Group That Lobbied Against DADT Repeal Obsessed With Gay Men In Showers
One of the primary groups to lobby Congress against repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is now just getting weird:
Since 1993, the Center for Military Readiness has been fighting to keep gay men and lesbians from infiltrating the United States military. So now that “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” has been repealed, what’s next for the group that fought so hard to prevent the open service of gay and lesbian members of the armed forces?
They have no big plans yet, Elaine Donnelly, founder and President of the Center for Military Readiness, told TPM in an interview Monday.
“I’m not prepared to say yet, it’s too soon to say because the new Congress has not yet come in,” Donnelly told me. “The options before the Congress have yet to be sorted out. One thing I will say — CMR will continue to support the troops, and our mission has always been to advocate high standards on a variety of issues and that will not change.”
(…)
Showers are “huge issue,” Donnelly said. “To pretend that throwing up a few shower curtains solves the problem is tantamount, again, to saying, well women should share close quarters with men, we’ll throw up a few shower curtains and that will take care of it.”
“I don’t know about the gyms where you go or most people go, but the gyms that I’ve seen have a sign inside the door, and the door says inside the women’s locker room ‘no boys of any age are allowed.’ Now there’s a reason for that,” Donnelley said. “It in no way is a negative reflection on anybody, it is just a sign of respect for modesty in sexual manners.”
“Knowingly, you don’t expose yourself to somebody who might be sexually attracted to you. Does it happen unknowingly? Sure,” Donnelly said. “It’s something that again, when you introduce an element of sexuality in an environment that previously did not have that, that is problematic. There will be consequences from that, because people are normal, they’re humans, they’re sensitive to that.”
Of course, the fact of the matter is that gay men have been showering in military barracks with straight men, and straight women with lesbians, from the beginning of communal military showers. The idea that the repeal of DADT means that servicemen and women are suddenly going to start molesting each other is so absurd that it has to lead one to wonder about the psychology of the people obsessed with what is, in the end, a superficial issue.
http://www.theonion.com/articles/repeal-of-dont-ask-dont-tell-paves-way-for-gay-sex,17698/
Why is this clip coming to mind:
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?title=demon-wrestling&videoId=341363
Throw up a thick shower curtain and I have no problems showering in the same facility as men.
Hell, I’ve been cleaning their bathrooms for nearly seventeen years here.
Regarding the “problem” of showers, well, in both private and public gyms, has there ever been a segregation between “gay” and “straight” showers?
When I was in graduate school, there was not such a segregation in our student recreation center.
Yet, somehow, society has survived for decades, if not demi-centuries, with gender-segregated but not orientation-segregated showers in civilian life.
Is the military so sensitive that it cannot withstand this? I think not. I think the military is more like what was shown in James Cameron’s movie “Aliens” where men and women were using the same facilities. They didn’t care as long as their comrades could “do the job”.
Jeez, what is it with these people. First they venerate the military then then insult it.
The last sentence should read “then they insult it.” Darn it….
All I can say is, “you ever seen a grown man naked?”
Well, I have to suspect that there may be gay guys showering at my actual gym. Kinda think that’s true of most gyms.
And it’s also true that we all know the biggest problem associated with gym locker rooms: old guys who wander around naked.
If someone wants to write a piece of legislation requiring fat old dudes (and I include myself) to minimize their public nudity, I can totally get behind that. I think gays will join us in that quest. After all, for straight guys the spectacle of fat old naked dudes is distasteful, but for gay guys it might even be more disturbing.
lolI don’t want to shower with men at all, I wouldn’t when I was in school and didn’t when I played football, and it really sucked when I was in jail and had to. Whose Idea was this anyway?
I know lets have all the jr. high kids school shower together after gym. lol WTF, who’s Idea was it ?!?!?!?!
Funny piece, Alex.
If a person, in the act of showering with persons to which he is attracted shows signs of that attraction (erection) is that grounds for busting his chops?
How do you know he isn’t fantasizing about Stephanie at home?
This is hardly surprising…many homophobes seem to be closet cases or, at the very least, have some kind of issue with their own sexuality…
I know lets have all the jr. high kids school shower together after gym. lol WTF, who’s Idea was it ?!?!?!?!
I have to admit, I have to agree with G.A. one more time here before the year is out. Let me tell you, this is no fun for a late bloomer.
If a person, in the act of showering with persons to which he is attracted shows signs of that attraction (erection) is that grounds for busting his chops?
Is that a euphemism?
But seriously, it seems like it is at least grounds for discipline. They don’t let guys with boners walk around nude beaches, either.
I suppose by th CMR’s line of reasoning, men should only have male (or lesbian) doctors and, likewise, women should only have female (or gay) doctors (and, indeed, only women/gay males should be allowed to go into obstetrics and gynecology).
