Skip navigation

Advertisements

42 Comments

  1. Once again, the Politically Correct scream and howl about the lack of “Diversity” in the End-of-Year holiday season. As if it’s not enough that there’s Christmas for the Christians; Hanukkah (or however you choose to spell it) for the Jews; Yule for the Druids, Pagans, and Wiccans; Kwanzaa for the Black Liberation Theologians; and Festivus, for the rest of us (well, at least the Seinfeld fans).

    If I don’t see at least one story each day during Advent (that’s the 24 days before Christmas for all you non-Catholic and non-Episcopal types) that some group somewhere is complaining about one of the many traditions (Carols, Trees, Nativity Scenes (or Creche, if you prefer), Menorah, etc.), I wonder if the media, the ACLU, or the SPLC are asleep.

    Gee, for the people that preach tolerance and acceptance as their sole (almost put soul, could I be more correct with that?) purpose in life, They are the most intolerant people I’ve ever seen.

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 12, 2010 at 3:18 am
    • Permalink

    The best compliant I have heard this season…. “I hate the commercialization of the “holidays”, I would rather just not participate in this materialistic orgy of consumerism. Yet I still want to help out with the economy. I know we can barter this year!”

    • Phil Arbeit
    • Posted December 12, 2010 at 7:03 am
    • Permalink

    Too close to call.

    • cobainfan69
    • Posted December 12, 2010 at 5:15 pm
    • Permalink

    Is it me or does Diversity’s face get smaller and smaller with every comic?

    • Steve
    • Posted December 12, 2010 at 6:23 pm
    • Permalink

    It is you~

    • Steve
    • Posted December 12, 2010 at 9:23 pm
    • Permalink

    Although these three choices can be “too close to call” – I see another aspect to these three;

    First, the Grinch eventually has a very strong Christian-like epiphany, rescues the stolen loot from falling off Mount Crumpet – and becomes a beloved friend to Whooville.

    Next, despite the insidious threat of militant Islamic fundamentalists, there are a vast number of Western-friendly moderate Muslims who we can share the Christmas season with, without rancor.

    Last – the invincibly twisted anti-Christian adversaries are the Lane adults – their mentally dysfunctional and maladaptive behavior pattern of a secular, pot smoking, homo – bisexual sicko subculture,… will never accept the consequential truths of their conduct.

    To them, the truth & reality of their anti-Christian vitriol eventually becomes self-convicting, and very threatening.
    Their invincible ignorance has the energy of a New York, 20-something pervert-palace of internet “artee-ists”… these lispy- Liberace-like, self-castrated pansy-boys who slur their affected voice like younger versions of Barney Fwaank
    And when their STD infested pelvic disorders disrupt their lives – it certainly will be “…Reagans fault”.

    Where this pathetic whimpy-boy crap derives from… only God knows…

    Oops!… did my opinion seem like ” H A T E ” speech to you libs?
    ( your thought-control vocabulary is so darn transparent )

    Aw shucks ! — I love the 1st Amendment too, don’t you ?!?

    Now, go report your pending gay-friendly rage to NAMBLA, GLAAD, Code-Pink, the DNC, et al…

  2. Smokey Behr: You gotta remember: “Advent” among the lib/left set is the 24 days before Che Guevara’s birthday.

    Ikabod: Yeah, ‘bartering’ is probably a kind of golden Ideal for leftist types– “You fix my car Mr. Auto Repairman and I’ll do your accounting come tax time this year.” Too bad they can’t put it together that money was invented to make all that waste-of-time dickering seem totally beside the point and primitive. But ah, the purity of living like you’re in the Stone Age– before modernity came and RUINED everything.

  3. Phil: Good answer.

    I may sometime throw this open to readers, actively encouraging them to send in their answer, and why. The Grinch never actually aimed to maim and kill Christmas tree onlookers, as the Muslim youth did; the libs ARE trying to blow up the American way of life, the Constitution, et al, which is just as bad as trying to bomb a crowd of Christmas carolers. It’s an endlessly faceted speculation…

  4. Fun stuff, Steve– you’re on fire here, we may need Smokey Behr to put you out. But you’re right, I expect no Christian-style epiphany from these characters or the many like them from Berkeley to Manhattan. So far this year they’ve already banned in New York even the YMCA (“Young Men’s Christian Organization,” recall) from hosting a Santa Claus for the kiddies– he was replaced by some kind of Snowman character. I’m surprised they didn’t go all the way and substitute a Warmy the Global Warming Polar Bear.

  5. “….a secular, pot smoking, homo – bisexual sicko subculture…”

    “…pervert-palace of internet “artee-ists”… these lispy- Liberace-like, self-castrated pansy-boys who slur their affected voice like younger versions of Barney Fwaank…”

    “…pending gay-friendly rage to NAMBLA, GLAAD, Code-Pink, the DNC, et al…”

    Really, Steve?

  6. The War on Christmas meme is the result of sitting in a dead silent room straining one’s ears until you can finally hear the comments of the fruit flies in the other room as they hover over the fruit bowl. Most people who visit your house would never pay the slightest mind to the fruit flies, let alone pay any attention to their silly complaints. If they paid them any mind at all, it would only be to ask you why you haven’t gotten rid of them.

    But straining and straining to hear them, and magnifying the importance and relevance of their complaints, eventually leads to the belief that the pack of fruit flies are an entire army of elephants. Speaking only to others who believe in the elephants—and who write whole books about them with titles like (gee!) “The War on Christmas”—will intensify this further.

    Stop listening to fruit flies.

    Merry Christmas from one side of my bloodline and Happy Hanukkah from the other.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 16, 2010 at 4:50 pm
    • Permalink

    Yes, Marbles — R E A L L Y — !!… (a.k.a. I meant every letter of it!)

