McCain: ‘Open Sexuality in Military’ Is An ‘Intolerable Risk’ to America
McCain: ‘Open Sexuality in Military’ Is An ‘Intolerable Risk’ to America
In a letter released today by the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) expressed his support for the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy that bans lesbian, gays, and bisexuals from serving openly in the military. McCain said he staunchly opposes openly gay servicemembers, asserting that “open sexuality within military presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and discipline” and national security:
I believe polarization of the personnel and breakdown of unit effectiveness is too high a price to pay for well intentioned but misguided efforts to elevate the interests of a minority of homosexual servicemembers above those of their units.
Most importantly, the national security of the United States, not to mention the lives of our men and women in uniform, are put at grave risk by policies detrimental to the good order and and discipline which so distinguish America’s Armed Services. … I remain opposed to the open expression of homosexuality in the military.
McCain’s personal beliefs are antiquated and ill-informed. The overwhelming majority of the military supports equal rights for all servicemembers. Last December, a poll of servicemembers in Iraq and Afghanistan found that 73 percent were “comfortable with lesbians and gays.” A 2004 poll found that a majority of junior enlisted servicemembers believed gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military, up from 16 percent in 1992. Furthemore, 55 percent of Americans believe “gays and lesbians should be allowed to serve openly in the military.”
McCain claims that permitting gays to serve is detrimental to national security, but since Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was instituted, at least 11,000 servicemembers, hundreds of whom had with key speciality skills such as training in Arabic, have left the military. While McCain vigorously backs the plan to send thousands of troops to Iraq, he should note that the military could attract as many as 41,000 new recruits if gays could serve openly.
Read McCain’s letter HERE.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
Go to Hell, McJowls
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:19 pmI’m sure all of the openly-gay British soldiers who are serving side-by-side American soldiers in Iraq will appreciate that. McCain, to back to the 1950s where you belong.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:20 pmBut, it is okay for straight soldiers to fu*k anything in site.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmWould YOU want to go to battle with someone who’s not just covering your ass, but coveting it too?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmWhat is he so scared of?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:22 pmOpen sexuality in Washington politics (Hookergate Part Two) is an intolerable risk to America. Why don’t you worry about what’s in your own backyard FIRST Mr. Mcain?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:23 pmSatyam - Quoting 360gay newservice does not bolster your “argument ” about a possible increase of 41000 new service members. As my brother says, why does he NEEED to know which guy some other guy wants to sleep with?? Keep that private business to yourself. Continuing to tell me how “normal” an abnormal behaviour is DOES NOT make it “normal”.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:24 pm“open sexuality within military presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and disciplineâ€
Does this mean what I think it means? That hetero soldiers can’t be open about their sexuality either? Isn’t that what this says?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:24 pmMcCain prefers gays remain behind closed doors, like when he sucks off Dick Cheney, while Dubya’s wearing his hat and boots and riding him from “behind”…
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:25 pmOh yeah John . . . I’ve got a friend who says there’s only one
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:26 pmthing he likes better than sucking c*ck . . .
and that’s KICKING A*S !!
There are countries where openly-gay people are serving in the military without any problem. I would like a rational explanation from McCain as to why he believes that American gays are incapable of that.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:26 pmi don’t know how tall mccain is, but however tall he stands, i was unaware that shit could be piled that high… mccain is a pathetic, pandering liar…
And, yes, I DO take it personally
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:27 pmvaliant venus, prove that being gay is “abnormal behavior.”
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:28 pm#9 - Sounds as though you speak from “experience”. Thanks for bolstering my argument.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:28 pmI think there is something to be said for having no gays in the military, and no women either. These are life or death situations we are talking about here. Get distracted on the front lines, and you are dead.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:28 pmIf only blacks could have hid their color and women their gender. Republicans like McCain are anachronisms.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:28 pmI hope like hell he leads off with this tonight.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmAll his hard core constituents enjoy the thought of McPain bashing gays, whether it is in the military or just on some country road.
The other 88% of Americans know he’s just an idiot.
I notice he doesn’t mention the demoralizing effect of all our women troopers being raped!
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmThe Straight Talk Express is on the fast track to nowhere.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:30 pmMcCain is an idiot. He’s spewing the failed Religious Reich rhetoric that lost the Repukes the last election and will lose McCain this one.
Gays have been in the military since there’s been a military.
I’ve read a few military history books that document this fact.
McCain is backing himself into a reich-wingnut corner. He is going to be unelectable. Good.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:31 pmMcCain: “But behind closed doors– woohoo!!!”
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:31 pmValiant Venus has her tongue up Uranus.
Please don’t feed this Repuke troll.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:32 pmjust listening to mccain makes me feel old
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:32 pmWould YOU want to go to battle with someone who’s not just covering your ass, but coveting it too?
Comment by BottomBoy
You worried you might let yourself get carried away and get buggered buttboy?
No?
Then what are you worried about?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:33 pmWhy would anyone support a policy that requires military personnel to mislead their officers?
You think it’s good for unit cohesion to make it official policy for troops to be sneaking around and lying to their comrades?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:33 pm#18: The extra dangers faced by women when they become POWs is an excellent argument against having them in the military.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:33 pmWell, if he had any hope of reaching outside the conservative base to the rest of America, it is gone now. Just replace “homosexual” with “negro” in his speech and would fit the pre-1960s bigotry just fine. Which is where he belongs.
At first the all-white military didn’t know how to integrate blacks, now they do. At first the all-male military didn’t know how to include women, now they do. Now some leaders don’t know how to accept gays, but the military can do it just fine.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:33 pm“I notice he doesn’t mention the demoralizing effect of all our women troopers being raped!” - Comment by madmatt
Excellent point. The military has a SERIOUS problem with rape and it has been covering it up for years. Partly because officers and NCOs are using their rank to rape soldiers.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:34 pmif there had been 145,000 gay soldiers in Iraq right now , Ill bet There would have been an exodus of all iraqis out the country at full speed
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:35 pmI think there is something to be said for having no gays in the military, and no women either. These are life or death situations we are talking about here. Get distracted on the front lines, and you are dead.
Comment by Markk — May 3, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
“Get distracted on the front lines”? Damn. You have obviously never been in a high-stress, dangerous situation if you think that a soldier on patrol is going to be “distracted” by thinking of sex with his patrol partner when he’s searching for IEDs.
Why do right-wingers have so little respect for our servicemen and women?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:36 pmValiunt:
The only person bolstering your argument, is the idiot you see in the mirror.
