Step 1: Denial
Maggie Gallagher covers her ass on Tyler Clementi’s suicide:
I do not think the absence of gay marriage is the cause of these tragedies or its presence will resolve them. We can make this a symbol of all our other fights, or we can try to save all our kids, gay and straight, from this kind of ugly and mindless cruelty. My heart goes out to the family of the young man. God bless him and them.
Step 2: Degradation
World Net Daily columnist Vox Day:
[Tyler Clementi] killed himself because he could not live with the shame of knowing that everyone would be aware of his submission to what he apparently believed to be evil desires. While giving in to our desire for evil is something that we all do from time to time, it is also true that some desires happen to be more shameful or humiliating than others. For example, a man’s desire for his neighbor’s wife is sinful, but few consider it to be as appalling as his desire for his neighbor’s child.
Step 3: Damnation
An account of Senator Jim DeMint speaking at a Spartanburg church rally:
DeMint said if someone is openly homosexual, they shouldn’t be teaching in the classroom and he holds the same position on an unmarried woman who’s sleeping with her boyfriend — she shouldn’t be in the classroom.
Step 4: Repeat
Here’s what the right-wing Christianist (not Christian) message boils down to:
It’s not our fault gay kids are killing themselves. They kill themselves because they feel naturally ashamed of their perversion. Also, they’re vile creatures who shouldn’t be around kids.
How angry are you? How much angrier can you get? Double that. Then get angrier.
You appear to be so enraged that you declare calls for an end to homophobic bullying in schools driving children to suicide as invalid until apologies and reparations are made for your own wounds from public comments.
Actually, I declare them as invalid because, as the examples I provided show, the gay and lesbian community openly encourages suicide, bullying, and harm to children.
Meanwhile, screaming “homophobia” is what gays and lesbians do to get their way when they want to have and molest children freely or demand sex from their coworkers without repercussion. It’s really nothing more than a six-year-old yelling, “I hate you!” at their parents in an attempt to manipulate them into doing what the six-year-old wants.
Meanwhile, screaming “homophobia” is what gays and lesbians do to get their way when they want to have and molest children freely or demand sex from their coworkers without repercussion. It’s really nothing more than a six-year-old yelling, “I hate you!” at their parents in an attempt to manipulate them into doing what the six-year-old wants.
Mr North Dallas Thirty, do you really see yourself as a six year old?
And finally, this was by far the best piece yet. Nothing like the gay and lesbian community stating that all Christians are responsible for killing gay and lesbian children to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt the sheer hypocrisy and antireligious bigotry that motivates the gay and lesbian community.
One of Savage’s comments puts it best:
No.
But remember, Neil, according to the commenters here, I’m not gay.
Nothing like the gay and lesbian community stating that all Christians are responsible for killing gay and lesbian children to demonstrate beyond a shadow of a doubt the sheer hypocrisy and antireligious bigotry that motivates the gay and lesbian community.
So it starts with the gay and lesbian community? Poor Christian victims? Christian kids are committing suicide because of the abuse they’re receiving in the schoolyard?
Dude, you keep saying you’re such a strong person because you don’t need the acceptance of the gay community, so why do you post seven (or was it eight?) comments in a row in furious defense?
If you’re so strong, leave us all alone.
ND30, just to highlight one thing, you say, “according to the commenters here, I’m not gay”.
Not all the commenters here have said that, but then that’s typical of your arguments. You take something some people say and treat it as though everyone you don’t like shares that belief.
People are individuals.
I’m so happy you are doing this. It just makes me sequel with glee North Dallas thirty.
Notice how you deal with just one paragraph (one you parse, by the way). Which is buried in that massive refutation of your posts. Which means you were specifically looking for something to hang me out on.
Wait, wait, wait… are you actually acknowledging that such a thing as an individual exists? That’s remarkable.
And you are right, I did miss the quote from “sadly no” on Evan’s article. Mostly because you made a series of demonstrably ridiculous claims about it.
