googlescoutphoto

Independence Day Parades and Barbarism

avatar
Print Friendly and PDF

“Barbarous: Primitive in culture and customs; uncivilized; coarse”

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that the Independence Day parade in Deerfield, Illinois included a nod to sexual deviance, but Wheaton, Illinois?

A justifiably irate parent from Deerfield, a liberal community on the North Shore, contacted me to tell me that one of the scoutmasters and a couple of the scouts he leads in her son’s troop (Troop 50) decided to add rainbow-colored bandannas to their official uniforms to demonstrate their support for something. Perhaps they were showing their support for the change in Boy Scout policy which allows openly homosexual boys to become members, or maybe they were advocating for a change in policy so that men who are attracted to males can serve openly as leaders of males, or maybe they wanted to signal their affirmation of homosexuality, or perhaps they want men-wannabes (i.e., cross-dressers and the genitally mutilated) to serve as leaders.

Angry parents of young children in Wheaton, a conservative community which is home to Wheaton College and a dozen theologically orthodox churches, contacted me to express their frustration that for the second year in a row, the homosexuality-affirming organization Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) had marched in the parade. No one opposes friendships with homosexuals, but, of course, that’s not really what this deviously-named organization is promoting.

For the second year in a row, these Wheaton parents will be contacting parade organizers to express their concerns, which will likely be ignored again. One hopes that Wheaton College professors and priests, pastors, and elders in Wheaton churches will be doing likewise.

It wasn’t enough for homosexuals to have their own parades in every major city in June—parades that have grown in size and decadence. These parades now match or dwarf in numbers of parade entrants and attendees virtually any parade anywhere in the country save perhaps the Macy’s Day Thanksgiving Parade, which last year included a performance of the award-winning Broadway play about sexual perversion Kinky Boots.

Communities now take pride in affirming shameful behaviors, with our elected leaders marching pridefully in celebration of that which no man or woman should celebrate let alone celebrate on Main Street in front of children. What a barbarous affront to families and an insult to our veterans. No Christian should bring their children to any event that celebrates and affirms soul-destroying sexual perversion. If Christians are unwilling to make even this small sacrifice, they are woefully unprepared for what’s coming.

Some will be tsk-tsking me (or worse) for criticizing these intrusions into what should be occasions to celebrate the founding of the greatest nation that has ever existed on this planet—a nation founded by men who understood that God exists and absolute, objective, transcendent, eternal moral truths exist. These men of diverse theological views would share in common a sense of outrage that their vision for liberty has been twisted into a sickening defense of sexual predilections that will hurt individuals and weaken the country that so many have died to bring into existence and to defend.

The tsk-tskers will huff and puff that I am the moral equivalent of a racist. They will offer the specious argument that inclusion of parade entrants who celebrate homosexuality is consonant with America’s vision of equality and liberty. But that argument works only if homosexuality is analogous to race. Opposition to celebrations of homoerotic predispositions, activity, and relationships bears not even the remotest relation to racism because homosexuality is nothing like race.

Our Founders did not conceive of equality as a principle that has any relevance to conditions constituted by sexual feelings and volitional sexual acts. Equality is not a principle that robs individuals or society of the right to discriminate between right and wrong behaviors.  Equality is not a principle that demands citizens treat all beliefs and all actions as equivalent.  And equality is not a principle that demands that conditions that have no behavioral implications—like race—be treated as ontologically and morally equivalent to conditions that are constituted by sexual feelings and sexual acts—like homosexuality.

What will parade organizers in Deerfield and Wheaton do when polyamorists, who are erotically and romantically attracted to multiple people concurrently and who voluntarily forge romantic/erotic unions, seek to march in  July 4th parades in order to promote their vision for the expansion of equality and liberty?

The proverbial writing has been on the wall for quite some time, and it doesn’t take a Daniel to read it. There will be no square inch of life that will be left untouched by the sullied hands of homosexual perversity–no celebration, no public school, no career path, and no church will be left unmolested.

If your community parade included participants who celebrated ideas to which no young children should be exposed, call the appropriate village, town, or city officials to express your opposition, telling them that next year you will find a child-friendly activity way to celebrate the founding of this increasingly uncivilized nation.

Print Friendly and PDF



Posting Policy

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read More

comments

  • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

    “Opposition to celebrations of homoerotic predispositions, activity, and
    relationships bears not even the remotest relation to racism because
    homosexuality is nothing like race.”

    Actually, that’s not true. Homosexuality and race are, indeed, analogous in that both groups have been victims of discrimination, hatred and violence in our culture. This article, itself, is an example of the hostility and, yes, hatred, perpetrated against gays and lesbians by radical “religious” hate groups, such as the Illinois “Family” Institute.

    • Jeanette Victoria

      Pure fiction people can and DO stop homosexual practice. It is impossible to stop being a certain race. There is no homosexual DNA there is DNA for race. Major fail.

      • Arthur Adams

        There’s definitely DNA for stupid. Been tested lately?

        • Jeanette Victoria

          We now know something we don’t need to test you for. You demonstrated your stupid quite nicely

      • raytheist

        There is no such thing as “ex-gay”. Just because people stop having sex does NOT mean their attractions have changed. I was married to a woman for 9+ years, and knew how to “act” but that didn’t make me straight, it didn’t make me not-gay. “Ex-gay” is a myth. You don’t need DNA or genes to identify sexual orientation.

        • Charlie_Feather

          That’s all that one is asking: Not that people stop being gay; just that they stop behaving gay.

          • mambocat

            Deal. Now, you stop behaving like a bigot.

          • raytheist

            What an insane proposition, and incredibly unreasonable and without justification. Gay and lesbian people have just as much right to live openly as anyone else, because they aren’t doing anything wrong or shameful.

          • Charlie_Feather

            It is disgusting what they do. Gays do not promote a wholesome environment for children and families, and they set a bad example. The militant gays are children of the devil.

          • helligusvart

            Thank you.

          • Kara Connor

            Sadly for you and all the bigots like you, the research proves you to be completely wrong.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Sadly for you and all the unwholesome perverts like you, the Bible proves you to be completely wrong. Please have the decency, at least, to stay away from children and not contaminate their souls with your toxic, libertine ideology.

