« Eco-Gathering Amuses, Nauseates | Main | Nobody Watching as Live Earth Moonbats Make Fools of Themselves »

Wow - Van Helsing is a very angry anti-gay bigot.

Wonder why he is so hostile to gays? Sounds like the Middle East to me.

People who have an innately different sexual orientation are not to blame for others who hold discrimminatory beliefs - whether those beliefs arise from a 2,000 year old religious book or from someplace else.

It is people like Van helsing that are repsonsible for many of the laws protecting gays that are passed today.

If it weren't for such hostility - There would be no need for such laws.

Thanks Van - Mary Cheney thanks you too!

Right - private property.

With tax exempt status.

Next thing up: A homosexual booth at the Southern Baptist Convention and an abortion clinic in the Vatican.

I note G. just won't go away. Enlighten us, dipwad; why do you hate Christians so much - and why don't you and your fellow fudge packers sue the local Mosque for wanting to cut off your homo heads? Do you pick on Christians because they're easy, non-violent targets? Of course you do. Chickenshits only pick on folks who don't hit back.

Hey Dipwad - here's a story about the helpless homos you so adore:

"Two news stories about hundreds, perhaps thousands, of lesbian gangs across the nation attacking and raping young girls in schools and other public locations have prompted a backlash against the reporters by members of the homosexual community.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=56577

Jimbo,

Judge people as individuals - not because they share an innate trait with others.
Be intelligent.

I am very much against Islamic fundamentalism for that very reason - in addition to many other reasons.

But Christian fundmentalists are in my own Country, have as similar mentality towards gay people, and have alot of political power.

I do not like Christian Fundamentalists because they use their beliefs to hurt others based on a 2,000 year old religious text.

Homosexuality is biological - all scientific studies to date indicate this.

Judge people on their behavior - not on their sexual orientation.

If that story about lesbian gangs is true and that is a big IF - of course that behavior is evil.

But what are you saying - that all lesbians do this???

I don't get your point?

"Judge people on their behavior"

What do you think we're doing, dipwad?

Just like you - I'm judging you by your behavior - and I'm not impressed by your hypocritical, factless, socialist drivel.

Maybe the Christian Fundamentalists and the Islamic Fundamentalists can forge a bond based on their mutual lies about, and hate for, gays.

G,

It's not so much that Van Helsing is an anti-gay bigot so much as you and the lesbian ladies in question are anti-christian bigots.

Seriously, this is on par with demanding that the NAACP hold a KKK rally at their HQ in Maryland. Or how about holding an economics class at the DNC?

Jimbo:

you are not judging me on my behavior - you don't even know me.

Darth T:

Many gay people are Christians. I am against people using religion to justify hating and lying about others. Some Chrisitns - not all - lie about gays.

A small % of people are born with an homosexual sexual orientation - it is not a choice and not a lifestyle - it is a sexual orientation.

I did not choose to be gay anymore than you choose to be straight.

Jimbo:

"Bill O'Reilly admitted to Rashad Robinson, GLAAD, that the recent story about lesbian gangs on The Factor, 6/21, was "overstated" and Robinson graciously thanked BOR for his effort to correct the mistake. For a brief moment O'Reilly appeared decent and even dignified but in a flash it was gone as he began explaining why he reported the story in the first place.

O'Reilly started his justification with the first story he noted but did not report initially about four women convicted in New York. Robinson reminded him that they were not considered a gang so O'Reilly rephrased with, " A pack of lesbians jumped this guy and killed him". Then BOR said he got the story about lesbians in Memphis and another from Philadelphia about a gang DTO, Dykes Taking Over. He told Robinson when he had three stories, he decided to do the report.

Robinson reminded O'Reilly that there had been no arrest in Memphis and in Philadelphia it was a one time incident by a group of 8th graders. O'Reilly claimed the 8th graders were a gang because they had a name adding that it was a valid story but admitted that the situation wasn't out of control.

Robinson was getting annoyed and told BOR that he had reported it as a "national epidemic".
O'Reilly made light of his "overstatement" with a wisecrack. "I'm not in fear of the lesbians beating me up." Then O'Reilly smoothed the tension assuring Robinson that in the future they would work together and all the usual blah blah.

It's hard to say if Bill O'Reilly would have apologized on his own if Rod Wheeler, legal analyst, hadn't admitted his facts were wrong.