Yes and? Once more, there was nothing in that piece indicating it was other than personal opinion.
Please prove so. Please prove every single statement he ever made was endorsed and supported by these groups and individuals.
You are lying again. Neither Richard Rush nor Wayne Besen commented at all on the content of the article. If you are going to comment on me missing a few lines at the bottom of an article, you should at least be honest about the entire thrust of your argument, particularly when it is your evidence you are presenting.
I, at least, have the fortitude to say I missed something.
Well, first you would have to be rational or truthful, as you are neither, well it is a bit of a conundrum. Of course I do not particularly believe any personal details anyone claims online. Oh, and please prove that every single person who challenges you claims you are not gay.
Rob: Why not do us all a favor and ban NDT? NDT will be happy because it will nurse his martyr complex and we wouldn’t have to see post after post hijacked by his endless rants. Thanks.
Oh good! More insanity from North Dallas Thirty!
And you are lying again. Actually you are lying and being really sloppy about it. You joined two entirely separate items into one chain of cuaseality, even though the one happened after the other. Please prove that Rob’s discussion with that NOM fan was used to paint Greensburg Indiana in any particular way.
That was a posting about an exchange that took place, and the psychology behind the exchange. It never claimed to be otherwise and it never took the position of anything other than that this was a particularly common line of thought. It never attributed it to anyone other than those who, specifically, hold that thought.
Now the other article on BTB is, of course, entirely accurate. It says nothing about the town, other than this behavior happens to be going on there. And that behavior is making it a very ugly place to be (something objectively true). It made no claims about any people in the town.
Please, stop lying.
Actually they do not. If you will notice this particular line, “When the Trial Trackers interviewed Mr. Adams, a NOM staffer advised him not to say ‘anything inflammatory’ but seemed to have no objection to Mr. Adams’ signage.” Which means they were perfectly aware of the sign (something that is almost never true of open comments sections), that they specifically talked to the person, and that they were trying to control him… but had no particular qualms about the content of the sign itself.
Something you are clearly not. Of course if you were an honest, rational, and fair individual you would not have brought the sign up at all since my quote was, “Individual people on the internet represent themselves and no one else.” Of which your sign example does not fit at all.
Unless they are not.
Which they didn’t. In a particularly egregious example of lying, Rob didn’t focus on a town or a community. Please pay better attention to your own evidence.
In other words, you would practice “equality” and hold the gay and lesbian community and its members accountable to the same rules you try to hold others.
John, ND30 can’t hijack a thread on his own. He needs the cooperation of the people he battles. There’s no need for anyone to refute his comments. No one’s going to think he bested you just because you didn’t reply.
Here’s a fun little irony. I first encountered ND30 at gaypatriot.net, which recently linked to an article by Robert Stacy McCain, who listed all the terrible debate tactics that the “Left” uses against the “Right.” Do any of them seem familiar?
Next time you read a post where he employs one of these methods (if you read his posts), just shake your head, laugh, and scroll on down.
My mother always warned me against poking the bear, but, hey, I’m going to anyway – and I’m aware of the double entendre there.
Now, ND30: you said that
Thanks for clearing that up for us. I’m a gay, and I wasn’t sure whether there was such a thing as a gay and lesbian community, and I certainly wasn’t at the meeting of the Gay and Lesbian Community when that rule was voted on.
I’ve some questions for the other readers of this site:
1. Were you at the meeting of the Gay and Lesbian Community when this rule was included in our Gay and Lesbian Community Constitution? It sounds like ND30 was, but I just want to know if any one else was there too.
2. How do I join the Gay and Lesbian Community? Is there a form to fill in, and or am I a member by virtue of, um, enjoying the company of other men?
3. If we want to introduce amendments to the rules espoused in our Gay and Lesbian Community Constitution, how many gays and lesbians do we have to get together in order to have a quorum? Do bisexuals count as gays and lesbians for the purposes of a quorum, and if so, can I presume that I’d need two bisexual men to equate to one gay man?