          • Kara Connor

            Your bible proves precisely nothing. It is the claim, not the proof. If you like theocracies, you might try Iran. I hear the weather is good apart from the dust storms.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Your children are probably contaminated with your poisonous ideology, and whose minds are perverted and heathen and leftist like you.

            The Bible is the final authority on all matters moral and spiritual. You are so much in conflict with the Bible and God, that one could likely characterize you as a hater of God. Am I correct about this?

          • Kara Connor

            How can I hate something that doesn’t exist? Are you a Zeus-hater?

          • Charlie_Feather

            I knew it! Committed homosexuals are invariably heathens and haters of God! You hate even the idea of God!

          • Kara Connor

            Can you read? You “knew” what I didn’t actually say. So do you hate unicorns?

          • Charlie_Feather

            No. I like unicorns. I also like the idea of unicorns. However, you hate the idea of God and God, Himself. You are a hater of God, which is like saying you are a hater of Being and a hater of Existence.

            Maybe that’s because of your own self-hate.

          • Kara Connor

            So we’ve established three things:
            1) You believe in unicorn
            2) You hate Zeus
            3) You can’t respond to what I actually said, but only to what you’d like me to have said.
            It isn’t hard to see, with your capacity for irrationality, and inability to discern fact, why you are religious.

          • Charlie_Feather

            1. I didn’t say I believe in unicorns. I said I like unicorns, or the idea of unicorns. Unicorns were likely rhinoceros when the Greeks first described them.

            2. I never said I hate Zeus.

            3. I don’t reply to what you say because you never reply to what I say first.

            So, right back at ya’! It isn’t hard to see, with your capacity for irrationality, and inability to discern fact, why you are a hater of God.

          • Kara Connor

            Thank you. You prive my point. I never said I hate your god. I simply find there to be no evidence he exists. Therefore it is nonsensical to suggest I “hate god”, just as it is clearly ridiculous that I say you hate Zeus.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Of course, you hate God. You are gay. It seems to go hand in hand; Be gay, hate God. You hate God so much you are even willing to deny He exists. To ignore someone and treat that person with indifference as though he doesn’t exist is hatred. And that is what you are doing with God: treating Him as though He doesn’t exist.

          • Kara Connor

            We’ve gone over this several times now. There can be no further point to this conversation. Have a great week.

          • Charlie_Feather

            It’s about time you figured that out.

          • helligusvart

            *Yawn* Another atheist.

          • Kara Connor

            Typical Jupiter-hater response. Or is Neptune?

          • Charlie_Feather

            Sadly for you and all the unwholesome perverts like you, the Bible proves you to be completely wrong. Please have the decency, at least, to stay away from children and not contaminate their souls with your toxic, libertine ideology.

          • helligusvart

            1. Homosexuals have rejected homosexuality. It’s hard, but it can be done.
            2. No one is going to send the lifestyle police into their bedrooms and arrest them for engaging in homosexuality. However, making out in public is vile and offensive. They should be arrested and jailed for doing this.
            3. Homosexuality is wrong and shameful, and those who refuse to repent of it will suffer conscious, never-ending torment in the lake of fire.

      • Kara Connor

        Please fly to Stockholm and pick up your Nobel Prize for proving there’s no genetic component (it seems unlikely, by the way, that there’s simply one gene involved – biology is rather more complicated than your limited understanding).

    • Laurie Higgins

      Finally, someone admits that homosexuality per se is not analogous to race per se. You admit that the analogy is not between the two conditions. The analogy is between society’s view of the two conditions. The problem with the analogy is that the BASIS for society’s disapproval for each condition bears no similarity. It is right and appropriate for society to assess the morality of the volitional sexual acts that constitute a particular condition (e.g., “minor-attraction”/”intergenerational intimacy”). It is not appropriate or even rational to disapprove of conditions that are behaviorally neutral. There is simply nothing to morally assess since morality is germane only to behavior.

      If cultural disapproval of a condition constitituted by volitional sexual acts were inherently and always wrong (and akin to racism), then cultural disapproval of polyamory, zoophilia and the plethora of paraphilias is wrong and akin to racism. That, my friend, makes for an argument with a very buttery slope.

      • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

        “You admit that the analogy is not between the two conditions.”

        When did I do that? I happened to use the example of societal discrimination to point out a frequently overlooked instance (one which could just as easily be applied to religion, couldn’t it? But we don’t want to go there, do we?). Of course, experts don’t know exactly what causes sexual orientation; however, they (experts, that is, not quacks or self-appointed “experts”) agree that it is a condition that cannot (nor should be) consciously changed. The main opposition to gays and lesbians comes, primarily, from religious extremists, whether they be the Taliban, the Westboro Baptist Church or even the Illinois “Family” Institute. While people (such as religious fanatics) are free to believe whatever nonsense they want, they are not free to impose their irrational, subjective “feelings” on others. Talk about your “buttery slope.”

        • Matthew T. Mason

          The main opposition to the homosexual agenda comes from people who don’t listen to the lies of the LGBTQW community.

          We are perfectly capable of seeing and hearing for ourselves the words and deeds of those people, and simply will not stand for it when we are being asked, “Who are you gonna believe? Us or your lying eyes?”

          You have the nerve, the audacity, to call anyone who refuse to march in lockstep with your sickness extreme? To compare us to the Taliban?

          You aren’t twisted. You are flat insane.

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Like I said, you’re free to believe what you want. In actuality, fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist Muslims do, indeed, share a hatred of, and discrimination against, gays and lesbians. Sorry, if the shoe fits, wear it. Getting angry at me doesn’t change reality, does it?

          • Matthew T. Mason

            Reality is Christians don’t hate homosexuals. It is the behavior that is hated. Problem is, homosexuals identify themselves through their behavior, and so they say we hate them. It’s a lie, and always has been.

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Your twisted logic works out very conveniently for you, doesn’t it? The truth is, we gays are who we are. Just like heterosexuals. We are no more able to change than you are.

          • Matthew T. Mason

            Yes, and what you are, are people who engage in sexually deviant behavior, around which you have built a whole world. You believe your behavior entitles you to not just forced acceptance, but special treatment.

          • raytheist

            Working to legislate discrimination under the law, and deny rights to LGBT, *IS* an act of hatred and aggression. So yeah, anti-gay IS hate.

          • Matthew T. Mason

            Your behavior does not entitle you to anything more than what you already have.

