Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Gays Can Not Be 'Pro-Choice'
Townhall.com ^ | Sunday, November 26, 2006 | Kevin McCullough

Posted on 11/26/2006 4:04:29 AM PST by flynmudd

There is a big "no-no" in America today - under no circumstances is a person who engages in homosexuality allowed to be 'pro-choice.' It is of the utmost threat to the elite radicals that are guiding the homosexual agenda, and it is the fundamental issue on which the rest of the entire house of cards is built. One person engaging in homosexuality suddenly making a decision to choose - and the total lie is unwrapped - warts and all.

It is this fundamental view of homosexual activity that the activists must keep alive in order to stake the rest of their claims as to the need for "rights, fairness, and non-discrimination."

For this reason, Rosie O'Donnell must take it upon herself, to behave in a way that in a sense serves as partisan whip for the radical elite. Rosie has gotten so sensitive about the issue of choice, that she actually is now going on rampage's spouting rants and tirades against people for being homophobic - when no evidence of homophobia even exists, and in one case Rosie even attempted to "out" someone who has never indicated any public demonstration of homosexuality. But that didn't stop the mafia queen from going ugly on national television.

In Rosie's mind she is in fact a slave - without choice. She is facing an increasingly depressive scene in which what she sees to be true all around her - somehow does not apply for her. In the realization of such a world's existence it becomes necessary for her to defend her condition, her compulsion; her believed "state of being." And that is the truly sinister part...

In order for homosexual activists to make the case for special rights to be made for them as some sort of minority legal protection status, they must first convince the world that when it comes to their actions of engaging in homosexual behavior - they are compelled to do so. This is also a common belief amongst liberals when it comes to sexual behavior in general. There is no such thing as brake with liberals when it comes to sex, only a gas pedal.

Sadly, this is why Barack Obama will take this message of slavery to the teaming masses at Saddleback Church this Friday, and from Rick Warren's pulpit sing the praises for condom distribution as the solution to eradicate HIV/AIDS.

Why?

Because, he will argue, that it is not possible for people to make choices when it comes to their sexual natures. Incidentally that is the exact same argument Rosie makes concerning her friends who engage in homosexual behavior.

But what if Rosie and Obama are wrong? What if each of us does get to choose?

What if we actually aren't animals with any say in what we eat, drink, do for a living, and of course sleep with? What if we are actually more than the raging hormones that at time scream in us to give in to them - when we know with our minds that to do so is not only unwise, but under certain circumstances brings death?

Has the instinct to achieve an orgasm somehow now trumped the instinct to stay alive?

If Rosie is right about being enslaved to her own homosexual behavior then she is also right in arguing for special rights, special ideas of fairness, and preferential treatment. If Obama is right - and in his view - the uneducated natives of the African continent can not in anyway control their sexual compulsions then condoms would have to be considered the gold standard in fighting AIDS.

The problem for Rosie is - she's wrong. There is no DNA component that forces her to engage in sexual activity with anyone - much less someone of her same gender. Every time she has engaged in sexual activity it has been because of one specific idea - she wanted to. Whether its underage teenagers fooling around in the back of a car, an elicit meeting between married persons who are not married to each other, a man cruising the adult bookstore for "reading" material, or a foolish one night stand initiated at a local pub - ALL sexual activity is based on a series of choices. Persons who engage in homosexual behavior are no different. None.

And that's the one thread that undoes the entire fabric...

The truth is, society as a whole is in desperate need of many more voices to actually point out to young people, married persons, men, and women the danger of foolish choices. Such choices often do cut one's young life short, destroy one or more families, or develop permanent issues of mistrust, lack of transparency, or commitment. More voices speaking the truth about the impact of our choices would impact minds as to the reality that they are not slaves of their passions. In fact if anything life is best lived when our passions are subject to truth.

Instead of insisting that Barack Obama come to his church to preach the gospel of irresponsible sexual behavior and condoms, imagine if Rick Warren would devote the same monies he is spending to put on the affair to create positive initiatives in Africa? He could model them after the Ugandan program which has dramatically cut the AIDS numbers in recent years - specifically through the emphasis of "choice" and "abstinence."

No this could never be allowed. Homosexuals, and truly anyone who chooses to live the "if it feels good do it" mentality to its fullest could never allow such a truth to become known.

We humans have the ability to choose, and to do so wisely just might save our lives. That is if we don't allow such a gift to become subject to the tyranny of the pleasurable.


TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: abortion; prochoice
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 next last

1 posted on 11/26/2006 4:04:33 AM PST by flynmudd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: flynmudd

????...Is this like being a "Moderate Muslim"?


2 posted on 11/26/2006 4:06:40 AM PST by Dallas59 (Muslims Are Only Guests In Western Countries)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd
We humans have the ability to choose…

This argument is the core of the reason why there should be no “special rights,” no “gay marriage” or any kind of recognition other than the offer of restorative therapy for those who practice homosexuality.
3 posted on 11/26/2006 4:15:40 AM PST by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucky Dog

Exactly.


