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.
The philosopher David Hume once observed: "Nothing appears more surprising to those who consider human affairs with a philosophical eye, than the easiness with which the many are governed by the few."
And, by way of illustrating his point, nothing is more surprising than the ease with which a tiny minority of organized homosexuals has been overpowering such a mainstream organization as the Boy Scouts of America.
The Scouts won a victory this year when the US. Supreme Court ruled that they can't be forced to accept homosexuals as members and scoutmasters; but they have been losing other battles, as school districts from Massachusetts to San Diego have denied them access to school facilities because of their "discrimination" against homosexuals.
Federal courts are also using the 1964 Civil Rights Act to ban workplace "discrimination" against homosexuals. The use of such creative interpretation of the laws and the U.S. Constitution - investing them with meanings that never occurred to those who drafted them in order to achieve social revolution is one of the basic devices by which the Few rule the Many.
A semantic note. "Discrimination" is liberalese for free association liberals disapprove of, just as "civil rights" means forced association. The more "civil rights" the state enacts, the less freedom of association we have.
Fifty years ago; nobody absolutely nobody - foresaw that homosexuals would one day gain the upper hand over the Boy Scouts and private employers. It was literally unimaginable. Even the most hysterical doomsaying conservatives weren't worried about it.
It wasn't a liberal-conservative issue; liberals themselves didn't think of it as part of their long-term agenda. Homosexuality was considered a purely individual aberration, not a subject for social reform. The same was true of abortion and many other abnormalities that have been successively normalized. "Gay rights" was as remote a prospect as the legalization of cannibalism. Homosexuals weren't yet "gays." They were sexual deviants.
The liberal agenda is a profoundly unpredictable affair. Who knows what causes liberals - the dominant Few - may adopt in the years ahead? Who knows what they will insist that the Many be forced to accept as specious legal and constitutional imperatives?
Liberalism is driven by a mysterious antagonism to the moral traditions of the Many. In any society the Few rule the Many, but in most societies the ruling elite shares the general moral outlook of the majority of the population and there is no basic conflict between the rulers and the ruled.
In today's America, so alien to our ancestors, it is different. The Few not only hate the traditions of the Many; they have conducted a relentless propaganda campaign against those traditions, variously called "education, eradicating prejudice," and "consciousness-raising." They coin new-fangled words like "homophobia" to stigmatize deepseated popular attitudes; they publicize and memorialize minor local incidents, like vicious murders of homosexuals, making them symbols of the moral attitudes they want to condemn.
In pursuit of this agenda, the Many must be made to feel guilty about their natural feelings. And the government must be empowered to engineer a mass psychological transformation, until those feelings cease to exist. The process must begin with children in the public schools, where state propaganda will teach them that homosexuality is normal.
The desire of the Few to control and change even the inner lives of the Many is of course a totalitarian ambition. Liberals denounce "sexual McCarthyism" as they practice what might be called sexual Stalinism. As Stalin aspired to create the "New Soviet Man," liberals want to produce new, sexually, "liberated" children, with homosexual propaganda as one of their tools.
Such totalitarian programs never work; human nature is too stubborn. But in the meantime, setting an impossible goal - a fantasy masquerading as an ideal - allows the government of the Few to assume total power over the Many. And in today's America, the Many are dangerously passive, hardly aware of the sinister conditioning they and their children are being subjected to.
G.K. Chesterton warned against "the modern and morbid habit of always sacrificing the normal to the abnormal." That is liberalism in a nutshell, and it will always find more things to sacrifice on its altar of abnormality.
Democrats are political deviants.
Friends don't let friends vote Democratic!
Liberalism is driven by a mysterious antagonism to the moral traditions of the Many.
Profound -- I hope we can explore this further.
You are exactly right. All of these acts are abominations and they are committed through choice of behavior.
Homosexual minority dominates mainstream America
Kinky!
Couldn't resist!
Bush/Cheney will lead the charge against the immoral forces bent on destroying the family, constitution, our traditions and culture-----NOT!
There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest. They are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically harmful to society, all are abominations before God.
Your list omitted adultery and fornication. God never said, "sex between a consenting adult man and woman is okay." It is a MARRIAGE between a man and a woman that makes sexual intimacy right. Any other behavior "deviates" from God's norm.
The issue, however, is how a society should deal with these sorts of deviancy. What sort of laws should we have regarding each of the listed "deviations?" Laws aside, how tolerant should we be of "deviant" behavior?
Keep in mind that when making your list of "abominations before God," things like pride, a haughty look, a lying tongue, etc., will rank right up there. (They are also intrinsically harmful to society, only in a much more subtle way.)
Attaboy Jim. 'nuff said.
Oh Yeah, James Dobson of focus on the family was saying a decade ago that the homosexuality battle would make the abortion debate seem like a church picnic. This is because abortion affects atmost 10% of teenagers. But sexual promiscuity (sp?) affects all of them. They have a foot into the school sex ed programs, and afterall, Safe sex includes those that produce no pregnancy. By definition same sex experimentation is the cure all to pregnancy risk. Unfortuneately, this is the most orwellian debate I have ever heard. They haven't changed any words, onlu definitiions. Now, what we usd to consider normal same gender identification of 5 - 10 year olds has been renamed a lesbian / homosexual tendancy. Boys we used to call effeminate - we now call genetic homosexuals. We are all asexual until our hormones kick in around 10 - 13. It is the adults who have labeled and stigmatized the kids. It is the school system that says if you have fond felings for the same sex you ARE a certain orientation. This is BS and now kids see it this way because of indoctrination, not genetics.
PAT BUCHANAN is the only presidential candidate who has taken the position the a person can not choose or control their sexual oreintation.
This is the most pro-deviant position possible because it leads to the inevitable conclusion that sexual perverts should recieve that same special protections as racial minorities.
Excellent article and comment.
I guarantee that pedophilia is the next important milestone on the agenda.
Two important leftist campaigns will converge to accomplish this.
One is the "children's rights" rhetoric of Hilary Clinton et al. This rhetoric includes such gibberish as "the rights of gay teens" - that is, of homosexually-active 13 year olds. "Championing the rights of kids to make their own decisions" sounds pretty to soccer moms, but has a practical value to child molesters. The rhetorical groundwork is being laid.
The second leftwing movement is the aggressive promotion of "TV homosexuality" that is, the funny, cheerful, witty, compassionate sodomite who goes out occasionally on a glamorous date but spends most of his time enjoying showtunes and merlot in the company of women friends whom he understands so much more deeply than their boorish spouses. The reality of homosexuality: rough and anonymous promiscuity, bitter hatred of faith and family, early death, addiction, violent sadomasochism, rampant "domestic" abuse, psychological problems and barely-concealed misogyny is never mentioned.
