Another day, another Right-wing hypocrite.

[mikeyh9in]

Inferior traits constantly show up in populations.

The trait could be considered superior in some situation - you could make the argument. Fair enough. But overall....well, if everyone turned gay the baby production would likely drop significantly. Dontcha think ? Not really a superior idea.

Again, trying to judge sexual orientation is not getting any of us anywhere.

A superior trait does not mean that everyone has to have it.

 

[conntom]

A superior trait does not mean that everyone has to have it.

But it suggests that it is enviable by the whole population.

Going on Darwinism then, the female of the species would select the males more often with that feature. Where does that leave us?

Again, it is a futile argument. It is what it is. Naturally occurring. Not needing of judgement either way.

 

[B_OtterJoq]

I'm Tea party-ish and I fully reject that statement as would many Tea Party people.

Yeah, but they'd be wrong.

Again.

 

[mikeyh9in]

It was not rhetorical... the anti-gay organizations have used this term "militant gay agenda" constantly to stoke fear into people. You continue to use it (intentional or not)... without defining it. You are continuing to propagate this nebulous idea that somehow there exists a secret document that is passed onto all new gays titled "secret gay militant agenda" that they must follow.

It is stupid, but what is more stupid are the assholes that pretend that words don't matter... you are continuing to enforce those fears in people.

Your question was rhetorical anyways. Was it not? I don't think you need me to define it. Anyting I would say would be my opinions on such things.

Stop looking for a fight. It gets you nowhere. If you are set to disagree with me and call names then you have made that clear and accomplished your goal. You can feel free to move on.

 

[mikeyh9in]

But it suggests that it is enviable by the whole population.

Going on Darwinism then, the female of the species would select the males more often with that feature. Where does that leave us?

Again, it is a futile argument. It is what it is. Naturally occurring. Not needing of judgement either way.

There are a lot of fat females in the midwest married to a lot of gays. Ask Larry Craig's wife, Rev. Reker's wife, Haggar's wife, (on and on)... To bad it is not quite as easy to have a gay baby... which suggests nature's requirement for homosexuals is not strictly hereditary.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

Sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me.

The fact that so many of you resort to personal attacks is telling.

And I'm sure when you refer to people as "liberal" you're meaning it as a compliment.

Spare us the fake-ass morality routine. You may not type four or five letter descriptive adjectives, but you insult and attack people just as much as anyone else.

 

[conntom]

I say liberal only as it describes one's politics.

I understand why the left feels the way it does. I feel no need to belittle or name call as you and some of your cronies do. I've stated several times before that I feel their heart is often in the right place. I simply disagree with your methods of managing the problems we face.

The fact you can't take that at face value and accuse me of fake morality, sadly, says more about you than it does me.

I wish you well. I hope you come to grips with disagreement and handle it better. You are often capable of making good points and I respect that but it often gets lost in your spiteful, venomous typing.

 

[B_VinylBoy]

I say liberal only as it describes one's politics.

So what... you still imply that it's a bad thing which is an insult.

I understand why the left feels the way it does.

SNORE.... seriously, watching you start every gripe with rhetoric about "the left" and "liberals" is beyond tired.

I feel no need to belittle or name call as you and some of your cronies do.

But you still insult them by implying that their way of life is wrong. You remind me of a very young starinvestor... another noted anti-liberal who made it a trend to associate everything they dislike with government with one group. And BTW... although I tend to agree with many of your adversaries they are not my "cronies". They are all individual people, just as I am. The more you realize this, the less you'll stop trying to put us all in one political box in a sad attempt to label everyone with one generalizing stroke.

The fact you can't take that at face value and accuse me of fake morality, sadly, says more about you than it does me.

It says that I can read between the lines. Trust me, I know bullshit when I see it.

I wish you well. I hope you come to grips with disagreement and handle it better. You are often capable of making good points and I respect that but it often gets lost in your spiteful, venomous typing.

Oh, I haven't even begun to get spiteful. You obviously don't know me as well as you think. Ask around... I can get much worse when necessary. The key word here is "necessary".