Exactly. We should all be following our moral superiors in male/female relationships and do as the Saudis do.
It’s interesting to read the perspective of individuals who have never served in the foxhole actually being shot at by the enemy in regards to don’t ask don’t tell or should I say a lack of perspective. They took a survey vote and the true combat troops don’t want it and the rest don’t care. With this perspective maybe they could at least take a second look and let them serve in non-combatant area like the women in the military. On my first day of service in the war I was sent to make an arrest of a murderer in a homicide. While holding the gun on him I asked him why he killed the other guy. Without all of the political correctness of today he said: “Because that fag wouldn’t leave me alone and kept pushing himself on me. He thought that because he was in a position of authority he could have his way.” In the war there were so many fraggings of officers and NCOs you couldn’t keep count. From a financial standpoint this is going to cost so much money in training, lawsuits, increased recruiting, etc. it isn’t going to be funny but in the political correctness of today we will never know the costs just like the way everyone tries to hide the figures as a percentage of all HIV cases as compared to the number of cases occurring in the homosexual community. In addition there has never been any consideration given to the religious aspects involved wherein the parents would give approval to their young adult child to join wherein we now have a different ballgame. The old religious grounds involved mainly the minority anabaptist view of separation of Church and State as well as a general interpretation of killing not being distinguished from murder. In this new ballgame though you will now have the additional mix of scripture forbidding the yoking with unbelievers for which all agenda driven homosexuals out of the closet except by Episcopalians and Evangelical Lutherans who have abandoned scripture to follow what they believe to be the current mood of the Holy Spirit as interpreted by homosexuals within their denominations. They are no longer sola scriptura Protestants.
Did anyone in the Pentagon or White House truly represent the interest of the guy in the foxhole in Afghanistan? I think not. I believe it was their view having never been in a foxhole. So the guy in the foxhole asks the question: “How do they know epistemologically that it is the right things to do: To put a homosexual in this foxhole with me?” Do they know my enemy? Do they know the tools of my enemy and how they recruit? In Pakistan where you have the Afghan refugee the question will now ensue: Do you want American homosexual soldiers in our country? But has Gates and Obama ever had the empirical experience of questioning a POW like I did or the guys in Afghanistan do? So now you will go to your local VFW hall and American Legion Hall and have some homosexual come up and ask you to dance as they now qualify. The VFW Hall and American Legion Halls will be open spectacles of the wild embracing homosexual crowds. Good places to take your children? Why is it that they only “truly” took the perspective of the homosexual crowd. Answer: Because they are part of the democratic party base. Why is it that this legislation took so long to pass and now only at the last minute? Answer: Because the Republicans are coming. The atheist and agnostic do not follow the standard of God and they are more than likely going to be part of that democratic base also. So now one would say, “Oh those are such conservative remarks.” They used to be conservative but now that the legislation has been passed they are not for conserving the status quo, they are reactionary remarks. A reaction at the voting booths is necessary to bring back what was and what was, was part of the standard of God. Not a right wing conservative but a right wing reactionary. It’s not about a 60 year old such as myself walking around some gym shower but rather the young 18, 19, 20 year olds like I was with raging hormones with guns in their hands who have come off of the streets of the cities of America who will have to live with this political issue acted upon by a new commander in chief. What did General Washington do? He kicked the homosexual out of the military.
Oh, lest I not forget about the showers, in Basic Training in Fort Bragg North Carolina in 1969 a homosexual was noted to be looking at some guy who let the other guys know. He was beaten to a pulp with blood all over the floor. The guys who did it while I was not in the shower came out laughing and giggling hyper as could be. I told them they were crazy and they would get in trouble. They said they didn’t care. Currently there are what, over 2,000,000 people in US jails. Ah so what, let’s laugh about in a blog and maybe will do something like elect an Obama and put another 100,000 in there. Public gyms with showers are voluntary. Military showers are mandatory. You don’t just go up to the Sergeant and say, “Hey Sarge, I don’t like this job, I’m going to quit.” Then Sarge will say, “You can’t do this and you can’t do that and if you try to your going to go to jail. AWOL is a crime.”
“It’s interesting to read the perspective of individuals who have never served in the foxhole actually being shot at by the enemy in regards to don’t ask don’t tell or should I say a lack of perspective. They took a survey vote and the true combat troops don’t want it and the rest don’t care. With this perspective maybe they could at least take a second look and let them serve in non-combatant area like the women in the military.”
