March 2, 2008
Getting In ‘Way Too Deep
I have absolutely nothing against two or more consenting adults, sequestered in properly private surroundings, indulging in whatever non-lethal activities they please, so long as they keep it among themselves and refrain from involving anybody who does not wish to be included in the realm of their respective perversions.
In fact, while I strongly oppose same sex marriages, I have nothing against a same sex couple making legal arrangements in areas of family level hospital visit access (without veto power over such family decisions as life support issues and also without being permitted to adopt children) and dependent benefits, as long as all parties, including the employer in question, are agreed. The same applies to inheritances via will. This is done all the time between individuals who aren’t sleeping together, as it were.
However, I do have a problem with those same people imposing their chosen lifestyles on the rest of us via the courts and via our political system.
The conservative policy group Concerned Women for America is speaking out against a new project launched by a coalition of homosexual activist groups designed to recruit and vet openly homosexual professionals to serve in influential political positions in the next presidential administration.
Truncating…
Members of the homosexual lobby have done a masterful job of equating their chosen, changeable sexual behavior with immutable characteristics such as skin color, says Barber.
“They’re comparing apples to oranges, of course, because they are not the same,” he says of the homosexual lobby’s attempt at comparison. “They have hijacked the language of the genuine civil rights movement and, as such, in corporations around the country and in various governmental entities are considered minorities worthy of special consideration and special rights in terms of hiring practices.”
That is the issue in a nutshell.
A Burl Ives song I recall from my days as a wee lad, called The Monkey and the Elephant contained a verse,
The monkey asked the elephant
oh why are you so gray?
I’m gray because I’m gray, said he
and why are you so brown?
The monkey simply answered,
I’m brown because I’m brown.
Neither had any choice in the matter, one was born gray, the other was born brown. You can be born white, black, brown, tan, yellow or burnt umber, what you see is what you get. Depending upon where you are in the world, you can be a minority because of your skin color.
Here in the United States, if you’re not white, you’re considered a minority. If you hang with Republicans, you’re likely not suffering from any sort of racial oppression. If you choose to live in a Democrat managed environment, well, you made your bed… If they don’t keep you down so as to champion the quest for your “equality” and you get ahead, they might lose your vote. Is that convoluted, or what? Yet for some reason, it apparently works and is therefore a mainstay of Democrat policy.
But I digress.
Homosexuality is a matter of choice — I know, I know, I could be bombarded by arguments that it is more than a matter of personal option, it is a case of mix-up: A woman’s psyche was born in a man’s body or whatever, someone has a gene imbalance, etc, etc, etc — the attraction to folks issued the same gender as onesself is a far cry from the carved-in-stone reality of being born with skin of one color or another.
However, liberal lawyers, judges, activists, media and politicians have been aggressively, tirelessly misinterpreting the Constitution and twisting the truth long enough and successfully enough that they’ve mastered the art of sneaking in a veritable cornucopia of dogmas that run contrary to mainstream American beliefs and even logic itself.
They’ve successfully promoted homosexuals to the same status as genuine minorities and given them power in that regard, making them a favorite butt-munch for vote-hungry liberal politicians.
We’ve allowed our self seeking, ambitious politicians to lead us off the beaten track, as it were, into a kind of moral quicksand, and we are getting in ‘way too deep…
http://hardastarboard.mu.nu/wp-trackback.php?p=795
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:45 am
brilliant work my friend and yes ..Behavoir is clearly a choice!
the PC herd will deny that because it lets them off the hook
of moral responsibility!:)
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:17 am
Angel –
That’s the gist of it.
Maybe we’ll next make strong lobbies for pedophiles, addicted public nostril fingerers (ewwww!), date rapists (they can’t help themselves, there’s obviously some kind of gene imbalance and that makes them a minority that should be honored) and kleptomaniacs, who can’t help but steal.
At some point in time, politicians and judges were where they were because of such qualities as patriotism and wisdom. Not now, dagnabbit!
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:50 am
I have been waiting for the correct place to share this and it did not talk long! On my way to get my pancakes this morning I heard on the radio about some homo action in my hometown of Shelby, NC. I guess it is a small town I never really seen a gay person there. Seems that 2 females have been asked not to attend a few churches so they are going to make their own house or worship. This is not a joke….. they are calling it Camp Lickalotta. They listed 3 reasons for the name and none of them make reference to my favorite pastime, but I have to assume they have the 4th reason! I found an article on it:
http://www.shelbystar.com/news/camp_29063___article.html/leedy_lickalotta.html
March 2nd, 2008 at 11:54 am
Jeff –
Those two ladies sound like they’d be right at home in the Bay Area, perhaps on a farm someplace, populated by major wingnuts (picture denizens of the reservation school in Billy Jack).
…some homo action in my hometown of Shelby, NC.
ROTFLMAO!!!!
What people in normal, honest, uncomplicated, small American towns consider anomalies, your counterparts in big cities consider “business as usual”.
In Shelby, the vast majority of residents might look at a guy with purple hair, eye shadow, a pierced face, black painted fingernails and an exposed nipple ring attached to a leash wielded by a 400 pound diesel dyke as bizarre, but in a city like San Francisco, that same guy could be a municipal judge or deputy mayor.
March 2nd, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Boy you took a chance on getting the libs riled with this post. WAY TO GO! LOL I agree that the courts have no business in making law that apllies to chosen life styles. If that was the case then people who want to mary dolphins, ( and yes there is a lady in Florida who made that request last year..go figure), will aslo have the right to take it to the courts and have law established for their chosen life style.
So then where does it end ? It never does without drawing the line where it already is and not allowing the courts or legislative branch to get involved. What two people do in their home is their business but forcing their chosen life style on the public and demanding as they do actually violates the Constitutional rights of privacy for everyone else.
Good post!
March 2nd, 2008 at 12:48 pm
Seth maybe they are infiltrating the smaller towns? Last time I went home… someone cleared all the woods behind my parents’ house. It was a wonderful backyard all closed in you would have loved it. 100 ft Popular trees and such. It was all cut down with a horse pastor and barn installed. When I inquired to my mother about why the barn had a satellite dish on the side of it, she said oh I guess they had got power ran to it. It had a wood stove outside for heat! Then she explained that the husband kicked the wife out b/c she was practicing lickalotta with a friend (not Moms exact words). But the lady decided to move into the barn with her GF! Mom also said she has had to call the “dog pound” 4 times b/c the horses keep coming into her yard. She said once she was watching TV and one was looking at here through the living room window. Needless to say I moved out of Shelby as soon as I became employed!
March 2nd, 2008 at 2:13 pm
Ken –
Thanks!
We are getting “so screwed” by the acquiescence of politicians who were elected because of their supposed conservatism to portside colleagues and their agendas. While we watch major issues being addressed by Congress, they pass the minor stuff that erodes the values previously embraced by our government and lends precedent to future infractions.
Every time we are hit by a ruling against adherence to American core beliefs, a legal precedent is set for additional erosion later on, and that’s how the left is gradually eating away at the foundation of our free, Constitution-based society.
March 2nd, 2008 at 3:06 pm
Jeff –
You mean the husband lives in the house on the property while his wife occupies the barn with her girlfriend?
LOL, that must be a really strange situation for rural NC!
Look for the husband to end up being kicked off the property by some judge and the missus, as sole resident/owner, to end up hosting visits from every lesbian within reasonable driving distance of Shelby!
The city of Lesbos in Shelby, NC.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Seth, is there anything Freudian about the title of this piece?
I have little tolerance (most of my social problems start there) to someone trying to shove his/her/its homosexual agenda down my throat and even less tolerance for people trying to shove their/its homosexual agenda down the throats of innocent school children. School is for learning the three “R’s,” not the three genders!
Politicians that pander to the likes of these beings (homos, be they gay or lesbian) should be voted out immediately if not sooner. Homosexuality should be treated, not catered to… Damn! Who let the gays out?!?!
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:10 pm
OBTW, almost forgot… I have a new post up.
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:10 pm
Old Soldier –
Seth, is there anything Freudian about the title of this piece?
While I had no such ulterior designs, that thought had entered my mind after the fact.
The ongoing efforts by the liberal run school system to indoctrinate young children into the “homosexuality is good” camp is a typical leftist strategy. Who’d've known that after winning the Cold War on a global scale, we’d lose it, to some extent, in our own country?
I’m coming over there to visit now…
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:41 pm
While their is a genetic element, it is in the end a choice, otherwise it would be 100% amongst identical twins and it’s nowhere near 100%.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:59 am
Shoprat –
That sounds suspiciously like science, and liberals only cite science when they can find a way to misinterpret it in their favor.
March 5th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Seth,
You need to stay in touch with the base:
http://www.lcrga.com/about.shtml
March 6th, 2008 at 2:21 am
BB –
LOL!!!!
“The base”, indeed.
More like the Trojan Horse, sort of like when Bloomberg ran for N.Y. mayor as a Republican.
March 6th, 2008 at 8:20 am
Considering Old Soldier’s “is there anything Freudian about the title of this piece?” and your later “Trojan..” reminds of the Reaganfreud “There you go again..” *heh*
March 6th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
BB –
I meant the giant wooden equine full of soldiers, way before our time.
But the concept, to me at least, of a PAC that purports to support the GOP while also single-mindedly pushing homosexual political agendas — although by means of a “softer” approach (read that as gradual) is indeed a Trojan (see Troy) horse.
I do know that one of their agendas is a valid Constitutional issue — that of the rights of states to make their own decisions about gay unions. My own belief is that such issues, like abortion, medical marijuana and other social-based venues should be the bailywick of individual states to enact, not the federal government’s job. It’s up to the right thinking voters in a given state to exercise their responsibility as both voters and taxpayers to try and ensure that their states remain focused on, as the title of Rush’s first book (I believe it was his first) puts it, “the way things ought to be”.
In states like California and Massachusettes, which are lost causes for the moment, the deeds of the politicians reflect the majority of the voters, as terrible as the results happen to be.
That said, my greatest misgiving about the Log Cabin Republicans is that like all other organizations that share agendas with the left, once successful in facilitating early-stage agendas (in this case sex unions in various states), they will undoubtedly advance, stealth fashion, into the stage of campaigning for full gay marriage in same.
Chalk it up to the cynicism resulting from a rather full and often unconventional life…
March 10th, 2008 at 11:02 am
I would like to see this nonsense go away myself.
March 10th, 2008 at 2:17 pm
Marie –
If those politicians who claim to be Republicans would quit pandering to the Democrats, it just might, but that doesn’t seem to be in the program.
March 11th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
WOW, I am late to this post. Sorry! Been very busy, but it’s an excellent post, Seth, and I couldn’t agree with you more. Regarding the title, I think it’s perfect!
I read all the comments on this thread, and Jeff’s really hit home because I had the same experience with a neighbor in Oklahoma… Lawton, Oklahoma to be exact. She was a short, exceedingly fat nitwit who used to stand out in her yard and shout obscenities at my kids. They weren’t doing anything except walking from the house to their car, but everytime she saw one of them outside she’d yell “I’ll get you, you perverted little b*stard!” She was completely deranged. She was married, and her husband slept in the basement. She slept in the master bedroom with her fat girlfriend. I learned about that from her daughter, who for some strange reason didn’t like her mother very much! LOL!
They’re everywhere! They’re everywhere!
March 12th, 2008 at 8:31 am
Gayle –
Thanks.
That’s one house I wouldn’t want to visit, it sounds like one perpetual Jerry Springer moment, LOL. The husband obviously belongs there, or he wouldn’t be going with the program. I wonder how often the daughter brought home friends from school!
March 13th, 2008 at 7:22 am
I don’t know how hard-wired the homosexual is in matters of sexual preference. But it doesn’t matter. Playing the “minority” card for political power, economic hand-outs, and special preferences is wrong. Manipulating facts and threatening opponents is wrong.
As you say, there are things such as contracts. Homosexuals can use them. Period.
March 13th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Benning –
San Francisco is a prime example of what happens when gays take over a political subdivision, and what they’ve done there is what they’d like to do all over the country.
They haven’t yet managed to make same sex marriage legal, but that’s only because it’s a state issue and there are enough Californians who oppose it — so far.
But most other political agendas seem to be homosexual dominated.
When I lived there earlier in this decade, I was highly irritated when I learned that some of my tax dollars were financing city-paid sex change operations as a “health care right” or something.
I’d just as soon they kept their political aspirations confined to their present geographic bailiwick, but this is not happening — they want to infect the rest of the country as well.
Luckily, there are enough conservatives in the rest of the country to (hopefully) keep the gays’ political ambitions at bay.