            Man you are so full of crap I have to clean my laptop.

          • raytheist

            Sexual orientation is not a “behavior”. And in many states under law I still cannot marry the person of my choice, so no I don’t have the same rights as others.

          • Matthew T. Mason

            Homosexuality is a behavior, not an orientation. So far you have been spewing the same old nonsense I have been hearing for years. You may repeat the lie until YOU believe it, but those who can reason know better than that.

          • raytheist

            nonsense, Matthew…. the professionals disagree with you. So do every gay and lesbian person I’ve ever met. There’s more to relationships than just sex.

          • Matthew T. Mason

            I really just don’t care what your buddies and so-called professionals say. We all know political pressure removed homosexuality from the DSM so I am hardly impressed.

          • helligusvart

            The “professionals” can go pound sand. Most of them are worthless anyway. I care what the absolute, inerrant, verbally inspired Word of God says.

        • Laurie Higgins

          It is not the Illinois Family Institute that is demanding that our beliefs about the ontology of marriage or the morality of homoeroticism and gender confusion be imposed on others in, for example, public schools. That would be GLSEN.
          And the Left IS imposing their subjective beliefs about the ontology of marriage, and the morality of homosexuality and cross-dressing and elective surgical mutilations–well, everywhere.
          And yes, the Left propagates not just lies but virulent hatred.

          • Truth Offends

            Yes. In public schools across America, schoolchildren are not permitted to speak a single word against homosexuality without threat of punishment.
            Today: “homofascist” schools. Tomorrow: Time will tell.

          • Laurie Higgins

            If teachers are prohibited from presenting resources that suggest homosexual activity or relationships are immoral, they should be equally prohibited from presenting resources that affirm homosexual activity or relationships as moral or good. Both are moral assumptions–not facts. If schools are to places to freely explore ideas and which honor diversity and foster tolerance, censorship of one side of a cultural debate on moral beliefs has no place.

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Wrong. Bigotry is never “one side” of a cultural debate.

          • raytheist

            Wow…. the irony is astounding.

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Correct. One of the purposes of educators is to teach children how to be polite and considerate. So, you didn’t know that, huh?

          • Truth Offends

            There is nothing “polite and considerate” about silencing dissenting points of view.
            And, it is not the purpose of public schools to teach impressionable schoolchildren that homosexual behavior is perfectly normal and acceptable and that it is wrong to oppose homosexual behavior. That is “indoctrination” not “education”.

          • raytheist

            False. Kids can say whatever they wish and hold whatever archaic superstitions they wish. What they cannot do, however, is use those silly beliefs to harass and abuse other students.

          • helligusvart

            You are a fool.

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Of course the IFI is demanding that it’s gay-hating views be accepted everywhere (have you actually read any of the posts on your site?). Your organization would do anything it could to ensure that no expression of gay identity be allowed ANYWHERE, including public schools (hence your opposition to anti-bullying programs). You guys just happen to be losing that culture war and are, understandably, angry about it.

          • Laurie Higgins

            I’ll be generous here and say that you have “misconstrued” our positions.
            First, no one at IFI hates “gays.”
            Second, our opposition to the expression of Leftist beliefs about “gay identity” emerge from Leftist demands that ONLY their beliefs about “gay identity” be expressed.
            Finally, we have no absolute opposition to anti-bullying programs. We oppose anti-bullying programs that either implicitly or explicitly espouse or affirm Leftist assumptions about homosexuality and gender confusion. We support any efforts to combat bullying that are non-polemical and refrain from promoting non-factual beliefs as facts. We also object to the construal of moral disapproval of activity as hatred of persons, which most Leftist-sanctioned anti-bullying programs do, particularly through their use of the epithet “homophobic.”

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Yes, I’m familiar with your organization’s talking points and propaganda. Propaganda that is, as you well know, extremely unpopular and increasingly outside of the mainstream. A handful of individuals and on your FB page may agree with your radical opinions, but that’s just about it, isn’t it?

          • Laurie Higgins

            You did not respond to any of my contentions about censorship in public schools and the ideological monopoly that the Left seeks when it wants its assumptions (or I guess you call them “propaganda”) expressed while censoring dissenting views.

            The fact that not everyone agrees with conservative assumptions is not a good argument in defense of censorship.

            As for hatred, just read the comments below from “Butterfingers.”

          • http://batman-news.com/ Twisted Mister

            Wow, you found one person that made a rude comment; therefore, ALL gays are hateful, right? Not very logical of you, is it? People on the right (including Christians) make plenty of rude, abusive comments online, too. So what’s your point? The real abuse is that which is perpetrated against gays and lesbians by professional hate organizations, such as the American “Family” Association and the Illinois “Family” Institute.

          • MarcoZandrini

            So, Laurie, at age 11 or so, did make “the” decision to be attracted to boys and not to girls.

            I don’t care if there is or is not a DNA cause of homosexuality. However, what matters is how each and everyone of us treats everyone else. If you condemn someone because that person is gay, you are wrong. If you condemn someone because he or she is engaging in consensual sexual relations you are wrong.

          • Laurie Higgins

            It’s only “progressives” who argue treating people rightly means affirming all their feelings, values, beliefs, volitional acts and relationships. But of course they don’t really live their lives according to that principle. They don’t believe that in order to treat orthodox Christians rightly they must affirm all of their feelings, values, and beliefs.

            Nor do most “progressives” argue that moral opposition to consensual polyamorous activity or relationships is wrong or that moral opposition to polyamorous activity or relationships constitutes “condemnations of polyamorists.”

            Most people are fully capable of delighting in the company of and even deeply loving those whose feelings, beliefs, and life choices they find flawed, disordered, or immoral. In a diverse world, most of us do it every day. Most of us don’t demand that all of society affirm our feelings, beliefs, values, partner choices, or worldviews.

            And if you’re arguing that any powerful, persistent feeling that emerges at a young age is automatically and inherently morally legitimate to act upon, you’ve opened up a Pandora’s box of cultural problems.

          • Kara Connor

            You’ve nailed it – they are losing state by state, and are a dying demographic. They are scared because the foundations of their make-believe world are collapsing. They’d love to roll America back to the 1950s where life was just dandy – if you were white, male and straight.