"Humbly, I submit to you that as a professional, I am not too proud to admit when I've perhaps made a mistake, have misspoken, or have been misinterpreted surrounding a particular issue," he wrote. "I urge all who felt personally offended by the information provided to accept my apology, and let's focus and work together at addressing the gang and other real problems in some communities here in the United States."

http://www.newshounds.us/2007/07/09/bill_oreilly_admits_lesbian_gang_story_overstated_but.php

Jimbo,

If you have hate in your heart - take a close look at it. It is easy to find a target for it outside in the world. Look inside yourself.

By Pamela Constable
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, July 10, 2007; Page A06

One night in 2003, on the wintry streets of Kosovo, a group of thugs stalked and beat Gramoz Prestreshi almost to death. Police in the war-scarred Balkan province laughed and called him names. The emergency room workers made him mop up his own blood. It was a sordid but hardly unusual episode in the hostile environment homosexuals encounter in societies of all kinds.

Unlike many such victims, though, Prestreshi kept his wits about him. He had photographs taken of his injuries. He complained to the press and clipped every article. When his family disowned him, he joined a gay rights organization and slept in its office. This spring, his determination bore unexpected fruit, and Prestreshi was accepted as a legal refugee in the United States. He now lives in the District.

Homosexuality is biological - all scientific studies to date indicate this.

Hogwash. This is just as unsupportable as your claim that AGW is scientifically proven. Once again, you're spouting ideology without having looked at the science.

Do some reading. And when you do, consider the agendas of the people who did the (limited) studies that found a (very weak) genetic component.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/942255.stm

One notorious incident of gay-bashing occurred on September 22, 2000. Ronald Gay entered a gay bar in Roanoke, Virginia and opened fire on the patrons, killing Danny Overstreet and injuring six others. Ronald said he was angry over what his name now meant, and deeply upset that three of his sons had changed their surname. He claimed that he had been told by God to find and kill lesbians and gay men, describing himself as a "Christian Soldier working for my Lord".[2]

On July 30, 2006, six men were brutally beaten after leaving the San Diego, California Gay Pride festival. One of the gay men was beaten so badly that he had to undergo extensive facial reconstructive surgery. The attackers were all adults, except for a 15-year-old and were charged with hate crimes.

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20060921-1257-bn21attacks2.html&cid=0&sig2=5j6BFSRc0TOf8Nsuf9cy4w

Jimbo:

you are not judging me on my behavior - you don't even know me.
g.

Your behavior is to come to a conservative discussion board for no other reason than to be disruptive and shove your opinion down other's throats - just like the radicals you admire. I take no such actions on homosexual or liberal sites - I figure they are allowed to freely discuss and agree with one another; a respect you don't have for us.

Now - as far as "hate" - is that you're narrow definition of "hate" (anyone who disagrees with you is hateful) or real hate? You believe you know what's in my heart, so that means you believe you can read my mind. Tell me, dipwad - what am I thinking right now?

ent,

It is not hogwash.

I have done extensive research into for years because I have wondered why I am gay.

All responsible, credible research to date indicates a biological basis - not to mention empricial data.

The religious right wing organizations put their religious ideology and belief system ahead of rigorous science and facts.

It is not hogwash.

I have done extensive research into for years because I have wondered why I am gay.

All responsible, credible research to date indicates a biological basis - not to mention empricial data.

Then please, kindly provide the data uncovered by your `extensive research into for years', which `indicates' `a biological basis' for homosexuality.

G.
Get a life.

Here's a question for your feeble brain:

What if the Lesbians tried to sue for the right to be "married" in a mosque....in IRAN?

Let's try that again:

It is not hogwash.

I have done extensive research into for years because I have wondered why I am gay.

All responsible, credible research to date indicates a biological basis - not to mention empricial data.

Then please, kindly provide the data uncovered by your `extensive research into for years', which `indicates' `a biological basis' for homosexuality.

White Cane,

No one chooses their sexual orientation anymore than they choose their height. You did not choose your sexual orientation and I did not choose mine.

For starters read:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biology_and_sexual_orientation

"Then please, kindly provide the data uncovered by your `extensive research into for years', which `indicates' `a biological basis' for homosexuality."

Are you saying that homosexuality is a choice?

The disclaimer to the Wikipedia entry mentioned above states, "Information in this article or section has not been verified against sources and may not be reliable."