In a world where people are deceived into believing that sodomites are just regular people and that 10 year olds are able to competently make life-shattering choices, an acceptation of pedophilia is not far away.
In ten years, only a "bigot" will dare to prevent his 12 year old son from "dating" a 40 year old biker. I hope I'm wrong.
"The issue, however, is how a society should deal with these sorts of deviancy. What sort of laws should we have regarding each of the listed "deviations?" Laws aside, how tolerant should we be of "deviant" behavior?"
Zero tolerance. Violators should be stoned to death without exception. End of Problem.
Right on the money! Have a nice BUMP!
In ten years, only a "bigot" will dare to prevent his 12 year old son from "dating" a 40 year old biker.
Should read bigot AND his shotgun
"Your list omitted adultery and fornication. God never said, "sex between a consenting adult man and woman is okay." It is a MARRIAGE between a man and a woman that makes sexual intimacy right. Any other behavior "deviates" from God's norm."
Good point!
BTTT
This whole article is gay.
Yeah, right--watch Junior name the queer RINO Kolbe (who was given a featured speaking slot in Philly when Keyes, Barr and Quayle were denied podium time) to be his Sodomy Czar...
How do you suppose that Log Cabin delegation brought Baby Bush around?
To Joseph Sobran (as if he actually frequents this site)
In today's America, so alien to our ancestors,
Those are not your ancestors you speak of, they are mine. You wouldn't want to live under their rules and neither would I. I have met people, who like you in many ways, have forgotten the past or have romantic notions about it. Who and what would Joseph Sobran be in the not too distant past? I wouldn't know nor care, and neither would anyone else. And you know why. How soon you forget. You wouldn't even have been allowed to live where you live in all liklihood. You can thank my ancestors for that. Am I proud that particular aspect of these otherwise decent and productive people? Nope. I don't even think you are an excuse for why they did it. They did it because they were backward and xenophobic. You're okay with that, I am not. You think that cultures can't mix and that any evidence of it is doomed. But you see I am not challenging a culture that I am not a part of. I am very much a part of that culture and I have every right to challenge it and change it where it is so decidedly wrong. You might get some attention with your stupid remarks, but don't confuse it with respect. The two are not the same. Your attempt to elevate yourself at my expense, to mainstream yourself at my expense, is transparant.
it is different. The Few not only hate the traditions of the Many; they have conducted a relentless propaganda campaign against those traditions, variously called "education, eradicating prejudice," and "consciousness-raising."
You want to celebrate My ancestors' traditions of discrimination and prejudice Sobran? Would you like to start with you and yours? I didn't think so.
Do you know when and where Buchanan said that? I agree with you that it is a dangerous, incorrect position to take on this issue.There is no evidence that homosexuality is genetic or "they have no choice in the matter."I still expect Bush/Cheney to ignore the homo agenda marching through our schools.They can use the bully pulpit to condemn this phenomenon, but I don't expect them to.
Heh...you're right. Probably best not to use your bare hands.
Your thread was right on the money. The outrage against the Boy Scouts is sickening. Homosexuals pretty much dominate the mainstream media, the highest levels of government, and the entertainment industry. Personally, what someone does in their own bedroom with their own adult partner(s) is their own business. I draw the line when it comes to them shoving their sick agenda down everyones throats, especially our children. Forcing schools to teach that homosexuality is normal is disgusting, and I am appalled that more parents haven't taken a more aggressive stand on this. If this stuff continues, more parents should consider home schooling their children (maybe this is why the homosexual elite are so against vouchers).
Homosexuals should not be entitled to special protections because they choose to put their stuff in a different orifice. Only because homosexuals dominate the media does this issue get any attention, because most Americans think this is stupid. Why not have special protections to keep women from getting raped? Why not have special protections to keep older people from getting beat up and mugged? It's because there are laws already on the books. Murder is murder, regardless of what orifice the victim chose to use.
You remember the flap over what John Rocker said to the magazine reporter. Allen Iverson recently came out with a CD with lyrics far more sick that anything Rocker said. Rocker said nothing about killing people or endorsing violence against anyone. Nothing happened to Iverson while Rocker was branded for life. Rockers mistake was he mentioned "the queer with AIDS." When someone busts on gays, look out!
There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest. They are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically harmful to society, all are abominations before God.
Nice post. Your comment is absurd. By saying there is no difference between all of these different things you are saying bestiality and incest are synonymous? which obviously they are not.
A culture without a moral foundation is doomed. We might not be able to stop you from dragging a lot of people down with you, but we will make sure that you will not drag us down into the cesspool of your choosing when the inevitable happens.
What's next?
'By saying there is no difference between all of these different things you are saying bestiality and incest are synonymous? which obviously they are not.'
How can you say that. I have seen some of your relatives. ;->
Does anyone know what ZOPHAR is ranting about?
Is this some sort of heterophobic rant?
They are not synonymous, just equally depraved.
I'm happy to see Joe Sobran is slipping back into the mainstream. He's one of my favorites.
The ACLU once appeared on Crossfire to defend kiddie porn as "published material".They conveniently forgot the invasion of the childrens' privacy and the fact that they were unable to consent.The next time the ACLU has a major convention I hope they have an outbreak of botulism.
Your comment is absurd. By saying there is no difference between all of these different things you are saying bestiality and incest are synonymous? which obviously they are not.
Nice try. You might want to check out your dictionary and look at the definition of synonymous or you can use the following:
syn·on·y·mous
adj. (Abbr. syn.)
|
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Third Edition Copyright © 1992, 1996 by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved. |
Obviously, homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest are all equivalent in connotation and have a similar meaning because they are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically harmful to society, all are abominations before God.
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 23 | Top | Last ]
ACLU="ANTI-CHRISTIAN LUCIFERIAN UNION"
Sorry garv, they are not equally depraved either. They are different things with different levels of depravity or lack thereof.
The degeneracy coming through the Hollyweird sputum is a direct result of the degeneracy rampant in Hollywood. When you see or hear things infiltrating our society which denegrate wholesome values, implying such conservatism is blasé, you can be sure there is a larger than average homosexual influence running the shows. They will degenerate OUR society to get their lusted for affirmation, the nation's survival be damned.
homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest.
You want to rank them in order or just point out the one(s) that are not depraved?
If you want to believe bestiality and pedophilia are nearly the same thing then go right ahead. I'll settle for pointing out this is absurd.
Keep in mind that when making your list of "abominations before God," things like pride, a haughty look, a lying tongue, etc., will rank right up there. (They are also intrinsically harmful to society, only in a much more subtle way.)
Yes that is true, but it also is an individual thing, answerable to God. I've never seen an organization drive to make fornication, lying etc. an acceptable behavior to be forced upon the majority of society.