      • butterfingers

        Good thing society doesn’t outlaw bigoted, knee jerk hysterical c*nts, bnecause Higgins would be in jail.

        • Truth Offends

          immature vulgarity
          flagged

          • butterfingers

            Flag all you want, f*ckface. Enjoy yourself.

          • helligusvart

            I’m glad to see that many of these people are getting deleted. I’ve flagged some of them myself. It makes for a nicer reading experience. If people can’t be civil, then they should stay off the site.

        • Laurie Higgins

          What in my writing suggests to you that I’m “hysterical” or that my responses are “knee-jerk” responses?

          The rest of your comment exposes real, venomous, uncivilized (i.e., barbarous) hatred. What kind of man uses language like that?

          • Stephen Mahi

            Nonetheless, quite justified.

      • Stephen Mahi

        If what you say is true, why was the black race discriminated against by society? Were no bibles readily available in the ’40s and ’50s?

        • Laurie Higgins

          The reason that Christians discriminated against blacks in the 1940’s and 1950’s is the same reason that Christians are now affirming homosexuality: Lousy exegesis to rationalize desire.

          And just as there were Christians in the 1940’s and 1950’s who understood what the Bible really teaches about race, there remain many Christians who understand what the Bible really teaches about gender, sexuality, and marriage.

          In addition, there are secular reasons to defend marriage as inherently constituted by sexual differentiation.

      • mambocat

        Homosexuality is not analogous to race in the same way that race is not analogous to a preference for cucumber sandwiches and quiche or fried chicken and watermelon. Black skin does not make one “act black,” white skin does not make one “act white,” homosexuality does not make one “act gay” — whatever those things are aside from the stereotypes we have ingrained in our society — does “acting black” mean doing a buck-and-wing, playing basketball, saying “be” a lot, and eating watermelon, or does it mean social leadership? Does “acting white” mean parading in sheets, blasting bad country music and being a redneck, or does it mean belonging to a country club, dancing badly, being a stockbroker and having a wife who firmly checks all emotion lest she develop wrinkles? Does being gay mean flipping your wrists, saying “fabulous” a lot and having a belt that matches your shoes, or does it mean loving your partner, going to the grocery and having a barbecue on Sunday? THERE IS NO ANALOGY. You are born white, gay, black, Latino, Asian, left-handed, color-blind, with or without handicaps, female, male, sometimes an hermaphrodite. You are NOT born a bigot, and you are not born “religious.” Both are taught and learned and BOTH ARE CHOICES. I did not choose to be “straight.” My loved ones did not choose their orientations, either. Get over it.

        • helligusvart

          No one is born homosexual. We don’t know what causes it, but if it was an inborn trait, God would have told us. But He didn’t. Anyway, thank you for putting social stereotypes to rest.

    • Matthew T. Mason

      Absolute nonsense. Skin color and sexual behavior are two very different things, and saying “rights” bring them together is not merely a stretch but something simply not comparable within the reasonable, rational mind.

      • truth or consequences

        I wish Dr King were alive for this time in our history. He would be setting the record straight of the attempt to call this perversion a civil right.

        • liberalcrusader

          You are wrong as his widow stated time and time again he was for gay rights!

          • Arthur Adams

            But what did she know? She was only married to him; she didn’t have Fox News to set things straight (pun intended) for her!

          • Jacobus Arminius

            And yet MLK wrote a response to a young gay male in Ebony magazine (1958), which said just the opposite of what you’re claiming. He wrote, “You are already on the right road toward a SOLUTION, since you honestly recognize the PROBLEM and have a desire to SOLVE it.”

          • helligusvart

            She only stated that she THOUGHT he would be for gay rights. She may be the only relative who feels this way, as his daughter Rev. Bernice King and niece Alveda King have expressed the opposite opinion.

          • liberalcrusader

            She knew him much more intimately, As MLK was a supporter of Bayard Rustin who aided MLK in his civil rights work.

          • Jacobus Arminius

            And yet MLK wrote a response to a young gay male in Ebony magazine in 1958, which said just the opposite of what you’re claiming. He wrote, “You are already on the right road toward a SOLUTION, since you honestly recognize the PROBLEM and have a desire to SOLVE it.”

            Working with Rustin doesn’t mean that he agreed with his lifestyle.

          • mambocat

            What his wife, who knew him most intimately, and his nieces and nephews think, are entirely different maters. I doubt if most of my nieces and nephews even know my husband’s favorite song, color, or what size shirt he wears.

          • Jacobus Arminius

            And yet MLK wrote a response to a young gay male in Ebony magazine
            (1958), which said just the opposite of what you’re claiming. He wrote,
            “You are already on the right road toward a SOLUTION, since you honestly
            recognize the PROBLEM and have a desire to SOLVE it.”

          • mambocat

            Indeed she did. I had the honor of meeting her very briefly once, after a speech in which she said exactly that.

          • Jacobus Arminius

            And yet MLK wrote a response to a young gay male in Ebony magazine
            (1958), which said just the opposite of what you’re claiming. MLK wrote,
            “You are already on the right road toward a SOLUTION, since you honestly
            recognize the PROBLEM and have a desire to SOLVE it.”

          • Jacobus Arminius

            And yet MLK wrote a response to a young gay male in Ebony magazine in
            1958, which said just the opposite of what you’re claiming. He wrote,
            “You are already on the right road toward a SOLUTION, since you honestly
            recognize the PROBLEM and have a desire to SOLVE it.”

          • liberalcrusader

            yes the key here being 1958, Look at the hatred directed towards him and his race just because of their skin color! gay rights were not even on the board then.

          • Kara Connor

            Stop introducing facts – the bigots are immune to them.

    • thisoldspouse

      There is no objective determining trait for sexual deviance (homosexuality) as there is in ANY of the other groups, save religion, which is explicitly protected in the Constitution. Anyone could claim “gayness,” and no one could logically deny them this label. It is wholly contrived and political.

      • Stephen Mahi

        You proceed from a false assumption that homosexuality is sexual deviance.

        • Matthew T. Mason

          Three words: Homosexuals cannot procreate.

          And there goes your strawman.

          • raytheist

            Nonsense. I’m gay. I have four children, born the ‘old fashioned way’. My step mother was lesbian, she had two children the old fashioned way, too. Homosexuals can and often do procreate.