    Here is a little inconvenient history for you (and those who share your values);

    Back in the late ’60s – early ’70s, the American Psychological Association, under increasing pressure from universities and other secular, ‘liberated’ groups, decided to de-list homosexuality from being a mental illness.
    Up until then – for all known Western medical history, homosexuality was considered a mentally dysfunctional and maladaptive condition.
    [ note: this is where an open & honest-minded, thinking person would wonder why… why for so many centuries, this behavior was considered an illness ]

    If you want the links / sources to confirm this- the rate of STDs within the homosexual community are vastly higher than in the non-drug using heterosexual population.
    The life expectancy of active male homosexuals is 20+ years less than the national average.
    ( just another “equally legitimate” life style, right ? )

    The twisted irony in the last 40 years of “progress” is that the ‘PC’ vocabulary now has words like “homophobia” – which is also an inaccurate, nonsensical misuse of Latin, because “homo” is Latin for human, or one’s own kind… (sorry, facts are stubborn things…)

    So, the pathetic irony on those of you who want to promote and legitimize a mentally ill and disease ridden life style, is that you are trying to pervert the modern dialog towards smearing those who will not accept it – as us being mentally deficient.
    Terms like “hate speech”, and “gay-hatred” are classic attempts to squelch dialog and debate, and try to sanction or criminalize a point of view (damn I’m glad for the 2nd Amendment!)

    If you want to study some ‘pillars of mental health’ – go watch / study the in-depth biographies of Boy George, Liberace, Elton John, George Michael,… all these people had some sad and damaging events in their youth that dramatically affected them.

    Or Marbles, would you like to offer something to glorify that 1.5 – 2% part of the population that has always had the highest AID / HIV rates than anyone else in the US ?

    • Steve
    • Posted December 16, 2010 at 5:26 pm
    • Permalink

    Marbles-
    One other point; why don’t you attempt a margin of character improvement by having the integrity to copy & paste the entire sentences I use ?

    Obviously, the NEA – pubic school education you received failed to ‘learn you’ that a sentence in the English language is (supposed to be) a complete thought.

    If I want to quote someone, I use their entire sentence…

  7. You just keep painting by the numbers, Steve.

    Context is everything, except for those times when the context is completely redundant.

    The reason I isolated those parts of your post is self-explanatory.

    And you know what that reason is.

    You also believe that the reason is based on a false premise, as you and your soulmates have articulated many times.

    You can go on believing that, Steve, but you’re only able to do so because you won’t let yourself empathize with those who are different from you.

    Furthermore, and more importantly as it relates to politics, posts like that one demonstrate that for many, actual policy and actual governance take a backseat to the much more emotionally satisfying preoccupation of angry backlash.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 16, 2010 at 9:58 pm
    • Permalink

    Marbles,
    Every premise I have used is well-grounded in the realities and consequences of the sad and misplaced nature of same-sex attractions.
    If my sarcastic irreverence is distracting – sure, I understand that much.

    Guess what? Nature (if you wish to dismiss the Scripture of the 1st & New Testaments) has designed sex for procreation – that means, reproducing one’s own species.
    Polar bears, killer whales, or rabbits… do not pair-off in same-sex couples, saunter into a sweaty bath house and sodomize one another. No other species comes close to the patterns of same-sex bonding and copulation, that human homosexuals do.
    Only humans have the brain size and higher mental capacities where a very small fraction of them develop the maladaptive tendencies to ‘drop the towel & soap’ and copulate with a same sex partner.

    Who says I need to empathize with different people ? I certainly do not empathize with the Pope, or Billy Graham – yet I can & do have the highest respect for their strong faith, devotion (no, I am not Catholic) and many of the traditions they work to uphold. [ do not even bring up the priest – sex scandals ]

    How about you Marbles, empathize with the disruption, shattered lives and extreme pain caused by the hyper-promiscuous sexual tendencies, very common among younger homosexual males ?

    Many see the most basic institutions of a Judeo-Christian grounded culture under attack by a militant “gay agenda” – they intend to impose their twisted and destructive life-style on the institution of marriage, and now, impose their values onto the US military.

    A simple fact – there is NO such thing as a “right” to serve in the US military. Being accepted is a privilege, it is a matter of meeting exact standards, of not having certain risk factors in your life, and of having a reasonably clean & law-abiding background that is indicative you show good potential for accepting training and demands of much higher requirements.

    Both in college and after I left the military, I have lived around folks who were homosexual. One was my landlord for a few years… does that surprise you, huh?
    I have no problem with ‘live & let live’ – I mean that!

    The traditions of civil rights in the US has to do with no discrimination due to race, color, creed or national/cultural origin. Those attributes are given as innocuous differences.

    Homosexual behavior is NOT like different eye or skin color – it is about willful behavior – behavior that has a historically terrible ‘butcher bill’ of disease, drug abuse, suicide, not to mention the many dimensions of broken families and emotional traumas.

    Behavior is very consequential… and it was no accident that thousands of years ago, Scripture was written specifically calling homosexual acts as “an abomination”.
    The word, ‘abomination’ is not used much in the Scriptures – it is not even attributed to violations of the Ten Commandments… it was reserved for the most hideous acts a human can do.

    Human nature has stayed the same, even over these thousands of years. As you might regard those men as old, uptight & with many inhibitions, they certainly saw the nearly same social disruptions and problems with homosexual behavior, as we know today.

    Sorry Marbles, I am not “…painting by the numbers…”, as you assert – I am outlining realities you are unaware of – or more likely, want to remain in denial about.

    Reality ” is a bitch “, and it will catch up with you.

  8. First of all, Steve, thank you for answering with sincerity instead of sarcasm. It makes a huge difference.

    Anyway.

    “Does that surprise you, huh?
    I have no problem with ‘live & let live’ – I mean that!”