4. Is there a separate Gay and Lesbian Community in each country, or am I automatically covered by the US Community no matter where I am? I’m a New Zealander, you see, and I’m not sure whether I want to be part of the United States Gay and Lesbian Community. I’d like my own local one.
That’s all the questions I have. I ask these because it’s just interesting that ND30 has said that the comments posted on ONE thread, just ONE thread, on just ONE website discussing just ONE issue can somehow constitute a binding rule for an entire subset of humanity, a subset which is spread across every continent, and with members as disparate and individual as flakes of snow.
Good points, Rob. I just get weary of seeing the same crap on blog after blog.
I like your consistent attempt to repeat the same lies, as if that will make them true.
And since you claim to be gay, and you are making these comments the gay and lesbian community openly supports not telling people to blow their brains out. Do you understand the stupidity at work in these posts? It’s been brought to your attention more than once?
In other words, because someone did not go to your blog then to the comment thread in question and post comment, it is support? And that is the equivalent of speaking to someone face to face and giving them behavioral instructions? My, what a silly world you live in.
Wow, overusing the copy and paste feature aren’t you? Sloppy, sloppy work.
Except in the way they demonstrably do not…
I love the attempt at objectivity in this. It’s about you, which is what all your posts are about. Oh, and no.
bullying,
I like how this is just thrown in unsupported.
And I love not only relying upon anonymous internet comments, but the linking to yourself. Such pathetic behavior.
Really? A Daily Mail article? Why not link to a Fox News article? There’s not even a pretense of objectivity in that article nor in the the Daily Mail in general. Please find an article about the story from a respectable news paper.
Oh look! More lies! The Fire Chief in question said the claims were false, the various people making the accusations said they were true. The city council made a confidance vote. At no point did anyone say she should be able to demand sex from anyone else without repercussions.
Or more like a rather silly individual on the net having fun cherry picking. Shall we list the number of members of the heterosexual community who have been involved in child molestation and/or sexual harassment lawsuits?
Wait… wait… wait… wait… Did you just use an 1994 email from NAMBLA protesting how it was expelled from a group as evidence that the “gay and lesbian community rails against the age of consent?” That’s… presenting evidence that is directly against your claims. I checked, and I couldn’t even find a mission statement from the ILGA, but please, enlighten us as to what this particular organization has to say about age of consent laws (and quoted directly from an up to date mission statement).
Which is an obviously false claim. In fact that article makes the following claims, “I [Ron Simmons, president of Us Helping Us] can remember going to a funeral every four or five days. Now, if you talk to some of these young men, they say, ‘If I do get infected, I will simply take the blue pill or the pink pill, like my friend.’” Which places the blame squarely on the teenagers themselves and the perceived lack of threat from HIV. And then this little section, “Researchers recruited “opinion leaders” in the gay communities of three cities in North Carolina. The people were trained to talk to their peers not only about ways to protect themselves from HIV but also about other issues, such as homophobia in some black churches and racism. A year later, the frequency of unprotected high-risk intercourse was down 30 percent in the three gay communities, and the number or people who said they always used condoms was up a similar amount.”
Thus proving, once more, you are lying. And even offering evidence disproving your own point.
So, apparently, in your world Us Helping Us and gay opinion leaders are not members of the gay and lesbian community? This is getting pathetic. No, wait, it already was pathetic.
And after another entirely copy and past post we get this:
Oh good, I was afraid this might get silly… too late.
Yes. We agree for once. The evidence you are about to present is nothing like the gay and lesbian community stating that all Christians are responsible for killing gay and lesbian children.
As you’ve failed to demonstrate anything, possibly ever, this should be good.
Oh look! It is Dan Savage speaking on behalf of himself. In fact, since he is speaking about gay Christians you have to accept that there is no “antireligous bigotry” in the gay and lesbian community. Oh, and Savage said no such thing in the quoted part. He was talking about the religion, not the individuals who participate in the religion. As always, everything you say is pretty demonstrably a lie. Often by your own evidence.