          • Matthew T. Mason

            So, you are saying a baby can be created by two men or two women having sex?

            Idiot.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Nope! Never happens. In order for homosexuals to procreate, they have to be heterosexuals, at least as long as it takes to make a baby.

          • raytheist

            Nonsense. I was never hetero, but I’m intelligent and I learned a skill. Homosexual/Heterosexual is not something you DO…. it’s part of who you ARE, even when you have to pretend to be something else. Until this current generation when it was okay to be out, there were many of us pretending to be straight in order to survive. That is no longer necessary, which is a good thing.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Homosexual/Heterosexual IS something you DO…. it is NOT part of who you ARE! Sexual orientation has nothing to do with who or what one is!

            There is really only one sexual orientation: NORMAL heterosexuality! And then, there are all the abnormal perversions and deviancies on that.

          • helligusvart

            Hmmm. So that’s how it happened.

        • thisoldspouse

          Forget sexual deviance for the sake of argument, and just show me any objective criteria for proving that someone is
          “gay.” It can’t be done. A pathologist autopsying an unknown corpse can make no determination, absent the diseases rife in homosexual groups, of the sexual predilection of the subject by any means. It is a wholly subjective identity, one that can never hold up to even the most elementary scrutiny.

          • raytheist

            Nonsense. There are NO diseases unique to gay and lesbian people, so even if the coroner has a body presenting with HIV or some other STD, there’s no way to know if the person was gay/lesbian.

        • helligusvart

          It is.

  • Michex

    Maybe homosexuals wish that America did not become independent from England. Those all-male British boarding schools are notorious for creating homosexuals. Maybe homosexuals wish these types of schools for the U.S.

    • Halou

      Quite the opposite actually, Britain had a law called, if you’ll forgive the use of the word, the “Buggery Act”. It was in force across the nation and its territories from 1533 until 1828 when a new law superseded it and the provisions laid out within it.

      During it’s 295 years as a law, homosexuality in Britain was an offense punishable by death. The law was signed into force by Henry 8th, a man who so pleased the Pope for his vigorous defense of Catholicism from the Protestant heresy that he bestowed upon the king the title “Defender of the Faith”, a title that every British monarch since had inherited, all this was of course before the king founded his own church and “redefined” marriage so he could have a second wife.

      Even though it was still illegal to be gay in the newly independent USA, the laws put in place by the founding fathers after winning independence were remarkably lenient by comparison to those in Britain. In fact, American independence was as close as you could get to ‘gay rights’ in the mid-18th century.

      A fun fact. The British monarchy, as with most or all other monarchies in Europe, claimed to have been appointed by god himself to rule however they pleased. According to the British authorities at the time, rebelling against the king was as bad as rejecting the rules of god himself.

      Such arrogance is what caused French king Louis 16th to lose his head to a revolution, one that decriminalized homosexuality altogether in France and all French controlled territory in 1791.

      American independence was the first step on the long road of gay rights, and gay people in America have every right to celebrate an event that saw the removal of the death penalty for homosexuality.

      • helligusvart

        No one in this country, least of all I, want homosexuals to be put to death. We just want a sexually sane society. For example, I’m not interested in prosecuting most pornography, but I don’t want to be forced to be exposed to explicit imagery. The same rules should apply to homosexuality in public. By the way, God’s name is capitalized.

        • Arthur Adams

          Define “homosexuality in public”.

          My partner and I hold hands in movie theaters, and might give each other a quick kiss in view of others. Do you want to lock us up?

          • helligusvart

            Yes.

          • Arthur Adams

            I… I… wow.

            Please, run for office. I would love to make you the new face of the Christian right.

        • raytheist

          When straight folks stop holding hands and kissing in public, quit showing off their children (because we KNOW how they got them), and all the other ways they flaunt their lifestyle and cram it down our throats,,, MAYBe we’ll consider denying who we are in public, too.
          And, by the way, not everyone puts a capital “G” on god, because it is not required.

          • Charlie_Feather

            The difference between straight folks and gay folks is that straight folks are not Satan-worshipping sex perverts. Well, not, necessarily.

          • raytheist

            Neither are gay folks. Most people don’t believe in satan anyway, so it’s foolish to think they worship satan.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Who cares if gays believe in Satan or not? They are his useful idiots who serve him inadvertently. Just admit it: You and other rebellious gays hate God. You claim He doesn’t exist. But, assume for a moment that He does exist: Then you would be opposed to Him and on the side of Satan.

          • helligusvart

            They are sex perverts, though. And those who don’t believe in Satan will believe in him on Judgment Day.

          • helligusvart

            Why do you hate God so much? And don’t tell me you don’t believe in Him, because you do. Everyone knows God exists. You just refuse to acknowledge Him because you hate Him. Why? Is it because He hates your homosexuality?

        • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

          Every time someone claims the Bible is 100% correct and infallible and then uses it to condemn same sex attraction they are promoting Leviticus 20:13 which does indeed say gay men should be put to death. I think your statement, “No one in this country, least of all I, want homosexuals to be put to death,” ought to be reconsidered.

          • helligusvart

            Leviticus contains the Law of Moses, which was “nailed to the cross along with Christ.” (Colossians 2:13-14) However, this does not legitimize homosexuality, since the New Testament, which was written after the Law became null and void, condemns homosexuality. (Romans 1:18-32 and others) The Law proscribed the death penalty for adultery, as well, but we know how Jesus dealt with that. Homosexuality is no different.

  • truth or consequences

    Whether anyone likes it or not homosexual acts are twisted sick perversion. Any attempt to promote them publicly is twice as evil

    • Arthur Adams

      homosexual acts are twisted sick perversion.

      Prove it. Without resorting to “Jesus hates them” or “I think they’re just icky!”

      • helligusvart

        Go to a gay pride rally and see for yourself.

        • https://www.youtube.com/user/vampswagen Persephone Sixty-Six

          I want to one years ago, it was pretty boring.

          • helligusvart

            That must have been in Antioch, Nebraska or something. The ones I read about on the news may be many things (almost all bad), but B-O-R-I-N-G is not one of them.

          • Arthur Adams

            No more shocking than Mardi Gras or Spring Break.

          • helligusvart

            And these things are vile and should not be allowed, just like homosexual “pride” parades.

