On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:

> I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an
> individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is
> gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him
> straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?"

A clever and apt rejoinder, to be sure, and it might make the light of
understanding come on for some thinking people, but not for those
self-proclaimed "Christians" for whom thinking is tantamount to blasphemy.
For those individuals, the answer to "Why are you straight?" runs along
the lines of "Because that is God's order for the world. Homosexuality is
inherently disordered, an abomination before God, and it is a behavior and
a lifestyle choice at best, and a sickness at worst. Come pray with us and
Jesus will cure you of your homosexual urges."

That's a longwinded way of saying what President Bush's Karl Rove said
just the other day:

"If we want to have a hopeful and decent(!) society, we ought to aim for
the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a
union of a man and a woman."

Yep, that's the Bush administration..."spreading freedom and democracy
around the globe" (the Brits called it "bringing them civilisation" a
century ago...didn't work out too well back then, either).

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:

> I am recalling a program I saw on cable of a search into why an
> individual is gay. An individual, seeking to understand why someone is
> gay, asked a gay person: "Why are you gay?" The gay person looked him
> straight in the eye and asked: "Why are you straight?"

A clever and apt rejoinder, to be sure, and it might make the light of
understanding come on for some thinking people, but not for those
self-proclaimed "Christians" for whom thinking is tantamount to blasphemy.
For those individuals, the answer to "Why are you straight?" runs along
the lines of "Because that is God's order for the world. Homosexuality is
inherently disordered, an abomination before God, and it is a behavior and
a lifestyle choice at best, and a sickness at worst. Come pray with us and
Jesus will cure you of your homosexual urges."

That's a longwinded way of saying what President Bush's Karl Rove said
just the other day:

"If we want to have a hopeful and decent(!) society, we ought to aim for
the ideal, and the ideal is that marriage ought to be, and should be, a
union of a man and a woman."

Yep, that's the Bush administration..."spreading freedom and democracy
around the globe" (the Brits called it "bringing them civilisation" a
century ago...didn't work out too well back then, either).

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:

> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted:

> > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
> > target of hatred

> Well, then, maybe derision???

"Maybe"...? Y'think?

Turn on your TV set during primetime any night of the week. Scarcely a
sitcom episode goes by without they don't make clunky, hamhanded innuendo
or outright laughtrack-enhanced punchlines at the expense of
cardigan-wearing, mincing, oh-so-coiffed fag-stereotypes, and entire
series are built on same, e.g. "Will and Grace" or "Queer Eye for the
Straight Guy" or "Queer as Folk".

One doesn't have to work very hard to imagine how black people felt when
they saw such as "What's Happenin?" on television. Hollywood, for their
part, is glibly contrite for years of making money off black stereotypes,
but they evidently have zero problem doing the selfsame thing with gays
right now, today.

Gandhi said of social change: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule
and denounce you, then they debate you, then you win."

-DS

On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, indago wrote:

> 041108 2142 - Wound Up posted:

> > Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
> > target of hatred

> Well, then, maybe derision???

"Maybe"...? Y'think?

Turn on your TV set during primetime any night of the week. Scarcely a
sitcom episode goes by without they don't make clunky, hamhanded innuendo
or outright laughtrack-enhanced punchlines at the expense of
cardigan-wearing, mincing, oh-so-coiffed fag-stereotypes, and entire
series are built on same, e.g. "Will and Grace" or "Queer Eye for the
Straight Guy" or "Queer as Folk".

One doesn't have to work very hard to imagine how black people felt when
they saw such as "What's Happenin?" on television. Hollywood, for their
part, is glibly contrite for years of making money off black stereotypes,
but they evidently have zero problem doing the selfsame thing with gays
right now, today.

Gandhi said of social change: "First they ignore you, then they ridicule
and denounce you, then they debate you, then you win."

-DS

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>hate.
>
>
> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of
> Mairca).
>
> DS

Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. CTPB
Bush is not a basher.

--
YOU are the real piece of work in this post. I think you are
a couple of drumsticks short of a picnic there bud. - SVTKate

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>hate.
>
>
> ...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States of
> Mairca).
>
> DS

Shut up Daniel, I know a number of gays that supported Bush. CTPB
Bush is not a basher.

--
YOU are the real piece of work in this post. I think you are
a couple of drumsticks short of a picnic there bud. - SVTKate

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>hate.
>
>
>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>of Mairca).
>
>
>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>target of hatred ;)
>
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

Well, let's be fair. There's lots of reasons to hate someone, like if
they're not white, not Christian, or any number of other reasons. Hate:
it's not just for fags anymore.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>hate.
>
>
>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>of Mairca).
>
>
>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>target of hatred ;)
>
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

Well, let's be fair. There's lots of reasons to hate someone, like if
they're not white, not Christian, or any number of other reasons. Hate:
it's not just for fags anymore.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>hate.
>
>
>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>of Mairca).
>
>
>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>target of hatred ;)
>
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

What is the evidence of this?

Matt

Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Nov 2004, Wound Up wrote:
>
>
>>>>No one deserves to be the target of blind, ideological, prejudicial
>>>>hate.
>
>
>>>...unless they're, y'know, gay and living in the YSM (Yoonaad'd States
>>>of Mairca).
>
>
>>Homosexuality does not serve as an acceptable excuse for being the
>>target of hatred ;)
>
>
> Are ya sure? A lot of voters seem to hold the opposite view.

What is the evidence of this?

Matt