You miss the point about a small minority forcing their beliefs on society as a whole.What kind of a world would it be if rape should become acceptable.Individual sins are acountable by that individual to God Himself.
ZOPHAR likes to rant, VE. He's ranting out of anger that people have the unmitigated gall to disagree with his leftism.
He (?) likes to refer to other people's remarks as "stupid" when he does not understand them. He feels that calling other people stupid will mask his inability to make coherent, syllogistic arguments.
In this case, he's apparently taking Joe Sobran to task for being a Ukrainian Catholic and for advocating the moral and political principles which that heritage implies. He is further making the erroneous suggestion that Ukrainian Catholics were unwelcome in America until statist leftism took hold. He is, of course, ignorant of the fact that Slavic Catholics were living here since the earliest days of the Republic.
Tell us, ZOPHAR, was it mere passive xenophobia or ardent bigotry against Sobranesque persons that inspired the Continental Congress to make Kazimierz Pulaszki the General in Chief of the Continental Calvary and to appoint Tadeusz Kosciuszko as General and Chief Engineer? Explain to us again the insuperable prejudice of the Colonials.
I get the impression you're an animal lover.
Should read bigot AND his shotgun
Razwan, What are you thinking? In 10 years the Libs will have all shotguns crushed and made into Yugos or some other innocuous,non-violent thing.
Don C.
If I had known you were one of the local punks I wouldn't have addressed you. See you around.
That headline should read "Homosexual minority dominates mainstream media [in] America"
We'll all be dominated to the extent that we allow ourselves to the dominated.
The people of Vermont recently took steps to rid themselves of the curse, by voting out the varmits who voted for gay marriages.
Nebraska is in the process of passing a law that refuses to recognize gay marriages.
Studies show that there is no such thing as the "gay gene", which anyone with an ounce of common sense, already knew. If there was a "gay gene", there would also be a "murder gene", a "robbery gene", and a "nose-picking gene". They are all "behaviors", pure and simple.
People all over America are picking up the slack in the charitable and business donations that are being denied the Boy Scouts, as a result of the national homosexual hissy-fit over losing the Supreme Court ruling.
I think the pendulum is starting to swing back, gradually. People are starting to see that gays are not exactly "normal", in the normal sense of the word. The anger and hostility shown for normal people by the gay community is waking up a lot of people.
As more and more of the lies and frauds of the clinton administration surface, people will see who has been supporting the gay agenda, and that association will not speak well for their perverted causes.
Like everything else that gets changed in a society, the impetus will have to begin at the grass roots level. Until people see the gay agenda for what it really is, and take notice that their focus seems to be in taking over organizations that consist of boys and young men, their perversions will flourish, especially with their willing accomplices in the media.
Fight it. Do not feel or show any shame for your principles, morals, and beliefs...they don't. Let the media and networks know that you are tired of their promotion of all things gay. Boycott sponsors of gay-agenda programs.
Conservatives have been staunch enough to bring Smith & Wesson to their knees of their beliefs, and the same thing can eventually be done to the gay agenda...or at least the public promotion of it.
Its time to cut off the Dog's Tail...its been wagging us (the majority) too long.
"Do you know when and where Buchanan said that? "
"4. Every American, whatever his or her sexual orientation, is entitled to the same constitutional rights. Hatred of, or derision for, men and women for an orientation they did not choose is wrong. Violence against these individuals must be condemned and punished; and everyone's contributions to our country and society appreciated. "
Pat Buchanan, August 11, 2000 at the Reform Party Convention
"I understand homosexuality has existed from time immemorial. As I said in that statement, we have got to respect people and their contributions, and everybody has the same constitutional rights. And any harassment or abuse of people because of an orientation they can’t control is wrong. "
Pat Buchanan August 13, 2000 Meet The Press
Before you all attack me for this, let me state that I don't support homosexuals - nor do I oppose them, I simply don't care what they do so long as they don't do it to me.
There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest…. all are abominations before God. -Jimkress
The difference between these (aside from incest) and homosexuality is consent. Abominations before 'god' are a religious matter, not the state's.
Your list omitted adultery and fornication. God never said, "sex between a consenting adult man and woman is okay." It is a MARRIAGE between a man and a woman that makes sexual intimacy right. Any other behavior "deviates" from God's norm. -Kyrie
Those who break 'god's' rules will have to take it up with him when they die. It is not the government's place to forcefully enforce 'god's' rules unless we are a theocracy - which we are not.
Personally, what someone does in their own bedroom with their own adult partner(s) is their own business. I draw the line when it comes to them shoving their sick agenda down everyones throats, especially our children. -flair2000
Agreed. No one aside from family should have the right to promote any agenda with children. If mass media does this you should boycott it, and let the laws of supply and demand take care of the problem (no demand - no supply). If your school does it, elect a new school board or homeschool.
Travis McGee mentions the NAMBLA case in a cartoon. Believe me, I am no fan of NAMBLA. However, you fail to see that when the government seeks to increase its powers, it does so in a case that no one will oppose because of the unpopularity of the defendant. Once the case has been one, precedent has been set and the government is free to use its new powers against everyone else. Need proof - look up the use of RICO laws against abortion protesters. The government's position in the NAMBLA case is that since someone who visited a NAMBLA's website committed a murder, the website and its owners/posters should be held responsible for the crime. Following this logic, if someone who visits Free Republic commits a crime WE are responsible. The implications of what the government could do with such powers are frightening. Watch - if this case is upheld, the NRA will soon be prosecuted for any crime involving a gun committed by any member.
I apologize for the length of this post - there was a lot to respond to.
Sorry if I insulted you, I intended that last comment as tongue-in-cheek, but I can see how you might not get that impression. My apologies.
However, you are really on thin ice when you argue that any of these deviancies are harmless. I understand that beastiality could be construed as a victimless appetite (PETA won't like the act or my use of "appetite") as opposed to the far more heinous pedophilia, but it is still pretty damn sick.
Additionally, many of these pathologies are found in combination, leading me to conclude that I wouldn't want someone who liked cats (if you get my meaning) babysitting my kids.
You mean like jay-walking and murder? Is that how this game is played?
Not without a fight
It's about consent Dear. Heterosexuality and homosexuality between those who may consent to have sex with each other under the law, is entirely different than anything else you mentioned. BTW was that heterosexual necrophilia or homosexual that you were referring to? Is on better than the other? Check your diary and get back to us.
Hey, evidently I posted to myself instead of you. Scroll up and read the post I directed to myself.
It's about consent Dear. Heterosexuality and homosexuality between those who may consent to have sex with each other under the law, is entirely different than anything else you mentioned.
Not many people are interested in what two consenting adults do behind closed doors, bugger away!
However, once these acts are taken out of the bedroom and put on display with the admonition to accept the act and lifestyle as normal, well I think it is unreasonable to expect people with normal gender identities to keep form vomiting much less give approval.