 

[FRE]

Crackoff....everything you say is right but when you hold a position of trust with young people there is less room for the normal occurrences of crime to be tolerated.

The Catholic church needs to feel some sever punishment for what happened and particularly for how they handled it.

There has been some sever punishment, but not enough of them have been severed from the church.

 

[FRE]

Question for you... and just asking, since most homosexuals are anti-creationism and pro-Darwinism.

Just askin'?

Interesting. Are you assuming that most non-gays are pro-creationism and anti-Darwinism? Please state the source of your statistics which show that most non-gays are pro-creationism and that most gays are anti-creationism. If you are going simply by anecdotal information, I suggest that you take some courses in statistics to learn the importance of random samples.

 

[FRE]

It was not rhetorical... the anti-gay organizations have used this term "militant gay agenda" constantly to stoke fear into people. You continue to use it (intentional or not)... without defining it. You are continuing to propagate this nebulous idea that somehow there exists a secret document that is passed onto all new gays titled "secret gay militant agenda" that they must follow.

It is stupid, but what is more stupid are the assholes that pretend that words don't matter... you are continuing to enforce those fears in people.

As a gay man, I think that I must have missed something. I have not been presented with a copy of the "militant gay agenda" and am wondering where I can find a copy of it.

 

[D_Tim McGnaw]

Interesting. Are you assuming that most non-gays are pro-creationism and anti-Darwinism? Please state the source of your statistics which show that most non-gays are pro-creationism and that most gays are anti-creationism. If you are going simply by anecdotal information, I suggest that you take some courses in statistics to learn the importance of random samples.

Bam! The whole basis of his question was statistical nonsense, nice one :wink::biggrin1:

 

[mikeyh9in]

FRE,

You must have missed that meeting.

I love that folks through the term around, like everyone knows what it means. I am very interested to learn what people believe is on that Militant Gay Agenda.

Of course like everything else the "right" or "republicans" do, they will through the term out there and make zero attempt to define it... even when asked.

I suppose (and pure theory here) that the "Militant Gay Agenda" would have on it:

- Be able to walk down the street without be called "Fag"
- Be able to go into bars where other gays hang out, without it be busted by cops and beaten.
- Be able to Adopt children
- Be able to be not be discriminated against for employment
- Be able to provide health insurance to my partner without a heavy tax penalty (equal with heterosexual couples)

It seems *way* too militant to me... I guess since we sometimes wear army fatigues they through in that "militant" word to scare everyone.

As a gay man, I think that I must have missed something. I have not been presented with a copy of the "militant gay agenda" and am wondering where I can find a copy of it.

 

[FRE]

Some people also complain that we shouldn't be letting our sexual orientation be known, and they claim that they don't. However, they do!! They even blatantly announce their engagements in newspapers!! They wear wedding rings!! They have photos of their spouses and children on their desks at work!! And we're supposed to hide the fact that we are gay? How hypocritical!!

 

[dick4dick]

George Rekers is a a Baptist minister and co-founded the Family Research Council with James Dobson and is one of the nation's leading anti-gay activists. He hired a gay escort to accompany him on a recent trip to Europe.
What a asshole!
Christian Fundamentalist Gay for Hire


Here's a picture of the 20yo puerto rican hairless twink Reker hired to help him with his baggage and sacks.
George Reker's Gay 4 Pay

 

[B_Nick4444]

they're both homely as hell

I can see why it was a monetary transaction

 

[D_Wally Walnuts]

I saw this on Colbert Report...priceless comedy.

 

[B_talltpaguy]

Redundant thread.. this topic already has an active thread discussing it...

http://www.lpsg.org/182391-another-day-another-right-wing.html

 

[TurkeyWithaSunburn]

:repost:
http://www.lpsg.org/182391-another-day-another-right-wing.html

Anyway, seriously, he hired the escort to help him with his bags because he had an operation and couldn't lift heavy things? Uhm yah sure you betcha that's believable, if you're living in a bubble :rofl:

Link to the story and link to the whore he hired were posted in the thread. But who can be bothered clicking for minor details like that.

 

[dick4dick]

Here's the 20yo twink he hired ...
George Reker's Gay 4 Pay