Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Will you PLEASE define this vague and probably non-existent "agenda" you speak of? No one else on the extremist fringe has done so. That's one.
Two, of course Roger Williams is evoked by modern progressive, just as George Wallace, Joseph McCarthy and Ronald Reagan are considered icons of today's conservatives. Williams was a Puritan progressive. He was against colusion between church and state, he was pro-nativist, he was anti-slavery. These are all progressive values. We have other heroes, too, like FDR and LBJ, and again, this should not be surprising: they were progressives.
So I guess I fail to see what your issue is.
Stop with all the like, facts, and history and stuff. I need to put back in my intravenous needle of FAUX News and WPRO to stop this pain!
I am not gay, but I am sure curious about this book too. Maybe I can order a copy, along with its associate edition...The Liberal Agenda and its dumb down summary version The Socialist Conspiracy....
Is a copy of this "agenda" available to all homosexuals? Because I didn't receive mine yet.
It's part of the conspiracy-based mindset of the radical right. They always think there's an "agenda" behind every corner. Maybe it's projection on their part because surely, surely they have an agenda: to hurt and harm America!
This notion of a gay "agenda" has always bothered me because it implies there's some organized gay leadership that barks out marching orders and plots political twists and turns. Hardly -- organizing gays is like herding cats. Second, the intonation of "agenda" brings up right wing agit-prop about gays trying to convert heterosexuals to homosexuality, and of gay school teachers trying to convert their charges into gaydom.
So far as I know, the "agenda" is simple equality with heterosexuals, and in Rhodde Island, we got a lot closer to that goal this week.
Um, those right wing extremists who posit that there is a gay agenda, can you please post a copy for all of us to read? We must have missed that memo.
It's part of the conspiracy-based mindset of the radical right. They always think there's an "agenda" behind every corner. Maybe it's projection on their part because surely, surely they have an agenda: to hurt and harm America!
This notion of a gay "agenda" has always bothered me because it implies there's some organized gay leadership that barks out marching orders and plots political twists and turns. Hardly -- organizing gays is like herding cats. Second, the intonation of "agenda" brings up right wing agit-prop about gays trying to convert heterosexuals to homosexuality, and of gay school teachers trying to convert their charges into gaydom.
So far as I know, the "agenda" is simple equality with heterosexuals, and in Rhodde Island, we got a lot closer to that goal this week.
Um, those right wing extremists who posit that there is a gay agenda, can you please post a copy for all of us to read? We must have missed that memo.
I'd like to see it, too. I'm a long-time activist for lgbt, women's and African-American rights and the only agenda I've seen is the desire for full equality.
Yet the wing-nuts will of course tell you that "they just want to be treated the same as everyone else". Yeah, OK.
We are the same as everyone else.
I love when you misuse the word "wingnut." You might want to know it refers to right wingers!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wiki
"Wingnut" (sometimes "wing-nut") is used in United States politics as a political slur referring to a person who holds extreme, and often irrational, political views usually with a religious overtone. According to Merriam-Webster, it is "a mentally deranged person" or "one who advocates extreme measures or changes : radical."[1] In American politics, the term is more often aimed at members of the political right than those of the political left,[2]
My my my, the cites you post! Mostly anecdotal BS of no consequence. For instance, from your first cite:
Quote:
It has become commonplace in Massachusetts schools for teachers to display photos of their same-sex "spouses" and occasionally bring their "spouses" to school functions.
Uh, gay equality exists in Mass. -- it's the law of the state. So with gays being equal, what's wrong with gays having pictures of their families/spouses? Are only heterosexuals allowed this? I Don't Think So. Being equal means being equal. They are, after all, legally married.
Your second cite was a laugh riot:
Quote:
This paper will focus upon three related issues. First, a brief comment on the role of
mainstream media in shaping public opinion by suppressing truth in the service of special sexual
interests. Second, an overview of Alfred Kinsey’s role in promoting the current cultural advances in
pedophilia and homosexuality. Lastly, the schoolroom initiation of children into heterosexual and
bi/homosexual sex, as feeding child prostitution, chiefly “[t]ightly run organizations” that traffic in
roughly half-a million boy prostitutes
The author of the claptrap, Dr. Reisman, is a known wingnut.
Quote:
Reisman has claimed that the homosexuals employ recruitment techniques that rival those of the United States Marine Corps.[1] Reisman cited "a clear avenue for the recruitment of children" by homosexuals in her public support of Oregon Ballot Measure 9 (1992).[17] In 1994 Reisman spoke at a conference of Christian right leaders in Colorado Springs, saying that homosexual "recruitment is loud; it is clear; it is everywhere." She estimated the homosexual population at the time to be 1-2% but predicted at least 20% (and possibly over 30%) "of the young population will be moving into homosexual activity" as a result of recruitment.[5]
As a result, many more children in Massachusetts appear to be self-identifying as "gay." According to the Massachusetts Youth Risk Behavior Survey, given to students in high schools across the state, between 2005 and 2009 both the percentage of kids "identifying as gay" and who had same-sex contact rose by approximately 50%. Although this bi-annual survey is unscientific and largely unreliable, it still shows a disturbing trend among those students who chose to answer the questions in this way. (At a minimum, it implies that these answers are being encouraged.)
"Although this bi-annual survey is unscientific and largely unreliable," you cite it as gospel!
Well here's an interesting study on male sexuality. A head scratcher because of the doubled percent for hispanic men, who are thought more to be very much 'traditional males' -go figure. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/20/op...es-of-gay.html
Delaware Becomes 11th State to Vote for Gay Equality
Quote:
Originally Posted by AP
DOVER, Del. — A divided state Senate voted Tuesday to make Delaware the 11th state in the nation to allow same-sex marriage, after hearing hours of passionate testimony from supporters and opponents.
Less than an hour after the Senate’s 12-9 vote, Democratic Gov. Jack Markell signed the measure into law
.
Next up, Minnesota! The tide, my friends, is turning!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