Homosexuals who just want to live their chosen lifestyle and be left alone would best spend their energies convincing their activist brethren to end their 'in-your-face' style of promotion. This type of activism causes severe backlashes
Great post.
As for the "gay gene" it probably exists in the same way that a genetic predisposition to alcoholism exists. It is, of course, impossible to genetically inherit a "behavior" and such a "behavior" being replicated in such a manner is doubly impossible since it represents a reproductive dead-end.
Even so, there are probably people who have a harder time avoiding sexually deviant behavior, just as there are people who have a more difficult time than others in stopping after a few drinks.
Our entire society's message to homosexuals is the equivalent now of telling an addict "shoot up as much heroin as you want and be proud of it. Parade down 5th Avenue with needles in your arm. If anyone tells you that heroin is bad for you and that you should kick - why, they're just bigots".
I was the one making value distinctions between deviancies, I was responding to someone who did. BTW, did you hear the one about the gay mortician? After work he liked to suck down a few cold ones.
As for you, if consent is the only question at issue, I guess adult incest gets the green on your acceptance meter.
I've never seen an organization drive to make fornication, lying etc. an acceptable behavior to be forced upon the majority of society.
Ever hear of the Executive and Judicial branches of the U.S. government, headed by Bill and Hill Clinton with the aid of Janet Reno?
I am still confused. Cows and sheep and pigs do not give consent to being killed and eaten by humans, why should "consent" be an issue if some human wants to enter into a "loving relationship" with him/her? Isn't a life as a caring partner with a bestiality practitioner better than being killed and eaten?
Still waiting for you to back up your intelligent remarks about the persecution of Ukrainians in early America.
Isn't a life as a caring partner with a bestiality practitioner better than being killed and eaten?
That'll be PETA's next gambit. Mass marriages arranged between PETA members and stockyard heifers and steers to save them from the slaughter.
>>>Sorry garv, they are not equally depraved either. They are different things with different levels of depravity or lack thereof.<<<
Assigning such things their proper level of comparitive depravity is a wonderful example of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
A healthy society has no need for any of these.
How about if cannibals give consent in their wills to being eaten by likeminded cannibals upon their demise? What would possibly be wrong with bloody cannibal banquets if "the entree" has given clear prior consent to his being roasted and served?
If consent is all that is at issue, clearly cannibalism and bestiality cannot be universally outlawed.
Likewise for necrophilia: if the "passive partner" in a loving necrophiliac relationship has given prior consent to being the object of dead desire, what can be "society's" objection?
However, you fail to see that when the government seeks to increase its powers, it does so in a case that no one will oppose because of the unpopularity of the defendant. Once the case has been one, precedent has been set and the government is free to use its new powers against everyone else.
That's an unwarranted leap of logic that is typical of fuzzy Libertarian thinking. The government is always called upon to use its powers to enforce laws, and of course there is always a tendency to overreach. It isn't a zero sum game, though. If the government overreaches the remedy is to is to ratchet it back, punish the governmental wrongdoers--not eliminate its power to enforce the laws, or place whole important areas off limits.
And make no mistake about it: child sexual assault is an important area that is well within the span of governmental control. Child pornography is THE gasoline that fuels assaultive behavior by pedophiles. Ask any lawyer who has ever prosecuted or defended a pedophile about the defendant's child porn stash. You will discover that 1) invariably there IS a child porn stash, and 2) the pedophile considers it to be his most valuable possession.
Only a Libertarian would deny a link between child porn and child sexual assault and rape.
Try to stay on the plain of reality, okay?
At the risk of you calling me "dear" (yuck) please answer the "consent" related questions in my 55,59 and 60. And let me add incest: if a 40 year old dad and his consenting 18 year old daughter want to get married, who's business is it? I mean, they could always agree to abort any fetus they accidentally created, so "no one" would suffer, right? How about it, if we can argue away the "consent" issue, it would seem that bestiality, cannibalism, necrophilia and incest cannot possibly be any business of society at large. If anything, they are safer for all concerned than casual rectal intercourse between homosexual strangers in bath houses and public parks.
So there we have, faggotry right in the middle of its peers: bestiality, cannibalism, necrophilia and incest, "private matters", and not the business of society. Right?
Excuse me, where exactly have I slipped beyond the plane of reality?
I said that the corpse would give clear legal consent while alive.
So what, are you some kind of narrow minded bigot who thinks anal buggery is swell, but sex with the consenting deceased is not?
What kind of necrophobe are you?
How about if cannibals give consent in their wills to being eaten by likeminded cannibals upon their demise? What would possibly be wrong with bloody cannibal banquets if "the entree" has given clear prior consent to his being roasted and served?
Reminiscent of a scene from "The Restaurant at the Edge of the Universe." An animal bred to want to be eaten, that recommends its best cut, and then cheerfully pops off to kill itself. Fully consensual, so what's the beef?
Ask ZOPHAR, I can't wait to hear his answer.
If anything, they are safer for all concerned than casual rectal intercourse between homosexual strangers in bath houses and public parks.
Your logic is airtight, Travis. I guess that's why they find it disturbing.
I'm not going to get into that with you. I don't think I said persecute. I was talking about discrimination. I assume you live in Baltimore or have some affinity with Pulaski. I couldn't care less. White Anglo Saxon Protestant means exactly what it says. In the past it meant a lot more. That was my point.
For your amusement:
New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samual Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
You might find a Catholic or two in there, but if you find a non-Anglo in there let me know.
I'll leave it to you and Kevin to decide. Let us know if you put anything on paper so we can respect your wishes.
Apology accepted.
Assigning such things their proper level of comparitive depravity is a wonderful example of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.
I will have to remember that line.
Razwan, What are you thinking? In 10 years the Libs will have all shotguns crushed and made into Yugos or some other innocuous,non-violent thing.
1stIowa, what are you thinking? In 10 years the libs will have all shotguns and Yugos crushed and made into public transportation train cars.
jim: Nice post. Your comment is absurd. By saying there is no difference between all of these different things, you are saying bestiality and incest are synonymous? which obviously they are not. I think what the statement is saying is that they are all the same not by the literal action, but by the result that is born from such behaviors. It does not at all suggest that bestiality and incest are synonymous outside of the fact that these actions are conditions for something that is "intrinsically harmful to society" They are the same by the result that they create.
I am parsing the use of the language is all. Sometimes I like to play language cop. What I am saying is that there is an defined difference between homosexuality and rape, not to mention a legal difference.
I see you are incapable of responding with any intelligent, logical or reasoned arguement in defense of considering buggery as normal behavior while excluding bestiality, necrophilia etc as abnormal. Your lack of an answer speaks volumes.
bttt
There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia,
pedophilia, rape, and incest. They
are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically
harmful to society, all are abominations
before God.