Notwithstanding, I do not regard editable-by-all Wikipedia articles as authoritative. I do, however, wish that you, G., `could kindly provide the data uncovered by your `extensive research into for years', which `indicates' `a biological basis' for homosexuality.'

White Cane,

Seek the TRUTH - not the verification of your own preconceived notions. Rigorous, honest truth seeking.

I did not compile a report - I have done extensive reading of scientific journals.

I will try to find some of those for yuou and provide links.

Are you saying that homosexuality is a choice?

I'm haven't said homosexuality is or isn't a choice. Nevertheless, I would like to see some of that much-touted `rigorous science and facts' which `indicat[e]' `a biological basis' for homosexuality.'

White Cane,

* A June 2006 Canadian study published in the journal, “Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,” said that nature, instead of nurture, explains the origins of homosexuality. The study’s author, Prof. Anthony F. Bogaert, at Brock University in Ontario, explored the causes behind what is known as the fraternal birth order. The research showed a correlation between the number of biological older brothers a man has and his sexual orientation. Dividing his sample of more than 900 heterosexual and homosexual men into four groups, Bogaert examined the impact of all types of older brothers, including step and adopted siblings, and the amount of time brothers spent together while growing up.His research found that only the number of biological brothers had an impact on sexuality, regardless of whether the boys were raised together.

* A study released in May 2006 by Swedish scientists demonstrates that biology plays a key role in determining a person’s sexuality. The research shows that the portion of the brain that helps regulate sexuality – the hypothalamus - reacted the exact same way in straight women and gay men when exposed to male pheromones, which are chemicals designed to provoke a behavior, such as sexual arousal. The same area of the brain only became stimulated in heterosexual men when introduced to female pheromones.

* In 2005, Dr. Brian Mustanski of the University of Illinois at Chicago published a study in the esteemed biomedical journal Human Genetics, claiming he identified three chromosomal regions linked to sexual orientation in men: 7q36, 8p12 and 10q26.

* In 2003, University of Texas psychoacoustics specialist Dennis McFadden found that when measuring the way the brain reacts to sound, lesbians fell in between heterosexual men and straight women, suggesting they might be exposed to higher than normal levels of male hormone in utero.

* In 2003, University of Liverpool biologist John T. Manning found that the lesbians whom he studied have a hand pattern that resembles a man’s more than a straight female’s. Manning concluded from his study that this “strongly tells us that female homosexuals have had higher levels of exposure to testosterone before birth.”

* In 1993, the National Institute of Health’s Dean Hamer illustrated that homosexuality might be inherited from the mother by her sons through a specific region of the X chromosome (Xq28). Hamer demonstrated this by noting that 33 out of 40 pairs of homosexual brothers whom he studied showed the same variation in the tip of the chromosome.

* A 1991 study by Dr. Simon LeVay found that the hypothalamus is twice as large in heterosexual men as it is in women or gay men. This strongly points to biological influences on sexual orientation.

* Another 1991 study by scientists Richard Pillard and John M. Baily studied homosexuality among brothers and found that 53 percent of identical twins were both gay. In adoptive brothers, 11 percent were both homosexual. Of non-twin biological siblings, 9 percent were gay. Again, this points to solid evidence that homosexuality is a matter of nature.

* The JUN/JUL 2006 issue of Seed Magazine points out that at least 450 vertebrate species engage in homosexual behavior.

To my fellow posters: "G" does not have employment, otherwise "it" couldn't post so frequently and rabidly. Anyone who claims admiration of science and then slanders it in the next sentence without documentation is not worthy of conversation. I hold 3 degrees in the sciences, have read extensively on many topics in several fields of science and therefore know a leftist godless clone when I see it.

Take some advice: Don't feed the trolls.

My dear G., I need links to or reprints of the actual articles and studies; I don't need your summaries.

"A 1991 study by Dr. Simon LeVay found that the hypothalamus is twice as large in heterosexual men as it is in women or gay men. This strongly points to biological influences on sexual orientation."

BTW, this study by LeVay (an avowed queer) was long ago discredited. His study design wouldn't have gotten approved by a masters' thesis committee for its appalling sloppiness. I know since I studied his paper and conducted a statistical analysis of it.

Everyone, please remember that homosexuals aren't out to stifle anyone's religious beliefs. Passage of hate crimes laws won't have any effect on churches and other religious institutions.

