'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause

Culture and Family Institute/ Concerned Women for America ^ | 12/5/02 | Allyson Smith

[Polycarp]

'Gay' Reaction to Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder: Silence to Applause 12/4/2002 By Allyson Smith

"I really don't feel sorry for her. She paid a very steep price for being an arrogant religious fascist. Too bad for her." – "Iris," in a posting on the ACLU Online Forum.

"Quite frankly, if anyone in this case was being ‘persecuted’ it was Mr. Gutierrez. Unfortunately for the victim this was a lesson that she learned too hard and too late. Maybe this will give pause to other people who similarly try to ‘help’ homosexuals." — "Silence Dogood," on ACLU Online Forum.

Mary Stachowicz

In the three weeks since Mary Stachowicz was murdered by homosexual Nicholas Gutierrez in Chicago, some pro-homosexualists have reacted with much more sympathy for the ‘gay’ killer than for his Christian victim. In fact, several even have gone as far as saying that Mrs. Stachowicz deserved to die for questioning the man’s lifestyle.

Predictably, the mainstream media and homosexual advocacy organizations have reacted to Mary Stachowicz’s murder the same way they did to 13-year-old Jesse Dirkhising’s torture-murder at the hands of two homosexual men in 1999: by avoiding it. As of December 4, no formal condemnations of Mrs. Stachowicz’s murder have been issued by leading groups such as the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, or the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

Soulforce, a group that works in churches to oppose the traditional Christian view of homosexuality, issued no press statement, but a spokeswoman did give a quote to The Washington Times:

"We condemn this murder, like we do all murders," said Laura Montgomery Rutt, spokeswoman for Soulforce. "A hate crime needs to have an intent to intimidate a whole class of people. If in this case, it was directed at this person and intended to intimidate Christians, that would be a hate crime in my mind."

A devout Catholic, Mary Stachowicz met her martyrdom while working at the Sikorski Funeral Home on Chicago’s northwest side, where she got to know Gutierrez, 19, who lived in a second-floor apartment above the funeral home. On the afternoon of November 13, Stachowicz attended Mass at St. Hyacinth parish across the street, then returned to the funeral home and went to visit Gutierrez in his apartment.

According to Chicago police, an argument broke out when Mrs. Stachowicz lectured Gutierrez about his lifestyle and his lack of direction in life. Gutierrez later told police that he had issues with his mother and that the way Stachowicz was talking to him gave him flashbacks of his mother that angered him.

When Stachowicz asked him, "Why do you [have sex with] boys instead of girls?" Gutierrez snapped. In a fit of rage, he punched, kicked, stabbed and strangled the 51-year-old wife and mother of four. Gutierrez then stuffed her body into a crawl space under the floor of his apartment, where it remained for two days until he confessed to police.

Family members were baffled by Stachowicz’s disappearance. They posted fliers in neighborhoods, and her daughter made a public plea for her safe return.

"My sister is very healthy. She's very stable. She has the closest family you can imagine," Stachowicz’s younger sister, Alice Kosinski, told NBC5.com. "Her faith would not allow for anything out of the ordinary."

After learning of Gutierrez’s confession, Stachowicz’s loved ones agreed that the circumstances of her murder were in keeping with her character. Kosinski told The Chicago Tribune, "Because she's so Catholic, there's no room for being gay in the Catholic Church."

Friend Mary Coleman said, "Those of us who knew her immediately hear her soft voice saying something like, 'God wouldn't approve of the way you're living your life.’ That's how Mary did things."

Rev. Francis Rog of St. Hyacinth Church told ABC 7 Chicago news, "She was a very intense person, concerned about the good of the parish, always seeking things for the poor as well as spiritual welfare for people."

Police recovered Stachowicz’s body on November 15 and charged Gutierrez two days later with first-degree murder, concealing a homicidal death, and burglary for attempting to steal money from Stachowicz’s purse.