Markk:
Yah is that why you’re not over there serving, because you’re really a woman deep down? Or just another coward like all the rest we see here.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:37 pm#13 - “valiant venus, prove that being gay is “abnormal behavior.â€
Comment by Republicans are the Fear and Smear Party — May 3, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
In non-graphic terms, the “puzzle pieces” don’t fit - and don’t get confused with the opening that evacuates fecal waste. And as our lesbian friends don’t come naturally equipped, that would be an abnormal pairing, too.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:37 pm#9 - Sounds as though you speak from “experienceâ€. Thanks for bolstering my argument. Comment by valiant venus
You don’t want to see the list of Republican pedophiles again do you? Cause I can show you their experience. Now be reasonavble and quit trying to pass off these politicians,you seem to ‘adore’, as moral or compassionate people.
You have been kicked off your moral highground for the next decade by your own GrOPes, get used to it “Liberal” V V.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:37 pmI remember reading an account by a WW2 combat veteran about a gay man he served with in a line platoon.
The gay guy was the BAR man, handling a 15 pound automatic rifle. The BAR guy always drew fire, because the BAR fired like a machine gun.
Anyway the writer was quite adamant that he and his buddies didn’t care that the guy was gay. The only thing that mattered to them was the guy was a good BAR man.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:39 pmMcCain is archaic! The only thing he should be running for is his meds.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:39 pmValiant Anus, have you ever participated in an oral sex act? Would you consider THAT an “abnormal pairing” too?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:39 pmthere should be a special brigade of gay soldiers say like
” Georges Bushes 66th Gay Spunk Blunderbus regiment”
tell you what that would frighten me ……. surrender would be no option
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:39 pmAnybody got a current link to the Republiperv list?
Last time I saw it, it was over 4 pages long. A long list of Repukes caught for sex crimes.
I bet the DC Madam’s black book is mostly Repukes too. They are real pervs, probably because they suppress it so much.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:40 pmLIberals say, “who cares if you are homosexual or not.”
then they say, “but make sure you make a big deal about if you are gay, tell the whole world and have a whole coming out day. Also, don’t forget to fly your gay flag. But remember, who cares if you are gay or not.”
the sad part is that most Liberals are too stupid to realize the contradiction in their statements.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pm“As my brother says, why does he NEEED to know which guy some other guy wants to sleep with??”
He doesn’t, of course, which is why we should simply allow all qualified people to serve and not worry about what their sexual orientation is.
“Continuing to tell me how ‘normal’ an abnormal behaviour is DOES NOT make it ‘normal’.”
Continuing to pretend that perfectly normal behavior is abnormal DOES NOT make it abnormal.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:41 pmI seriously want to know how these guys explain openly gay people serving in their precious Israeli army. Have they ever been asked?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmShe-Man, I think your pedophilia response is typical “sideways” obfuscation. But yes, please show us the list of scum-sucking immoral Republican/Democrat “straight” pedophiliacs AND the list of GAY pedophiles from both Parties. All are pigs from hell - and I defend none of them - - apparently unlike YOU.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmIn non-graphic terms, the “puzzle pieces†don’t fit - and don’t get confused with the opening that evacuates fecal waste. And as our lesbian friends don’t come naturally equipped, that would be an abnormal pairing, too. Comment by valiant venus
They, GrOPers, like you, speak alot of crap about whats moral, then do just the opposite, like TOBUYASS.
Given the latest rash of corruption and prostitution by YOUR TEAM you need to be over at FreeRepublic spewing about how immoral your team IS before you can even being to criticize anyone else. The Republicans have become neo-liberals.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmTo paraphrase Bill Maher; We need more gays in the military. At least when their stuck, they know how to get out of a sh-thole.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pmWhen the troll’s nickname has “the hater” in it, you know you’re wasting your time trying to discuss this issue with them.
I bet this hater is a “good christian” too. Her pastor tells her who to hate.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:42 pm“LIberals say, ‘who cares if you are homosexual or not.’”
Why yes, dear, we do. We think it’s kind of icky that folks like you and McCain fixate on sexual orientation so much.
“then they say, ‘but make sure you make a big deal about if you are gay, tell the whole world and have a whole coming out day. Also, don’t forget to fly your gay flag.’”
No, dear, we don’t, which is why you can’t find any examples of such things. As usual, you’re simply making shit up. It’s so much easier to have a debate when you get to make up both sides, dear, isn’t it?
“But remember, who cares if you are gay or not.”
Precisely, dear.
“the sad part is that most Liberals are too stupid to realize the contradiction in their statements.”
ROFL…. Since you are, as usual, simply making shit up, I’m afraid that the contradiction only exists in your own mind.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:44 pmAlso, don’t forget to fly your gay flag. - - Is that spandex, puice and periwinkle? Or is that a euphemism.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:45 pmValleyNut,
Why do we need a national prayer day then? It’s not “natural” for man to worship lies and fairy tales. Only those brainwashed from birth have that learned behavior.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:45 pmThe sad part is that most Liberals are too stupid to realize the contradiction in their statements.
Comment by valiantthehater
The sad part is you have been a hypocrite for so long based on the name of a party you actually condone and enable the currrent culture of corruption and prostitution in Washington, Hypocrite.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:46 pmI agree that an all-gay combat unit would be effective.
Those Islamic fundy terrorists really really really hate gays. Even more than the Religious Reich Christofascists hate gays. In Iran, they hang gays, just for being gay.
An all-gay combat unit would really demoralize those terrorists.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:47 pm“In non-graphic terms, the ‘puzzle pieces’ don’t fit”
Dear heart, obviously the “pieces” do, in fact, fit, which is why so many men and women, not to mention all of the various animal species continue to make good use of them. In short, you don’t have a case. But then, you already knew that.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:47 pm#40 - If gayness is SO normal why would I KNOW anyone was gay UNLESS they told me?(But the gay community, obviously feeling inferior and seeking phony acceptance, wants society to give their seal of approval. They keep trying by shoving this sad abnormal behaviour in our faces. FYI - PBJ, it’s none of my business. But if you want me to recommend some basic sex ed primers for you, you might see that my “puzzle piece” argument supplants your confusion…..
Tooodles…..’til later….XOXOX
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:48 pmby the way those Iraqis have been treated at Abu Gharaib , i suspect theres plenty gays in the army, also guantanamo prison guards must be gay , also some of them CIA must be gay phedaphiles too
McCain must have been graped in Vietnam by a bunch of them
McCain also was a necrophiliac till some rotten c*nt split on him ???????
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:48 pmThat National Prayer Day today is a scam.
James Dobson set the whole thing up, to make it look like state governments were endorsing his narrow-minded, hateful brand of phony Christianity.
Organizers of prayer events had to sign an affadavit swearing that they’re good conservative Christofascists. No other faiths need apply.