    No, it doesn’t, because you’ve said that before. What’s surprising is that you don’t see the direct contradiction between “live and let live” and the (yes) hate-filled rhetoric you use freely. As I’ve told you before, no one who came across your words would EVER assume “live and let live” would cross your lips in this context. Whether or not you’re being disingenous I don’t know, but the fact is that your words betray a deep hatred. Words like “perverted” and “twisted,” the invoking of carboard stereotypes, and out-of-nowhere mentions of groups like NAMBLA** say that this is about personal disgust, and nothing else.
    The “ick factor” (thanks for the term, Leonard Pitts) is not enough to justify depriving anyone of their civil rights. And yes, they are civil rights. The idea that homosexuality is a a mere “behavior” is nonsense and anyone who is honest with themselves knows it. And honesty is what this WHOLE thing is about. What do you think causes a lot of the emotional trauma and broken families you cite? The shame. The fear. The stigma. The ostracization. Of COURSE decades, centuries of this of course create problems. The kind of language you freely use—-how does that help anyone? All it does is hurt people. Imagine being spoken of that way. Now imagine being spoken of by EVERYONE that way. Surely you can empathize enough to understand that having the entire world believe you’re a sick, demented freak to be feared and ostracized would cause problems for ANYone.
    The rate of HIV and other diseases is indeed higher, but not because of any practices exclusive to homosexuals. So that doesn’t wash. Yes, it’s a problem. A big one. And so is HIV in Africa, where the primary spreading agent is of course not homosexuality.

    “Many see the most basic institutions of a Judeo-Christian grounded culture under attack by a militant “gay agenda” – they intend to impose their twisted and destructive life-style on the institution of marriage, and now, impose their values onto the US military.”

    That is always the talking point among those whose own visceral disgust is the core of their justification for what is, and always has been, discrimination. And there’s never been any truth to it. Only those for whom the “ick factor” (thanks for the term, Leonard Pitts) is the primary motivator behind their stance, allow themselves to believe that the quest for tolerance and acceptance is “imposing a lifestyle” on anyone or being “militant.” It really is a classic boomerang manuever—project your own intolerance onto the very people you’re being intolerant towards, so that they can be accused of being unreasonable.

    (Are you aware of what’s going on in Uganda right now? Google Uganda and “David Bahati.” It’s that “impose” rhetoric carried to its extreme, but logical, conclusion)

    Furthermore, no one has ever bothered to explain how a miniscule percentage of the population can destroy the foundations of society.

    “The word, ‘abomination’ is not used much in the Scriptures – it is not even attributed to violations of the Ten Commandments… it was reserved for the most hideous acts a human can do.”

    Of course the men who wrote the Scriptures called homosexuality an “abomination.” Being human, their “ick factor” was as intense as that of most people today.

    The most hideous acts a human can do? This is where it gets laughable, Steve. Seriously.
    My heart breaks every time I open the paper and some savage sociopath has murdered a child in cold blood, or taken someone’s parent, sibling or friend away from them forever, especially when it was over $10 or something. My blood turns to ice when I read about atrocities such as the Rape of Nanking, Mai Lai and what goes on every day in the isolated villages of the DRC. I’m sure yours does, too.
    Does your heart break similarly when you see two guys holding hands or two women snuggling? Are you filled with sorrow at the sheer scale of human tragedy and suffering? Do your insides twist with despair at the innocent victims whose lives are ripped apart by brutality and violence?
    Do your internal reactions to these two kinds of things even exist in the same GALAXY?

    “The most hideous acts a human can do.”
    Honestly.

    “Human nature has stayed the same, even over these thousands of years.”

    It sure has. And everything that’s come with it. Usually below the surface, sometimes out in the sunlight (ancient Greece, anyone?) Human sexuality is a mercurial, ungrabbable thing, hard to nail down and hard to fully understand. It does not fall into the neat little boxes many of us would like to believe it does. As such, it is ridiculous to use it as a basis to discriminate against others.

    **The use of NAMBLA (!!!) in the same sentence with GLAAD, and GLAAD with the DNC, can only be met with a repeating of “Really, Steve?”

    • Steve
    • Posted December 17, 2010 at 5:09 am
    • Permalink

    There you go again with the word, “hate” again…

    Is THAT the best of how your reasoning works ??

    All your side can do is regurgitate the “…hate ~ hate ~ hate…” mantra, over & over again… hoping and promoting its vacuous reasoning into consequences like “hate crime legislation”, which is exactly and nothing more than thought crime statutes.

    That is another serious threat to overall liberties in this country – codifying “hate crimes”… as much there are never ‘love crimes’ defined… your thought-culture is wanting to criminalize thoughts that are innately no crime at all – and the use of such charges are subject to the whims and subjective applications of whomever is a District Attorney.

    Sorry with your denial of reality – homosexuality IS ABOUT BEHAVIOR – it is about acting out desires and urges that up until recently, were near universally considered dysfunctional and damaging ( pssst! – a mental illness~ )

    People are tempted all the time to do things they successfully resist doing. A young person, in their developing years who successfully resists the urge to shoplift, is not a thief. That is someone making proper decisions to control their behavior.

    The fact that our disagreements here prompt this most basic cause & effect example — reflects how vacant and deprived a whole segment of our culture is on the most basic understanding of ethics, morality, and fundamentals of right & wrong.
    Whatever makes up your, or my behavior, it is that which largely determines how society evaluates us. Simple reality – get used to it!

    If I see behavior or signs that someone is prone to such behavior, my RIGHTS to free association and controlling factors that may bring harm, distress or problems to my family, my living, or friends – I will exercise those rights to keep people whose behavior is considered unacceptable away – far, far away !
    Yep – that is certainly discrimination – a very legal moral and practical version of discrimination – and when I get dressed to go out in the cold this morning, I will carefully discriminate among the clothing I wear, too.