Chicago local media reported these events, choosing headlines devoid of the words "gay" or "homosexual." In contrast, several homosexual publications – including Gay.com/PlanetOut.com, Gay People’s Chronicle, and the Washington Blade -- did use "gay" in their headlines.

Gay.com began running the story on November 19, a full week before the first mainstream news story appeared in The Washington Times.

The same day, National Review Online columnist Rod Dreher published a commentary titled These Victims Are People, Too" wherein he lamented "the deafening media silence around the savage murder of Mary Stachowicz" and speculated on its cause:

"One cannot help wondering if the upright citizens who report the news don't privately share the view of gay blogger James Wagner, who said of Stachowicz’s strangling:

The woman who did such great evil is dead, but unfortunately the evil and the church and the society which creates it is not, and it will continue to destroy Nicholas Gutierrez and many others. I shake, safely sitting here at home, fully understanding, and fully familiar with, the horrible impact her words must have had for a man already so terribly damaged by his society, and his own mother.

Dreher added, "I believe many, and probably most, journalists share the unspoken assumption that Christians bring such trouble on themselves."

That assumption appears to be shared by pro-homosexual cyber citizens. A search for "Mary Stachowicz" on message boards, e-mail lists, and Web logs (blogs) turned up several people who reacted viciously toward Stachowicz and Christianity.

For example, James Wagner’s boyfriend, Barry, expressed the hope on his blog that "maybe [Stachowicz’s murder] will strike fear in the hearts of a few fundamentalists" and then asked, "Where do I send a check for his (Gutierrez’s) defense fund?"

James and Barry’s statements drew the following response from fellow homosexual Michael Benedetto:

"I think that if gays are going to continue to have any credibility in politics, our sympathies in cases like this are going to have to lie first and foremost with the victims. And that's one upsetting thing about Barry's and James' posts: Until the criticism started to roll in, the only sympathy they expressed was for the wrong person."

Elsewhere, Benedetto wrote, "[Y]es, the woman (Stachowicz) was clearly a meddlesome b---- who didn't understand that the lives of her co-workers were none of her business. That does not make her any less the victim, or absolve her killer of any of his guilt."

"I don’t condone this murder, BUT …."

Several posts implied that Stachowicz had brought on her own death. One man wrote to a Yahoo discussion forum, "It's Sad Someone Was Murdered, BUT... ...I do wish the Religious Wrong would learn to mind their own business."

"Iris" wrote to the ACLU Online Forum: "I am in no way condoning this man's behavior. Murder is murder. He should receive life or the death penalty for his actions. But one fact remains ... if she would have been minding her own [expletive] business instead of attempting to ram her religion where it didn't belong, none of this would have ever happened. I really don't feel sorry for her. She paid a very steep price for being an arrogant religious fascist. Too bad for her."

"Silence Dogood" agreed: "I won't go so far as to say that she deserved what she got, no one deserves to die, but I won't exactly be shedding any tears for her. Quite frankly, if anyone in this case was being 'persecuted' it was Mr. Gutierrez. Unfortunately for the victim this was a lesson that she learned too hard and too late. Maybe this will give pause to other people who similarly try to ‘help’ homosexuals."

"Real" hate crimes

Other discussions centered on the characteristics of hate crimes. "Real" hate crimes, explained ACLU Online Forum member "morningstar," must be like Matthew Shepard’s murder; they must be premeditated and target a group.

"KingFred" wrote to the MacAddict Forum: "Since (Gutierrez has) already admitted he did the crime, there's no question he should do the time. But ‘hate crime’? Don't see it here. He didn't go out to get himself a Christian. He did in a person who may have been berating him, using her Christian beliefs as ‘weapons'. That doesn't justify what he did by any means, but it may explain it."