National Prayer Day is a scam.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pm“#18: The extra dangers faced by women when they become POWs is an excellent argument against having them in the military.
Comment by Markk — May 3, 2007 @ 3:33 pm”
We let thousands of Jewish servicemen fight in Europe. Hell, we drafted them and sent them to Europe.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pm“open sexuality within military presents an intolerable risk to morale, cohesion and disciplineâ€
Unless you’re homophobic, how so? … And if you’re homophobic, that’s YOUR f cking problem!
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:49 pmMcCain is an intolerable risk to the U.S. — As a Senator and potential President…
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:52 pm“They keep trying by shoving this sad abnormal behaviour in our faces.”
Do you hold your husband’s hand in public? Have a picture of him at work? Answer the question “What did you do this weekend?” honestly when the guy at the next fry-o-later asks you?
If your definition of “shoving this sad abnormal behavior in our faces” sounds like any of the above, rather than something that follows the words “Dear Penthouse Variations,” then you really don’t have an argument.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:52 pmBut yes, please show us the list of scum-sucking immoral Republican/Democrat “straight†pedophiliacs AND the list of GAY pedophiles from both Parties. All are pigs from hell - and I defend none of them - - apparently unlike YOU.
Comment by valiant venus
Bwahahha. You come here every day defending ‘your team’ from all the scandals that have been brought to light under this administration. Why are you NOT cheerleading your ‘pseudo morals’ over at freeper hypocrite land?
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:52 pmvaliant venus aka mighty aprhodite, are you sure you live in San Diego? Americans don’t spell “behavior” as “behaviour.” No wonder you have such a hard time understanding honesty.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:53 pmHe/She man - Still waiting for that list of Gay and Straight Pedophiles from Both Parties….
Tooodles……..
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:53 pmSeriously, we’re going to debate the legitimacy of homosexual acts. This is the 21st century. Homosexual acts should be as accepted as heterosexual acts - since they are both mediated by the same fundamental urge…there are just different targets.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:54 pm“LIberals say, ‘who cares if you are homosexual or not.’â€
Why yes, dear, we do. We think it’s kind of icky that folks like you and McCain fixate on sexual orientation so much.
“then they say, ‘but make sure you make a big deal about if you are gay, tell the whole world and have a whole coming out day. Also, don’t forget to fly your gay flag.’â€
No, dear, we don’t, which is why you can’t find any examples of such things. As usual, you’re simply making shit up. It’s so much easier to have a debate when you get to make up both sides, dear, isn’t it?
“But remember, who cares if you are gay or not.â€
Precisely, dear.
“the sad part is that most Liberals are too stupid to realize the contradiction in their statements.â€
ROFL…. Since you are, as usual, simply making shit up, I’m afraid that the contradiction only exists in your own mind.
Comment by PaulB — May 3, 2007 @ 3:44 pm
yeah, don’t worry Pauly wants a cracker, I already knew you lived in a very isolated little box.
just keep on entertaining me little one. you’re posts are fun to read and you make my job at slamming left wing propaganda way too easy.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:58 pm#60 - Yes, I live in beautiful San Diego. (We are fortunate to have Camp Pendleton act as a buffer between LA/Orange County and our little oasis.) And they spell it the way they learned it depending on where they went to school. Thankfully, I have a WONDERFUL assistant at work to correct my spelling and grammatical errors.
Scoooting……..
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:58 pmThe Reperv party is up to their necks in this.
Repervs were in the back of those lim-HO’s.
Repukes also supported sex slavery and forced abortions in the Marianas, what Bill Moyers called “the heart of darkness of the Republican party”.
Repukes are psychpathic perverts. Every last one of them.
May 3rd, 2007 at 3:59 pm“We let thousands of Jewish servicemen fight in Europe. Hell, we drafted them and sent them to Europe.” - Comment by joe
And we put a “H” for Hebrew on their dogtags. In more than one instance, a GI was shipped off to a death camp because of that H.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:00 pm#62 - Lupppey - The “target” makes all the difference between norm vs. abnorm…………If my neighbor gets the urge and the target is the sheep in the pasture, or his step-daughter- that’s normal???…iiiickk! (Pssst….your argument sucks!)
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:01 pmHey McCain, 1955 called - they want their homophobe back.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:02 pmIt used to be considered intolerable to have black troops mixed with white.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:05 pm..Tooodles…..’til later….XOXOX
Comment by valiant venus
V V always runs away when it gets it’s logic tweaked.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:06 pmHey Venus. You look kind of cute. I just wonder what made you grow so twisted and hateful on the inside.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:08 pm“If gayness is SO normal why would I KNOW anyone was gay UNLESS they told me?”
Dear heart, you do realize that those two things are wholly unconnected, right? That knowing whether someone is gay or not has nothing to do with whether it’s normal? You don’t? Oh, dear…
As for knowing whether someone is gay, you know it the same way you know whether someone is straight — meeting their families, pictures of spouses on their desk, idle water-cooler chit-chat about what they did over the weekend, and the like. I know the sexual orientation of every single one of my friends, gay and straight alike.
But hey, if If straightness is SO normal why would I KNOW anyone was straight UNLESS they told me, right?
“(But the gay community, obviously feeling inferior and seeking phony acceptance, wants society to give their seal of approval.”
No, dear, just equal rights, privileges, and opportunity.
“They keep trying by shoving this sad abnormal behaviour in our faces.”
ROFL… There’s a simple solution, dear heart — look the other way.
“FYI - PBJ, it’s none of my business.”
Precisely, dear.
“But if you want me to recommend some basic sex ed primers for you, you might see that my “puzzle piece†argument supplants your confusion…..”
ROFLMAO… Just cannot deal with the fact that you’re wrong, can you? Of course the pieces fit, which is why they’ve been fitting together for as long as there has been sex. TTFN.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:09 pmI like McCain’s advice - let’s re-form the military, and staff it with 100% old men who are no longer interested in sex.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:11 pm“yeah, don’t worry Pauly wants a cracker, I already knew you lived in a very isolated little box.”
ROFLMAO… Nice try, dear. Still waiting for you to point out a single “liberal” who has said anything even remotely resembling what you claim. You can’t, of course, but it’s hilarious watching you duck and weave and try to evade the question, just as you do every time you get caught making shit up.
“just keep on entertaining me little one. you’re posts are fun to read and you make my job at slamming left wing propaganda way too easy.”
Since the “left-wing propaganda” exists solely in your own mind, dear heart, I’m afraid that the “slamming” you’re doing is entirely internal. But do keep going; I’m enjoying myself immensely. I haven’t had this much fun since the last time I dealt with one of you trolls over at another site.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pmValianttheVenushater, what’s your problem?