    The “ick” factor is simply a result of boundaries being crossed that are not acceptable. Perhaps if you witnessed me go to the range and lay out my Glocks, my M1A rifles, numerous loaded high-capacity magazines and spare boxes of ammo – perhaps that would cross a comfort boundary of yours.
    From a different perspective, men french kissing men, or watching the movie ‘Pink Flamingo’s ‘ is crossing some staunch boundaries for an overwhelming majority of grown-ups. Just another “ick” factor…

    If you consider my lumping GLAAD, NAMBLA, and Code Pink together as absurd – perhaps you can explain why I have repeatedly seen their signs, buttons, and enthusiastic supporters all ‘arm & arm’ together in solidarity at DNC events over the past 20+ years ??
    Hmm ?

  9. Sigh. I knew you’d have that reaction to “hate.” It’s common and expected.
    Steve, if anyone, anyone at all, used adjectives like that against you or someone you cared about, for any reason, you would characterize it exactly the same way. You don’t get to use scorching, vindictive words and not accept the logical conclusion of being slapped with that label. Own your rhetoric or drop it. You don’t feel that’s fair or accurate—-well, how do you think your targets feel at being called every nasty thing in the book? Targets who—and this is key—have never done a thing to harm you, besides gross you out.

    I don’t support hate crime leglislation, incidentally. Too arbitrary, subjective and something of a slippery slope.

    “…desires and urges that up until recently, were near universally considered dysfunctional and damaging ( pssst! – a mental illness~ )”

    I repeat, what do you think made a disproportionate amount (but still minority) of instances dysfunctional and damaging in the first place? It sure wasn’t the open arms with which their friends, family and neighbors greeted them.

    “The fact that our disagreements here prompt this most basic cause & effect example — reflects how vacant and deprived a whole segment of our culture is on the most basic understanding of ethics, morality, and fundamentals of right & wrong. Whatever makes up your, or my behavior, it is that which largely determines how society evaluates us. Simple reality – get used to it!”

    What it reflects is how vacant a case for someone’s judgment of another often is. THe “right and wrong” judgemnt is precipated on how much of a negative or positive effect one’s actions have on others. Private actions that do not affect anyone else in the slightest have no grounds to be condemned on this basis.
    It is known to you, f’rinstance, that Ellen DeGeneres is homosexual. It is “wrong” of her to do what to you, precisely? You would despise Rachel Maddow if she was as straight as an arrow, so her private actions impact you in what way, again? And what about my bisexual friend in Jersey? How do she and her girlfriend harm you and your family, wherever you live? I’ll be sure to tell her how.

    “If I see behavior or signs that someone is prone to such behavior, my RIGHTS to free association and controlling factors that may bring harm, distress or problems to my family, my living, or friends – I will exercise those rights to keep people whose behavior is considered unacceptable away – far, far away!”

    Yes, you enjoy those rights—and you would deny similiar rights to the ones you’re fleeing from. They are not free to associate to the fullest, as it were, with whom they choose. (and this is certainly not “live and let live, since you would clearly prefer to not do any letting, if you had your way.) As no one has to be anywhere near them, they in turn shouldn’t have to be held prisoner by anyone’s disgust, as if it was a universal law.

    You keep bringing the word “moral” into it. If that must be invoked, it should be easy to explain what is IMmoral about the “boundary” that has been crossed. I didn’t say disgusting or gross. I said immoral. What moral boundaries are breached when a woman lies with a woman?

    “The “ick” factor is simply a result of boundaries being crossed that are not acceptable.”

    Just like any position other than missionary was considered not acceptable by western authorities for centuries. Do you really want to go there? Think before you answer.

    “Perhaps if you witnessed me go to the range and lay out my Glocks, my M1A rifles, numerous loaded high-capacity magazines and spare boxes of ammo – perhaps that would cross a comfort boundary of yours.”

    Only if I had to listen to two straight hours of “2nd Amendment remedies” rhetoric from the entire rangefull of gun owners while you did it.

    “…crossing some staunch boundaries for an overwhelming majority of grown-ups.”

    Lose the “grown-ups” schtick. It accomplishes nothing. Especially since those “grown-ups” to whom you’re so unhesitatingly condescending have been through things that you and I will never understand.

    “If you consider my lumping GLAAD, NAMBLA, and Code Pink together as absurd – perhaps you can explain why I have repeatedly seen their signs, buttons, and enthusiastic supporters all ‘arm & arm’ together in solidarity at DNC events over the past 20+ years ??
    Hmm?”

    Same reason you see everyone from Birchers to birthers to neoncons to militias to white supremacists to old-school libertarians to Christian crusaders at Tea Party events.

    Again, you have the right to use all the scorching adjectives you want, but you don’t have the right to escape the responsibilities that come with choosing to use them. If you’re weary of hearing “hate” brandied about, you should try harder to understand why it’s such a widespread reaction. It’s not as if it’s a hard thing to understand. Your words are pretty self-explanatory. Own them or lose them. That’s what a “grown-up” does.

    Did you look up David Bahati? Did you swallow your political revulsion and watch the interview on YouTube?
    He says it’s not about “hate,” too. Of course he does.
    He can say that all he wants, but it will be of small comfort to the future arrivals on Uganda’s death row that he would see put there.

    That’s where this language takes you, Steve. The exact same language.