Nice post. Your comment is absurd. By saying there is no difference between all of these different things you are saying bestiality and incest are synonymous? which obviously they are not.
Ah, but which is NOT an abomination before God?
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
The next time the ACLU has a major convention I hope they have an outbreak of botulism.
I favor Ebola.
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
G.K. Chesterton warned against "the modern and morbid habit of always sacrificing the normal to the abnormal."
Actually, modern society has gone much further. It has labelled abnormality normal and praiseworthy, and has labelled opposition to what was once considered abnormal as "bigotry." Note that in today's discourse, homosexuality is not considered a mental illness, but "homophobia" is. It distills the true meaning of the term reprobate: one whose mind and moral compass are completely reversed.
homo alert
Huh?
Those are not your ancestors you speak of, they are mine. You wouldn't want to live under their rules and neither would I. I have met people, who like you in many ways, have forgotten the past or have romantic notions about it. Who and what would Joseph Sobran be in the not too distant past?...You want to celebrate My ancestors' traditions of discrimination and prejudice Sobran? Would you like to start with you and yours? I didn't think so
What the Hell are you talking about?
I can't get past the hunch that I think I disagree with you... but that is tempered by the fact that I haven't got the slightest idea what you are talking about... a sentence or two almost starts to make sense, and wham! off it goes in some other direction and finishes as though it was written by some random-word-generator. Please advise.
The government's position in the NAMBLA case is that since someone who visited a NAMBLA's website committed a murder, the website and its owners/posters should be held responsible for the crime.
Sorry, you're not up to speed on this case. The government has charged no one with a crime. The parents of the murdered and molested boy have sued NAMBLA seeking damages. They are deserving of them and I hope they win -- just as similar money judgments have been obtained against the White Aryan Resistance and the Ku Klux Klan.
A pox upon the uninformed -- like you -- and the ACLU who would support the NAMBLA perverts.
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
I can't get past the hunch that I think I disagree with you... but that is tempered by the fact that I haven't got the slightest idea what you are talking about... a sentence or two almost starts to make sense, and wham!
I'm still trying to decipher what he means by his ancestors vs. Sobran's ancestors, and why it is that Sobran would be so out of place among ZOPHAR's precursors. Then again, if ZOPHAR's ancestors were as incoherent as he is, I can understand why Sobran and others wouldn't relish their company.
Ah, but which is NOT an abomination before God?
As you know, the USA is not a theocracy . The problem with the Gay Lobby versus the Boy Scouts is not one of abominations, it is one of freedom of association. I wouldn't send my son off into the woods with a grown man who is attracted to the same sex because I would not trust the man's motives for being a Troop Leader.
As you know, the USA is not a theocracy . The problem with the Gay Lobby versus the Boy Scouts is not one of abominations, it is one of freedom of association. I wouldn't send my son off into the woods with a grown man who is attracted to the same sex because I would not trust the man's motives for being a Troop Leader.
The USA does not have to be a theocracy in order to determine the answer to the question "which one is not an abomination before God?" One only need disclose what his or her God says about it.
Personally, the entire list -- homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest -- are abominations to my God.
And yours?
(And thanks for your sentiments about not having gay Boy Scout leaders.)
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
Travis you and your other brother Darrel over there have been told countless times, and explained to countless times why your wanderings are irrlelvant to the discussion. And like Manny Festo himself you just come back with the same old crap. Game is over. Go play now.
some random-word-generator. <<<
I'd say that might be a million dollar invention. David Bowie has a phrase arranger that was created for him, but I don't know if it generates the phrases or just mixes them up.
Bring us up to speed if you will. It was my understanding that the judgement against the supremicists was due to a provable cause and effect, as in superiors within a paramilitary organisation ordering subordinates to commit acts of violence.
I have been to the NAMBLA website prior to it's closing so I would know what I was talking about, and I don't see how it could be considered the same. Certainly it should be clear to a blind man that they support having sex with boys too young in any state, but it's presented in such a carefully worded way that they only appear to be celebrating some fantasy about ancient times and changing present laws. I am not aware that anyone maintains that the sex offenders in question actually had contact, orders, or support other than what is on the website.
This would appear to be a defense of the goals of the organization to some here, but it isn't. What I am saying is that if the law can find cause and effect from NAMBLA's content on the web. it could just as easily find a religious organization party to a crime if, for instance a person who was 'borderline' on killing someone, found justification and method in the scriptures posted on a website and stoned his cheating wife to death.
Do you agree?
It's my understanding that the BSA has long had a policy, written or unwritten, that no adult should be alone with a boy in any situation that might be misunderstood. MOst organizations, even schools, do not encourage adults to be alone with a child these days.
One of the reasons I find your concern offensive is because my dad and his cousin were both single male scout leaders after college and before marrying. They did it because they enjoyed scouting.
The call to teach, be it scouting, mountain climbing, horseback riding, dance, or gymnastics is one that many people feel regardless of sex or sexual orientation. All of those things and many other present opportunities for inappropriate or criminal behavior.
It sounds like lot's of folks have a mental picture of a scoutmaster snuggling up in a pup tent with the boys. I can't say that I have ever heard of that being the situation in scouting.
The what if scenarios just go too far. I still think that many people seem to be grasping for a false sense of security. Think about if, If a child molestor would go to all the trouble of becoming an eagle scout so he can be a scoutmaster, so he can molest boys, would he stop short of getting married for appearances? Is the open gay male who is legitimately interested in scouting and teaching really the person you have to worry about?
One of the reasons I find your concern offensive is because my dad and his cousin were both single male scout leaders after college and before marrying. They did it because they enjoyed scouting.
What does that have to do with anything that I said? I didn't say anything about single male scout leaders.
Is the open gay male who is legitimately interested in scouting and teaching really the person you have to worry about?
I vote thumbs down on gays in the scouts and in the military. That is just my opinion. The scouting organization feels the same way. Start a different organization. Call it Multiculturalists in the Woods, or whatever. Don't private organizations have the right to discriminate? YES.
You have certainly been able to wade through the smoke screen of politically correct and delusions, to lay out the facts in simple to understand terms.
Basically the perverts and liberal enablers, with their bastardization of reality, have defined everyone who objects to their agenda as ignorant, small minded bigots, who belong on the Jerry Springer show. In misguided self defence, normally intellegent, usually open minded people, are pretending to agree with the goofy intelectuals, so as to not be identified with the Klan, white supremists,homosexual bashers etc.
The perverts are taking our civilization to hell, and we are pretending to understand them, to avoid the wrath of militant normality-phobes.
And like Manny Festo himself you just come back with the same old crap. Game is over. Go play now.
Is this your pained way of conceding you cannot answer the questions put to you? Check, checkmate. Go celebrate a perversion for liberty.
