Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Americans Have No Idea How Few Gay People There Are
The Atlantic ^ | May 31 2012, 2:17 PM ET | Garance Franke-Ruta

Posted on 06/02/2012 4:53:40 PM PDT by Wagonboy

Surveys show a shockingly high fraction think a quarter of the country is gay or lesbian, when the reality is that it's probably less than 2 percent.

(Excerpt) Read more at ...

TOPICS: Culture/Society
KEYWORDS: gaymarriage; homosexualagenda; homosexualagends; kenyanbornmuzzie; swrdswllwngsdshw
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 next last
To: TwelveOfTwenty

When they get their comeuppance, which is mere months from now, they won’t be able to recover from it.

Or rebuild it in the future. They had their chance to convert everybody and failed miserably.

21 posted on 06/02/2012 5:46:33 PM PDT by txhurl (AB would vote for Scott Walker.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Last Dakotan
20-25% of the characters I see on TV and movies are gay - hence it must be the same proportion in the population - right?

That's the image they want to plant in people's heads, but if images were true, the economy would be improving, 90% of the people out there would be knee-jerk liberals, and my pistol would never run out of ammo.

Also the gay characters are the most noble, wise, honest and in every way the very best people - this must be true elsewhere - right?

They never show them as some of the most screwed up and patently UNhappy people out there (and most of the ones I have seen are).

But then, television is all about images, generated to give a perception that sells things, soap, cars, ideas, whatever.

Which just means that there are a bunch of homosexuals controlling what gets put on the air, trying to sell us on the idea there are more of them than there are. I suspect the same is true with liberals and the polls, too.

That doesn't mean we have to watch it, and I won't, whenever possible.

22 posted on 06/02/2012 5:59:16 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy
Bill Whittle's YouTube video "The Battle of Big Ideas, Part 1: CONSTRAINED vs. UNCONSTRAINED" is based on Thomas Sowell's book, "A Conflict of Vision's".

Sowell asks, "Why do Liberals & Conservatives end up diametrically opposed to each other on so many totally different issues?" He then explains the vastly different "visions" of the two groups. Another term would be "world view", as in the way one view's and understands the world around him, the framework upon which to hang all of the observations & ideas which we call Reality.

One definition of Wisdom would be, "To see the world, people and events as God sees them." Those who would disagree vehemently with this definition fight tooth and nail to destroy anything which agrees with and promotes this idea of Wisdom.

Looking at it this way makes it easier to understand why Homosexuals, Gaia worshipers, abortionists, the sexually unrestrained, "recreational" drug promoters, militant atheists and serious Islamist all give each other a free pass ("the enemy of my enemy is my friend") or all show up at the same protests.

The Islamists tend to be far more exclusive, but all of the other crowds are always mutually supportive.

23 posted on 06/02/2012 6:05:15 PM PDT by BwanaNdege (Man has often lost his way, but modern man has lost his address - Gilbert K. Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
"It's not really amazing. A small but well organized group of people can start a revolution - and often win.

Those groups of people today are called "parties," but it doesn't mean that the group must be large. The group has to appear large, though - either by numbers, or by political influence, or by strength of its weapons - or by acceptance (if not by support) of large segments of population."

You have the right idea....but let me make it simple. They have the perceived "power" and "numbers" and image due to one thing, and one thing only: support of Hollywood. No question that Hollywood has more than its share of homosexuals. When you own the eyeballs of the nation, that gives you tremendous power to further any agenda you choose.

Of course, too many stupid Americans have swallowed it hook, line, and sinker.

Take the media back....we take back the country.

24 posted on 06/02/2012 6:05:27 PM PDT by RightOnline (I am Andrew Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow

I prefer to call them “angries.” Nearly every one I meet is.

25 posted on 06/02/2012 6:31:17 PM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

They keep pushing with the propaganda hoping they will be accepted as normal by mainstream America —which they will never be PERIOD

If fact they themselves probably will never believe it

Sad situation for society and the homosexuals both

26 posted on 06/02/2012 6:42:48 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: N. Theknow
We're in the same valley as Palm Springs, which proudly proclaims to be fruitier than San Francisco -- Mayor and bulk of city council suck things other than their fingers.

"Pride" parades monthly, complete with the feathery boas....yet the contingent feels they have strength in numbers, so they howl to the rooftops.