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 18, 2010 at 5:07 pm
    • Permalink

    The word hate nowadays is the left go to word to shut down any disagreement one may have with the left’s “right thing to do” regarding any issue. From perceived racism, homophobia, to accusations of Islam supporting terror. Its gotten to the point now that its beginning to loose its meaning on the very people its supposed to be directed at Conservatives, Christians, and anyone supporting our military (see we HATE Islam.) However, hatin the Jews is cool, shows ones solidarity with the so-called “occupation”. In any event, homosexuality is a personal condition. I don’t care what peer reviewed, scientific study claims that homosexuality is part of the human DNA. Or that just one DNA Molecule happens to setup in a certain way that makes one predetermined to enjoy comfortable shoes, and be a snappy interior designer. I don’t care. Even their service in the military is no problem in my book. However, if they are going to go this route why make anything gender based? Bathrooms? Co-ed. Military Barracks? Co-ed. However, we must remember, that when in battle. Islam strictly forbids homosexuality. Since we need to be tolerant of our enemies’ religious “hate”. Our forces in Iraq and Afghanistan need to restrict our gay/lesbian/trans gender warriors from entering onto the battle.

    “I don’t support hate crime leglislation, incidentally. Too arbitrary, subjective and something of a slippery slope.”

    Regardless of your resistance to hate crime legislation, the continued passage of such will continue. Opposition will mostly come from Christian and Tea Party groups and any number of other racist, bigoted groups I don’t support. However, Islamic organizations will have free reign to continue their hate spewed opposition, since well…. It’s cultural based and do we really want to piss off Islam anymore than we already have? Homosexuals will continue to be a part of our society regardless. We might as well get used to it. However, as long as there are groups out there like NAMBLA, our kids will be at risk. So if that makes me a gay-pedophile hater. I wear that badge with honor.

    I do apologize for going bouncing all over the subject. Too much to comment on without much organization.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 18, 2010 at 6:42 pm
    • Permalink

    Ikabod – your characterization of “… Christian and Tea Party groups and any number of other racist, bigoted groups I don’t support.” – is rather a broad brush characterization that surprises me, coming from you.

    Honestly, I thought your perspectives were better than this.

    First – the Tea Party is a very heterogeneous and varied group of folks from ALL demographic ‘stripes’.
    Literally, these many millions of folks come from all corners of this Republic. Old ‘blue-dog Democrats, Libertarians, ‘moderates’, conservatives, ‘Birchers’, old ’60’s commune throw-backs, pro-choice, pro-lifers, atheists, Christians,… you name it – this group is by any objective analysis, a broad, organic up-rising from all corners of this country.
    They have one central concern in common – government is too big, it taxes too much, and it needs to be constrained within Constitutional limits.
    THAT’s it !!… that is their call~

    Why the hell do you consider them “…racist bigoted” ??

    Because a few fringe, attention-seeking extremist nuts showed up, and the alphabet-MSM gave them front & center coverage ?… or a few folks were repeatedly misquoted?
    Honestly, I thought you would see through that smoke screen… I thought you would know better.

    I am sad to read you consider Christians among the “… racist, bigoted groups” too.
    There is nothing in orthodox Christianity that condones or blesses either of these attitudes,.. in fact, much to the contrary, all Christians are called to love their enemies.
    A simple fact of the human condition is that all Christians fall short of what scripture calls them to do and be. Following a Christian life is about an endless struggle to improve and refine ones character…

    Are there “Christians” who as individuals, behave in shameful ways and bring shame on the rest of their Christians – hell yes there are !… and there always will be.

    I challenge you to find ONE part of Christian scripture that is racist or bigoted.

  10. ikabod:

    “The word hate nowadays is the left go to word to shut down any disagreement one may have with the left’s “right thing to do” regarding any issue.”

    It gets abused like anything else, and “wolf” does get cried. But a spade is still a spade, and those who think they can hide behind the skirts of the First Amendment without getting called on it are cowards, plain and simple.

    “Since we need to be tolerant of our enemies’ religious “hate”.”

    That’s the kind of straw man jab that’s directed at people who don’t really exist. Who exactly is calling on anyone to be “tolerant” of the beliefs of those who want to destroy us?

    The unfortunate reality is that the only reason anyone gives a flying #&%!! what jahadist Wahabi Muslims think is because, unlike your common street thug, they aren’t afraid to die. That’s what makes them so dangerous.
    But remove that, and they’re nothing but overglorified thugs. And the concerns of thugs, by definition, are beneath being worthy of acknowledgement by the rest of us.

  11. “However, as long as there are groups out there like NAMBLA, our kids will be at risk. So if that makes me a gay-pedophile hater. I wear that badge with honor.”

    That’s silly, Ikabod. NAMBLA is no more a threat to anyone’s kids than the Flat Earth Society is a threat to NASA. Or to use a more political analogy, they’re no more a threat to your kids than the Prohibition Party** is a threat to Budweiser. They can wish all they want for legitimization, but it ain’t gonna happen. So if someone feels the need to find some justification for being wary of homosexuals, citing NAMBLA is a pretty poor choice.

    **Yes, it actually does still exist. I can’t believe it, either.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 19, 2010 at 2:57 am
    • Permalink

    Marbles –
    So you assert; ” NAMBLA is no more a threat to anyone’s kids than the Flat Earth Society is a threat to NASA.” ?

    Interesting~

    I would love to be in a very large auditorium, the seats filled with the parents and immediate family members of all those boys who have been kidnapped, or lured in by homosexual pedophiles, and raped ( most repeatedly, some were murdered — those who survived are deeply traumatized and scarred for life.)
    In this setting, you need to be on stage, and repeat you statement to these people.

    I will ensure the doors are locked, all cell calls electronically blocked — and you can face them and the consequences of your words, for an hour.
    ( on second thought, I would limit the attendance to just the male members of these families, because the ladies have a tendency to hold back their men… )

    If you consider my wishful meeting idea, as described to be intemperate, or vigilante-like, the very large sales of Blue-Ray DVDs of what would happen to you – speaks a very different truth.
    The worst of what could happen to you is nothing compared to the hideous suffering of the child victims of the NAMBLE culture. Idea’s have consequences, and what you espouse condones the most hideous violation of innocents imaginable.

