Posted on 01/18/2005 6:35:43 AM PST by presidio9
It is very very easy to say "so and so was gay" since that person is long gone and cannot defend himself.
It's part of a well planned and well funded campaign:
An excerpt from "THE OVERHAULING OF STRAIGHT AMERICA"
"(4) Make gays look good. In order to make a Gay Victim sympathetic to straights you have to portray him as Everyman. But an additional theme of the campaign should be more aggressive and upbeat: to offset the increasingly bad press that these times have brought to homosexual men and women, the campaign should paint gays as superior pillars of society. Yes, yes, we know -- this trick is so old it creaks. Other minorities use it all the time in ads that announce proudly, “Did you know that this Great Man (or Woman) was ________?” But the message is vital for all those straights who still picture gays as “queer” people -- shadowy, lonesome, frail, drunken, suicidal, child-snatching misfits.
The honor roll of prominent gay or bisexual men and women is truly eye-popping. From Socrates to Shakespeare, from Alexander the Great to Alexander Hamilton, from Michelangelo to Walt Whitman, from Sappho to Gertrude Stein, the list is old hat to us but shocking news to heterosexual America. In no time, a skillful and clever media campaign could have the gay community looking like the veritable fairy godmother to Western Civilization.
An excerpt from "The Homosexual Propaganda and Media Manipulation Game"
(50) Infer and speculate that famous historical figures were gay for two reasons: first, they are dead as a door nail, hence in no position to deny the truth and sue for libel; (page 188)
Actually, I think the first part is supposed to be blob of tissue - baby - child, and so on.
I thought that someone's sexual orientation wasn't important. Isn't it supposed to be the content of their character?
Saying someone did something great isn't good enough anymore. Now we have to say they homosexual AND they did something great.
I'm sick of this crap.
"I laugh at all the people they state were homosexuals, I mean any admittance of a "possible gay thought" lands people in this category. It disgusting that they feel they must show "historical figures as gay" in order to make their disgusting lifestyle acceptable to themselves. When will they stop going to these lengths?? I mean if it is really "okay" and they are "born this way" why justify it??"
Good point. I wish they would get back in the closet and we could nail the door shut.
""Gay" activists need to STFU and get back in the closet""
Yes, they do.
ROFLMAO!!!
I loved that movie!
I hear William Wallace was a homosexual... and that Tony Blair along with King Arthur are all gay.
Right next to the Twinkies.
THE ULTIMATE JUNK FOOD
Most of what I've seen indicates that nobody is even sure who Shakespeare actually was. How can a "mystery man" be gay?!
That headline scared me.
I thought you meant WAYNE Newton.
Be still my heart. =:P
Huey Newton?
I'm just trying to figure out how we're here if all the previous generations were gay.
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.