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

Skip to comments.

Is This Gay Behavior Sick?
Too Good Reports ^ | November 21, 2001 | Henry Makow Ph.D.

Posted on 11/21/2001 6:50:27 AM PST by Stand Watch Listen

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-270 last
To: operation clinton cleanup
Women find most gay men attractive.. Men find most gay women unattractive (including wannabe Ann Heche). Whats up with that?

A guess. More gay men than straight men look after themselves and straight women like the look of that; while gay women tend not to be caught up with the "looks" thing and straight men are all about the "looks" thing.
251 posted on 12/16/2002 7:21:40 AM PST by BikerNYC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Few people are more self-righteous than the defenders of homosexual perversions. Their capacity for long-suffering tolerance and acceptance is truly on the level of deity. After all, any normal human being can detest pathologically sick sexual behavior. It takes someone better than an average human being to embrace and even celebrate dysfnctional, life-shortening, disease-spreading, sepetic sexual behaviors. It takes a god.

Just ask the defenders of the gay lifestyle. Well, you don't even have to ask them. They'll use a megaphone to tell you without being prompted.

252 posted on 12/16/2002 7:29:43 AM PST by Kevin Curry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Here's how "normal" the homosexuals have made their "deathstyle" here.

For your consideration, edification (and violent regurgitation!), we present the newest PC BSA Merit Badge:

The proposed RIMMING, SNORKLING and GERBIL STUFFING badges are still being designed and will be -- er -- OUT soon.

253 posted on 12/16/2002 7:35:06 AM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: GW in Ohio
You can only define homosexual behavior as "deviant" if you also define any sexual activity that isn't aimed at producing children as deviant.

Which is precisely the truth. The reproductive function is integral to the sexual act. Any sexual act that subverts the reproductive aspect of intercourse is by defiition disordered and immoral.

There are many sexual activities engaged in by men and women that aren't directed toward impregnantion. Sex between two men or sex between two women is simply one of those non-reproductive sexual activities.

Trying to separate reproduction from sexual relations is like trying to separate nutrition from the act of eating: a perversion of the natural order.

A lot of the prejudice against gays originated in Biblical times, when it was imperative to be fruitful and multiply in order to ensure the survival of the tribe, or the species. Any activity that didn't lead to reproduction was bad, because it didn't contribute to the survival of the group.

Uh, sure, Perfesser. Thanks for that utterly unupported personal opinion.

These days, when we have too many people crowding the earth...

Another unsupported assertion. Who says we have too many people crowding the earth?

...those old taboos against non-reproductive sex have fallen, one after another. The Catholic Church is one of the last holdouts for the "be fruitful and multiply" point of view in the modern world.

The Catholic Church supports human life in all its forms. We are 100% in favor of human beings, and we always will be, no matter what a "majority of reputable psychologists" say.

The Church still officially forbids any kind of birth control, including contraceptives, doesn't it?

Since the reproductive function is integral to the sexual act, and since any sexual act that subverts the reproductive aspect of intercourse is disordered and immoral, then, yes, the Church forbids artificial contraception.

"Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,[Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10 .] tradition has always declared that 'homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.' [CDF, Persona humana 8.] They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved."

254 posted on 12/16/2002 7:55:04 AM PST by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Romulus
Slam dunk, Rommie. The dubious "progress" of the humanistic, atheistic Revolution can be measured in heaps of bodies and gallons of tears. Modernisme? Merci, non. I'll take the Catholic Church, in all its "backwards" glory.

By the way: thanks for helping out Captain Picard!

255 posted on 12/16/2002 7:59:02 AM PST by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry; scripter
Bump & Ping
256 posted on 12/16/2002 8:08:06 AM PST by EdReform
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
Yuk! Now that’s really SICK behavior.
257 posted on 12/16/2002 8:27:37 AM PST by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: Clint N. Suhks
Hey, I'm just the messenger!

It's WHAT THESE FOLKS DO!!

258 posted on 12/16/2002 8:29:49 AM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

To: B-Chan
Any sexual act that subverts the reproductive aspect of intercourse is by definition disordered and immoral.

Exactly! That’s why what happens between a man and woman has no relation to the practice of homosexuality. Obviously the only thing those who pretend an anus is a vagina can produce are dirt babies.

259 posted on 12/16/2002 8:32:59 AM PST by Clint N. Suhks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 254 | View Replies]

To: GW in Ohio
Either we're a free society or we are a repressive theocracy.

If those are the only choices (which they aren't), then I vote for "repressive theocracy".

260 posted on 12/16/2002 8:33:46 AM PST by B-Chan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
If a group of people prefers to have sex with their dogs; do we want to allow them to exhib that behaviors in public parks and beaches?
261 posted on 12/16/2002 8:38:35 AM PST by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: Kevin Curry
Well enough said.

Though authentic Christians are called to rise yet above the homosexual's self-construed lofty heights and to

OUT LOVE *THEM.*

Few Christians seem able to get by the hideous behavior enough to begin that task convincingly, effectively.

And toooooo many Christian fathers are tooooo distant, unloving and unaffectionate ENOUGH with their at risk sons to avoid producing more homosexuals.

Blessings in your loving efforts to those around you.
262 posted on 12/16/2002 9:39:35 AM PST by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Stand Watch Listen
Very potent and fitting post.
263 posted on 12/16/2002 9:46:10 AM PST by Quix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philosofy123
This is a point I TRY to make all the time: SHOULD this culture allow public displays between homosexuals that once got heterosexuals arrested? The bottom line (pun intended!) is that the homosexuals don't want "equality." They want SUPERIORITY.

While most of the taboos prevalent when I grew up in this country have been expunged from the national conscience -- thanks in no small measure to the coursening of the culture by the feminist/homosexual axis -- SOME things really should be kept behind closed doors.

And I really don't CARE what folks do behind those doors: I just don't want to see it. And I sure don't want my grandkids to see it.

264 posted on 12/16/2002 5:31:49 PM PST by Dick Bachert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert
BTTT
265 posted on 12/17/2002 6:15:47 AM PST by EdReform
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: headsonpikes
I guess only thing you can do is to copy & paste or say nothing. I guess I don't have to blitz on you since you offer no resistance. Very McNabb of you...

266 posted on 10/06/2003 12:59:29 AM PDT by ideablitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: sit-rep
to pussy-whipped...

so what do you suggest those who remain single? Are they useless. Apparently many are useless because population is decreasing many areas in the world. Apparently worthy 3rd human are reproducing at incredible rate.

anyone who doesn't reproduce are waste of life... according to you... Almost no logic and no thought. You should be part of ESPN NFL Crapdown cast crew.

Your kind and thought are not only abonormal or stupid... Are from Florida or Rio Linda CA?
267 posted on 10/06/2003 1:04:32 AM PDT by ideablitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: ideablitz
So you're out of prison again!

Keep your nose clean.
268 posted on 10/06/2003 6:34:56 AM PDT by headsonpikes (Spirit of '76 bttt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: ideablitz
11/21/2001 2:12 PM PST by sit-rep

A little late with a response, but what the hay... I was refering to the faggots being a waste of sperm. If you would still like to defend them, at this stage of the game, all I can say is... ...shut up stupid...

269 posted on 10/06/2003 10:40:05 AM PDT by sit-rep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

Comment #270 Removed by Moderator


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 101-150151-200201-250251-270 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