Catholic League President William Donohue summed up the problems with hate crimes statutes as illustrated by Mary Stachowicz’s murder in a November 26 press release:

"A few thoughts on this matter: a) this (Mary’s murder) will not be listed as a hate crime, thus showing how useless this category of crime is; b) the killer is going to be charged with a capital offense, thus showing once again how useless this category of crime is; c) Mary Stachowicz will never be remembered the way Matthew Shepard is, thus showing how politically corrupt the whole concept of hate crime legislation really is. The fact is she was murdered for having a Catholic-informed conscience."

Others blamed the Roman Catholic Church for Stachowicz’s murder. On the Naked Writing blog, "JodyW" commented, "Gutierrez is responsible for what he did. So the RCC [Roman Catholic Church] is responsible for continuing to put forth a silly, stupid and factually wrong doctrine of ‘objective disorders’ and ‘intrinsic moral evil’ regarding homosexuality. For all that that evil that that doctrine has done and continues to do, they have a lot to be held accountable for."

Perhaps the cruelest comment of all was this from a San Francisco man on Yahoo: "The b---- had it coming to her. I'm glad he killed her. Too bad he'll probably spend the rest of his life in prison getting his little butt pounded, but still, I'm glad he killed her. The b---- deserved to die."

Mary Stachowicz, R.I.P.

The Chicago Tribune published the following obituary for Mary:

Mary Stachowicz, nee Frank, devoted wife of Jerry; beloved mother of Peter, Christopher, Angela (Louie) Ruffolo and Daniel; loving daughter of Agnes and the late Rudolf Frank; dear sister of Irene (John) Rog and Alice (Mark) Kosinski. Funeral Tuesday, 9:30 a.m., from Cumberland Chapels, 8300 W. Lawrence Ave., Norridge, to St. Hyacinth Church, Mass 11 a.m. Interment St. Adalbert Cemetery.

Four pages of condolences accompanied the obituary, where former classmates, co-workers and other family friends left messages of sympathy for Mary’s tragic demise.

The Chicago Sun-Times reported that, after Mary’s death, Alderwoman Vilma Colom (35th) introduced a city council resolution in her memory. "She lost her life in an unselfish attempt to help a very disturbed young man, and for that she should be remembered," said Colom, who goes to the same church Stachowicz did.

Mary’s sister, Alice Kosinski, told the Chicago Tribune that her sister's death is difficult for everyone in her family to fathom.

"We're not doing that well," she said. "It just doesn't make any sense, and somehow we're going to have to make our peace with it."

[Polycarp]

A devout Catholic, Mary Stachowicz met her martyrdom while working at the Sikorski Funeral Home on Chicago’s northwest side, where she got to know Gutierrez, 19, who lived in a second-floor apartment above the funeral home. On the afternoon of November 13, Stachowicz attended Mass at St. Hyacinth parish across the street, then returned to the funeral home and went to visit Gutierrez in his apartment.

According to Chicago police, an argument broke out when Mrs. Stachowicz lectured Gutierrez about his lifestyle and his lack of direction in life. Gutierrez later told police that he had issues with his mother and that the way Stachowicz was talking to him gave him flashbacks of his mother that angered him.

When Stachowicz asked him, "Why do you [have sex with] boys instead of girls?" Gutierrez snapped. In a fit of rage, he punched, kicked, stabbed and strangled the 51-year-old wife and mother of four. Gutierrez then stuffed her body into a crawl space under the floor of his apartment, where it remained for two days until he confessed to police.

Amazingly, some of the most brazenly diabolical comments referred to in this article were mirrored in comments on threads about Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder on this very Forum.

Pinging

[anniegetyourgun]

But O'Reilly doesn't think it was a hate crime - just a guy who 'went off'.....uh huh.....

Soon it will be said of those who say "I'll pray for you" - 'he/she had it coming'......

[Fish out of Water]

bump

[laotzu]

"mirrored in comments on threads about Mrs. Stachowicz’s Murder on this very Forum"

Ohhh man!! I wish you were joking.

Shame is brought on us all.