And it certainly wasn’t very difficult to do so. Hence your backpedaling and spinning when you were caught in an obvious and blatant lie.
But of course, you don’t have that fortitude, because you blamed me for the fact that you were caught lying.
The piece was posted on the Truth Wins Out blog. Clearly it was endorsed and supported by Truth Wins Out, given that there was no, “This post is the opinion of the author only”.
With pleasure.
According to the gay and lesbian community, anything stated must be specifically repudiated and condemned in the exact places demanded by the gay and lesbian community, or it applies to everyone associated with or commenting on a particular group.
Some people have given me flack on my NOM logo redesign. They say it’s unfair because the original sign, the one with the his-and-his nooses, did not come from the NOM leadership.
They have a point.
But that doesn’t mean they’re right.
I have to admit, that graphic was not my most intellectual effort. When I saw the original sign, my clock got punched and it felt like the only thing to do was yell. But you know what? I held back. Before anything else that morning, I checked NOM’s reaction to the sign. I checked NOMblog. I checked NOM’s Facebook page. I checked NOM’s Summer Tour Facebook page.
I saw nothing.
Wayne Besen and Richard Rush clearly saw this post and did not condemn or repudiate it; therefore, they endorse and support it.
Rachel Maddow clearly saw the Truth Wins Out blog and did not condemn or repudiate it; therefore she supports and endorses it.
Feel free to demonstrate good faith by holding Rob Tisinai similarly accountable if you wish to object.
Of course, the title is “Greensburg, Indiana: America’s Ugliest Town”, but of course, Loki argues that the article says nothing about the town.
Really? Please provide proof that all the people making these comments are from Greensburg.
But you just stated that the article said people were behaving this way and posting nasty comments in Greensburg.
Which means they were perfectly aware of the sign (something that is almost never true of open comments sections), that they specifically talked to the person, and that they were trying to control him… but had no particular qualms about the content of the sign itself.
But you were holding people in Greensburg responsible for comments posted in an open comment section.
But you stated that individual comments left on an open comment site proved that Greensburg, Indiana was “America’s Ugliest Town”.
This is what makes you so amusingly contradictory, Loki. You demand that people police comments but refuse to police your own. You demand that people condemn offensive statements but refuse to condemn others. You insist that individuals’ actions only represent themselves and no one else but then use individual actions to blame every person in an entire town.
Loki, silly, you yourself have claimed I am not gay, precisely because no “real” gay person would ever dare to criticize another gay person’s behavior.
Such behavior is anathema to “real” gay and lesbian people like yourself, who, when confronted with an example of gay and lesbian people molesting children, claim it was all made up by right-wing news sources and that there’s not an ounce of truth in it.
That’s why you make such hilariously contradictory statements as this:
on a blog that openly espouses just that sort of mindset.
But of course, it does get better.
Actually, had you read the email, you would have noticed that it was NAMBLA protesting that it was being expelled after ten years of good membership and support by ILGA and pointing out how doing so was completely inconsistent with numerous resolutions passed by ILGA, which it quoted, specifically condemning age of consent laws and supporting sex with individuals regardless of age.
Evidently molesting and having sex with underage children wasn’t a problem for the gay and lesbian community until it became a public relations disaster.
Based on self-reporting, which the gay and lesbian community insists is invalid because people always lie.
Which is why he refers to them as “Jewish Nazis”.
Evidently molesting and having sex with underage children wasn’t a problem for the gay and lesbian community until it became a public relations disaster.
A gentle reminder, Mr30, this blog entry is about concern over the effects of homophobic bullying against children.
On the matter of NAMBLA and ILGA, age of consent is actually quite a complex issue and there are wide cultural differences around the world on what constitutes age of consent. In Japan, Argentina and Spain it’s 13. In Tunisia it’s 20. Part of the reason a group like NAMBLA came to be under the umbrella of ILGA has to do with how even in countries where homosexuality was legal, there would be different age of consent rules for lesbians and gay men and straight people. Sexually active queer adults found themselves being prosecuted by law enforcers keen to harass the queer community.
It’s important to remember too that even in most developed countries, homosexuality was only legalised in the late 1960s. The early gay rights movement had only just emerged from persecution by the state and naively saw in the likes of NAMBLA another group struggling with the laws of the land. Homosexuality had also only been disassociated from pedophilia in the field of psychiatry in the early 70s. Another entanglement to be dealt with.
Murmurs of dissent about NAMBLA within the queer community began back in the late 70s. ILGA held on anachronistically largely because its voting rules required for expulsion required an 80% majority.
There’s a lot more to this story but I haven’t the time to go into it now. From the tenor of your posts I rather suspect I’d be wasting my time. You display a notable tendency to clench tightly to a starkly black and white view on things.
Oh false! How, exactly, is it “backpedaling” or “spinning” to admit I missed something? By the way, note how you link to the comment section when you were talking about something in the article. You tend to do that quite a lot. It’s sort of why you only link and don’t actually quote the relevant portions to what you are speaking about, because if you did, you would be proven to be lying… as you have been.
I think we should add “blame” to the list of words you CLEARLY have no clue what they mean. Because I did no such thing. Stating why something happened is not the same as blaming someone.
Anywho, speaking of being caught lying… why, exactly, have you failed to mention the about dozen times I caught you lying? Obviously someone lacks fortitude.
After looking at the first page of the blog, the oldest page of the blog, and a random page in the middle of the blog I do not see a single example of any post being labeled “this post is the opinion of the author only,” no matter who the author happens to be. So no, it is not “clear” no matter how desperately you wish it to be. As it is a blog post written as personal opinion, most reasonable people would take it as… personal opinion.
Oh this should be good! I’m literally overflowing with glee!
And you fail… again. That’s one person speaking on behalf of himself and his arguments and his experience. One person can not, by definition, be a community.
Oh, and you are leaving out this particular quote from that piece, “Here’s my take on what NOM actually chose:
Several people from NOM warned Adams to be careful in what he said to video cameras on our side, or not to talk to us at all. Yet none of them asked Adams to put away his gay lynching sign.
Even though NOM has consistently been willing to exile those they disagree with from their rallies — to point of involving the police — NOM chose not to exile Adams.
Brian Brown and his fellow NOMmers have repeatedly praised the behavior of their supporters and condemned pro-equality protestors as hateful and intolerant. It’s NOM who’s pushing the notion that people’s actions at these rallies reveal the character of the side they support. But NOM has had nothing to say about Larry Adams.
Finally, this wasn’t NOM’s first chance to address Adams’ favorite passage from Leviticus. When a beauty contestant said gays “shall surely be put to death,” Maggie Gallagher’s only public reaction was to praise her for standing up against hate. Yeah, you read that right.”
Which nicely defeats your entire point.
Not from the evidence you presented.
Not from the evidence you presented.
I wouldn’t mention good faith in the same post as where you claimed a single individual is also a community.
And here’s some real bad faith. You quoted me out of context. You even took out the comma indicating a second part to the clause. Lies upon lies.
I never made that claim. I claimed that this behavior was going on there, not that every participant was from Greensburg. If you are going to copy my style please do it correctly.
No, I stated “behaviors.” Behaviors are not people. A person is not people. And fact is, that behavior was happening in Greensburg.
No, I actually fairly specifically did not.
No, a writer on BTB stated that. I merely claimed that was an accurate description. And it still is an accurate description… because (as I stated) those behaviors are taking place there.
I think it is more that your reading skills are not particularly good.
Please quote me stating any comments section should be policed. Ever. As a Discordian it goes against my religion to say something like that.
And when, exactly, did I make this demand? Please quote me.