If you want to think homosexuality is immoral, that’s fine. You just can’t impose that belief on others. Nobody is forcing you to couple with someone of the same sex. Indeed, nobody is forcing you to have sex at all, not even with yourself.
Sex between an adult and a minor is illegal because the law considers a minor capable of informed consent. Rape is also illegal because it involves a lack of consent. Prostitution is sometimes legal and sometimes illegal because issues of consent are problematic in the oldest profession.
Who is McCain kidding? There has always been sexuality in the forces. Jokes about sailors and their preferences are two centuries old. Who cares? Why the fuss? It’s all driven by homophobia and not by any concern for the military. Don’t Ask? Don’t Tell? Don’t make me laugh!
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:12 pm“The ‘target’ makes all the difference between norm vs. abnorm”
Why yes, dear, it does. Alas, this does nothing to bolster your own argument, since having a sexual attraction to another adult of the same sex is perfectly normal, by both the dictionary and the clinical definition of that word.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:13 pmPersonally, I am tired of the religious right shoving their f##king bible in my face and down my throat. Christian hypocrisy irritates the hell out of me.
Practice your damn religion and stop forcing it on me. Get it out of my face.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:14 pmvv - with the sheep, you’re talking about trans-species…which is not normal, nor did I ever say it’s normal.
with the step-daughter, I’m assuming you’re talking about somebody who isn’t of age to procreate…which isn’t normal. Not to mention the psychological damage that causes the minor. And even if you’re not talking about a minor, the pheremones of an unrelated female could produce the urge - making it normal…but not socially acceptable.
When you talk about gay or straight, its another question of social acceptability…not normality. With the “of age step-daughter” example, the guy in that case could (hypothetically) choose any female to satisfy his urge and wouldn’t have to break the social norm by sleeping with the step-daughter. However, in homosexuals, there is no way to satisfy that urge without breaking what homophobes think is socially acceptable. So again, it’s all about the target. There is no way for homosexuals to appease homophobes and satisfy their normal urges like heterosexual people can. Therefore, there is something fundamentally wrong about allowing homophobes to decide what is and isn’t acceptable in this case.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:21 pm“We hold these truths to be self evident, that all White heterosexual Christian men are created equal.”
Personally I’d like to see an all female unit of soliders. I think that would really mess up the islamic fundamentalists. Every time I hear about some woman being forced to wear a Burkah I wanna go over there wearing nothing but a machine gun and kick some serious ass. Too bad they don’t want me in the army.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:26 pmWhomever is getting to VV, keep up the good work! Heh.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:27 pmLunacy - I don’t disagree with you about hypocrites like the gay perv ex-Congressman Mark Foley or any other immoral hypocrite like Newt Gingrich. I guess we can thank the ‘if it feels good do it” crowd from the 60’s for starting our headlong slide into moral relativism.
I don’t force you to practice my religion - quit forcing me to accept the immoral.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:28 pmvv - Immorality is a perception, religion is an absolute. Abstract vs. Concrete. Subjective vs. Objective (mostly). Do you see the difference?
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:33 pmLunacy - I don’t disagree with you about hypocrites like the gay perv ex-Congressman Mark Foley or any other immoral hypocrite like Newt Gingrich. Comment by valiant venus — May 3, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Foley was a pedophile - that’s not “gay” - st*pid bigoted c*nt.
I guess we can thank the ‘if it feels good do it†crowd from the 60’s for starting our headlong slide into moral relativism. Comment by valiant venus — May 3, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
Moral relativism? You mean like cover up the crimes of fellow republicans, and fabricate non-existent smears against democrats? Is that the sort of moral relativism you’re talking about? Well it was the era of draft dodging republicans, with an*l cysts and all…
I don’t force you to practice my religion - quit forcing me to accept the immoral. Comment by valiant venus — May 3, 2007 @ 4:28 pm
No one forces you to be immoral, but you do excuse your immorality through your hypocrisy and *use* of religious dogma. Sorry *child*, but you can’t blame religion for YOUR immorality! It’s ALL YOU - st*pid c*nt!
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:35 pmWhat I find most hilarious is someone in this day and age fixating on something as silly as “the pieces don’t fit,” a self-evidently false statement. The two V’s are definitely good for humor, are they not?
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:36 pm#60 - Yes, I live in beautiful San Diego. (We are fortunate to have Camp Pendleton act as a buffer between LA/Orange County and our little oasis.) And they spell it the way they learned it depending on where they went to school. Thankfully, I have a WONDERFUL assistant at work to correct my spelling and grammatical errors. Scoooting…….. Comment by valiant venus — May 3, 2007 @ 3:58 pm
You better have one to do your work for you as well - because if these posts are any indication of your *legal-mind* - you’re f*cked! Then again, we ALL know you’re a 24 year old Anorexic commodities trader Mighty Aphrodite - you can cut the lies…
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:37 pm“Immorality is a perception” to moral relativists. And if contemporary religion is so absolute, why the moral ambiguity in so many Protestant religions.
You might want to STOP digging now!
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:38 pm#62 - Lupppey - The “target†makes all the difference between norm vs. abnorm…………If my neighbor gets the urge and the target is the sheep in the pasture, or his step-daughter- that’s normal???…iiiickk! (Pssst….your argument sucks!)
Comment by valiant venus — May 3, 2007 @ 4:01 pm
But by your previous argument, those situations are not abnormal because all the “puzzle pieces fit.” I’m not arguing that its normal, just that you need to come up with a different metric for normal.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:39 pmBut yes, please show us the list of scum-sucking immoral Republican/Democrat “straight†pedophiliacs AND the list of GAY pedophiles from both Parties. All are pigs from hell - and I defend none of them - - apparently unlike YOU. Comment by valiant venus
You’ve confused the “pedophelia” with “adult-sexuality”. Most pedophiles are *hetero* in their *adult* sexuality, even when they prey on children of the same gender. Hope that clears it up - but pedophilia is *unrelated* to gender attraction.
I suggest you go get treatment for that homophobia of yours - you do know it’s a *symptom* of mental derangement - don’t you child?
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:39 pmPBJ - Many aspects of morality do not change - unless you are a liberal.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:40 pmVV,
No one is forcing you to accept it, we are just forcing you to live in the same country with it. Just like all you religious nut jobs force me to live in the same country with you.
I’m allowed to talk all I want about how religion is a stupid mythology created by hierarchal groups to control the poor people, and how belief is a coping mechanism that we humans use to help us deal with the unknown. But I still have to live in the same country with you delusional fanatics. I have to respect your rights to attend public mass each week, as it does not affect me, and put up with you telling me how great it is that some guy died 2000 years ago.
And you are allowed to think that being gay is “abnormal” (Which by definition it is, as normal is defined by what “the majority” does, however I think it is a wrong to assume that the abscence of normality is bad. If everyone was normal then there would be no progress no new ideas, because we would all be the same. So your rejection of things that do not fit the normal worldview is based on false pretenses.) You’re also allowed to not like it, and to say that you don’t like it. However you still have to live in the same country with them. You have to respect their rights to do whatever it is they chose to do in the privacy of their bedrooms(As consentint adults) since it doesn’t affect you, and you have to put up with them on occasion pointing out that they are different than you and completely happy about it.
Sucks, doesn’t it. If you don’t like it, LEAVE.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:43 pmSomeone stick a dick in his mouth, PLEASE.
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:47 pmno, it’s better to just have a draft instead of letting gays into the military…
May 3rd, 2007 at 4:58 pmThat National Prayer Day today is a scam.
James Dobson set the whole thing up, to make it look like state governments were endorsing his narrow-minded, hateful brand of phony Christianity.
Organizers of prayer events had to sign an affadavit swearing that they’re good conservative Christofascists. No other faiths need apply.
National Prayer Day is a scam.
Comment by Tom3 — May 3, 2007 @ 3:49 pm
Are you against prayer?
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:03 pm#89 - You are absolutely right!! What someone does in their bedroom is NONE of MY BUSINESS!! So keep it to yourselves. If vociferous homosexuals would quit “sharing” so much personal info they would have far less drama…..
I owe ALL people simple, common courtesy. I owe no one my imprimatur on behaviour I think is immoral.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:04 pmVV: Where are you getting your morality yardstick? Even you are guilty of moral relativism, since you continue to use yourself and your experiences/values as a yardstick by which to measure everyone else. Looks like a perfect example of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.
If you don’t like the hate crimes bill you can either get over it or move on to some place where everyone else thinks JUST LIKE YOU. If you choose the latter, though, you had better be prepared to for a rather bleak and lonely existence. It must be tough being so self-righteous.
Oh, one other option: Call 1-800-CRY-BABY
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:05 pmI don’t think many male soldiers would feel comfortable being in the shower with an openly gay male. I agree, having openly gay people within our military would be an intolerable risk.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:07 pmVVGFU - “I suggest you go get treatment for that homophobia of yours - you do know it’s a *symptom* of mental derangement - ”
You mean by the same folks who used to consider homosexuality a mental disorder???? So this is what Lewis Carroll felt like when he penned “Alice in Wonderland”?!
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:07 pmRandie - My morality yardstick comes from religious upbringing. My position has not changed - that I leave to the moral relativists among you…..
Thank you for your input……Zzzzz……….zzzzzz……..
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:11 pmAs long as gay soldiers are not having sex with each other while non gay soldiers just have to wait to get back to their wives… then I dont see what McCains problem is. This goes for single straight soldiers male and female not having sex either though…
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:12 pmValianttheVenushater, what’s your problem? By all means, believe that homosexuality is immoral and abnormal. You don’t have to do it. You can have sex with someone like yourself or not. And you don’t have to hang out with gays or lesbians if you choose not to.
However, you can’t force gays & lesbians to ‘act’ straight. You can’t punish them in the workplace for being who they are. And you can’t deny them basic human rights because they’re not like you.
VV, you might hate the Swiss with a passion. Well, you don’t have to go there. You don’t have to buy their chocolate, open a numbered bank account, or keep time with one of their cookoo clocks. You don’t have to climb the alps or ski down them. But you can’t prohibit others from going Swiss fondue. To each their own. One man’s meat is another man’s poison. It takes all kinds to make a world. Just ignore those Swiss fondue lovers.
Do you, VV, know many gays or lesbians? You must. They tend to be human like yourself. If you prick them, do they not bleed? If you tickle them, do they not laugh? Who cares? It’s not really any of your business what consenting adults get up to as long as they are consenting and they are adults. So, get over it.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:17 pmVV….
Well you can’t seem to shut up about your religion, why should they shut up about their sexuality.
Besides if they don’t tell you that they are gay you wont know which well dressed man you should be hating with the fire of your being and sentancing to eternal damnation.
You need to be honest with yourself though, what is your morality but an excuse to feel good about yourself by looking down on the actions of others? I mean it is one thing to oppose actions that hurt other people (killing, stealing, lying). But to be morally opposed to other people sharing information with you? Or doing things that have no bearing on you? Isn’t that just a way for you to make yourself feel better for being slave to an outdated code of behavior?
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:18 pmVV - your position has not changed, but it IS relative to your religious upbringing and not to some provable universal truth. Why should YOUR religious mythology that is based upon belief and not established fact take precedence as the prime legal moral benchmark instead of mine?
Additionally, relative to your post #96, homosexuality has not been a recognized mental disorder for more than 30 years, phobias (or UNREASONABLE fears) are still remain in the DSM-IV-TR.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:21 pmThe Bible speaks openly about the gay love of David for Jonathan.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:26 pmEvery other NATO country has managed to integrate openly gay soldiers while America continues to act like a third world country. It’s fucking embarrassing.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:30 pmThe John InVain campaign
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:36 pmRe : # 97
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:43 pmPosition hasn’t changed, vacant venality?
No wonder you’re falling asleep!
You still here Daryll?
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:45 pmI need to have a word with you about your obsession with homosexuality……..
McCain is old and out of touch. People from rigid, authortarian backgrounds tend to become less tolerant with age, why would he be any different?
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:49 pmDavid - Funny you bring up the Swiss. Their complicity with the Nazis is notorious. And lets not examine many Austrians and Vichy French. You’re right, I know quite a few homosexuals and lesbians. I am unfailingly polite to them, which is what they deserve - nothing more, nothing less. i don’t discuss my religion with them and I don’t want them to share their sexual proclivities with me. What do we talk about? Work, vacations, food, shoes, hair and interior design…those are pretty neutral topics with my gay acquaintances.
“The Bible speaks openly about the gay love of David for Jonathan.”
Comment by david
No it doesn’t. You must be referring to your interpretation - Period.
May 3rd, 2007 at 5:58 pmplease the left using code words, like antiquated thinking, to refer to people that know homosexuality is wrong is a very old tactic used by the communists and others that don’t want the opposing views to be heard.
they want to shame people into silence.
once again, who the fuck care if you are gay. If it is not a big deal why does the gay community have coming out day, October 11. Why do they have a flag? why the parades? why the whole coming out crap? why feel the need to tell people that they are gay.
I know fools like Pauly wants a cracker who live in a very isolated little box deny these things happen, but anyone that lives in the real world knows it happens.