[bourbon]

According to Chicago police, an argument broke out when Mrs. Stachowicz lectured Gutierrez about his lifestyle and his lack of direction in life. Gutierrez later told police that he had issues with his mother and that the way Stachowicz was talking to him gave him flashbacks of his mother that angered him.

[sarcasm]
NOOOO!!! A gay man who has 'issues' with his mother?!?! You have got to be kidding me. I read a newspaper article once that said homosexuality was genetic!
[/sarcasm]

Oh and then there's this: pro-homosexualists

Is that a new term? Never heard that one before.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Sometime O'reilly is right and other times he is a moron. This time he is playing the village idiot.

[anniegetyourgun]

On the issue of homosexuality, he's lost all perspective as he attempts to prove himself right.

[FreeTally]

But O'Reilly doesn't think it was a hate crime - just a guy who 'went off'.....uh huh.....

I dont watch him very much, but he honestly caught me by surprise last night when he said that. It doesn't wash with the fact that the killer invited her upstairs to his appartment, assaulted her and then killed her. That's premeditated, obviously spurred by her comments questioning his lifestyle. He didn't just "go off".

[Polycarp]

I think there is a small but vocal homosexual activist presence on this Forum. Look through the comments on this thread:

Woman Murdered After Witnessing to Homosexual; TEEN STABS DEVOUT CATHOLIC TO DEATH

[Paul Atreides]

And to think, these are the people trying to worm themselves into the Boy Scouts. Get ready Christians, if they get their way, you will be locked up for believing that homosexuality is wrong.

[Slyfox]

But O'Reilly doesn't think it was a hate crime - just a guy who 'went off'.....uh huh.....

O'Rielly is so tiresome. We just got his radio show here in Dalls and I can not get to the radio quick enough to switch him off.

I wonder if Bob Barr and Dick Armey, and their new relationship with the ACLU, are going to be allowed to give any 'advice' on the subject of Mary's death.

[Frapster]

It seems to me that the very strength of sites like Freerepublic and conservatives who are gaining such popularity on the national air-waves is their ability to not only espouse the conservative viewpoint but to shape thinking as well. In fact, the freedom to do such a thing is one of the things that makes this country so great. I'd even go so far as to say that the very thing we often want to do internationally in our foreign policy is not to merely defend ourselves but shape foreign governments in such a way that they will embrace a more democratic process for their people.

It does not surprise me that people on FR criticized and even lambasted Mary Stachowicz - it reveals a deep-seated hypocrisy. While we are busy 'Freeping' various politicians on the streets thoughout the country it is shameful and hypocritical to say anything even remotely like 'she deserved it' simply because she was sharing her spiritual convictions. Her right to do so is fundamental to what makes this country great and to affirm in any way an action that stifles that right is to be the very thing we hate.

As for the posted article itself - the homosexual activists in many ways have become the very thing they themselves fear and hate. There was a time in American history (and still exists in some places) where a gay would have been beaten if not to death then nearly so for being gay. As deplorable as that may sound there is a very real mentality as evidenced in this article that they would beat to death a critic and feel justified for doing so. They are 'right' after all. Bullhockey. It's never been right for anyone to beat someone else to death for a sin committed. (we're not talking capital punishment here)

What's the difference between a 'conservative' and a 'homosexual activist' who savors the death of Mary Stachowicz at any level simply because she's a Christian? No difference - they are the same. Despicable.

[maxwell]

Maybe this will give pause to other people who similarly try to ‘help’ homosexuals."

Hmmmm... What's the message here, folks-- question them and they'll hurt ya?

Another Religion of Peace.

[anniegetyourgun]

And so it will ever be as there are many here who claim to be Christians and yet pick and choose what of His Word they will believe.

[Polycarp]

Speak of the devil...

I see a couple of the homo activists have already showed up on this thread that I was referring to from the previous one. Predictable.

[MoGalahad]

Its only a hate crime if a 'gay' is the victim. Same double standard I have come to expect from that quarter.

Unfortunately for Mary Stachowicz's family she forgot Jesus' admonition in Matt 7:6 "Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet and then turn and tear you to pieces." May God comfort them in their loss.