This tired argument again? I’m sure a similar rationale was used to argue against integration of the military…it is rather amazing that soldiers have (or at least are supposed to have) enormous amounts of discipline to perform a variety of difficult tasks, but can’t serve with someone who may (or may not) find them attractive…it is also rather cute the way the crude stereotype–of how gay people just get all hot and bothered over just about every person of the same sex that they meet, is injected into the argument…oh, and lest I not forget, it’s not 1969 anymore…
Oh no not this tire argument again about the tired argument again. Why not try and be a little more inventive with a leading phrase rather than a meaningless nothing comment. Truly nothing comes from nothing and a tired argument phrase adds nothing to a meaningful comment. Your sureness again is full of nothingness as again you add nothing by your suredness as it is a no nothing tired argument. Your rationale is a tired argument in that you fail to recognize the rationale that history repeats itself but again that is another tired argument so I won’t use that one either as that is something you would say. Apples are apples and oranges are oranges is what you learn in the first grade. Yet if you can make it as far as philosophy 101 you can learn that trying to mix apples and oranges is a tired and irrational point of logic as integration with blacks does not equal integration with homosexuals. This is absolutely not an ad hominem but I truly do not know your sexual orientation as I would ardently try to understand your illogical point of argument so that since it is illogical you should really disclose why you are prohomosexual agenda to understand where you are coming from at a point of logic. Oh and lest I not forget I also don’t know your sex but guess what, “An Interested Party” males are attracted to females and that’s why they have separate showers and likewise a homosexual male or female are attracted to their same sex and that’s not a stereotype. As the head of the Marines and Army stated during a time of war this is not a good time to experiment to see if people in 2011 are still like they were in 1969. But then maybe you could do a google search. Put into Google, “hate crimes and homosexuals” and see if anyone is still suffering from physical abuse wherein the DSM Gender Identity Crisis is at issue. Lest we not forget. Now you may be a 60, 70, or 80 year old overweight male or female for whom no one is attracted so you should not psychologically project your own image into the showers at Fort Bragg North Carolina. Yet if someone is murdered down there or anywhere via your liberal experiment their life is on your head and way of thinking just like Obama’s head. Just in case your interested. Now if you actually have any facts I’d be glad to see them so produce them. In addition I made many other arguments which you did not address so I guess I will have to assume you agree with them.
Never trust a writer who doesn’t paragraph in public.
A meaningful comment certainly isn’t telling us what a bunch of homophobes did back in 1969…and homophobic comments definitely add nothing to this conversation…oh, and if anyone is murdered because of the repressed rage of some bigot, said bigot should be tried, convicted, and sentenced to an appropriate term in prison for his/her crime, which will be solely on his/her head, no one else’s…
Doug is either a parody or a closet case.
Too late.
Wow, I’m so impressed by such thoughtful comments. May I recommend to you the Rulebook for arguments since you are all shut down and don’t know how to argue from logic. You see it is not me you argue with but rather the standard. Homophobe- Oh, sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me. Your about as good as a nursery rhyme as you all stay in your closet “An Interested Party” but remember when the first homosexual suffering from a gender identity crisis is whacked and killed because of your elitist homosexual rights agenda the death of that poor innocent is on your blood stained hands. I’ll pray for you all including the crazed idiot that kills him/her. Then you can sit back and say, ah honey I didn’t think people were still that crazy like they were back in 1969. Remember, 2,000,000 crazy idiots in jail today in the USA. Meanwhile some poor family will be standing over a grave site blaming some sick homophobe. All the little children are running around a circle yelling: HOMOPHOBE, HOMOPHOBE, HOMOPHOBE, HOMOPHOBE, HOMOPHOBE! And the adult walks over and asks them why are you singing that? And the children answer because our Mom and Dad hate HOMOPHOBES. And the adult asks why? And the children stare up and say, “We don’t know why.” They just do. They also hate people who don’t indent their paragraphs. E torja vwee fsoh dooraki.
And here are the ads on your website, take a look at the upper right hand corner:
Meet Gay Singles
Find Lasting Love with Local Gay Singles Based on Chemistry.
Chemistry.com/Gay-Lesbian-Dating
Meet Hot Local Gay Men
Meet 5 Guys in 5 Minutes. Try it Now for Free!
http://www.SpeedDate.com
Gay Singles at Match.com®
Browse Profiles & Photos for Free. Find Local Gay Singles!
GayDating.Match.com
Meet Gay Men Tonight
Find a Guy, E-Mail Him. Meet him Tonight!
ManPlay.com
You should really take them up on all their GAY activities. Honestly I didn’t realize this was a homosexual website.
“You should really take them up on all their GAY activities. Honestly I didn’t realize this was a homosexual website.”
Considering how much this issue seems to preoccupy your mind, one would think that you would appreciate all those ads, as they offer you a wealth of research possibilities…
Doug, those ads are all about you. That’s how web advertising works – it targets the user by the sites they go to and the searches they do. My version of this page doesn’t have any gay men ads. I’m seeing ads for Optimum Online, American Express, and MSNBC.
Sorry y’all but I didn’t know this was a homosexual website and I now understand why no one agreed with my comments. I am not into doing missionary work where I walk into a homosexual bar with you and all of your friends. I’m not Jesus Christ. But I follow the standard of God which I know via His word in which He tells me not to be Evenly Yoked with Unbelievers and open homosexuals like yourselves have an agenda which conflicts with my agenda which is to push the word of God as in the scriptures. As to Sheila, check out conservative web sites and you will never see such ads appear. No they only show up except on homosexual websites like this. Again, I did not know this was a homosexual website.
It’s not a homosexual website, Doug, it’s a political website. People from all points of the political spectrum comment here.
That doesn’t mean that your comments are going to be well-received, and that’s not only a product of your apparent inability to organize your thoughts into paragraphs. I’ve read through your several screeds above, and I see little but fear and anxiety about homosexuality — your argument boils down to, 1) “we should continue segregating gays from the military because some people in the military are prejudiced against gays” and 2) “we should continue segregating gays from the military because if we let gays in the military then they’ll be all gay and stuff.”
I need not be a combat veteran in order to have standing to refute the logical and policy weaknesses within those arguments. As to the first, the previously-made analogy to racial integration of the military is flawless. As to the second, here’s a news flash for you — there are already gays in the military and the people serving with them know full well that their comrades are gay and they don’t care. As it turns out, teh ghey isn’t contagious.
Sorry, Doug. I never, ever see gay ads on this website. Dude, it’s about you.
I’m sorry but the ads do appear on this website whether you see them or not. Your absolutely right that gays are in the military and I served with them and never tried to claim that they didn’t serve in the military. The issue now is to allow them to serve openly in the military walking hand in hand down the street changing the whole culture, dancing intimately at the VFW and American Legion Hall, asking other guys to dance etc. etc. etc. and you and all of your homosexual friends on the homosexual website are ok with that and I understand that, I just didn’t know this was a homosexual website. I copied and pasted the above ads from this website. Just keeping watching and you will see them pop up and then eventually you’ll see them popping up in your junk e-mail folder and I understand you don’t have a problem with that but I do.
Yeah, I think you do have a problem.
I don’t hate you, Doug. I just find big blocks of type difficult to read.
A friend does the same thing in emails. It gives me a headache.
I never noticed those ads Doug.
Anyway, being a homophobe is OK. I am not big on people who are different myself.
But I just recognize that actually expecting people to respect these feelings would reflect very poorly on me and my worth. I know Western men are getting exceedingly good at *self-compassion*, but that doesn’t mean other people have to avoid hurting your fee-fees.
The ads on OTB are pretty accurate, they seem to know I am partial to Hickey Freeman & Ike Behar, I suspect they are seeing cookies on my hard drive related to those products.
For the sake of full disclosure, I have to admit I like Thomas Pink shirts a lot as well. Does that make me gay or a communist in (or both) wingnut land?
Anytime you see “ology” at the end of a word think, “science”. Science is the shedding of a little bit more knowledge on any given subject and when you have a topic or subject where a lot of it goes on you then have the “ology” pop up. The word “axiology” means the study of the nature, types, and criteria of values especially in the area of value judgements. Axios means “worth” and is the root of this word axiology. I accidentally landed on this website from another website which had this website as a link. If I had known it was a homosexual website I would have never clicked onto this website. Axiologically speaking I am fully aware that my values are dead set against those of a homosexual as well as all those who have bought into the emotional acceptance of that lifestyle. I have had 6 homosexuals with whom I have had acquaintances in my life through various contacts in example professionally. Three of those 6 are now dead from AIDS due to their life style for which all homosexuals of course don’t live that risky life style as they did. I also have an acquaintance of a lesbian for whom upon contact with my Granddaughter who was 8 years old made a comment to her that “we don’t have any rules, you can do whatever you want” which was against whatever she was told by her Aunt. I told my son who quickly corrected my Granddaughter that she couldn’t do whatever she wanted. As a student and teacher of Axiology I guess I could also call myself a Scientist since Axiology is a science and in this study of values I can see that we all disagree as we come to differing judgments about allowing homosexuals to serve in the US Military. My Grandfather served during World War 1. My father was in combat in the Pacific in World War 2 in the Army and I was 3rd generation in the Army in Vietnam. However, with the repeal of DADT I would instruct my family and all future members of my family to never serve in the US Military as long as DADT is non-existent. Therefore since I am no longer in the military and have no family members therein, I don’t have a problem as you suggest. In my personal view my country has a problem and with whomever I am friends with in the military has a problem. In addition the veteran associations including the American Legion and VFW have a problem. I am a Christian and I don’t find being a Christian to be a problem. Being a Christian I am to follow instructions from God as per God’s words in the Bible. God sent angels to Lot as noted in the Book of Genesis. Why? Because of the city of Sodom. The issue with Sodom as per Wikipedia was as follows: ” In Christianity and Islamic traditions, Sodom and Gomorrah have become synonymous with impenitent sin, and their fall with a proverbial manifestation of God’s wrath.[Jude 1:7][1] Sodom and Gomorrah have also been used as metaphors for vice and homosexual deviation. The story has therefore given rise to words in several languages, including the English word “sodomy”, used in the law to describe the act of sex, which depending on jurisdiction can consist of oral sex or anal sex or any non-genital to genital congress, whether heterosexual, or homosexual, or with human or animal.” The word homophobia is defined in wikipedia as, “Homophobia is a range of negative attitudes and feelings towards lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and in some cases transgender and intersex people. Definitions refer variably to antipathy, contempt, prejudice, aversion etc. etc.” As to a follower of Jesus Christ who is not a hippocrit to simply celebrate Christmas and Easter I adhere to the teachings of Christ who teaches to be separated from unbelievers in such a way that we are not to yoke with them but we are to witness to them. Now this website has labeled me as a homophobe and a person with a problem because I have an opposite view to them. Christianity teaches that we are to love the person but hate the sin. As you can see the definition of homophobia includes a multitude of descriptions but again I believe it to be a sin to engage in the above acts just like fornication is a sin. I would also be against allowing those into military service who are heterosexual fornicators. I believe that an officer who is committing adultery should be thrown out of the military. I believe that there should exist a code of ethics in the military of the highest standards which is against the code of this homosexual website. However, I strongly would reply that I do not have a phobia or fear about being around homosexuals. Why should I? Simply because I don’t agree with the flagrant display of sin makes me fearful to be around someone who sins? That’s ludicrous and is simply the way homosexuals and those who have made emotional commitments to homosexuality react to those who are against sin. They reach into the psychological grab bag of the DSM and try and show there is something wrong with you which is a very pathetic and weak argument. Especially since you have won the debate with Obama.
For those who still insist this website is not homosexual here again are the pronouncements I copied at 8:13PM on this website 12/29/2010.
Meet Gay Singles Find Lasting Love with Local Gay Singles Based on Chemistry. Chemistry.com/Gay-Lesbian-Dating
Meet Gay Men Tonight Find a Guy, E-Mail Him. Meet him Tonight! ManPlay.com
Doug…
Do you know anything about how the internets work? James has the site monetized. That is to say, he sells space for ads to Google. The site is a business, or part of one, and as such, needs revenue.
Google is spidering the words “Gay Men” in the title of this tread, and since they use relevancy algorithms, you see a few ads that might interest Gays. That does not make this a “homosexual site” any more than a Hickey Freeman ad makes is a habadashers site.
If the right would quit obsessing about gays and simply let them go about their lives, we would not have any need for threads such as this in the first place.
Hey Anjin you asked: “Do you know anything about how the internets work?” Answer: Yes, Anjin, I know something about the internet.
You say: “James has the site monetized. That is to say, he sells space for ads to Google. The site is a business, or part of one, and as such, needs revenue.” Answer: Yes I know all about what James is doing.
You said: “Google is spidering the words “Gay Men” in the title of this tread, and since they use relevancy algorithms, you see a few ads that might interest Gays. That does not make this a “homosexual site” any more than a Hickey Freeman ad makes is a habadashers site.” Answer: Ah, but here we have to disagree Anjin. As a point of argument their are two sides to the argument like there are two sides to a knife which cuts both ways. Now you may not like the fact that someone disagrees with your side Anjin but last time I checked it’s still not a hate crime in the USA to say what I have been saying. The second point is that just because you say something Anjin according to your moral relativity doesn’t make your point correct Anjin. It doesn’t work that way. If you get everyone on this homosexual site to agree with you it doesn’t make it right. The democracy in Germany eventually got Adolf Hitler to the point where he could take over but that didn’t make it right. Eventually the majority of Germany was behind Hitler and that didn’t make it right. That’s why I tell you to read up in a book called the Rulebook For Arguments and learn about arguing as you keep presenting fallacy after fallacy in everything you say. When I say “fallacy” I mean a logical fallacy. James has the right to control what Google says and does as it’s his website just like I have 2 of my own websites and I have control over those websites. Remember that in a rationalistic argument where you are applying reason you need to try to stick to the rules of logic with all of it’s principles and laws. The law of causality states that everything that came to be had a cause. This principle has been used throughout the sciences to make brilliant discoveries. When a society goes downhill there are also causes. Now the fly in the ointment is that homosexuals and those who have emotionally embraced homosexuality do not see it as society going downhill and that is what I am trying to get across to you that this is a homosexual website. It advertises homosexuality and you don’t see anyone taking my position but me. It is not right wing, it is not moderate, it is not left wing, it is promo-homosexual agenda. Look at the topics reflected and picked to be discussed and then look at the positions taken as well as the statements accusing me of being mentally ill according to the relativistic moral standards of this homosexual website. I am surprised that they have not kicked me off of here yet. In a debate everything can be turned around and looked at from the other side and the internet is supposed to be forum yet this is a bunch of emotional condescending comments stating or insinuating that someone taking the opposite position is mentally ill. For example, you say:
“If the right would quit obsessing about gays and simply let them go about their lives, we would not have any need for threads such as this in the first place.”
Now when you state “obsessing” your insinuating that the right is mentally ill with a diagnosis of obsessive compulsive. Yet you are obsessing that we change a society which has existed for thousands of years to come to your terms. You are not an average individual as you have strong emotions tied into your statements thus I would assume that you are either homosexual or have a close relative or friend who is and thus you feel the need to stand up for them. What you fail to see and fail to discuss that the right is not motivated from a political standpoint but rather from a religious ethical not moral standpoint. You don’t wish to address that point for some reason and that is the most relevant point of issue. I used to feel at one point in my life when I was liberal democrat that I could care less about the homosexual issue. I had no close friends who were homosexual but then I became a born again Christian and no longer thought about just my life but what God wanted me to do with my life. All of the right feel the same way but you just think it is some political game. When the homosexual is in the closet they are in the closet for a reason or several reasons. Some may be in the closet because they feel that it is a sin. I pray for these people as well as for others. However this isn’t the 1950’s anymore and in this country many, many people have walked away from Christianity and this is no longer what I would consider to be a Christian country. One of the reasons we fought in Vietnam against the communists was because they were Atheists with a history of burning Churches or confiscating them to be used for some government purpose. This country lost it’s will to fight that kind of a fight anymore. There is a movement afoot in your leftist camp to take away free speech on the radio right now. So the right is rising up in the tea party movement and it has caused fear in the leftist neighborhood.
I hope I answered your questions but again I would have never come to this site if I had known it was a homosexual website.
> it’s still not a hate crime in the USA to say what I have been saying.
No, just egregious stupidity.
> So the right is rising up in the tea party movement and it has caused fear in the leftist neighborhood.
There is some truth in that. Bush did vast damage to our country, and the potential is there for the tea party/palin to be much worse.
> James has the right to control what Google says
Really, you have the T&Cs of his agreement with Google on hand? Could you share what clause states this?
> I would have never come to this site if I had known it was a homosexual website.
Why do you keep returning?
And for the disbelievers here now at 8:34 AM on December 30, 2011 this website on this page begins with the following at the very beginning of this webpage:
Meet Gay Men Near Your Find Gay Singles, Powered by eHarmony. Review Your Matches Free! http://www.CompatiblePartners.net
Gay Personals A New Service from Match.com. Find Gay Singles In Your Area! Chemistry.com/Gay-Lesbian-Dating
Meet Gay Men Tonight Find a Guy, E-Mail Him. Meet him Tonight! ManPlay.
Meet Gay Singles Find Lasting Love with Local Gay Singles Based on Chemistry. Chemistry.com/Gay-Lesbian-Dating
In addition there was a great big block ad of two guy standing next to each other with their arms around each other offering homosexual matchups which I could not copy and paste.
Now to address to your additional questions you are correct in stating that I said that if I had known that this was a homosexual website I would have never clicked on it and so now you question why do I keep coming back and so to answer your curiosity I will do the best I can. Generally speaking if I begin something I attempt, time willing to complete it especially when vitriol is at hand wherein as some have suggested that I am a mentally disturbed person as I am going about the work of the Lord. You see Anjin that is tantamount to saying that the Lord is a mentally disturbed person as a worker for the Lord you don’t abandon the good fight for the Lord as the song goes: Onward Christian Soldiers marching off….. etc.. In addition I was very surprised when I revealed that this was a homosexual site and that I was a Christian that they would not have kicked me off but here I am. As you study logic you have to carefully examine every statement the other person makes and simply stated as you have discovered the statement that you would have never done something doesn’t mean that you back off from where you are so at your stage of understanding logic I would explain it this way: Suppose you jump in water in the swimming pool and the immediate thought is, whoa this is cold I should never have done it but then you swim on in the pool. In logic there is a rule of equivocation of language so that you must look closely at what is being said. For example, one person said they don’t like reading what I say because I don’t just write short jabs poking at people but rather take the time to write. If you study philosophy you will learn in 101 the basics are Metaphysics and Epistemology. Metaphysics is broken down into Cosmology and Ontology. Ontology asks the question: What is it? This question points at “BEING” in your explanation of what something is when you say “what is it”. Epistemology asks the question of How do you know? So then within the point of debate the issue becomes should Gays be allowed in the military under the new policy of DADT being canned. You see when I was in the military 40 years ago there was no DADT so as an appeasement to the homosexual community, Clinton who was caught with his pants down in the Oval office and lying to federal prosecutors instituted DADT to them. Now Obama for whom it has been alleged has had homosexual relations in his youth which has never been proved or admitted to takes it a step further to have complete freedom for homosexuals in the military. On the battlefield where I assume you have never been there is a need for complete discipline which now brings up a point wherein all kinds of things can develop that we are unaware of yet we keep hearing illogical arguments. For example, homosexuals have already served in a distinguished manner. I don’t argue that homosexuals have already served in a distinguished manner and that is not the argument. If you study the questions asked by the survey of the soldiers in combat you will find one of the questions was how did they think it would affect unit cohesion. I’ve read the whole survey and so my question to you is this: Did you read the survey and study the results of the survey? Do you have empirical experience of being in combat? So you may not find these questions relevant to the discussion but in philosophy they are relevant as to the Epistemological question of “How do you know?” Epistemologically speaking you have 3 positions: Empiricism, Skepticism and Rationalism. So if I have read the study wherein you have not I have an advantage over you in the philosophical debate since I know rationally what is going down in addition I have another advantage over you in regards to Empiricism as I have been in combat and was nearly killed 5 times and you have not. Yet since you or others are either homosexual or have an emotional investment in a relationship with a homosexual by way of relatives, friends or colleagues I am then castigated to be a person who is mentally disturbed. Now of course I just could walk away from this whole issue and as to myself what should I care but God is a different issue because it now gives the unbeliever another chance to say that all Christians who speak their mind are idiots and furthermore that God does not now nor ever did exist. That I cannot let stand. So as soon as the comments stop and my word is the last word I am out of here. I do care about my country which is being taken over by left wing pseudo intellectuals for whom at the top have many pseudo intellectuals driving their agenda. You need to study the phrase equivocation of language. For example, I can say a dog is “good” and what does that mean. It means that he comes when called, sits when told, doesn’t bark when told, and defecates outside. Yet when I say a man is “good” does it mean the same thing? Of course not. Why? Because we are talking about a different “BEING”. Likewise with God now as to whether God is GOOD, He also is a different being than man. Those who claim that you have the same issue with integration of blacks into the military as with homosexuals are mixing apples and oranges as they deal with different categories. I have heard black Pastors become enraged over this comparison. Yet I am referred to as being mentally disturbed. Yet again I understand that you are a homosexual and or you have an invested relationship with a homosexual so that with all that emotion you cannot see clearly regarding this issue but there may be others who are not. In addition in accordance with my religion I believe that God the Creator is Omnipotent, Omnipresent and Omniscient so that He is listening to all this also and will make judgments as He deems necessary. So the bottom line is I will continue the thread as long as I deem necessary or until they throw me off.
You have stated, “Bush did vast damage to our country, and the potential is there for the tea party/palin to be much worse.” Yet you do not state why? As a lefty you should give specific reasons for your rationalisms or empirical examples which reflect your opinion otherwise you are just a parrot repeating what other lefties are saying. You say it to stir debate but there is NOTHING in what you say and from NOTHING YOU GET NOTHING which is another law of logic. Nothing begets nothing. This website reflects much of this so you should not feel alone as I am not just picking on you.
Then you say: “it’s still not a hate crime in the USA to say what I have been saying. No, just egregious stupidity.”
Well what can I say except that telling someone they are stupid is at the first grade “bully” level. As the bully grows up and learns how to read and write and he gets a computer it then feeds onto the computer. Absent an argument to say an idea is stupid ends up being nothing. Whereas if I say the leftist communist movement is stupid I am doing the same thing. But if I add to it the empirical evidence that it resulted in the deaths of over 100,000,000 people I am adding something to the discussion. Yet the other debater can then raise the issue what are you talking about I am not aware of that. Then I have to further define what I am talking about and mention all those killed in Siberia by Stalin et al, the Socialist movement of Hitler, and Mao’s tirades in China then you can have something to rebut as it is no longer a NOTHING comment like your STUPID comment which reflects a sign of immaturity.
Then you say: “James has the right to control what Google says. Really, you have the T&Cs of his agreement with Google on hand? Could you share what clause states this?
Of course you know I don’t have a copy of Jame’s agreement so why would you ask this other than to make a point. This point is then countered with the question of: What did Jame’s do to try and counter this? Did James try and negotiate with someone else like Dogpile, Yahoo, Alta Vista, Bing etc.. and then of course there is the ethical not moral question of why would he do it and does the ends justify the means. For example, My parents had a bar and sold liquor, they could be enablers of an atrocity which could occur. They did it. As a Christian I would never sell liquor, weapons, or lotto tickets because I believe it to be unethical even though people find it to be morally ok in our society. So what other negotiations and avenues did James take?
@Doug:
Your obsession with the Google ads is amusing and your attempt to use them as proof that this is a “homosexual site” (whatever that means) is amusing. I am further amused that you seem to find the fact that this is a “homosexual site” as repellant, yet you have spilled a lot of electrons here.
Second, in the interests of accuracy:
DADT was instituted early in Clinton’s first term (1993) while the Lewinsky scandal didn’t break until Clinton’s second term. Indeed, the story broke in early 1998.
A website cannot be homosexual. Nor can a website be heterosexual, or bisexual, or asexual. A website is not an entity that possesses sexuality. It lacks a sexual identity and it lacks a sexual preference and it lacks the capacity to engage in sex. Why? It’s a website, an electronic configuration of data, not an organism.
For further review: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b9/MagrittePipe.jpg
Now, a website may cater to homosexuals, it may contain content likely to appeal to homosexuals, it may illustrate or encourage homosexual activity. That, however, is not this website, which to my knowledge contains content focused on reporting, analyzing, and commenting upon current events with a focus on political and legal issues.
@TL: well said.
Wow, I can’t believe it. I turned this website on and like magic, all the homosexual advertisements are gone. It’s truly amazing. Steven I find your obsession to defend a website which is not an entity that possess sexuality to be truly amazing also. It’s interesting that you would actually take the time of day to come out and defend the rights of an asexual entity. All with the piling of the Transplanted Lawyer over such an issue of an asexual entity. You must truly love this asexual entity to be so obsessed to defend it. But then you know being a lawyer that the asexual entity of a corporation has been deemed to be a person by no other than the Supreme Court of the United States of America. Now is a person a sexual entity and why is the Corporation a person. The second thing is how do you define sex like with Clinton, how did he say it? I think it was how do you define the word “is” or something but as you are obsessed with knowledge of Billy Clinton what was that word. And by way when was it that that other woman accused that great humanitarian Billy with rape? Was that before DADT or after. You see I am not obsessed with Billy and I just can’t remember. I’m getting old ya know, 60 years old. And wasn’t it that great lefty liberal Rosie, not the lesbian but the other who grabbed her crotch at the ball game who said you can have sex with pole or something like that. So that in the person’s mind they can make a website a sexual entity but in reality what I mean is that this is a homosexual website in that it must be a gathering place for homosexuals like a homosexual bar. I hope that explains it for you. You know like some of those bars up in New York City. One time I had to urinate really bad. I stopped the car and ran into the bar. I came back out and said to the person with me, I didn’t know that was a black bar. I’m surprised he didn’t try to educate me in the fact that the bar was actually green in color. Obviously he was not obsessed with trying to correct people rather than when you don’t know what someone means by something you just ask: “What do you mean by a homosexual website?” and then accuse them of being OBSESSED with something like it is a diagnosis out of the DSM Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. So I’ll ask you since I don’t know, does Transplanted mean really like a cover for the word “Transvestite” or something as I don’t have a clue. Not that I’m OBSESSED or anything. I mean I’m not trying to insinuate you have a mental disorder for using “transplanted” or anything. Just why do you use Transplanted rather than your real name. Now when transplanted gives his answer, Stevie you be sure to tell him, “well said” or “attaboy” or something like that ok. Don’t forget now. Really and seriously though are you guys as transplanted says: “homosexual. Nor can a website be heterosexual, or bisexual, or asexual.” Are you atheist, agnostic, pantheistic? Democrat, Republican, Independent, Communist, Socialist, Conservative? And by the way the subject is supposed to be DADT. Are you in favor of DADT being removed from the military? Why? Don’t you agree that these points are more interesting than what you term to be my “OBSESSIONS”. I have also been defined as a “mentally disturbed person” on this website because I didn’t agree with that person’s views. So why would you want to get deep with an obsessive mentally disturbed person over such things rather than what is the subject is here which is DADT. I’m heterosexual so don’t waste your on me in that area if you are bi-sexual, homosexual, transexual, etc.. In other words I’m not looking for someone to try and make time with me just to discuss DADT nor am I interested in a layman’s psychoanalysis. Your not a Psychiatrist. Don’t forget the attaboy Stevie. We sure could of used you two guys in Nam.
Whoops just as I was about to click off this site up pops another homosexual ad. It reflects two guys in a romantic pose with the statement: “Someplace to be yourself. We know what you need. Visit GAY Palms California.”
So oops, I have to say it again, this is a homosexual website.
Don’t you just hate it when someone like transplanted lawyer puts a note in another language and you can’t read it. I am referring of course to his link with the pipe with a statement in a foreign language. Oh yes, I know I have been referred to as stupid by people on this website because I didn’t agree with them but I do know 4 languages but I also remember what it was like when somebody like Trans would do that so for those of you who don’t know the language you can go to http://www.translate.ru/ and translate the words.