🚀 go-pugleaf

oaa@cbnewsl.cb.att.com (owen.a.alexander) writes:
>Anyway, let me stop here, before I start to get angry.  Am I
>anti-homosexual? Yes!  Would I disciminate against or harrass them? No.
>I still stand firm that I don't think that specific laws addressing a
>single group is necessary in this case, but general laws should be
>sufficient.

Arrghh!!  What a horribly politically incorrect thing to say!   Oh, I think
I see the problem.  You're not only a Creton, you're a Creton *MAN*.  I'm
not exactly what a "Creton man" is, but  it sounds pretty bad; I'm afraid
I may be one too.

(Incidentally, the original "Sad Day For Liberty" poster, Beth Carr, said
not only that Creton men were likely to be offended by her statements, but
also that things were looking up now that the Republicans were out of office.
Now, I consider myself a Democrat (for lack of anything else), but contrary
to what Beth Carr or Pat Buchanan might think, my vote for Clinton was NOT
a vote for "gay marriages."  I don't like the idea (that's put forth by
Democrats AND Republicans alike) that that's what the Democratic party stands
for.)

>As a side issue; some people complain how Christians are trying to push
>their morality on others.  I think the gay agenda is a clear case of
>homosexuals trying to push their (im-)morality on others.
>The hypocrisy of it is amazing to me.

Exactly.  I'm not condoning physical "gay-bashing" in any way, but 
homosexuals are protected from getting beaten up by exactly the same laws
that protect me from getting beaten up.   Any laws specifically designed
to protect that segment of the population would not serve a prohibatory
function as much as a legitimizing function, as you said.  It would serve
as the official legal standpoint of the U.S./Georgia/wherever towards
homsexuality, but it should be obvious that there are a whole lot of people
in the U.S. who DON'T see homsexuality as a valid "lifestyle choice."

It has become politically correct not only to accept homosexuality as a
valid "lifestyle choice," (in fact, I think we've gotten to the point where
you're super politically correct if you say it's not a choice, that it's
biological), but also to equate "homophobia" (an incredibly ill-chosen
and PC word) with racism, sexism, and the like.  I find racism and sexism
very offensive, and I find it equally offensive that many homsexuals (and
defenders thereof) claim the same protection under the Civil Rights legislation 
as people who are BORN of a non-white race or BORN female.  Until I see
evidence that homosexuality is biological and is NOT a choice, I won't feel
any guilt in thinking that it's wrong and certainly doesn't deserve any
special legislation to legitimize it as a way of life.

Chuck "Damn!  There goes my place as a good Democrat!" Jordan

-- 
                  Chuck Jordan | jordan@castor.cs.uga.edu
"Sorry I'm so long."
"Braggar."
					-- Mystery Science Theater 3000