Thanks for the post, Polycarp.

[bourbon]

Sincere Christian rebuke is a powerful thing.

Should it strike us as odd that the rebuked would lash out in their shame? or that those who might be similarly rebuked would wish to make excuses for their comrades who do lash out?

[Frapster]

Curious - do you criticize Freepers for freeping various political and social events?

[Frapster]

The reason I ask is that while I find the extreme anit-gay opinions often expressed on this forum as counter-productive it seems to me that Christian witnessing seems to fall under your opinion of something morally repulsive. Am I wrong?

[anniegetyourgun]

1. CWA never suggested that it is the duty of those organizations to respond to every crime committed by a gay person. However, since CWA is an organization that is distinctly Christian, perhaps it's reasonable to assume that they might question the silence of those organizations, in light of this woman's faith.

2. No one expects organizations of those who choose homosexuality, lesbianism, bi-sexualism, etc. to openly advocate the murder of Christians. At least not any more than one would expect Hollywood types to suggest the public stoning of Republican elected officials and their family members.

[bourbon]

I'm glad you share my misgivings about that word, "pro-homosexualist." I hate it when conservatives participate in the debasement of our language and coin neologisms at the drop of a hat.

[Polycarp]

Don't expect a "straight' (so to speak) answer from this Freeper. Their comments on previous threads about this poor woman martyr were repulsive.

[FreeTally]

Now, is it enough that I think that persecution of gays is evil,

Please elaborate on you definition of "persecution" if you will.

[UbIwerks]

Speak of the devil... I see a couple of the homo activists have already showed up on this thread that I was referring to from the previous one. Predictable.

I see them too but from a thread from an earlier thread. It will only be a matter of time before they smear me by saying I'm with Fred Phelps or some sort of nonsense again.

[Skooz]

Get ready Christians, if they get their way, you will be locked up for believing that homosexuality is wrong.

Yes, we will. I have no doubt of that.

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"Sometime O'reilly is right and other times he is a moron. "

You're right. He comes across a lot like many righteous liberals on most issues involving morality. He keeps his "faith" in a neat little box on the shelf, because that is "personal" and we shouldn't offend anyone else with our beliefs. He was ranting along those lines last night regarding a hospital technician who was fired because he tried to counsel a woman about to have an abortion on the Biblical view of the matter. "He should have been fired...that is highly personal and I wouldn't want that." He's a total ignoramous about such things, but that sure doesn't keep him quiet.

I have to agree with many of the comments I read on this forum last night about his becoming tiresome.

[UbIwerks]

I'm glad you share my misgivings about that word, "pro-homosexualist." I hate it when conservatives participate in the debasement of our language and coin neologisms at the drop of a hat.

I believe the term homosexualist was coined by Scott Lively and Kevin Abrams and it sounds pretty good to me; however, the term pro homosexualist seems redundant.

[Polycarp]

In their minds "persecution" = simple Christian charity in sharing the Gospel Truth, no matter how benign the messenger or gentle the message.

[Right Wing Professor]

I'm don't like 'pro-homosexualist', but 'homosexualist' is no neologism. Auberon Waugh was using it over 20 years ago to describe what we might otherwise call homosexual activists or people who were pro-homosexuality. And even if it were a true neologism, it's reasonable to coin a new word to describe a new phenomenon.

[MoGalahad]

"That's the sort of dishonest analysis that promotes closed-minded extremism and prevents honest discussion. No credible person asserts that hate crimes apply only to gay people, not even us 'pro-homosexualists'"

Well that is certainly the kind of response I would expect from a person like yourself. The analysis is in essence correct and it seems to me that you are the extremist here. Honest discussion must start with the truth and the truth is that homosexual behavior is detrimental to society as well as being fundamentally immoral. You are not interested in honest discussion only in promulgating your warped sense of right and wrong. Whenever someone accuses me of being closed-minded it automatically sends up a red flag that that person is less than honest and has an agenda.