Of course they have the right to discriminate. The courts agreed that they were indeed a private organization. The problem was that just about everyone else thought they were public and open to all, and didn't have a problem with them enjoying special privileges afforded to public organizations. You know that.
Around here though, people are saying that they are a private organization, entitled to discriminate, but that they should still be treated as if they were open to all. That's the whole disagreement. Yes, many of the groups that are demanding that the scouts be treated as a private and discriminatory organization are also "demanding" ie trying to influence the BSA to stop discriminating. The two things are not the same. It's a two prong issue. One says that as long as they discriminate they should not get special favors that other such groups don't get.
If a government allows all groups to use public buildings or land for free, then the scouts should be treated no differently. But if they charge those groups that are not open to the public, then they should charge the scouts.
You say why don't I start my own organisation. I say, if you are going to run the scouts as a church, then meet in a church building and operate solely on donations. Don't expect squat from the public funds.
Kevin I intended to stop responding to you long ago. I shall try to do better. If you claim victory on that basis so be it. I have explained everything to you twice under two screen names. You are irrelevant.
>>>I have explained everything to you twice under two screen names.<<<
Two screen names? What, did you get kicked off on the other two and are just using this one until you get kicked off again?
The thing that is most pathetic about you militant queers is that you pick on the Boy Scouts. Everyone knows the BoyScouts help kids. I repeat: KIDS. But you have a group of intrinsically unhappy sexual abnormalites who are having a selfish hissy fit because they can't lead healthy straight boys off onto camping trips so by God they will see to it that no extra letter of the law money goes to the organization. Pathetic. Don't adddress me anymore. Good luck in your prissy fight with the BSA. I vote conservative Republican every chance I get because of people like you.
Two screen names? What, did you get kicked off on the other two and are just using this one until you get kicked off again?
That would be Jeb'sFan. He lives to inflict his unhappiness on the BSA.
Only a Republican would deny a link between child porn and child sexual assault and rape.
CATO
Still no answer. I am not surprised. Homo advocates are usually sad sick little men. You have to be to enjoy buggery.
Just read that the orthodox Jewish court excommunicated Lieberman, in part for his views on homosexuality. From now on, all new scout troops need to be sponsored by Orthodox Jewish organizations; at least they STAND UP for what they STAND for.
Two screen names? What, did you get kicked off on the other two and are just using this one until you get kicked off again? <<<
You really don't pay attention do you? I have explained this before, and I may have explained it specifically to you. I deleted the cookies for FR in a cleaning spree. While of course I knew my screen name I hadn't used my password since I originally signed up and could not remember it. Since I no longer used the e mail address that I had signed up with, it did no good to request that my password be sent to me so I could sign in again and accept cookies again.
So I signed up all over again with my present screen name and my present e mail address. Not only that, I don't think I wrote down the password this time either. Fortunately, unless I go on an anti-cookie binge again, I won't need it.
BTW, the CC was cute.
Sometimes Rabbi's that tick off the parents of gay people find themselves on the brink of looking for a new job.
Is the open gay male who is legitimately interested in scouting and teaching really the person you have to worry about?
Hello, ZOPHAR. The answer is "yes." The Scouts, ever since their inception, have had a policy: Scouting isn't about sexuality. Scouting is for boys, not men. The Scouting program carefully avoids any discussion of sexual matters, leaving that area of development to be guided by the boy's family. An openly homosexual man as a Scoutmaster would simply send the wrong message to boys, many of whom are easily-influenced regarding sexual matters, even if he doesn't try to seduce them. There would be no opposing message because the official Scouting policy is to leave the subject alone and let others teach about it. Thus, through his actions (which speak a thousand tinmes louder than words), the homosexual Scoutmaster would be preaching to a captive audience.
Nope. But since it none of your concern, it will suffice to say that I was in good standing when I deleted myself. I'm sure those whose business it is to know this have ways of checking. I personally know nothing about the construction of a bbs.
"There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest. They are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically harmful to society, all are abominations before God."
and we are admonished to hate the sin and love the sinner. don't skip over that part.
>>Only a Republican would deny a link between child porn and child sexual assault and rape.<<
Linking these two items makes no more sense than linking hetero porn and rape. Establishing a causal link between two behaviors is extremely difficult. It would require an impossible to construct study of enormous proportions. Anecdotal stories are not evidence. This is the kind of fuzzy thinking that yields tons of stupid laws made to prove that politicians are "doing something" about a problem.
I hate pedophiles as much as the next guy, but lets keep our wits about us please.
If you read who my post was for, you would see that it is a word for word rephrasing of Kevin Curry's remark about Libertarians with his comment:
"Only a Libertarian would deny a link between child porn and child sexual assault and rape."
When this thoroughly despicable S*** makes this kind of comment then I must respond in kind. That is what I did and will do again if the cretin continues to use these kind of attacks. If you are a Republican then I am sorry, but you need to talk to this fellow Republican on the subject of civility. I am not in favor of homosexuality and he knows it. He just uses everything he can think of to smear us "dangerous Libertarians" who will pull at most 2-5% of the popular vote. You might ask him why he is soooo worried. It seems he and his alphabet soup brethren can't stand for there to be anyone who dissents from the REPO/DEMO duopoly. I don't know why he and his friends can't stand for anyone to not vote the party line, but it borders on obsessive compulsive behavior.
Regards,
CATO
Bring us up to speed if you will. It was my understanding that the judgement against the supremicists was due to a provable cause and effect, as in superiors within a paramilitary organisation ordering subordinates to commit acts of violence.
According to a documentary I saw on the History Channel or A&E, the Metzgers got tied into the killing of a black man (in Seattle, Portland?) simply by making available daily recorded phone messages of a hateful nature which their membership could dial up and listen to. If an order had been given to do the crime the Metzgers would be behind bars today. Absent that, Morris Dees went after them in civil court.
I have been to the NAMBLA website prior to it's closing so I would
know what I was talking about, and I don't
see how it could be considered the same. Certainly it should be
clear to a blind man that they support having sex with boys too young in
any state, but it's presented in such a carefully worded way that they
only appear to be celebrating some fantasy about ancient times and changing
present laws. I am not aware that anyone maintains that the sex offenders
in question actually had contact, orders, or support other than what is
on the website.
I likewise looked it over once. It contained detailed instructions on how to seduce young boys for sex. That may not be criminal because of the 1st Amendment but it should be actionable in civil court for the same reasons the Metzgers got cleaned. (Let's hope it happens.)
This would appear to be a defense of the goals of the organization to some here, but it isn't. What I am saying is that if the law can find cause and effect from NAMBLA's content on the web. it could just as easily find a religious organization party to a crime if, for instance a person who was 'borderline' on killing someone, found justification and method in the scriptures posted on a website and stoned his cheating wife to death.
You continue to mix criminal with civil. The NAMBLA-influenced perverts are in jail because of the crime. It's the civil lawsuit in which the ACLU is defending NAMBLA.
I have no objection to legal action being taken against a religious organization whether civil or criminal. Each case stands on its own merit.
Do you agree?
If your position is the same as the ACLU ... not much.
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
It sounds like lot's of folks have a mental picture of a scoutmaster
snuggling up in a pup tent with the boys. I
can't say that I have ever heard of that being the situation in
scouting.
You are either totally uninformed or you're attempting to peddle an agenda. Do some research. The BSA is being sued constantly because scout leaders have engaged scouts in sexual misconduct. The major news magazines have run lengthy stories about this issue. The mental image you haven't heard of is, in fact, quite real.
The what if scenarios just go too far. I still think that many people
seem to be grasping for a false sense of
security. Think about if, If a child molestor would go to all the
trouble of becoming an eagle scout so he can be a scoutmaster, so he can
molest boys, would he stop short of getting married for appearances? Is
the open gay male who is legitimately interested in scouting and teaching
really the person you have to worry about?
This is the most dense reasoning I've encountered in awhile. Where do pedophiles go to do their deeds? Where the kids are, of course. And where do the homosexual pedophiles go? Where do you think?
So, what's your problem? Ultra-liberal or just fruity?
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
You say why don't I start my own organisation. I say, if you are going to run the scouts as a church, then meet in a church building and operate solely on donations. Don't expect squat from the public funds.
I would agree except for one thing. Over the years the BSA has contributed to the public while it has received. Many of the trails in our national park system have been constructed and maintained by scouts. In my own community two Eagle scout projects have added valuable infrastructure and beauty to our city park with all costs borne by the scouts and their supporters.
My sons will be at Fort A. P. Hill next year for the National Scout Jamboree. The Army will expend some public funds as host of the event. However, the Army will also "use" the 35,000 attendees for training exercises in such things as crowd control, transportation drills and tactical scheduling. (They may even do some recruiting among the older scouts and younger leaders.) It's something of a trade-off.
In San Diego, where the ACLU is trying to get the $1 per year lease on a campground canceled, the fact is seldom disclosed that the landscaping and infrastructure for the 18 acres was done by the BSA. Further, the BSA maintains the property from year to year and also makes it available to any other group who wishes to use it when no scout function is going on.
Support the Boy Scouts ... BOYCOTT Levi's jeans & Dockers
What I don't understand is how the devient left maintains its power.
I know they control the newsmedia, colleges, and hollywood, but all of these institutions are completely dependent on normal people for money: all colleges lose money and must beg alumni for donations, most newspapers operate on a razor thin margin of profit, and most Hollywood movies lose money.
If we simply sent our children to conservative christian colleges, boycotted liberal newspapers, and refused to attend hollywood movies, liberal power bases would be destroyed.
The sad thing is, conservatives seem to have a desperate need to prop up these institutions: they continue to send their kids to ivy league colleges, conservative businessmen advertise in leftist newspapers, and we cannot even seem to boycott hollywood properly.
I know freepers talk about these things, but it does not seem to be translated into action among the sheeple.
When are we going to realize the power is in OUR hands?
>>>Two screen names? What, did you get kicked off on the other two and are just using this one until you get kicked off again?<<<
>>>That would be Jeb'sFan. He lives to inflict his unhappiness on the BSA.<<<
Oh yes. I should have recognized the pro-homo rhetoric but, since they all repeat the same nonsense, I must confess that I can't tell them apart.
The pro-homo gang uses some very deceitful methods in trying to eliminate any dissention in the public realm.
I shouldn't be surprised to learn that they're using different screen names to inflate their numbers. Wonder if he's also sakic, ItsJeff, Marcus Welby, and the other pro-homo posters?
>>>You really don't pay attention do you?<<<
Yes, I do but you all sound alike, you see. Ha-hah!
>>>I have explained this before, and I may have explained it specifically to you.<<<
I didn't see your previous explanation and you haven't explained it to me before. Gee, another mystery cleared up.
Now if we could just get you to understand the meaning of 'abomination.'
>>>Sometimes Rabbi's that tick off the parents of gay people find themselves on the brink of looking for a new job.<<<
Yes, the pro-homo gang are a vindictive bunch, especially against those who speak the truth!
>>>...we are admonished to hate the sin and love the sinner. don't skip over that part.<<<
Quite true, but there is a difference between hating the sinner, which we shouldn't do, and getting really annoyed by the hissy pro-homo posters on FR.
We also must not celebrate the sin. "Gay pride" is the ultimate oxymoron!
Now, let's pray for strength and keep fighting the GOOD fight!
I have no problem with a fee for use arrangement. When I go to Yosemite I have to pay to enter, to camp, etc. I have no problem with a government organization in charge of public lands offering the use of those lands to the BSA in exchange for housekeeping duties on the part of the scouts as long as a similar deal is open to other groups.
I would have a problem with a dedicated property where the service of the BSA is not to maintain in exchange for some use, but is to maintain a public property that is for their exclusive use.
Since I am unfamiliar with the work that the scouts do at AP HILL, I would appreciate input on specifics. It's one thing if they do work that endures and benefits the site beyond their use. It's quite another if their work only amounts to preparing for and cleaning up after themselves. That is expected of anyone who uses a park facility.
"...the Many are dangerously passive, hardly aware of the sinister conditioning they and their children are being subjected to."
Ephesians 4:14 "That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive"
"Liberalism is driven by a mysterious antagonism to the moral traditions of the Many."
1 Peter 4:4 "Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you"
"Profound -- I hope we can explore this further."
I for one would appreciate a flag to any such discussion.
God bless
mitch
You give me too much credit. If I can't remember one password do you think I could remember a dozen?
I may not know much about BBS construction, but I do know that each person using a bbs that accepts cookies, by accepting those cookies, allows the BBS to "know" what their web address is. When I enter Free Republic it knows who I am, doesn't your set up work that way?
"Now if we could just get you to understand the meaning of 'abomination."
Yes, and I'm sure you are just as vociferous on these other "abominations," right, Former?