    You obviously are either an extremely ignorant, mentally vacuous, immature fool, who likes to make grotesquely outrageous statements…, -OR- you are among the most vile scum-of-the-earth reprobates who get their jollies from the homosexual rape of children.

    The very title of NAMBLE is about the homosexual rape of male children. That fact is not debatable. The sleazy arguments about children being “consenting” is nothing but a vile LIE. Children can never make those rational, consensual decisions about sexual behavior, anymore than they can evaluate and sign-off on an investment portfolio, as an adult can.
    That is why it is –by statute– known as rape.

    If you, as a consenting adult want to ‘air your backside’ to that “lifestyle”, all the consequences that will impact your health – you will very much deserve.
    The actuarial statistics show that a very large percentage of ‘your types’ do not see age 50… and THAT is damn good news, from my perspective.

  12. Wow. Showing our true colors, much? I’m surprised at your irrational ferociousness. Not that I should be, but I am.

    I shouldn’t even have to say this, but the stats on homosexual vs. heterosexual child rape do not lend the slightest bit of support to your grotesque and rage-filled fantasies.

    And not that I should have to mention this either, but NAMBLA in truth barely even still exists as a coherent organiztion, which is only a slight step down from their former status as a group that was, like many groups chasing a hopeless horizon, all talk and nothing else. They have about ten thousand times more power in people’s fevered little imaginations than a stampede of elephants has in real life.

    The all-too-typical and disgusting low move of equating homosexuality with child rape is older than Adam and reveals about as much independent thought as a doorknob.

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 19, 2010 at 3:16 pm
    • Permalink

    “NAMBLA is no more a threat to anyone’s kids than the Flat Earth Society is a threat to NASA.” Perhaps, yet at the moment, nambla supports pedophilia. For now, its regarded as rape. Yet how long will this last? Ya think any chance one day that such activity will be regarded as perfectly normal, perfectly healthy? How long before those of us who are against forced rape of young boys or girls will be labeled as bigots? It maybe a long slippery slope….. I dont suspect namblas cause to ever see the light of day either. Its the road they will continue to drive down and the kids they will harm along the way that concerns me.

    “Or to use a more political analogy, they’re no more a threat to your kids than the Prohibition Party** is a threat to Budweiser.”

    They should threaten Budweiser! Bud is just nasty!
    I celebrate repeal day every December 5th! Thank goodness there are people out there that still hold our right to enjoy a good Mai Tai with reverence!

    http://www.repealday.org/

    • Steve
    • Posted December 19, 2010 at 3:34 pm
    • Permalink

    Marbles – anyone… ANYONE who abuses and rapes children are just as creepy and loathsome as those you seem to chose to defend.
    Hetero, or homosexual, violating the innocence of a child ought to merit a very painful death sentence. [ see! – how much of an equal-opportunity guy I am-!?! ]

    However unwelcome to you are the hideous facts about NAMBLA and their pedophiliac – predatory history towards young male children – that does not change the historical facts of who and what they are about.

    If you have an ounce of intellectual honesty in you – go search for it yourself… the facts are documented & are out there.

    The male homosexual culture, entertainment and pornographic preferences have always pursued the youngest male models and actors they can find. Extensive studies of the homosexual culture have been documented for decades by at least two prominent organizations I know of – and the patterns of their preferred male sexual preferences have been younger and younger male figures… right down to adolescent boys.

    NAMBLA has long publicized ‘how to’ instructions, for where and how to get to young boys… that has been well documented too. Recall the big “NAMBLA” signs at every “gay” pride parade in San Francisco ?

    If you want the sources, I will make them available to the moderator.

  13. Steve, your entire middle paragraph about “the male homosexual culture” is exactly applicable—and I mean exactly—to heterosexual male culture as well. Not that is exactly earth shattering news. Women are constantly stressed out by this, as we all know.

    Singling out gays for this universal trait is typically indicative of the failing to see homosexuals as actual people, as opposed to beings that are defined entirely by their sexual orientation.

    And pretending that the coupling of child predators with homosexuals is anything but a fear-based smear is also typically spurious. The evidence does not, and never has, supported the idea that anything is disproportionate on that side of the aisle.

    I indeed looked up NAMBLA before. That’s how I know that they’re a bunch of defanged, toothless talkers who only number about 1,100. Ooh, scary.

    Go ahead and list the sources. Agendas run wild and selectively collect data to support themselves. Doesn’t change the fact that rhetoric such as yours is rooted in hatred and fear.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 20, 2010 at 4:29 pm
    • Permalink

    Marbles – per your expressed interest, go to the two links below.

    http://americansfortruth.com/

    http://www.narth.com/index.html

    Put “NAMBLA” in their search box fields… and dive into the buffet of material available.

    To no ones surprise, there is an old history of left-wing caterwauling to attempt to discredit these two organizations – those old ‘song & dance’ accusations of “hate” and “homophobic”,…blah-blah-blah~

    These folks are serious and very thorough in their work… and they have never had to recant their findings. All of NARTH’s work is multi-peered reviewed… they take their research and objectivity very seriously.

    If you are inclined to dismiss NARTH as lacking credibility, please begin by reading this paper first.
    Anti-Gay?!
    NARTH President Addresses Misperceptions about NARTH

    by Julie Hamilton, Ph.D.

    http://www.narth.com/docs/addresses.html

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 20, 2010 at 5:21 pm
    • Permalink

    The best way to deal with a threat is to simply ignore, look the other way or when all else fails! “Your a bigot!” Those crazy sick men that like boys….. Nope not homosexual, just crazy mixed up straight white guys! Got it. Whew! Coupling homosexual men with pedophiles….. What on earth was I thinking!

    Look away Steve your being consumed by your own bigotry!

    • Steve
    • Posted December 20, 2010 at 6:18 pm
    • Permalink

    Ikabod –
    Setting up the straw man that I equated ALL homosexual men with pedophilia is a tired old technique from those who rather shut down a source of discussion, rather than engaging in the merits of the subject at hand.

