Re: I really just stand for decency, but if that means its bigotry than so be it
posted at 10/1/2009 3:16 PM EDT
In Response to Re: I really just stand for decency, but if that means its bigotry than so be it
[QUOTE]In Response to Re: I really just stand for decency, but if that means its bigotry than so be it : We will be, and it really does take courage to refute the liberal orthodoxy that is common-place today. You people are as much, if not more, one-sided and intolerant of alternate views than the most hardened jim crow advocate. Listen to the incendiary comments from van jones, yes; it’s going to take a lot of courage to counter his (and others like him) hate and rage. The left is violent, more than the right has been. As I stated at the onset of this posting, I stand only for decency. The homosexual movement is really nothing more than the legitimizing of deviant sexual behavior, re-read the attached article if you don't believe me. There is no question that a connection between homosexuality, deviant sexual behavior and pedophilia exists; we as a culture have been too cowardly to acknowledge it...yet! Do you actually believe the age of consent should be lowered? You realize the liberal camp believes it should (cause after all its all about getting off) I've certainly demonstrated my 'courage', as you put it, and could care less if it appears bigoted. That being said, if you believe in reducing the age of consent, why don’t you show your courage to acknowledge your endorsement of trans-generational love – that’s the new liberal pro-word, soon to be placed in common parlance, to describe child molestation .
Posted by aconvosier10[/QUOTE]
Where to begin...
First of all, "phobias" are not parlance, liberal or otherwise; they are psychological intimations manifested as behavior, ie to avoid water or spiders, while ignoring the relative risk of such behaviors. Those who are afraid of water have convinced themselves they will drown even if standing in water up to their ankles.
You say that you stand for "decency", so does that mean you consider it impossible for a homosexual person to also be a "decent" person? I submit that 'decency' is entirely subjective and therefore devoid of any objective societal standard. What you consider indecent, I might consider completely normal. Who's to say that you're right and I'm wrong, and vice versa? Maybe you should better define your terms.
You also seem to consider homosexuality to be a recent phenomenon, as if there were no gays before 1955 or something. That is plain ridiculous. Homosexuality not only exists in the animal kingdom - to which humans belong - but it exists as an evolutionary behavior just like swimming, or climbing trees, or fighting. People have been "gay" as long as there have been people, and this is verifiable as long as we've had recorded history.
Lastly, your conflation of homosexuality with sexual relations is rather confused. Being gay has nothing to do with gay sex. Most people need close, personal relationships; they need camaraderie, acceptance, love, respect, and emotional support. A person can be a virgin for their entire lives yet still be homosexual or heterosexual. Commonality is also irrelevant; does it matter if lifelong virgins are less or more numerous than homosexuals? Add to that your false conflation of homosexuality to pedophelia - not true - and it's safe to say that you lack the dissonance of placing yourself in the shoes of those you attempt to marginalize. Anything less is intellectual dishonesty.