4 posted on 11/26/2006 4:17:31 AM PST by flynmudd (Proud Navy Mom to OSSR Richard T. Blalock-DDG 61)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd
I don't want to knock anyone I agree with, but basing an argument on something "Rosie O' Dumbell" says or does is unworthy of this or any other forum.

Rosie is a tragic, pathetic figure. She only parrots as best as she can what she hears spoken in the elite cesspool she swims in. I honestly believe Rosie is a person with a good heart but no brain. She deserves our sympathy not our scorn.

5 posted on 11/26/2006 4:17:42 AM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: trek

Making excuses for bad behavior doesn't help anybody. That's why we have so many child molesters running free in this country. I will never feel sorry for someone who makes bad choices in life. Free will and all.


6 posted on 11/26/2006 4:21:59 AM PST by flynmudd (Proud Navy Mom to OSSR Richard T. Blalock-DDG 61)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd

What a poorly-written article! Mr. McCullough needs to stop relying on his spell-checker, because he's got one of the worst cases of homophonia that I've ever seen in print.


7 posted on 11/26/2006 4:23:55 AM PST by Tax-chick (My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd
Why Gays Can Not Be 'Pro-Choice'

like you can reason with someone who thinks "gay" is normal?

8 posted on 11/26/2006 4:25:45 AM PST by the invisib1e hand (* nuke * the * jihad *)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd
"Making excuses for bad behavior doesn't help anybody."

Look, I'm not making "excuses" for anyone. I am just pointing out the obvious when it comes to Rosie. Furthermore, making the jump from dumbello to child molester is a bit of a leap.

9 posted on 11/26/2006 4:28:50 AM PST by trek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Mr. McCullough needs to stop relying on his spell-checker, because he's got one of the worst cases of homophonia that I've ever seen in print.

What is "homophonia?"

10 posted on 11/26/2006 4:29:16 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd
This writers is full of Sh*t, and demonstrates a basic misunderstanding of human behavior.

He should more and write less.

A lot of sexual behavior is based on our unconscious programming and imprinting.

FACT not fiction!

But a 25 year old man who as a 5 year old was sodomized by his uncle and then acts the wounding out the rest of his life is not "in control" of his behavior, it is a compulsion.

Yes the behavior is not healthy, but until we address the real problem it will go unsolved.
11 posted on 11/26/2006 4:29:25 AM PST by stockpirate (John Kerry & FBI files ==> http://www.freerepublic.com/~stockpirate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
Fear of legitimizing behavior that will wreak society is actually a healthy emotion. Kind of like fear of a rattlesnake.

12 posted on 11/26/2006 4:32:06 AM PST by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SkyPilot
"Homophonia" is the misuse of homophones. Its endemic among those who right hastily and don't take thyme to edit there output.

Barack Obama will take this message of slavery to the teaming masses

13 posted on 11/26/2006 4:32:50 AM PST by Tax-chick (My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: William Terrell

That's as may be, but people who can't spell should get an editor or stop publishing.


14 posted on 11/26/2006 4:34:37 AM PST by Tax-chick (My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: trek

I never called her a child molester for heaven's sake. Get a clue. I was comparing the excuses for bad behavior.


15 posted on 11/26/2006 4:39:17 AM PST by flynmudd (Proud Navy Mom to OSSR Richard T. Blalock-DDG 61)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick
homophonia

homo… …prefix… denoting or meaning “same.”

phon...… suffix…of, or pertaining to, speech sounds

…because he's got one of the worst cases of homophonia that I've ever seen in print.

Even allowing for sarcasm, which I assume was your intent, your statement makes no sense.

Were you attempting to “play” on the word “homophobia?” Alternately, were you attempting to imply that the author was simply saying the “same speech sounds” as every other critic of homosexual practices?
16 posted on 11/26/2006 4:41:43 AM PST by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lucky Dog

"Homophones" are words which have different spellings and meanings, but sound the same:

their, there, they're
wreak, reek
rain, rein, reign

I, and others, use the coined word "homophonia" to describe writers' misuse of homophones. It's not a generally used FReepism, like "hugh" or "beeber," but most people understand the reference and consider it a very mild form of humor.

I'm sorry about the confusion.


17 posted on 11/26/2006 4:47:02 AM PST by Tax-chick (My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Tax-chick

Thanks for the clarification.


18 posted on 11/26/2006 4:48:56 AM PST by Lucky Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: flynmudd

100% in disagreement. Besides which, his analogy is a false argument. Of course there is no DNA that 'forces' us to have sex with anyone, man or woman. But whether or not we 'choose' as gays or straights to have sex or remain celebate, is NOT the same as saying that we aren't born with a pre-determined preference. And no, I'm not gay.


19 posted on 11/26/2006 4:49:08 AM PST by Kimberly GG (Tancredo '08 www.firecoalition.com/www.unitedpatriotsofamerica.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucky Dog

You're welcome!


20 posted on 11/26/2006 4:51:28 AM PST by Tax-chick (My remark was stupid, and I'm a slave of the patriarchy. So?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-84 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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