          • Arthur Adams

            Wow, you’re really disclosing your agenda.

            Do you think people should have sex for pleasure, at all?

          • helligusvart

            Yes, married couples should have sex for enjoyment. But that doesn’t mean acting as if the entire world revolves around sex. We are not meant to flaunt our sexuality everywhere we go. Contrary to what you atheists believe, human beings are made in God’s image, and are meant to have sex with one person and only one person, their opposite sex spouse. The Mardi Gras and Spring Break folks are destroying themselves spiritually (and in the case of Spring Break, sometimes physically). And that fills me with grief.

          • Arthur Adams

            If we’re made in “God’s image”, shouldn’t we be having sex exclusively with female Jewish virgins?

          • helligusvart

            That’s dumb and you know it. God made ALL people in His image, regardless of ethnicity. Grow up.

          • Arthur Adams

            So, then gay people, too.

          • helligusvart

            But He didn’t make them homosexual! He made them heterosexual and something went terribly wrong!

        • Arthur Adams

          I did. I came home with a “things to do” list.

          • helligusvart

            Hopefully, one of them was “Never expose myself to this cesspool ever again!”

          • Arthur Adams

            No, but one of them was “teach right wing nut jobs the concept of a joke”.

      • thisoldspouse

        First, you must learn what “perversion” means. It is not necessarily a term of insult; it has a meaning based in reality. Perversion wouldn’t exist if there were not an understood norm, and norms are defined by design, tradition and outcomes.

        Perversion is simply determined by an irrational departure from all three of these. The human body was designed to be sexually procreative; every organ has its indisputable place in this process. Homosexuality perverts, I.e. departs from, the indisputable design of the reproductive systems of either the male or female.

        • https://www.youtube.com/user/vampswagen Persephone Sixty-Six

          People do lots of things other people label as perversions. That does not make those “perversions” bad or harmful.

          So why were men “designed” with a g-spot that can only be reached through anal penetration?

          • helligusvart

            WHAT???!!! Please explain.

          • Arthur Adams

            Anal sex feels to a man receiving it.

          • helligusvart

            A man also feels it when someone beats him over the head with a hammer! Is this therefore a good thing?

          • Arthur Adams

            I left out the word “good”.

          • helligusvart

            Then why do only 2% of human males engage in it?

          • Arthur Adams

            I doubt if only 2% of human males have engaged in sexual acts that involve anal penetration. I’m not just talking about what you’re picturing as “gay sex”; this includes a man asking his wife “put your finger in… you know…”

          • helligusvart

            A couple of famous studies in the nineties showed that only 2% of heterosexual couples engaged in anal sex. I seriously doubt that many of those males asked the wives to “put her finger in.” If they did, then methinks they’re probably closet homosexuals. Add this to the 2% of men who are homosexuals, and you get…you know.

        • Arthur Adams

          Yawn. That old argument again.

          By your own logic, any sexual acts that cannot lead to reproduction are perverted.

          I’m assuming, by your own username, that you are married and that the two of you are beyond childbearing years. Do I need to ask the obvious question?

        • raytheist

          “First, you must learn what “perversion” means. It is not necessarily a term of insult; ”

          Nonsense. It is nearly always used as an insult, to suggest there is something wrong about being gay or lesbian.

    • https://www.youtube.com/user/vampswagen Persephone Sixty-Six

      Well that’s just, like, your opinion, man.

  • Sam Meteoram

    “the homosexuality-affirming organization Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) had marched in the parade. No one opposes friendships with homosexuals, but, of course, that’s not really what this deviously-named organization is promoting.”

    Wow. Scare tactic enough? Let’s get one thing clear. PFLAG delivers exactly what it promises. It is an organization for parents and friends of lesbians and gays. Just like this article delivers exactly what it promises- a bunch of misinformation and bigotry towards gay people. And you always know an unprofessional blogger when he/she cannot keep him/herself from commenting. Let’s keep it classy.

  • liberalcrusader

    Boycott Laurie Higgins!

    • helligusvart

      Then why are you on this site? Why aren’t you boycotting her? Hmmm?

  • Arthur Adams

    Alternate headline: Far-Right Wing Activist Calls for Boycott of Classic American Institution She Finds “Politically Incorrect”

  • https://www.youtube.com/user/vampswagen Persephone Sixty-Six

    I’m going to start making cry towells for people like Laurie.

    • Arthur Adams

      Please don’t. If you make even half the amount necessary to mop up their constant tears over society not being exactly how they think it should be, the price of fabric will skyrocket!

      • https://www.youtube.com/user/vampswagen Persephone Sixty-Six

        But I was going to print bible quotes on them. Maybe even a picture of conservative Jesus with an AR-15 shooting gays and abortion doctors.

      • helligusvart

        And if all of a sudden same sex marriage was outlawed nationwide, you and your fellow homosexuals would be rioting in every major city in America. So don’t talk to me about crying.

        • Arthur Adams

          Uh, yeah. If we had rights taken away from us, we would.

          • helligusvart

            This shows how morally bankrupt you are. You care about absolutely no one but yourself. And others exist solely for your own purposes. There will be a special place in Hell for people like you.

          • Arthur Adams

            Right. I’m supposed to just sit down and gleefully accept whatever you and your ilk decide. Was it you that argued my partner should be arrested simply for holding hands and quickly kissing in public? If you try to get that made the law, you’re darn right I’ll protest.

          • helligusvart

            No, I argued that both you and your boyfriend should be arrested.

          • Arthur Adams

            You’re despicable.

          • helligusvart

            Yes, Daffy.

  • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

    LGBT people are citizens of the USA as much as anyone else. I fail to see how trying to deny their patriotism and love for our country by complaining of their presence in a parade is a good thing.

    • QuadGMoto

      Their presence to actively push something that has nothing to do with the parade isn’t a problem?

      • raytheist

        The only “problem” is people wanting to pretend LGBT aren’t part of the community. How many other groups are also represented in the parade? Kiwanis? Rotary Club? Scouts? Churches? Boys Club/Girls Club?

        • QuadGMoto

          No one says the can’t participate in the parade as part of the parade’s purpose. (See this year’s Saint Patrick’s Day parades which are to celebrate the Irish and Saint Patrick, not anything else.) In other words, they are not being excluded “because they’re ‘gay'”, but because they are actively distracting from the point of the parade.