    Obviously my extreme un-pc ‘ness rubber stamps me as “bigot”… gee, how original, what a surprise !

    Are all those M.D.’s and PHD’s that have spent decades carefully studying the homosexual culture – do they meet your template for being bigots, too ?

    Having been friends and acquainted with homosexual men from the earliest days I was a college freshman… and I never had a problem with ‘live & let live’, over many years of socially mixing with and getting along with them well… so, where is my ‘Archie Bunker’ side ?

    Naaaa, forget it – it IS easier for you to adhere to your social conceptions, rather than taking the inconvenience to read the research material that challenges your ‘comfort zone’.

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 20, 2010 at 11:22 pm
    • Permalink

    Excuse the sarcasm Steve. My posting was to bring up a point regarding the term bigot for shutting down discourse and arguments with neo-libs. You are no more a bigot than Obama being in support of full scale production of the F-22!

    • Steve
    • Posted December 21, 2010 at 1:13 am
    • Permalink

    Ooops – sorry!… I must be sleep deprived or I need better reading glasses~
    I have been caught off guard before on certain styles of sarcasm… perhaps I am woefully behind on current discussion styles in the blogging world… that half-century odometer mark is approaching… time to get a transmission service~

  14. Unreal.

    Ikabod, just what WOULD someone have to say for you to consider them a bigot? I honestly can’t imagine.

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 21, 2010 at 11:52 am
    • Permalink

    A bigot is a person obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices, especially one exhibiting intolerance, and animosity toward those of differing beliefs. The predominant usage in modern American English refers to persons hostile to those of differing race, ethnicity, nationality, sexual orientation, various mental disorders, or religion.

    I am not intolerant of what people do in the privacy of their own homes as long as they are at the age of consent when the act or acts occur. The line is crossed when the rights of individuals are violated. Our events/acts occur against their will. But to really get to the point. A gay bar in our old nieghborhood, called the “Back Door”…… Not kidding… Am I a bigot for NOT wanting to go in there?

    But to answer your question: “I hate you, because your a __________” insert any religious/race/sexual orientation. Or, this one. “Yeah we drive our rice rockets pretty low…. Its an asian thing…” Overheard during auto repair visit. Huntington Beach Ca.

    “There’s a lot of racism going on. Who’s more racist, black people or white people? It’s black people! You know why? Because we hate black people too! Everything white people don’t like about black people, black people really don’t like about black people ,and there’s two sides, there’s black people and theres n#$%^s” Chris Rock

    Guess I see bigotry and even racism where I need it.

    Peace out!

  15. Ikabod, how can you say everything you just said—all of which I agree with—and NOT see the language that gets used here as bigoted? If that doesn’t qualify “animosity,” nothing does. How much higher can someone set their personal bar?

    • ikabod
    • Posted December 22, 2010 at 10:52 am
    • Permalink

    Bigotry is where you find it. Or rather bigots tend to be conservative, therefore conservatives must be by in large bigots! This meme has been lectured to me by so-called intolerant progressives for years. As for the “language” around here, folks are going to use language to get their point across. Bigotry may not be playing a roll in the substance. Rather the free use of language, where conservatives have decided the ridiculous notion of political correctness is of no use. Somehow even though participants to this forum have claimed clearly that they have nothing against what people do in the privacy of their own home, or even Live and let live. This tends to be not good enough. Only the full fledged open armed support and encouraging private homosexual behavior is necessary to some how reach that bar. The “ick” factor, somehow is considered bigoted? I certainly hope not. Since I believe I can be supportive of their right to exist and do what they do to each other. I just don’t need to see it, hear it, or encourage others to do the same.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 22, 2010 at 1:38 pm
    • Permalink

    There is a much ‘bigger picture’ – to this now codified acceptance of homosexuals in the military.

    This is a group of folks who are identified by their behavior – and behavioral-based groups were NEVER part of what the civil rights movement was about.
    Remember(?) – Martin Luther King wanted his children judged by the “content of their character”, not the color of their skin ?
    Race, color, creed, sex – are all considered benign differences.

    News flash here – a persons behavior goes directly to “…the content of their character”.

    [ Note: some future lib will copy & paste this statement as an example of “Steve’s hate speech”… who wants to wager $50? ]

    The military and most everywhere else discriminates based on folks behavior… that is a simple fact, and it is part of being a grown-up in a grown-up world.

    If you sleep walk, the military will not accept you (and that is not even pre-meditated behavior), if you are divorced, there are assignments in the service you will be passed over by. The military profiles a pilots life style to judge mental stability for select training and assignments.
    For decades, the pilots chosen for U-2 and SR-71 missions needed to be married, with children is better, a history of church attendance too. Why you ask?
    Stability and socially well-anchored life style aspects that greatly reduce the chance he would land his SR-71 into the hands of another country.

    A very long list of current assignments in the military screen prospective candidates for stability, even-headedness under great stress,… a wide variety of character traits needed as specific assignments require.

    Mark my word – this WILL happen over the foreseeable future; various units in the military will be known for the assignment of its homosexual members, and other unit assignments will be known for not having homosexual members.
    Why? – because the military has a lot of discretion as to how & where they can assign personnel for any number of reasons.

    So, within a few years, one of you may be somewhere where there are a table of servicemen, say Marines, talking among themselves — do not be surprised to overhear references made to certain other units or MOS’s in terms of its “fags”, or “queers”.
    — this is entirely predictable, and it is destructive of the mission of the military.

    Just another damaging consequence from the social-engineering progressives, whose agenda has damaged our military for decades.

  16. Ikabod, this is exactly why conservatives get tarred with the “bigot” brush. This right here. You may not like it, but this is it in stark black and white. It’s wanting to have the cake and eat it too—wanting to use inflammatory, malevolent words while dodging the responsibility of owning the consequences of those words.