These women knew eactly what they were doing when they tried to rent the property. Their live and let live attitude doesn't include religious opposition to their sexual behavior. They wanted this to happen.

A while back there was someone who wanted a Christian business do duplicate some homosexual propaganda videos. Like they just happened to pick that business at random.

A nightclub, in Australia I think, successfully got straight people banned. It's okay for homosexuals to feel "uncomfortable" around straights, but not the other way around.

People are suing eHarmony because they won't match up homosexuals. Not that there aren't many other avenues that they can use. Heck, I see commercials for Interactive Male on late night TV. The back of local "alternative" newspapers is full of businesses for just that purpose.

Homosexual activists want to eliminate any opposition to their behavior. Nevermind the fact that most people don't give a rats behind what they're doing. They just don't want to hear about it. What happened to, "it's no one's business what two people do in the privacy of their bedroom," and, "keep your Bible out of my pants?"

Van, you've got a live one with G here.

The studies on testosterone influence in utero on boys having older brothers does not take into account the "smothering mothering" effect on younger children, nor does it take into account the higher probability that a younger sibling will be raised without a father's influence in the home.

There were also studies on finger length in females (ring finger longer than index) where there "might" be evidence of testosterone influence and therefore, lesbians might be expected to have a more "masculine" ratio. I'm female, feminine in appearance, have slightly longer ring fingers than index fingers, have 2 older brothers (the testosterone influence) and yet am not queer. Of course, I had a stable family life (mother and father present) and my parents were comfortable in their sexuality so maybe that and not "biology" made all the difference.

You people are nuts.

You do not seek the truth - just confirmation of your pre-existing beliefs.

Good riddance.

You people are nuts.

You do not seek the truth - just confirmation of your pre-existing beliefs.

Good riddance.

I was going to post this (I had written it but hadn't pressed Post yet):

If G. is a troll, then the evidence (or lack thereof) he presents will be brutally refuted, and he will leave in shame.

Unfortunately, it turns out fellowes was right.

So, is G going to answer the question as to how two lesbians have the legal right to get married in a church which refuses to marry them?

"I'm haven't said homosexuality is or isn't a choice."

Care to say it now? Is it a choice or not?

"Nevertheless, I would like to see some of that much-touted `rigorous science and facts' which `indicat[e]' `a biological basis' for homosexuality."

Can I see your scientific evidence for it being a "choice"?

Whatever happened to live and let live? Mutual respect? Tolerance? I just don't see why those lesbians couldn't just choose a different church.

Actually, I do. Lesbians seem to have a predilection for militant behavior.

Lesbians should just create their own church to worship Gaia and have orgies with sex toys and strap ons.

panday - g. has adhd with a hint of ocd - it does not answer questions as is a typical trait of a leftardo. please forgive it as it knows not what it does.

It's just as easy to, you know... do the research yourselves instead of bashing on someone for bringing you answers that you, you know.. ASKED FOR.

I've seen trolls, this "G" person is no troll. He's just desperately trying to prove a point to people who are too blind to ever accept it.

Read psychology books, and you'll understand what I mean... or, psychologically speaking... you won't be able to and not even realize it.

Oh, how fun the human mind is!

Just goes to show that, no matter what, people DO NOT change. Just their acts.

Fun facts:
4% of the male population is exclusively homosexual, 1% bisexual.
1% in women.
Your brain controls everything.

Yes, that includes beliefs, memories, sexual urges, thoughts, life functions (such as breathing, homeostasis, heartbeat, etc), need to feed, need to live, adaptation, blah blah blah...

You only know as much of the world as you bother to know, religion gives you a quite simple explanation and, in turn, excuse not to have to learn anything more.

There's nothing wrong with faith... it's organized religion that's the problem, that and politics. Which is essentially the same thing since politicians like to press their religious beliefs even in a Democracy (Under God) which states that there shall be a seperation of Church and State.

Funny, huh?

So, in a way, SUING a church, is just kinda silly. But so is denying anyone the right to "officially" join in a union which they, one would hope, would keep "sacred". Meaning, they'd be faithful to each other.

What's so sacred about marriage this day and age anyway?
60% ending in divorce? Defend that, if you can... that's a majority.
So much for "Til death do you part" eh?

eh?

Oh, whatever... arguing is silly... just go read more books on different subjects. Or go back to school! That's always good, what's the harm in, you know... LEARNING more?

Knowledge is power.

Peace.