          • raytheist

            Seriously? Having a rainbow flag is a “distraction”??? Do no other groups have identifying banners, flags, symbols, etc.?

          • helligusvart

            It is when it refers to sick sexual practices.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            Of course this whole editorial is about excluding LGBT people! If not, then what is it really about? Maybe you feel LGBT people can participate but only if they remain closeted and ashamed of who they are? Why should they be censored in how they express themselves? Isn’t freedom and liberty – the goals of our Revolution – all about being able to express yourself freely?

            I have to wonder, did any churches march in the Wheaton parade? If they did then why are they allowed to march when religion isn’t part of the parade’s purpose?

          • Charlie_Feather

            Freedom and liberty is not about license and anarchy, which is what homosexuals are promoting.

          • helligusvart

            Because our country was founded upon the Christian religion, that’s why. And the Christian religion teaches that homosexuality is perversion (Romans 1:18-32). And therefore they should be ashamed of their perversion.

        • Charlie_Feather

          LGBT are a part of the community of Sodom and Gomorrah, not that of the USA.

          • raytheist

            LGBT are part of American society. That’s just a reality.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Murders, thieves, scum of the earth are, also, part of American society. Your argument is one of the worst arguments trying to justify sexual perversion.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            Sorry, Charlie. LGBT people work, live, pay taxes and do all of the things every other citizen gets to do in our great country. LGBT people are more like you than they are different. We are all Americans.

          • Charlie_Feather

            Any sex pervert, who should be kept away from children, or anybody for that matter, and whose poisonous philosophy should be quarantined, will make that same argument. Homosexuals are not differentiated from any of the other sex perverts. Sex perverts work, live, pay taxes and do all of the things every other citizen gets to do in our great country.

            I mean really! Just admit that gay philosophy on sexuality is twisted and perverse. Gays are essentially promoting sexual anarchy and libertinism. Is that something we want to teach our children and promote in society? If you had children, would you want them having sex with just anyone or anything in any way, shape or form?

          • helligusvart

            I remember reading about a mother who allowed her minor children to choose multi-colored condoms from a bowl and referred to it as a game. We are awash in sexual sin, and not just homosexuality.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            “Homosexuals are not differentiated from any of the other sex perverts.” This is your error. People who at tracted to members of their own sex are not doing anything inherently harmful. Pedophiles, who you are inferring, do demonstrable harm. Your comparison fails on that point and is invalid.

            Your charge that LGBT people are, “promoting sexual anarchy and libertinism [sic],” is also incorrect. Your straw man argument fails because this is simply untrue. I do have children, or had – they are grown up now – and you’re right, I wouldn’t, “want them having sex with just anyone or anything in any way, shape or form,” because I feel that a libidinous promiscuity is demonstrably harmful. But being gay, or lesbian or bisexual or transgender has nothing to do with promiscuity (heterosexuals can and are in some cases quite promiscuous as well). Again, your point fails because of a straw man argument, your basic premise is false and the rest fails with it.

          • Charlie_Feather

            People who attracted to members of their own sex are setting a bad example, and are directly undermining the traditional, societal ideal of the sexual relationship as a man and a woman united in a lifelong bond.

            Thus, the advocacy, promotion, celebration and acceptance of homosexual behavior, which is among other alternative sexual orientations and practices, are incitations to libertinism and sexual anarchy.

            “In the homosexual press,“gay marriage” advocates admit openly that they would not remain faithful if married. Homosexual columnist Michelangelo Signorile writes that “gays” would seek instead to make adultery acceptable, by redefining the “archaic institution” of marriage. The purpose of “gay marriage” is to win legal benefits and social sanction for homosexual couples, not to improve their behavior.”

            The “gay” agenda is to eliminate the existing Judeo-Christian model of civilization, grounded in marriage-based procreative sexuality, to make way for an irrational and impossible libertine model that imagines family-less, unlimited “sexual freedom”, while somehow preserving order in every other aspect of human society. It reflects an insane delusion that will only breed disorder and anarchy.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            “We’ve always done it that way” is no excuse, first of all, to avoid changing things that are harmful. Tradition is no reason to keep doing demonstrable harm in the world.

            Your connection is tenuous at best (spurious, more likely) since the same thing could easily be said of heterosexual orientations and practices, that they are “are incitations [sic] to libertinism [sic] and sexual anarchy,” especially when you consider how heterosexuals violate their vows of monogamy all the time (note the more than 50% divorce rate in our country).

            The LGBT Agenda has to do with being given the same kind of dignity and respect in our society that you expect from others for yourself. That’s it. Your negative and exclusionary interpretation of scripture is proven more and more wrong when it comes to gay people when you look at the benign effects of nondiscrimination laws that include sexual orientation and gender identity and marriage equality laws. You’re making things up, it seems, and carrying your delusions to their irrational conclusions with your nonsensical predictions.

            LGBT people deserve the rights and privileges of any other law abiding US citizen.

          • Charlie_Feather

            I agree with you. The promotion of libertinism started to become mainstream when Playboy magazine, which was geared to a heterosexual audience, gained relative respectability. The libertine philosophy gradually gained momentum, because going downhill is so much easier than maintaining high moral standards. Homosexuals and their activists basically rely on the philosophy of libertinism. I have never seen expressed any responsible, societal ideal of the sexual relationship coming from homosexuals. The best they come up with is a euphemism for sexual anarchy, that is, consenting adults doing whatever they like sexually with one another. Sexual anarchy is their societal ideal of the sexual relationship.

            Homosexuals who live and promote the gay agenda do not deserve any respect or dignified treatment. They deserve only contempt and banishment. They are irresponsible and socially destructive with their promotion and celebration of libertinism and sexual anarchy. Their rationalizations are an apologia of the same primal urges that drive a four year old. They are doing the Devil’s work.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            Puritanism. The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.

            H. L. Mencken

          • Charlie_Feather

            “Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil.” — C.S. Lewis

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires.

            Susan B. Anthony

          • Charlie_Feather

            I notice that people don’t even have to believe in God in order to do what they desire.

          • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

            Ain’t America grand?

          • Charlie_Feather

            Not so much anymore.