*****Idolatry --Deut 7:25 Deut 27:15
*****Unjust weights and measures ---Deut 25:13-16, Prov 11:1,Prov 20:23
*****The hire of a whore and price of a dog, as a consecrated gift --Deut 23:18
*****Uncleanness --Deut 24:4
*****Lying with a woman in her menses --Lev 18:19
*****Offering seed to Molech --Lev 18:21
And lets not forget these:
***** A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood,
******An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief,
19 A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren. Prov 6:16-19
Jesus, God in the flesh, explained that "Thou shalt not commit adulery" is not just a penetrating relationship with someone besides your spouse, but includes even the thought realm of unfaithfulness ("to look upon with lust in the heart"), and is deserving of such drastic measures as plucking out your eye or cutting off your hand to avoid going to hell. This clearly shows that our President and the society that thinks oral sex maintains one's virginity is woefully wrong. One post I saw today shows the effects of the tidal wave of pornography sweeping across this planet. Why even several on this forum will forcefully defend and rationalize their "rights" to lust over the porn stars. However, when you jump off of the Rock of faithfulness to God and the keeping of the covenant vow to a spouse of the opposite sex (the only way in which the human race can reproduce ... outside of Frankensteins' lab) how can you say I'm good but you are bad? Like the NAMBLA parade marchers being spit at and told that they can't march with the rest of the Gay Pride marchers because they are sick, how can a society that embraces pornography (whether hardcore or the milder adulterous sexual immuendo material that makes up about 90% of all television, commercials, movies and magazines that are available to children and teens) justify themselves while condeming the homosexuals? If we can buy and love movies and adore actors that are fornicators and adulterers both on and off screen, while reacting with disgust to the gay movies and actors, isn't the conscience already seared and full of hypocrisy? All of the above are deep in sin and in desparate need of Salvation and are channels of evil upon mankind with the intent of destruction of the family relationship and the relationship to the Holy God. They need to hear the truth but also be treated as God's property. Uncompromising truth and love is the only way to stop the slide off of this slope. We as a nation must get back on the Rock. When we can vote for the Adulterer-in-Chief and/or his wife and think nothing about the fact that if they as representatives of a Holy God can so easily break their vows to Him, and then to each other, then why would they treat others any differently? As long as we vote for a Clint Eastwood who is publically shacking up and making babies with Sandra Locke you will never to be able to speak out against the homosexual agenda with effectiveness.
Beat me to it!
You will appreciate this one. Joe Sobran is a gem.
You want to celebrate My ancestors' traditions of discrimination and prejudice Sobran? Would you like to start with you and yours? I didn't think so.
Uh...I think you might be on the wrong website. Please check your bookmarks.
>>>Yes, and I'm sure you are just as vociferous on these other "abominations," right, Former?<<<
Absolutely! However, my level of involvement against those other abominations is in direct proportion to the attempts to force them down my throat and use my tax dollars to indocrinate innocent children into those perversions.
OK, Paper?
>>>When I enter Free Republic it knows who I am, doesn't your set up work that way?<<<
Yes it does but that isn't the only way it works. There is a Logout button that removes those cookies. This permits multiple people to share a PC while not using the same login.
Also, I have no idea as to the number of machines available to you. I'm a small time computer contractor (done the big time before, not doing it again) and I've got 3 PC's sitting here on my home network. If I wanted to bother, each one could have its own FR login.
Ergo, I can not assume that your login procedure is the same as mine.
How did you know he was one of my favorite writers? Have we met before?
Have we met before?
One never knows. It is a strange world.
PAT BUCHANAN is the only presidential candidate who has taken the position the a person can not choose or control their sexual oreintation. This is the most pro-deviant position possible because it leads to the inevitable conclusion that sexual perverts should recieve that same special protections as racial minorities.
Only in your holler.
If your hand causes you to sin, then cut it off. If your eye, pluck it out. Mr. Buchanan surely follows Catholic doctrine; thence it follows that man is born a fallen creature--homos, too. Heredity brings only death; grace alone saves. It is perfectly consistent to believe that we are born with sinful desires and yet must be held accountable for our surrender to them---like murder, gluttony, avarice, sloth........and LUST.
There is no difference between homosexuality, bestiality, necrophilia, pedophilia, rape, and incest. They are all examples of deviant sexual behavior, all are intrinsically harmful to society, all are abominations before God.
This means that your reactions to your daughter being with another woman would be as bad as your son having sex with a dead woman or man, your son having sex with a 3 year old, your daughter being raped, and your father raping your daughter. Wow!!!!!
I neither live in Baltimore nor have any special affinity for Pulaski - I simply paid attention during history class.
You said you were talking about discrimination not persecution. Fine. You wrote:
"How soon you forget. You wouldn't even have been allowed to live where you live in all liklihood."
Were non-ASP whites consigned to ghettos, and were Pulaski's less-well-known ethnic cohorts excluded from polite company? Hardly - you'll have to produce evidence of this.
You seem to be unacquainted with our country's history, so I'll point out a few things. Just a decade before the War for Independence many Americans fought for the British in the French-and-Indian War. In 1776 there were dozens of battle-hardened WASP calvary officers who had seen service in that conflict. If the signers had been discriminatory and looked down on Slavics, why would they appoint a Pole as General of Calvary in preference to "their own kind"? Answer: America is a meritocracy from its inception and the early Americans picked the best man available for the job, regardless of whether he shared their religion or blood. He was an able soldier who had embraced their republican culture and ideals. That was good enough.
I don't think Pulaski rerquired a special permit to live in Northern Virginia. Nor would the Sobrans if they lived then.
And, by the way, William Paca was a Roman Catholic and an Italian-American. He was also elected Governor of Maryland by a majority WASP electorate. Maybe some of those backward, xenophobic, non-WASP hating ancestors of yours voted for him. Oh, but wait - discrimination against non-WASPS in early America was so strong that Paca could never have been elected, let alone own land in Virginia!
#45
"The difference between these (aside from incest) and homosexuality is consent"
The presence or absence of consent is irrelevant. Just because 2 (or more) individuals 'consent' to perform an evil or immoral act does not render that act OK.
"Abominations before 'god' are a religious matter, not the state's."
I have made no mention of the 'state' in my posts so your comment is also irrelevant.
"we are admonished to hate the sin and love the sinner"
I agree, although sometimes this is the hardest part of being a Christian. Take Clinton (for example) ...
Do you have any interests besides Israel and the defense of deviant sexual behavior? I ask this because whenever I see your name here it is invariably on these topics and on the latter issue your views are hard to fathom,coming from a conservative.
This is not to say that I expect a uniformity of opinion as reasonable men could differ on an agreed set of facts but your view seems to me bizarre.
Do you have any interests besides Israel and the defense of deviant sexual behavior?
Ice hockey.
I ask this because whenever I see your name here it is invariably on these topics and on the latter issue your views are hard to fathom,coming from a conservative.
I'm not a Conservative. I'm a Libertarian. You'll see me on other topics too but the topics you mention are where you'll see the most idiots spouting vitriol at me. Ergo, I spend more time in those topics exposing their lack of logic and hatreds.
This is not to say that I expect a uniformity of opinion as reasonable men could differ on an agreed set of facts but your view seems to me bizarre.
What view of mine do you consider bizarre?
137 Posted on 12/09/2001 17:01:10 PST by Zadokite
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |