This is Moon’s homophobic agenda being pushed here pure and simple. You don’t even mention what a rabid homophobe the WT owner is – as if there is no connection. Moon has pushed his homophobia in many ways, like funding Falwell and other religious extremists. Moon brags about using his paper and “other activities” to “influence” America. Moon has paid billions in overseas and often swindled cash – to push his ideology and most certainly has done so through his propaganda media. He has been wildly successful but TP won’t point a finger at him or even use his name.

You don’t honestly believe Moon is not the one who set the agenda for the paper do you? More so than say Rupert Murdoch, who you will criticize, does for his media. Yet, TP won’t even use Moon’s name in a post.

In a way you are misleading your readers and covering for Moon’s agenda whether you see it or not. The nation is blind to how much influence Moon has had over the political direction of the country the last 25 years. Moon has been the backbone of hard right politics that long. No one outspent him bringing this horror to our country. Moon is not even a citizen. NOT a citizen. Go ahead; imagine our nation absent the WT and Moon’s other fronts like the American Freedom Coalition or his billions in overseas cash funding people like Richard Viguerie, LaHaye and Falwell. How “close” do you think the 2000 election would have been absent his mind molding efforts? But TP, which supposedly has a goal to get the truth or reality out, is either naïve, uninformed on the biggest scandal and national security problem the nation has never faced, or they are just too stupid to see the guy who has been kicking their world view in the nuts all these years.

If you are too frightened to take on the man behind the curtain, what good are you?

Here let me show you how it is done.

Today, the Washington Times helped push the right’s attack on Dear Abbey over her support of gay marriage. The owner of the Washington Times and possibly the biggest homophobe on the planet, SUN MYUNG MOON brags about using the paper to influence America. Moon has been quoted as calling for the elimination of gays in his vision for the world in a talk to followers.

Then you could try pointing out that the paper is funded with billions in overseas cash that former members attest is laundered into the country by the bagful.

I dare anyone to watch this panel discussion featuring three former editors of Moon’s media and then tell the Washington Times is not Moon’s tool to screw our nation.

Here’s a quote from the talk given by the frost editor of the WT, James Whelan. He knows what he is talking about.

Seriously TP, like so many others, how long can you continue to look at something and not see it? This is in no way a freedom of speech or religious issue, if you think that you are grossly uninformed as to who Moon is.

http://tinyurl.com/yqqbmz

“They (the Moonies) are subverting our political system. They’re doing it through front organizations–most of them disguised–and through their funding of independent organizations–through the placement of volunteers in the inner sanctums of hard-pressed organizations. In every instance–in every instance–those who attend their conferences, those who accept their money or their volunteers, delude themselves that there is no loss of virtue because the Moonies have not proselytized. That misses the central, crucial point: the Moonies are a political movement in religious clothing. Moon seeks power, not the salvation of souls. To achieve that, he needs religious fanatics as his palace guard and shock troops. But more importantly, he needs secular conscripts–seduced by money, free trips, free services, seemingly endless bounty and booty–in order to give him respectability and, with it, that image of influence which translates as power.”

This is the basis for much of my liberal/progressive stand on issues – including the U.S.’s misguided foray into Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan.

I feel that liberty is not the specific domain of either party.

Examples:

conservatives want to protect your liberty to own a gun.

liberals want to protect a woman’s liberty to reproductive rights.

conservatives want to protect you right to spend your own money vs. empowering the government to spend it for you.

liberals want to protect you from government intrusion into your personal life (be able to marry who you want to marry, be free from government wiretaps, to not be censored from pornography or other forms of expression, etc)

Obviously, there’s more on either side. I generally come down on the side that I preceive that promotes more individual liberty.(I admit there are strong anti-liberty arguments for the forray into the war on terror).

I am also amazed out how generally, both ideologies seem to use the founding father’s as the foundation of their various principles (the founder’s seem to enjoy universally strong approval).

I just had a discussion with a guy I work with that is convinced the founder’s (who he believes where all Christian) would be appalled at what he sees as the lefts attempt to rid Christ and religion from what he believes is a Christian nation.

I disagreed with him, basically in total, but I found it interesting that I also used my perception of the founders to make my case.

Again, I find this to be succinctly profound.
This is the basis for much of my liberal/progressive stand on issues – including the U.S.’s misguided foray into Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan.

Conservatives that think they stand for liberty, need to consider the liberty of those they disagree with.

backup Says:
she is a disciple of the sexual revolution, which basically says if it feels good, do it.”

If this logic is so offensive to Republicans, let’s have them agree that they will abstain from any sex with their spouses unless the purpose is to concieve children.

If it feels good, do it. Isn’t that kind of a basic tennet of the Declaration of Independance. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

You should do all the ‘feel good’ stuff you can, as long as it doesn’t impact the liberties of your neighbors. Here’s the thing: homosexuals aren’t impacting conservative liberties; they are only upsetting their bigotry.

May 1st, 2008 at 1:18 pm

Every once in a while, Cap’n, you make sense.

That was YOU?????

she is a disciple of the sexual revolution, which basically says if it feels good, do it.”

If this logic is so offensive to Republicans, let’s have them agree that they will abstain from any sex with their spouses unless the purpose is to concieve children.

If it feels good, do it. Isn’t that kind of a basic tennet of the Declaration of Independance. Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

You should do all the ‘feel good’ stuff you can, as long as it doesn’t impact the liberties of your neighbors. Here’s the thing: homosexuals aren’t impacting conservative liberties; they are only upsetting their bigotry.

Where’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?

Daryll is busy. He’s acting as substitute scoutmaster for Mark Foley’s Boy Scout troop.

The current one gives especially crappy advice most of the time. I often use her columns in a high school religious ed class to show how not to handle a situation. Much of the advice is evil and nasty – retribution, holding a grudge forever, etc all seem to be a-ok in her book.

when it comes to sex, she is a disciple of the sexual revolution, which basically says if it feels good, do it.”

As opposed to the modern conservative Christian ethos of:

“If it feels good, demonize it, THEN do it when you think no one is watching..”

And racial discrimination is a form of “traditional morality” too.

As for marriage, well divorce, cohabitation and out-of-wedlock parenthood are not only legal, but widely accepted. The idea that allowing gays to marry would be the real threat to marriage is pretty ridiculous.

“Late” founder? Let’s not kill off the original “Abby” just yet. Pauline Phillips, the original “Abigail van Buren”, started passing the majority of the writing duties onto her daughter Jeanne in the mid-90’s, due to the onset of Alzheimer’s Disease. However, she (Pauline) is still alive.

Her identical twin sister, Eppie, better known as the advice columnist Ann Landers, DID pass away in 2002, however.

Where’s Daryll telling us that it’s OK to be homophobic because the Bible says so?

Daryll is very busy these days. He became a gay prostitute so he could get into White House press conferences.