    You rationalize it all you like—that doesn’t change what is actually being said in plain words. You want to claim that angry, hateful and very personal language is just a way to “get a point across,” yet dodge the obvious conclusion that hateful words come from a place OF hatred? Um, no. It doesn’t work that way. Not in everday life OR politics. And you know that very well. You wouldn’t buy it if you were on the receiving end. Say someone at work spoke of you and your family the way gays are spoken of here, and when called on it just chuckled and said he was merely trying to make a point about some practices or procedures of yours that he disagreed with.
    Sure you’d buy it.

    That anyone should even have to have this explained to them is astounding to me, honestly.

    “Only the full fledged open armed support and encouraging private homosexual behavior is necessary to some how reach that bar. The “ick” factor, somehow is considered bigoted? I certainly hope not.”

    Sigh. Of course the “ick factor” is not bigotry. Discrimination, condemnation and humiliation are. Reactionaries always somehow think that they are being demanded to “embrace” and “celebrate” homosexuality itSELF. This strawman is a way for them to justify their intolerance.

  17. Steve:

    As we know, some people are just asexual. They have no real libido to speak of.

    As we also know, some people are celibate. They have forsworn all sexual activity.

    Now which one of those two is the “behavior”? This is not a trick question.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 23, 2010 at 1:13 pm
    • Permalink

    Marbles-
    There is not the slightest trick or challenge within your question however,…
    Am I to infer that I need to paste an excerpt from the English Oxford Dictionary, to define the meaning of “behavior” ? …I hope not.

    If three people are browsing over (unsecured) merchandise on a vendors table, and one by one, you can read their minds;
    – one has a pure & morally upright character, and the thought of stealing never occurs.
    – another is tempted, but keeps reminding himself of “…thou shall not steal”, and does not.
    – yet a third is not the slightest interested in the items…

    In this example, not one of these three stole anything, so no one of them is a thief.
    The three different states of mind are of no importance… their behaviors were the same, and no one behaved as a thief.

    Our dialog is at the subject of those behaviors people are tempted to do – as opposed to what they have the self-control to keep from doing.

    However negatively you may regard fundamentalist Christians, one thing they all have in common is they congregate to -among other things- to strengthen their resistance from doing behaviors they know are improper… to seek and learn things that help one another with self control.

    About those “gay pride” parades – that are typically too x-rated, to be showed on network television news…

    Seriously, how much self control do you see on display at those events ?

  18. About the same amount of self-control you see at non-gay pride parades of various sorts, where scantily clad babes cavort and the booze flows like the Niagra. Causes about the same amount of heartache for authorities, I imagine.

    Once again, Steve, your laser-eye focus on homosexuality is blinding you to the fact that virtually everything you condemn gays for is an exact replicate of the behaviors found among straights.
    (I would hardly point to “Girls Gone Wild,” for instance, as an example of hetero morality vs. homo decadence.) This is because you, like many others, have difficulty separating people from their sexual orientation.

    While your “nobody is a thief” scenario holds true, you are basing your outlook on the bedrock assumption that homosexuality is something on par with the deadly sins which thievery counts as its compatriots.

    Your prerogative, of course.

    But even allowing for that, the degree to which people willing to single out homosexuality as somehow being special or uniquely awful is bizarre.

    • Steve
    • Posted December 23, 2010 at 4:51 pm
    • Permalink

    Perhaps we are going in circles here…

    Foremost – I do not condemn “gays” for being what they are… if you re-read the long exchanges over this subject, I have condemned the assertion and the premise that homosexuality is just as legitimate, valid and equal a lifestyle, as heterosexuality is.

    I deeply resent and detest the “gay” agenda for imposing their lifestyle into the US military, imposing it into the institution of marriage, and indoctrinating through the public schools that homosexual behavior is another ‘normal’ lifestyle, and part of the protected differences under civil rights.
    I consider all these a very destructive corruption of our culture !

    Yep – I sure can have fun making fun of them – only the ones who fit the afore mentioned agenda.

    It seems the premise to your reply is that heterosexual acts are “…just as legitimate” as homosexual acts, and again, this is where you and I have an infinitely strong disagreement.

    As we are a species of heterosexual reproduction, it naturally follows that all indications toward that BEHAVIOR aspect of our lives will be seen everywhere in our cultures.
    There are plenty of boundaries to all types of heterosexual behavior, everywhere around us. Too many to mention here.

    As a species, heterosexual behavior is an essential and designed part of our existence and procreation – that is NEVER true for same-sex attractions.
    Every single living homosexual owes their very existence to millennia of heterosexual activity. Who on earth has ever owed their existence to two guys ‘doing’ each other ?

    Like it or not, the “…on par with deadly sins” aspect is exactly what comes from several places in Judeo-Christian scripture. Gee, what a surprise, huh?
    [ There was a man of distinguished education, incredibly intelligent and respected – he set about his research determined to disprove that God, of the Old and New Testament was false… his name was C.S. Lewis.
    Go read what C.S. Lewis has published~ ]

    Screening for blood and organ donors screens out people for all kinds of reasons. Heterosexual folks who have had any one of a number of ailments, can never donate blood. I can never donate, because at age 19, I had mononucleosis. I have been healthy ‘as a tick’ ever since.

    If homosexuality is as legitimate and equivalent as you seem to want to assert, answer this question;
    Assuming the questionnaire is answered honestly, why can NO homosexual male ever donate blood, for their entire life ?

    Hint: go to the NARTH website… there is plenty of enlightening reading material there.

    About your last thought — if or when you study and accept the verifiable facts about the history and consequences of homosexual behavior, you will easily realize how “…awful” the totality of that lifestyle really is. I am not joking, or being dramatic.

    That is entirely up to you~


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: