About Me

Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Blog Roll

 
[Click to edit me]

Gays on the Warpath!

Gays on the Warpath!

I rarely disobey my bride of 41 years. 

Well, that’s not actually true since I don’t feel I have to obey her, nor she me.  Like the newspaper comic strip, “Pickles,” we have achieved a detente of sorts, meaning I do what I want and she does likewise. 

She did request that I cease and desist with articles about our gay brethren since they were getting redundant and because homosexuals tend to misinterpret undue attention as subliminal interest in their activities and lifestyle.  When that attention is invariably of a very negative cast, that’s as logical as interpreting attention paid to alien life forms suggesting innate desires to relocate to Uranus. Yet they persist.

Thing is, in the last year or so especially, homosexuals have shown they haven’t given up or let up in their various campaigns.   To avoid referencing what they’re up to implies, to them, a craven cowardice which only encourages them to pursue their strategy of intimidating heterosexuals in order to achieve their goals of not just acceptance but endorsement and all that such acceptance and endorsement entails.

Rather than reiterate my views on their multi-faceted campaign of intimidation, their strategies, and goals, I suggest readers of this article type in “homosexuals” and/or “gays” on my website’s “Search” box to avail themselves of my dozens of well-researched, fully-documented, and brilliantly-written opinions on this topic. 

Warning:  Many of those articles are not for the faint of heart nor do they cater to that element in our society which adheres to the credo of “live and let live.”  That philosophy would be fine and dandy with an adversary–and the Gay Lobby has indeed evolved into a potent and unrelenting adversary– which is capable of compromise and rational discussion.  However, the Gay Lobby is fixated on a total, take no prisoners, victory. 

If gays take any offense at that observation or to the content of those articles, then so be it.  They should be advised that I take great offense to their agenda.

Some homosexuals get almost as turned on by the cowering of the straight majority as they do by teabagging, which is not a reference to the tea party tax protests of April 15th.  No sane males would engage in the aberrant behavior which so attracts gays any more than they would encourage copulation between gays and orangutans.  Gerbils seem to be their preferred partners, anyway. 

Nevertheless, gays must be commended for their persistance as evidenced by their recent court and legislative victories permitting gay marriage despite overwhelming public opposition to that debasement of the institution of marriage. 

Further testimony to their doggedness in pursuit of recruits from the ranks of school kids–something they deny vociferously–was last month’s outrageous “Day of Silence” staged in many of America’s schools. 

Without needlessly elaborating on that now-annual event, suffice to say it involves a day promoted by many schools and dedicated to homosexual indoctrination as students are expected to sheepishly listen and learn about the wonders of being gay while being prohibited from commenting or protesting with objections. 

The stated purpose of “Day of Silence” programs is to abolish bullying of homosexual students, which I would wholly endorse–if that were all the day entailed.  See “Day of Silence”–”Day of Gay Seduction,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=931.

As I said, grudgingly to their credit, the new breed of homosexuals never gives up. Even a year ago I would have bet all I own that their chances of ultimate success didn’t have a chance in Hell but now I’m not so certain.  They seem to have the bulk of the liberal mass media, virtually the entirety of the entertainment world, and an indeterminate but significant number of national and state legislators, and now the President of the United States, in their camp.

See here for a very favorable lesbian take on Obama’s pro-homosexual positions: http://lesbianlife.about.com/od/lesbianactivism/p/BarackObama.htm.

Not able to read minds, I can’t unequivocally delineate the motivations of gay advocates among the media and politicians although a reasonable surmise is that many closely identify with the gay agenda and, with politicos, also want their votes.

Absent a crystal ball as well as functioning powers of telepathy, I’m unable to predict the future with a great degree of accuracy.  However, as of May, 2009, all indicators are pointing to an eventual, possibly imminent, smashing victory for the homosexual agenda and a crushing defeat for the forces of tradition, morality, and common sense.

Residents and churchgoers in downtown Boston can attest to the bitter scent of defeat in the air.  Last Tuesday, they were harrassed by a phalanx of 30 extremely noisy gay . . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com/)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Homosexual Speaks Out

In the interests of fairness and since I have recently been accused of being a “mother f****r,” a homophobe, a bigot, a hater, an ignoramus, a slanderer, and a closet homosexual, (See comments following “Day of Silence . . .” article, http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=931#comment-1840), I hereby offer even more space for a supplementary rebuttal from a representative of the gay community.

Copyright restrictions prohibit reprinting the entire rebuttal–which may be a poor choice of words for a homosexual’s commentary–but I will provide the link to “Homophobia Is Killing Our Youth,” published on Newsvine.com and written by “ladyblue999:” http://ladyblue999.newsvine.com/_news/2009/04/18/2699852-homophobia-is-killing-our-youth.

Needless to say, I feel compelled to comment on the commentary by ladyblue999, to whom I shall refer as 999 for the sake of simplicity. First of all, for clarification, I believe 999’s title is a reference to gay youths, not young people in general, allegedly being killed by homophobia.

In the second sentence of her brief article, (assuming 999 is a “she,” something not always determinable among transgenders), 999 writes, “Amidst all this homophobic murder, . . .” Now, that’s confusing since one can’t distinguish whether 999 is referencing the “killing” in her title, which in itself is hyperbolic, or referring to actual murders of gays in our society. If the latter, then 999 is perpetuating a myth created by the LGBT Lobby that straights are roaming the landscape slaughtering homosexuals willy nilly, or even regularly.

Stuff happens, of course, and sometimes very evil “stuff” such as the murder of anyone for any reason, every instance of which should be condemned by all members of civilized society. However, if 999 is suggesting that instances of killing homosexuals by non-homosexuals even remotely approximates the reverse, i.e., gays murdering non-gays, she is a victim or a perpetrator of that manufactured fallacy.

Since this space was offered as an opportunity for 999 to speak out, I won’t belabor the point except to say that that fallacy goes back to the senseless murder in 1998 of Matthew Shepard by two degenerate cretins who, it has been proven, killed the Wyoming student not because he was gay but because they wanted to rob him. Gays, however, jumped on the case to advance their own causes even if their basic premise was flawed.

For a number of specifics refuting that canard, please see . . .
(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com/)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Heterosexual Questionnaire

Sometimes lately, too often, the efforts of the homosexual lobby, the LGBT crowd, to attract America’s young people to their twisted lifestyle becomes too blatant to be ignored.  Such is the planned Day of Silence/Day of Seduction set for 10 days from now, April 17th, in Massachusetts schools and, organizers say, in hundreds of other American elementary and high schools.  For details, see http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=931.

The gay movement seems to be picking up a great head of steam since Obama’s election as they mobilize in courts, legislatures, streets, and schools to win over the public to universal acceptance of its agenda.  The most liberal president in America’s history has made it vividly clear that their agenda is his agenda. 

As with most radical movements, in their fervor and haste to conquer the public’s mind and soul, they overstep, exceed limits, and betray their essential mindset that they believe most people are too stupid to notice their machinations.  A prime example is the website, http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/.

Ostensibly, “advocates for youth,” in actuality it is as much a vehicle for the seduction and recruitment of normal young people as it functions as a support group for gay teens.

Where it most obviously shows its intent is in a poorly-constructed “heterosexual questionnaire.”  The questions try to steer youths toward favoring and adopting homosexuality but are so laughably biased in that direction that it is a virtual parody of itself, replete with distortions, false assumptions, twisted facts, and outright lies.

Below is that questionnaire, intended to serve as a lesson plan for teachers.  I took the opportunitity to supplement it with editorial commentary to set the record straight: http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/lessonplans/heterosexual2.htm

  1. What do you think caused your heterosexuality?  (Suggestion: It’s some kind of genetic flaw or disease which, given some effort, could be cured.)
  2. When and how did you first decide you were heterosexual?  (Suggestion: It’s a decision heterosexuals make, in contrast to homosexuals who insist they are born that way.)
  3. Is it possible that your heterosexuality is just a phase you may grow out of? (Suggestion: This too will pass, like biting your nails or twitching.) ...
  4. (READ THE REST at http://genelalor.com/)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

A Gay Marriage Quiz

“Okay, get your thinking hats on, class, please, because we have a little quiz today and let’s have no cheating, borrowing answers, or conferencing.  It’s an easy quiz, just one question, and those of you who have kept up on current affairs–and not the affairs in Hollywood or on Desparate Housewives–should do just fine if you’ve been paying attention to the world around you.”

Sounds of discontent begin.

“Ok, here we go.  You will have more than enough time to pose queries and then 10 seconds from the time I finish asking the question and the end of the Q&A to write your answer.  And stop the complaining that 10 seconds isn’t enough time.  The quiz requires only a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response.   

“The one question is, and wait until I finish asking it before you interrupt, please:  Has any state in the United States of America ever approved by a constitutional, popular vote the legalization of marriages of people of the same gender?  Yes or no?”

Suzie at once raises her hand and blurts out, “You never said we had to know this for a test!”

“Well, no, Suzie, but this isn’t a test, it’s just a quiz.”

“Yeah, but still, it’s no fair,” Suzie adds as she folds her arms in indignation and murmurs of agreement filter through the room.

“What do you mean by, ‘constitutional, popular vote,’ anyways?” Johnny blurts out.  “What’s so popular about voting?”

“No, Johnny, ‘popular’ there refers to ‘reflecting the will of the people,’ not ‘popularity’ as with rock stars, for example.”

Johnny harrumphs.

“Any other questions?”

“Yeah, Teach, ah got a question,” Lionel chimes in.  “What about this constitution thing, huh?  I mean, what’s dat got to do with it?  Who cares what some old White dudes wrote down thousands of years ago?”

Encouraged by a smattering of tepid applause, Lionel goes on.  “I mean, if some sistah and some other sistah or some brutha and some other brutha wanna make hookin’ up all legal and whatevah, why not let them be happy?  Ya know what ah mean?”

Lionel returns to his seat to another smattering.

“Umm, Lionel, I know what you mean, I think, but first of all, it was hundreds, not thousands, of years ago, 1787, to be precise, and . . .”

“Wait, what’s all this have to do with the quiz?” Dwight asks.

“Good point, Dwight, and if there are no other questions, the 10 second answering time begins now.”

“Wait, wait, hold up, please!  How much will this count toward our final average?” Suzie blurts out.

In the event it wasn’t obvious, that dialogue never actually happened verbatim although in one way or another it may well be the topic of discussion in many a classroom over the next week or so given the most recent trashing of America’s Constitution by the Iowa Supreme Court:  http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D97B1TH80&show_article=1.

Once again, a judicial entity has superseded the authority and the right of the American people to determine who is legally entitled to marry whom in an ostensible democratic republic. 

This issue of homosexual marriage seems to have a life of its own.  Voted down by popular vote in California last November when Left Coasters resoundingly, and surprisingly, endorsed this simple 14 word amendment to its constitution, “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California,” one would have thought the case was closed.

Not by a long shot.

Even though the vote was 52.3% to 47.7% against the gay agenda, in one of the most liberal states in the nation, that expression of the majority will of the people only ignited homosexual activists who then resorted to heated demonstrations, rioting, threats of violence, and even death threats to get their way. 

(See “Homosexuals Resort To (More) Threats of Violence,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=745, for details and links to those efforts at intimidation.) 

Undeterred by that defeat, and preceding it, homosexuals have also been resorting to liberal state courts as a remedy. . .

(Read the rest at http://genelalor.com/)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

GAYS NOT GAY OVER GOVERNOR PALIN'S CHURCH

"GAYS" ARE UPSET BECAUSE SARAH PALIN’S CHURCH WANTS TO SAVE THEM?

Excuse me, but what’s wrong with these people?

Don’t “gays” have enough to worry about? Now they’re all exercised over Governor Sarah Palin’s church, the Wasilla Bible Church, and its efforts to convert them to normalcy: http://news.aol.com/elections/article/palins-church-promotes-gay-conversion/165471?icid=200100397×1208835546x1200532764.

I must not get it. There’s so much antipathy in this country toward homosexuals and yet good people who want to end that antipathy by getting “gays” to return to normal lives are castigated for trying to “pray away the gay.”

I realize that at least some “gays” don’t wish to convert or be saved and consider such efforts as discriminatory but why oppose those who wish to convert them, unless they have sincere doubts as to their life choice?

Governor Palin hasn’t commented publically on the issue so it seems to me this is just another effort to unfairly isolate her in an anti-homosexual corner in order to win votes for Obama. Since he has the "gay" vote locked up anyway, why all the fuss?

“I think gay Republicans are going to run away” if Palin supports efforts like the prayers to convert gays, said Wayne Besen, founder of the New York-based Truth Wins Out, a gay rights advocacy group.

I think there are relatively few “gays” in Alaska anyway so what’s Besen’s point? Where are they going to run? Alabama?

If acceptance by the straight world is their ultimate goal, the best route for a "gay" guy to take is to get out in the Alaskan woods and hunt, shoot, and field dress a moose.

(http://genelalor.com)


Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (3) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HOMOSEXUALITY IN AMERICA: PART FOUR-- WHAT DO GAYS WANT?

HOMOSEXUALITY IN AMERICA: PART FOUR WHAT DO GAYS WANT?

Sigmund Freud famously asked the question, obviously in frustration, “What do women want?”  He never did answer his own question and I would suggest that most women would respond with either, “You have to ask?” or, “It’s none of your business!” or, “We want you to stop asking stupid questions, that’s what!”  Personally, I wouldn’t dare to even ask.

Making an educated guess in answer to the question, “What do gays want?” I would say, first and foremost, to be accepted.  Whether that response involves acceptance as normal, or as a variation on the norm, or simply as people I wouldn’t venture to say but that isn’t really relevant since gays, homosexuals, lesbians have been well on their way to societal acceptance at all levels for some three decades now.  Whether that’s a good thing or not is another question.  I’ll save my answer to that for another day.

Today’s topic demands an understanding of how gays got to this point in the first place.

Over half a century ago, Karen Hooker conducted a study on biological determinism which many believe led to “normalizing” homosexuality (http://mybitchingarea.blogspot.com/2006/09/nature-vs-nature.html), which isn’t quite true.  In fact, the American Psychiatric Association, the APA, continued, for sixteen years after being aware of the Hooker study, to classify homosexuals as sexual deviants in its DSM, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.  It took until 1973 before the APA changed its diagnosis and expunged homosexuality as an abnormal mental disorder (Section 302 in the DSM II).

What happened in those intervening sixteen years to cause this re-evaluation?  In 3 words: agitation and  intimidation by the gay community and pusillanimity on the part of the APA.  (For details, see http://www.traditionalvalues.org/urban/eleven.php.)

(For the rest of this article, please see http://genelalor.com/)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (1) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

HOMOSEXUALITY IN AMERICA

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

GAY PRIDE AND EMASCULATION


Just coincidence, I’m sure, but as worldwide “Gay Pride Week” was in progress, European clothing designers were revealing a new fillip—well, relatively new—to their collection for men:  androgynous.

 http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080629/ap_on_re_eu/france_fashion

By JOELLE DIDERICH, Associated Press Writer Sun Jun 29, 3:41 PM ET

PARIS - The French menswear collections ended on Sunday in a sea of sequins, silk and all things pink, challenging the adage that boys will be boys.

Fine fabrics like silk, gazar and crepe de Chine crept into the male wardrobe for spring-summer 2009 as Paris designers increasingly blurred gender boundaries…

A black silk puff-sleeved blouse was worn over a T-shirt encrusted with black beads, while accessories included lace-up sandals and crinkly straw hats laden with thick ribbons.

It's clothes you want to have, clothes you want to keep," [designer Lucas] Ossendrijver told the AP.

Even at Paul Smith, the British label famed for providing classics-with-a-twist, the model who opened the show was strikingly androgynous, his silky hair flowing well past shoulder length.”

Now, I don’t offer myself as a couturier (which, I believe, only refers to an expert in the design of women’s clothing anyway) and I’m not ashamed to concede that I haven’t the foggiest notion of what gazar and crepe de Chine mean, but I do know what sequins, pink, puff-sleeved blouses, and beads are.  They’re the accoutrements of the fair sex, not of males.  And, as for being parts of “clothes you want to keep,” I could see that but only if I were the producer of The Boys in the Band.

Another article, http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=080629200339.bztl1xwu&show_article=1, reported on the Paris “show:”

“At YSL, [shorthand for Yves Saint Laurent, for my fellow fashion dunces] designer Stefano Pilati used quotations from Plato to explain why he combined female detailing with a masculine silhouette.

"The original human nature was not like the present ... the sexes were not two as they are now."

‘Pilati underscored the union of genders with a line for men made in fabrics normally worn by women -- crepe de chine, organza, shantung and silk voile, all fabrics which float rather than fall.’ “

Now, again, organza, shantung, and silk voile are also words that are foreign to me, in part because they are foreign, but I do know something about Plato, that brilliant philosopher of 2500 years ago, student of Socrates, mentor to Aristotle at the Greek “Academy,” and I know something of the Greek—and subsequent Roman—culture of the time when males were considered far superior beings to females.  I also know they pleasured one another and/or defenseless and vulnerable young boys sexually since it was the thing to do, so to speak. . .

(For the rest of this article, please see http://genelalor.com/
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1Next »