By the way, you aren't credible to me either so take your invective elsewhere because it is wasted on me. I could care less what someone who openly promotes behavior that is damaging to society, not to mention wrong, thinks. Have a lousy day, Jack.

[FreeTally]

In their minds "persecution" = simple Christian charity in sharing the Gospel Truth, no matter how benign the messenger or gentle the message.

I've gathered that by their posts.

[intolerancewillNOTbetolerated]

"What's the difference between a 'conservative' and a 'homosexual activist' who savors the death of Mary Stachowicz at any level simply because she's a Christian? No difference - they are the same. Despicable"

Your entire comment, not just the part I quote, was appreciated. It has become common for reverse discrimination to try and deny those who would say that any PC cause is wrong should be denied a place at the table. If this country is ever to be as "progressive" as the enlightened liberals would believe they are, they, too, must learn to allow the dialog to include those who disagree with them, whether on moral grounds or otherwise.

[Republic of Texas]

Just so I'm learning the lesson the gays are trying to teach me, we should NOT try to "help" them this way, right? I doubt they'd like my alternative, so I'll keep it to myself.

If I were part of a group that totalled 2% of the population, I'd try NOT to piss off the other 98%.

[UbIwerks]

Of course, nobody “chooses” a sexual orientation.

No homosexual chooses to stick a male phallus in his mouth or have the posterior opening of his alimentary canal penetrated by a penis?

What utter PC garbage you're spouting. And homosexuals don't choose to rub feces over themselves or put gerbils up their rectums either, eh?

[anniegetyourgun]

You are the one who 'set up' the argument you wanted to go after by suggesting that they suggest something they never suggested!

Yes, everyday people choose how to behave sexually. Who they will have sex with, how often, where, when, etc. Sex among humans is all about choice. But, we've been around on this issue before, madg. Can I help it if you are a single-issue type? Or that God has already spoken on this matter? Your problem is with Him.

[Polycarp]

But these are essentially the same people and the same sources which supported the Inquisition, witch burning, and sectarian Christian wars in Europe. Do we really want to listen to their latest project?

Just look at history, and the hundreds of millions murdered by anti-religionists in the last century.

The Crusades and Inquisitions pale in comparison to the brutality and sheer volume of sufferings inflicted by the "Freethinking" atheist regimes of the last century.

I'll take my chances with the Christians, thanks.

As this debate rages in this thread, you will see people resort to the Bible or the Catholic Catechism as support for the idea that homosexuality is a sin and should be suppressed.

How about resorting to simple medical data?

Published by Centre Daily Times, Friday, June 2, 2000

Homosexual behavior increases risk of AIDS

by Brian J. Kopp, DPM

Parental warning: The following "My View" contains graphic medical terminology about sexual activities that may not be suitable for younger readers.


In her May 12 "My View," Mina Yindra makes many errors, but I would like to correct her statements regarding AIDS and "bigotry."


Promiscuous heterosexual sex carries with it a much higher risk for AIDS, primarily because of the sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) associated with it, causing a breakdown in the natural barriers of both male and female reproductive tracts. AIDS is primarily concentrated among heterosexuals in Africa because of the high rate of female genital mutilation, leading to much higher than average rates of anal and oral intercourse, and culturally-accepted extramarital sexual activity, including widespread prostitution. Rates of STDs are quite high in these populations.


However, AIDS is by far most common among the homosexual population in the United States, primarily because the type and frequency of sexual contact, combined with STDs, is the perfect method of spreading a body-fluid borne virus.


Public health records demonstrate that homosexuals, representing 2 percent of America's population, suffer vastly disproportionate percentages of several of America's most serious STDs, with incidences among homosexuals of diseases like gonorrhea, syphilis, hepatitis A and B, cytomegalovirus, shigellosis, giardiasis, amoebic bowel disease and herpes far exceeding their presence in the general population. These are due to common homosexual practices that include fellatio, anilingus, digital stimulation of the rectum and ingestion of urine and feces.