Where I graduated from college there was a whole day event on October 11. They had a door in which gay people came through and once they were on they other side they would scream, “I am gay and proud of it!”
I thought it didn’t matter whether you were gay or not?
c’mon Pauly wants a cracker, will you deny that there is a coming out day for gays? will you deny the gay flag, the gay pride parades? only an poorly inform idiot would.
Many on the left, not all want to give gays rights that even heterosexuals don’t have. I don’t have the right to get married, I need permission from my State and I must get a marriage license before I can get married. Yet the left wants to give gays the right to get married. A right no heterosexual enjoys.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:08 pm#100 - “Well you can’t seem to shut up about your religion, why should they shut up about their sexuality.”
I never discuss my religion with gay people I know. I don’t discuss my sexuality with them, why would I want to hear about their private lives?
“Besides if they don’t tell you that they are gay you wont know which well dressed man you should be hating with the fire of your being and sentancing to eternal damnation.”
You’re right. I don’t want to know - it’s none of my business. And it’s certainly not my job to damn anyone - that is between them and God.
“You need to be honest with yourself though, what is your morality but an excuse to feel good about yourself by looking down on the actions of others?”
I am honest with myself. My moral code is road map for behaviour but you seem to feel pretty superior accepting aberrant behavior…which is of course, your business.
“I mean it is one thing to oppose actions that hurt other people (killing, stealing, lying).”
We agree on something!!
“But to be morally opposed to other people sharing information with you? Or doing things that have no bearing on you? Isn’t that just a way for you to make yourself feel better for being slave to an outdated code of behavior?” Comment by Shinobi
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:10 pmI don’t want my neighbour to share the fact he’s having an affair with his secretary with me. I’m not interested in your bathroom functions. I do not want to know how much money you make or how you pay your bills. IT’S NONE OF MY BUSINESS. And since I believe the Author of “outdated codes of behaviour” outranks you - I’ll throw my lot with Him.
how about the homosexual only schools, which are public schools, which means everyone taxes are going to pay for these regardless of your moral believes…..they are in New York, and other cities around the USA.
this is complete infringement on people’s right. But let us not forget the left odesn’t care much about the rights of those they disagree with.
Pauly wants a cracker, my poorly educated fool, will you also deny that these schools exist?
I am sure you will my entertainer boy.
entertaing me kid, post, all your post are a joke. So post away and have me laugh at your stupidity.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:13 pmYou know it is amazing, look at this left wing wackos using vile and hate to when they speak about religion and religious people. Look how much they hate anyone they believe is religious, mainly Christian.
but God help anyone that dares speak against what the left thinks is moral…….no matter whether you use slurs or insults towards them, if you dare say homosexuality is wrong without using any vile or venom, they will try to silence you through insults, through shame, by calling you names, etc.
so the left believes that they have the right to use venom, hate and vile against religious people, but if anyone on the right speaks with the same venom, hate and vile, then they are antiquated and hateful, not the left wingers.
the hypocrisy on the left, amazing. so sad. They love freedom of speech to attack Chirstianity, but they hate freedom of speech when anyone attacks homosexuality.
the sad part is that the left believes that their hypocrisy is not noticed.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:18 pmEverything is a risk to the US. Thank goodness US is the most powerful country in the world…
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:31 pm“You know it is amazing, look at this left wing wackos using vile and hate to when they speak about religion and religious people.”
LOL… You know, it is amazing. Look at this right-wing zealot using vile and hate [sic] to when [sic] they speak about liberals and Democrats.
“Look how much they hate anyone they believe is religious, mainly Christian.”
Look how much they hate anyone who disagrees with them, mainly liberals.
“but God help anyone that dares speak against what the left thinks is moral”
but God help anyone that dares speak in favor what the right thinks is immoral.
“…….no matter whether you use slurs or insults towards them, if you dare say homosexuality is wrong without using any vile or venom, they will try to silence you through insults, through shame, by calling you names, etc.”
no matter whether you use slurs or insults towards them, if you dare say homosexuality is perfectly normal without using any vile or venom, they will try to silence you through insults, thorough shame, by calling you names, etc.
“so the left believes that they have the right to use venom, hate and vile against religious people”
so the right believes that they have the right to use venom, hate, and vile [sic] against liberals.
“but if anyone on the right speaks with the same venom, hate and vile, then they are antiquated and hateful, not the left wingers.”
but if anyone on the left speaks with the same venom, hate, and vile [sic], then they are antiquated [sic] and hateful, not the right wingers.
“the hypocrisy on the left, amazing. so sad.”
the hypocrisy on the right, amazing, so sad.
“They love freedom of speech to attack Chirstianity, but they hate freedom of speech when anyone attacks homosexuality.”
They love freedom of speech to defend their hate speech, but they hate freedom of speech when anyone calls them on it.
“the sad part is that the left believes that their hypocrisy is not noticed.”
the sad part is that the right believes that their hypocrisy is not noticed.
I love it when VT writes my posts for me, don’t you?
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:35 pmI owe ALL people simple, common courtesy. I owe no one my imprimatur on behaviour I think is immoral.
Comment by valiant venus
_______________________
Heterosexual soldiers are given the “common courtesy” of posting pictures of their lovers on their bunks, talking about their lovers, and kissing their lovers upon returning from duty. If a heterosexual soldier dies, his or her spouse is given honors in the name of the soldier and monetary compensation. But a homosexual soldier…no such “common courtesy”. You, cowardly cupid, and your like-minded bigots ARE forcing your definition of religious morality into the definition of social morality.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:38 pm“how about the homosexual only schools, which are public schools, which means everyone taxes are going to pay for these regardless of your moral believes…”
Oh, you mean like the other various public schools that have various goals, student bodies, charters, etc.?
“this is complete infringement on people’s right.”
LOL… No, dear, it’s not. They are set up by the duly-elected representatives. If the people of the community don’t like them, they can always vote to replace those representatives.
“But let us not forget the left odesn’t care much about the rights of those they disagree with.”
Sorry, dear, but we aren’t like you. We believe in the rights of everyone, even homosexuals.
“entertaing me kid, post, all your post are a joke. So post away and have me laugh at your stupidity.
LOL… Oh, you mean like claiming that your “rights are infringed?” Love it, sweetie.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:40 pm“What someone does in their bedroom is NONE of MY BUSINESS!!”
ROFL… Then why are you fixating on it, dear?
“So keep it to yourselves.”
Most of them do, dear.
“If vociferous homosexuals would quit ’sharing’ so much personal info they would have far less drama…..”
“If those black people would just quit forcing themselves on us in public places, they would have far less drama.”
“I owe ALL people simple, common courtesy.”
Yes, you do, dear, along with their guaranteed rights, privileges, and responsibilities.
“I owe no one my imprimatur on behaviour I think is immoral.”
Dear heart, has it really escaped your notice that nobody gives a damn what you think is immoral? We just aren’t going to let you write your morality into law.
At least you’ve stopped making silly arguments about the pieces not fitting! That was fricking hilarious!
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:45 pm“quit forcing me to accept the immoral.”
We aren’t, dear. We’re just preventing you from writing your morality into law. You don’t like homosexuals? Look away, dear. It’s quite simple.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:47 pmPauly wants a cracker….
Thanks kid, thanks for the laughs. You have proven to lack originality, sense of humor and you are poorly educated.
Son, thank you for making me laugh.
Once again, obey me, post away and make me laugh. Post for my amusement child. You seem to do well when told to follow orders.
Post kid, post and amuse me.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:51 pmPaulB
I just wanted to tell you that I enjoy reading your posts. They are a great combination of biting humor and compassionate logic. I especially like the added “dear”, “dear heart”, and “sweetie” references - which must be very irritating to the “homosexualists” (I like that newly coined word for a person who is bigoted against homosexuals! - I just made it up typing this.)
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:52 pmWhat was most hilarious about VT’s little rant about how vile we all are is that really aren’t any posts here that contain anything even remotely resembling what she’s ranting about! As usual, she’s ranting against those evil liberals that exist solely in her own mind.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:52 pmI just love VT. She can’t answer the points I raise, so she has to duck, dodge, and weave and do everything in her power to obfuscate and avoid. It’s hilarious watching her at work, particularly when she gets caught simply making shit up. Still waiting for you to point us to those evil liberals, dear heart. After all, if there are so many of them, it should be easy to point them out to us, right?
Thanks for the laughs, VT. Trust me, as long as you keep writing mindless partisan drivel and really idiotic crap, I’ll be right here poking fun at you. This is just too funny to miss.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:55 pm“I especially like the added ‘dear’, ‘dear heart’, and ’sweetie’ references”
I do try to have fun. I wouldn’t do this if I were debating someone really worth debating, of course. Then it would simply be annoying and it would shut down the debate. Against morons and trolls like the two V’s here, though, I feel no such compunction. I have a wonderful time counter-trolling them and watching them froth at the mouth as they get called on their crap. Sooner or later, I’ll get tired of it and move on, though; there just isn’t much challenge with people as clueless as this. Most of the time, they don’t even try to make sense — it’s just the usual mindless partisan drivel and whiny rants.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pmPauly wants a craker…
really, nothing remotly close to what I am talking about…..Once again reading comprehension not your forte, eh?
why don’t you read ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus or Tom3’s posts, eh?
yeap, reading comprehension ot the forte of a left wing parrot. C’mon Pauly, want a cracker?
just post away child, you amuse me.
May 3rd, 2007 at 6:58 pmPauly wants a cracker,
here is a simple question for you….I am sure you being a simpleton you will be able to answer. Where in the Constitition of the United States do we find the right to marriage?
while you are it, if marriage is a right, why does everyone who wants to get married have to apply for a marriage license?
Freedom of speech is a right, correct? do we need to apply for a license to excercise this right?
I take it you weren’t taught how think on your own, were you? all you do is repeate like a parrot what you have been brainwashed to believe.
I am telling you kid, I know it has to suck to be you and to wake up each morning and to find out that you, are still you.
peace and love brother.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:01 pmit’s just the usual mindless partisan drivel and whiny rants.
Comment by PaulB — May 3, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
well, you have that right. Read the rants and raves, full of hate posts from the left. We can actually agree on something. Nice of you to admit this.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:03 pmPauly,
you never answered, why are you so obssesed with me? why do you feel the need, the want, the must to respond to my posts? not getting enough attention at home? mommy doesn’t let you out much? which one is it?
I am telling you kid, let me give you the information to my psychologist friend, he makes a fortune out clinacly depressed left wing fools like you. he made a fortune when left wingers ran to psychologists when Bush won over Kerry. You know how weak minded you guys are.
I almos, almost, feel pity for you, almost. :)
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:04 pmPBJ - “….has it really escaped your notice that nobody gives a damn what you think is immoral? We just aren’t going to let you write your morality into law.”
As usual, you’re late to the table. What you think of my morals is none of my concern - I don’t care about your opinion. But why is the homosexual community so intent on changing minds if they don’t care about the moral compass? (Hint - This systematic assualt of traditional values has been underway for more than 30 years - obviously, someone…somewhere seeks wider acceptance of the abnormal.) (Hint #2 - We have been very successful at the voting booth in the vast majority of states regrding gay “marriage”. That is writing our morality into law….Checkmate….)
PLC - Your United Church of Christ/liberal Protestant teachings seem socially fluid - a bit like quicksand……do be careful.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:07 pmWhere in the Constitition of the United States do we find the right to marriage?
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:14 pmComment by valiantthehater
__________________________________
Such a sad attempt! The Constitution is a limit on governmental powers and it specifically indicates that where the government is not given explicit regulatory powers that the people retain any and all rights, even those not referenced in the Constitution. I would also argue that marriage could be considered a form of the right of assembly or association.
PLC - Your United Church of Christ/liberal Protestant teachings seem socially fluid - a bit like quicksand……do be careful.
Comment by valiant venus
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pm____________________________
First, I have never said I belonged to the United Church of Christ and even if I do, it’s irrelevant to the POLITICAL debate. It is you who should be careful - careful of attacking my religious beliefs because I can demonstrate that I am not a pacifist. I don’t need a snot-nosed, 22 year old who has lied about her background and joking about being the mother of a dead baby lecturing me about morality in any way, shape or form. This is especially true when her posts cannot respond to the logic or facts, but only rely on such comments as the one I referenced above as a response. Your homosexualist attitudes fit very well with the rest of your bigotry.
I am not FORCING you to ‘practice’ gay sex either - quit forcing me to believe in YOUR god which you Christians do on a daily basis and try to legislate every single day by forcing non-Christians to accept your ‘immorals’!! Your ‘morality’ isn’t mine and vice versa so GET THE F%^K OUT OF MY FACE.
May 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pmDear PLC - Thank you for correcting me. I meant to say liberal Protestant Churches and teachings (i.e. United Church of Christ)….And the ONLY reason anything you say about religiosity is open for debate is your chosen moniker. Obviously, we belong to two different faiths - one more traditional, the other more free-wheeling….
Oh, to be 22 again… I always had the notion you were as gullible as you are “self-righteous”. I should be worried because you’re “no pacifist”? Now that’s a laugh…from a guy who is so sensitive he confuses feelings with facts. That macho stuff probably is a real turn off to your powerhouse wife.
Lunacy - I am not forcing you to believe in God…..Your god-less beliefs still don’t change biology or traditional societal norms…..next…..
May 3rd, 2007 at 8:30 pm“really, nothing remotly close to what I am talking about…”
Yes, dear, nothing, which is why you can’t find any specific examples to cite.
“Once again reading comprehension not your forte, eh?”
No, dear, that’s not a problem I share. Thanks ever so for your concern, though; it really touches my heart.
“why don’t you read ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus or Tom3’s posts, eh?”
I have, dear. Did you, perchance, have a point to make?
Love the ducking and weaving, dear heart. By the way, did you ever figure out that I was quoting your words back to you to reveal your hypocrisy? No? Ah … sorry; clearly I overestimated your intelligence.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:07 pm“here is a simple question for you….I am sure you being a simpleton you will be able to answer.”
Always happy to oblige, dear.
“Where in the Constitition of the United States do we find the right to marriage?”
Dear heart, I suggest you take it up with the United States Supreme Court, since they have at least twice found that marriage is a “fundamental right.” I’m sure that they will be delighted to find out they are wrong.
“while you are it, if marriage is a right, why does everyone who wants to get married have to apply for a marriage license?”
ROFL… Oh my … this is wonderful. Dear heart, if this argument even remotely made sense, I might feel moved to answer. Since it doesn’t, I fear I’ll have to give it a pass and just let the idiocy stand for all to see. Free clue: the formal record of an instance of a fundamental right has nothing to do with whether the action is indeed a fundamental right.
“I take it you weren’t taught how think on your own, were you? all you do is repeate like a parrot what you have been brainwashed to believe.”
ROFL… Oh, the irony…
“I am telling you kid, I know it has to suck to be you and to wake up each morning and to find out that you, are still you.”
Whatever you say, dear. Ta-ta, snookums.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:12 pm“well, you have that right. Read the rants and raves, full of hate posts from the left.”
No, dear. I see that reading comprehension still eludes you.
“We can actually agree on something. Nice of you to admit this.”
Alas, dear one, we don’t. I do hope this won’t bother you too much. Personally, I’m devastated, of course.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:13 pm“As usual, you’re late to the table.”
No, dear, I’m not, but it’s nice of you to pretend so that you can duck the question.
“What you think of my morals is none of my concern - I don’t care about your opinion.”
Precisely, dear.
“But why is the homosexual community so intent on changing minds if they don’t care about the moral compass?”
LOL… Dear heart, they aren’t even remotely bent on changing your mind. They are simply fighting for the rights, privileges, and responsibilities they are entitled to. And fighting to prevent people like you from writing their “morality” into law.
“(Hint - This systematic assualt of traditional values has been underway for more than 30 years”
Dear heart, gay men and women have been fighting for their rights for a lot longer than that.
“obviously, someone…somewhere seeks wider acceptance of the abnormal.)”
Dear heart, since homosexuality is not abnormal, by either the clinical or dictionary definition of that word, I fear you, once again, do not have a point. Moreover, as already noted, they are simply fighting for their rights.
“(Hint #2 - We have been very successful at the voting booth in the vast majority of states regrding gay “marriageâ€.”
And losing on hate crimes and anti-discrimination laws. Moreover, gay men and women have won civil unions and even marriage in multiple states now, and that number will continue to grow, since the younger generation is far more enlightened than the older generation. In 50 years, everyone’s going to wonder just what the fuss was all about, just as is true of interracial marriage.
“That is writing our morality into law….Checkmate….)”
Yes and no, dear. Yes, that’s writing morality into law; no, that’s not checkmate. Those laws can and will be overturned. You’ve already lost, dear; you just cannot bring yourself to realize it yet.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:18 pmvalianthater - I think PBJ is VVGFU’s medicated metrosexual brother……That poooor mother!
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:19 pm“Your god-less beliefs still don’t change biology”
Sorry, dear, but biology is on the side of gay men and women, as any study of the science would quickly show.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:20 pm“I don’t need a snot-nosed, 22 year old who has lied about her background and joking about being the mother of a dead baby”
Online, unfortunately, you simply cannot accept anyone’s word for who or what they are. Just look at “Jake,” for example, whom I’ve seen on several blogs using several handles and several identities. I rather doubt that either of the V’s has been truthful about their background.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:22 pm“I think PBJ is VVGFU’s medicated metrosexual brother”
What makes you think I’m a man, dear? Or straight? So nice of you to care, though. It just makes me feel all warm and fuzzy.
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:23 pmNormal - –adjective - conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.
PBJ - Obviously, the definition of the word “normal” eludes you - otherwise, you apply a definition which suits your poorly crafted “argument” best. Unlike sexual behaviours, which have morality standards attached to them, being left handed or red headed is “abnormal”, but certainly no morality attaches - unless you are a lefthanded redhead homosexual who want the people of your state to recognize “your union”.
Those Contitutional Amendments will be a bit toughter to overturn…..I could care less about civil unions - if that allows homosexuals to feel “normal” while they play house, so what.
Toooodles………….
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:30 pmPBJ - I don’t care if you’re a eunich, a gay man, a straight mom, an overweight butch lesbian, etc. It’s been my experience that most “people” who are named Paul by their parents (or call themselves Paul) are male. Nothing would surprise me…..
May 3rd, 2007 at 9:34 pm“Normal - –adjective - conforming to the standard or the common type; usual; not abnormal; regular; natural.”
Yes, dear, and by those definitions homosexuality is indeed normal, just as it is normal using the clinical definition.
“Obviously, the definition of the word “normal†eludes you”
No, dear, I’m afraid the problem is yours. You simply do not understand the word, I fear. Ah, well… maybe some day.
“otherwise, you apply a definition which suits your poorly crafted ‘argument’ best.”
Dear heart, I’m not making an argument; I’m simply poking holes in yours. An all too easy task, I fear, since your basic argument is that homosexuality is icky. It’s clear you know nothing of biology, nothing of psychology or psychiatry, and nothing of the science in this area. I still love the bit about how “the pieces don’t fit.” I’ve been passing that one around and everyone’s gotten a good laugh at it, gay and straight alike.
“Unlike sexual behaviours, which have morality standards attached to them, being left handed or red headed is ‘abnormal’,”
No, dear, they aren’t, by the strict definition of the word “abnormal,” a definition which still eludes you, alas. As for “morality,” I fear you have a problem there, as well, since morality is an individual definition, not universal. I consider homosexuality to be quite moral, thanks.
“Those Contitutional Amendments will be a bit toughter to overturn”
So? It will still happen. When you consider just how far gay men and women have come i