27 posted on 06/02/2012 6:47:21 PM PDT by ErnBatavia (A conservative, a liberal and a moderate walked into a bar; barkeep said "Hi Mitt")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy; All
Someone tell me if I am misreading the article, but it seems as though Ms. Franke-Ruta is saying, essentially, this:

"Since there are so few homosexuals, it is no big deal to allow them to marry. Sure, homosexual groups lied about their numbers in the past, but that was just to get heterosexuals to ACCEPT their that homosexuality is de-stigmatized, the homosexual groups acknowledge they are less than 5% of the population. So let's just let them marry, it is no big deal."

Now the above is just MY interpretation of what the article implies. Am I off base?

28 posted on 06/02/2012 6:49:47 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

There are no inherently homosexual people. There are just a few people who act as if they’re homosexual, often for political reasons.

29 posted on 06/02/2012 6:55:19 PM PDT by Tau Food (Tom Hoefling for President - 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

Maybe now the major minority for set-asides and preferences in hiring by the Federal Government should be: Male, White, Christian, Hetrosexual. If you fit this description then you should be hired immediately and subjected to the doctrination of acceptance practiced by the Federal Government. Of course, you will be expected to work harder, not get pregnant or AIDS, and to accept being passed over for promotions based on qualifications due to the fact that blacks get a percentage of promotions, females as well, and any other type of person on the Federal Checklist where you self identify. If you are Gay, then you can get family member preferences for your partner and insurance, housing, and they get a hiring preference too. BINGO with three letters - G-A-Y.

30 posted on 06/02/2012 6:59:26 PM PDT by Jumper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

Go visit Saugatuck Michigan. You’ll think the entire planet is gay.

31 posted on 06/02/2012 7:03:44 PM PDT by CommieCutter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tau Food

“There are no inherently homosexual people. There are just a few people who act as if they’re homosexual, often for political reasons.”

Queer is the only “Minority!” group you can choose to be a part of.

32 posted on 06/02/2012 7:25:26 PM PDT by tcrlaf (Election 2012: THE RAPTURE OF THE DEMOCRATS)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: momtothree; Smokin' Joe
Hollywood/New York portrays them as “folks you would love to live next door to”.

Its all propaganda. Goebbels would be so proud.

Of course the ones most easily swayed by this are the young and naive.

33 posted on 06/02/2012 7:28:22 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

Re your post #16: very good!!

34 posted on 06/02/2012 7:30:21 PM PDT by OldPossum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

Someone once told me it was all about increasing their numbers so that they would have more partners available to choose from. This person also told me, that most are unattractive to each other and if they can increase their numbers by making it appear normal then they may eventually have more partners to choose from.

35 posted on 06/02/2012 8:04:46 PM PDT by This I Wonder32460
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

I think there may be less than two percent. It is highly in Gay political interest to exaggerate their numbers.

36 posted on 06/02/2012 8:27:45 PM PDT by Anti-Bubba182
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

...and what really bites (a little gay lingo) is that this propaganda has its real effect on people that don’t spend much time keeping up to speed. These are the people that run corporations and decide to cater to this phantom 25% of the population...such as JC Penny.

37 posted on 06/02/2012 8:53:00 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

What? They’re not eveywhere? Not behind every bush? Well, behind bushes maybe, but, not everyone.

38 posted on 06/02/2012 9:29:17 PM PDT by Puckster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy
How many Freepers ever saw Torchwood?

I really wanted to like this show--a spinoff of Dr. Who

But in Season #1, 4-5 of the 13 episodes had gay themes in them. I was O.K., with the first two--but then it got to be too much. In fact, of the regular cast, a majority were involved in some homosexual experience during that season.

Then there was the abysmal Alexander the Great film a few years back. Gack.

And why did D.C. Comics make Green Lantern gay in the newest "reset?" Why not just invent a new gay superhero instead of changing an existing one?

39 posted on 06/02/2012 9:31:47 PM PDT by Lysandru
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wagonboy

Well, look at where the big impression comes from: the families (if they resemble healthy families at all any more) that sponsor most of the big media companies. It’s all about them and their spoiled offspring all the time.

40 posted on 06/02/2012 9:38:46 PM PDT by familyop ("Wanna cigarette? You're never too young to start." --Deacon, "Waterworld")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 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
Topics · Post Article

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