An exhaustive study in The New England Journal of Medicine, medical literature's only study reporting on homosexuals who kept sexual "diaries," indicated the average homosexual ingests the fecal material of 23 different men each year. The same study indicated the number of annual sexual partners averaged nearly 100. Homosexuals averaged, per year, fellating 106 different men and swallowing 50 of their seminal ejaculations, and 72 penile penetrations of the anus. (Corey, L, and Holmes, K.K., "Sexual Transmission of Hepatitis A in Homosexual Men," New England Journal of Medicine, 1980, vol 302: 435-438; as quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).


A study by McKusick, et al., of 655 San Francisco homosexuals reported that only 24 percent of the sample claimed to have been "monogamous" during the past year, and of this 24 percent, 5 percent drank urine, 7 percent engag-ed in sex involving insertion of a fist in their rectums, 33 percent ingested feces, 53 percent swallowed semen and 59 percent received semen in their rectums in the month just previous to the survey ("AIDS and Sexual Behavior Reported by Homosexual Men in San Francisco," American Journal of Public Health, December 1985, 75: 493-496; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).


Lesbians show similar patterns of high venereal disease incidence relative to the general population. They are 19 times more likely to have had syphilis, twice as likely to have had genital warts, four times as likely to have had scabies, seven times more likely to have had infection from vaginal contact, 29 times more likely to have had oral infection from vaginal contact and 12 times more likely to have had an oral infection from penile contact ("Medical Aspects of Homosexuality," Institute for the Scientific Investigation of Sexuality, 1985, Jaffe and Keewhan, et al.; quoted in "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

AIDS research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control reported that the typical homosexual interviewed claimed to have had more than 500 different sexual partners in a lifetime. Considered by themselves, the AIDS victims in this study averaged more than 1,100 lifetime sexual partners. Some reported as many as 20,000. Studies reported by A-P. Bell, M.S. Weinberg and S.K. Hammersmith in the book "Sexual Preference" (Bloomington, Indiana University Press, 1981) indicated that only 3 percent of homosexuals had fewer than 10 lifetime sexual partners. Only about 2 percent could be classified as either monogamous or semi-monogamous (from "Homosexuality and Civil Rights," Tony Marco, 1992).

To the present time, 75 to 85 percent of AIDS cases reported are related to homosexual activity, promiscuous heterosexual sex and IV drug abuse. AIDS stubbornly refuses to spread into the population in general, even 20 years after its discovery, despite dire warnings to the contrary.

These diseases are acquired directly through the sexual behavior homosexual activists are asking Americans to legally endorse and protect. Yet, as professor Jerome Lejeune of Descartes University, Paris, says of AIDS: "Only God can truly pardon the one who violates His laws; man pardons at times; Nature never pardons at all: She is not a person." The brutal consequences of attempting to break the natural law are not bigoted or hateful, nor are those, like Dr. Laura, Cal Thomas or Gary Morella, who try to point out the dangers and simple truths.

We are seeing the natural consequences of violating nature's laws now. They are also a warning to prevent the ultimate eternal consequences. How many will ignore that warning and continue to call the messenger a bigot and continue to shake their fist at God? How many will heed that warning of a loving Father, ready to forgive and reconcile His prodigal children?

[FreeTally]

Ploycarp posted:

In their minds "persecution" = simple Christian charity in sharing the Gospel Truth, no matter how benign the messenger or gentle the message.

WITBL replied:

Propagandist lie that will help you get your two minute hate on.

LOL!!! You just posted to me as your definition of "persecution":

If someone denied Christians jobs, reviled them for their 'sick' beliefs, knocked on their doors and asked them to renounce their scandalous lifestyles--that would be persecution.

[anniegetyourgun]

And no true Christian supports the hatred of fornicators or any kind. You won't find that website posted on FR by anyone except single-issue types like yourself.