerk leftist by default? I happen to be heterosexual, but that is not what defines me as a conservative. I'd say this woman is at the very least, a courageous free-thinker whose refusal to let others define her is worth applauding in of itself.
Good post. People who say gays (or atheists) can't be conservatives aren't thinking straight. So to speak.
They give all conservatives a bad name.
The Mohammedans hate all that stuff, yet the Left adores Mohammedanism...
When will they wake up?
These images come from an interview with Withers you can read here
This isn't Bizzaro World, folks, it's the Real Rorld. The far left has shown its true stripes by allying itself with bigoted, homophobic, religious fanatics who share their goal of destroying America, capitalism, and all of Western Civilization. I know whose side I am on, and I hope Ms. Withers gets more support from my fellow FReepers
Well they basicly hate everything and anything that isn't fundamentalist islam. So that basicly means they hate you and they have shown by their rhetoric & actions that if they think they can kill you they will try. Make your preparations & plans accordingly.
Uh yes as a matter of fact I do think that the groups name is indeed a oxymoron.
Thank you. I'm not threatened by two men or two women living together, making an honest living, paying their taxes, and generally making the sort of contribution to society that we expect any decent person to do. I am threatened by leftist radicals who disguise their true motives under the weasel words of "liberal" and "progressive", who lend moral support to terrorists, who agitate for harmfule and wrong-headed policy, and who would strip the rest of us of our First and Second Amendment rights while insisting on special protection for themselves, and their "right to dissent". And while I can only speak for myself, I certainly hope that most people here feel the same way.
What they are doing is recruiting.
And they are finding lots of takers, especially among disaffected black yutes.
Gives them justification for their anger.
I used to have a certain 'tolerance' for NOI - hey, anyone who can get young guys to wear bow ties can't be ALL bad!
But I've since changed my mind.
If they're not all bad, they're close enough...
And, why is Islam attractive to young people?
Because they have NO faith at all anymore.
And something beats nothing, every time.
They've already all but thrown the Jews over the side. When Howard Dean has pander to Jewish voters because leftist whackjobs were caught passing out anti-Semitic literature at DNC Headquarters last week during Conyers' mock "committee hearing", I'd say that's one constituency that's just barely hanging on.
Why do you have to be heterosexual before you can be called a conservative, and for that matter, why should a gay man or woman be automatically considered a knee-jerk leftist by default? I happen to be heterosexual, but that is not what defines me as a conservative. I'd say this woman is at the very least, a courageous free-thinker whose refusal to let others define her is worth applauding in of itself.
Good post. People who say gays (or atheists) can't be conservatives aren't thinking straight. So to speak. They give all conservatives a bad name.
The comment is particularly unhelpful to conservatives because lefties want gays to think that they must not only be liberals but fear and even hate conservatives. I agree with the poster who said he'd like to buy this brave woman a beer.
Related story in today's NY Times.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1428049/posts
When will they wake up?
They won't wake up. Its a textbook case of "be careful what you wish for--you might just get it." I'd love to see the look on the faces of the Leftists if/when they ever succeed in overthrowing Western Civilization as they know it. They think that, when all is said and done, they'll be able to ride the tiger and hang on in the cozy enclaves while the rest of the country/world suffers the effects of their policies & philosophy. On some level, it would be very satisfying to see these guys forced to worship someone else's God or suffer the whip. Unfortunately, the price would be the destruction of America.
Haven't read the article yet and have just wasted 20 minutes trying to figure out what the title means.
Because Mohammedism literally gives a licence to kill anyone you don't like, and take their stuff. Contriving a justifiable Mohammeden reasoning for doing so is a trivial exercise, given the specious philosophical tools Mohammedens arrogate to themselves.
It's like an endangered bird eating an endangered fish.
It's a real problem for the Times when a story doesn't contain any white male villains. ;)
Gosh, doesn't sound like she is celebrating "Diversity" to me.
Today, it's homosexuals. Tomorrow it'll be Capitalism. And then, those degenerate muslims will come for all those still left hiding in the corners...out of sight.
Tolerance is reserved only for those who can play well with others and not for those who have the annihilation of their different countrymen in store.
Right you are.
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.