          • helligusvart

            H. L. Mencken was apparently a bonehead.

          • Kara Connor

            My wife and I have been together and faithful for over 25 years. Quoting Fox News and the AFA simply makes you look ridiculous. Your argument, if it can be dignified by such a term, boils down to “gays are promiscuous so we should stop them marrying because they’ll still be promiscuous”.

          • Charlie_Feather

            My argument is that gays set a bad example. The example they set is that libertinism is socially acceptable. This is the only ideal they uphold for human sexuality.

          • Kara Connor

            And your argument is in fact not an argument, but a regurgitation of prejudice and debunked nonsense. Thank goodness your demographic is slowly fading away. It must just eat you up to be losing, state by state.

          • Charlie_Feather

            No, it doesn’t bother me at all. I am witnessing the end of the American empire as it degenerates into decadence and debauchery. You are on the side of decadence and debauchery, and you will go down with it.

          • helligusvart

            No, we should refuse to recognize same-sex marriage because it is spitting in God’s face!

          • Kara Connor

            America is not a theocracy, much as you’d like that. I appreciate that your losing state by state on this issue is doubtless causing you great annoyance, but perhaps in years to come you’ll see that you are on the wrong side of history like Sebator Robert Byrd. Opponents of civil rights back then used exactly the same biblical justifications you use.

          • helligusvart

            Except that Robert Byrd opposed people for the color of their skin, an immutable trait. Homosexuality is not an immutable trait, it is a chosen lifestyle. And it is the homosexuals and their sympathizers who are on the wrong side of eternity.

          • Kara Connor

            Please submit your theory homosexuality to the Nobel Prize committee and if I read you’ve won it, I’ll start giving it serious consideration. In the meantime, it males not a bit of difference whether or not we are born this way, or simply choose a “lifestyle” where we can’t get married to the person we life in a majority of states, are more likely to be the victims of violence, are more likely to be made homeless by our parents, can be fired if someone finds out we are LGBT in around 35 states, and are daily referred to as evil and abominations by people like you. Who wouldn’t choose that, eh? It doesn’t matter, because even if I found men incredibly attractive, but chose women as swxual partners so that I could get all the “benefits” I listed above, and more, I’m still entitled to equal protection. Here’s another thing to consider – yours is not the only religion. Yours is not even the oniy interpretation of Christianity. I realize that you believe yours is, by great good fortune, the only correct religion and the only corect sect within that religion, but there are lots of other people – many more in the case of Islam – who would just as vehemently claim the same thing. You can’t all be right, and I’d go further and suggest that none of your are.

        • helligusvart

          Those groups don’t flaunt sick, disgusting behavior in front of a captive audience including children.

      • http://emelyes-kitchen.blogspot.com/ Emelye Waldherr

        So, nobody should “push” anything when walking in an Independence Day parade? If that were the case then who, exactly, would be eligible to join?

        It seems to me that a parade on the 4th of July is designed to push the American Ideal, that ALL people are created equal, that we are ALL endowed with inalienable rights. ALL of us, not just the heterosexual, cisgender, right wing Christians. I don’t see how the Boy Scouts, PFLAG, etc. mentioned in this editorial violated that ideal.

    • helligusvart

      We don’t care if they join a parade. We care when they celebrate sexual deviance in front of a captive audience including children.

  • Charlie_Feather

    The walls of the citadel have been breached, and the barbarian hordes have entered the city and are running amuck.

    • raytheist

      That’s okay, we’ll have those right-wing Christian extremists rounded up and back in their corral soon!

      • Charlie_Feather

        There more of them than there are of you. I think you are the one who should be worried.

        • raytheist

          Not at all. Study after study show that these Christian extremists are losing ground and becoming more vocal as they become more desperate.

          • Charlie_Feather

            There are more of them to round up you gays and put you back in your corals …… or closets.

      • helligusvart

        Oh, you will, huh? Give it your best shot.

  • raytheist

    “save perhaps the Macy’s Day Thanksgiving Parade, which last year included a performance of the award-winning Broadway play about sexual perversion Kinky Boots.”

    NONSENSE and over-dramatic hyperventilating. Kinky Boots was about a guy who inherits a shoe factory and needs help keeping it in business, and help comes in the form of a drag queen who knows about fashion and business. Just because the hero of the story is a drag queen doesn’t mean the play was ABOUT Sex or “sexual perversion” (whatever that term means).

    • helligusvart

      But CHILDREN go to these parades!

  • DelAnaya

    “The tsk-tskers will huff and puff that I am the moral equivalent of a racist.”

    Well, yeah — that pretty much sums it up in your own words, doesn’t it?

    I’ll add a couple more: your views against gays are immoral bigotry and you should be ashamed to parade them around in public, like you have just done in this article. Paraphrasing you: No parent should bring their children within earshot of hatred like this without being ready to call it out for what it is — immorality that doesn’t have a place in modern America. We’re better than that.

  • raytheist

    “What a barbarous affront to families and an insult to our veterans.”

    Seriously? Gay and lesbian people have families. And many of those gays and lesbians are veterans. But Independence Day is NOT VETERANS DAY AND IT IS NOT ABOUT VETERANS, anyway. Independence Day is about celebrating the birth of our national independent from the shackles of British rule. And that is for ALL of us to celebrate.

    • Charlie_Feather

      Just because gay and lesbian people have families, that does not make them examples of wholesomeness that society should accept.

    • helligusvart

      Do I hear an anti-British sentiment here? Boy, are you BIGOTED!!!

  • Andy

    “The tsk-tskers will huff and puff that I am the moral equivalent of a racist.” Well, you are. Go figure.

  • Charlie_Feather

    The problem with accepting homosexuality as normal, is that once one accepts the premisses of homosexual philosophy, one must accept all the implications of that philosophy. And those implications are sexual anarchy and libertinism.

  • Arthur Adams

    When you’re right wing as Laurie Higgins, “support the troops” only applies to troops exactly like them. Remember, these are the type of people that booed an American soldier for asking a conservatively incorrect question at a Republican Presidential debate.

    I’d love to see one of them meet Eric Alva. There’s only thing that would keep him from kicking their… rear end.

  • Charlie_Feather

    Being a homosexual is like being a criminal. The way to stop being a criminal is to stop committing crime. The way to stop being a homosexual is to stop committing homosexual acts.

EmailTitle2

Sign up for BarbWire alerts!