And that is entirely not true as I didn’t even use an individual’s actions to blame anyone, not even the individual. “Blame” look it up since you clearly have a problem understanding the concept.
When did I claim this? Quote me making this exact claim that you are not gay because no gay person would ever criticize another gay person’s behavior. Exactly that. Prove you are not lying here.
Oh my, you are lying again. In fact, here’s a quote from me, “Please find an article about the story from a respectable news paper.” At no point did I say it was “made up” or “there’s not an ounce of truth in it.” I asked you for the story from a respectable news source.
Note what we skip here: that big section where you got caught lying about your own source.
I think we have to add “contradictory” to that list. After all, I am not contradicting myself. Anywho, I already dealt with that previously.
I did. Which is why I noticed it proved the exact opposite of your claim. And asked you for up to date evidence.
Which somehow changes the fact that they were… you know… expelled? Oh, right, it does not. And even then the sources do not support your own statements about them. To quote your source, “This small administrative body individuals issued press releases on November 7 stating that ILGA “condemns pedophilia” and that NAMBLA’s “political aims… are in direct contradiction” to those of ILGA.” And, “– In 1990 ILGA adopted as an official position that ‘Major power imbalances create the potential for child abuse. ILGA condemns the exploitative use of power differences to coerce others into sexual relationships.’”
So yeah, your own source refutes your position.
Even though your own source says otherwise? Hmm, interesting.
A claim which is utterly irrelevant to your claims, my claims about your claims, and even demographics. Both sample sets were based on the same self-reporting.
Note how you failed to address the fact that your own source, again, refuted all of your claims about it.
Too bad he didn’t refer to them as such. He said they were like being a Jewish person who is also a Nazi. Do you not under stand the difference between a “be” verb and the adjective use of “like?”
But you didn’t admit you missed something. You claimed that I caused you to miss something and therefore it wasn’t your fault.
And there you go again, blaming me for your failure to read the article.
Yes, just like you “proved” that I was lying when you stated that Evan Hurst had never endorsed said article.
But, since it is on the Truth Wins Out organization blog, most reasonable people would take it as the statement of the Truth Wins Out organization.
Evan Hurst is the representative of Truth Wins Out and speaks on behalf of Truth Wins Out and the gay and lesbian community. The problem here is that you cannot condemn his behavior, so you have to spin and deflect.
But you use individual comments on a site to brand an entire community as “America’s Ugliest Town”.
Are you now stating that you have never questioned my sexual orientation because of my statements? My goodness, your lies just keep piling up.
My goodness, poor Loki can’t even provide his entire quote.
You are clearly stating that this story was made up and that there isn’t an ounce of truth in it. Now you’re backpedaling because it clearly proves how gays and lesbians, instead of confronting the behavior of gays and lesbians who molest children, start screaming and attacking the source.
And that nicely segues into your attempt to spin for the fact that the gay and lesbian community endorses and supports pedophiles.
After ten-plus years of saying the exact opposite, including the fact that, quote, “NAMBLA delegates to ILGA helped write ILGA’s constitution, its official positions on the sexual rights of youth, and its stands against sexual coercion and corporal punishment”.
And what changed? Oh, right; Jesse Helms publicized the fact that the gay and lesbian community endorsed and supported NAMBLA and other pedophile groups as a vital part of the gay and lesbian community.
Uhh, by this summation of how the events transpired, you contradict the first first sentence with the second sentence. Oh, and I never made any claim about fault.
And there you go again, misusing the word “blame.” I merely follow where you lead.
Or rather, like I proved you were lying when you said, “given how the gay and lesbian community… seems hell-bent on infecting and disabling teenagers” or your claims about the fire chief, or when you used my comment about anonymous comments as evidence I claimed said comments were imaginary. Let’s see you’ve got one example of me missing something in your evidence and I’ve got about a dozen examples of you openly lying about your own evidence, sometimes within two sentences.
And what reasonable people are these? It didn’t state, “this is official policy or opinion of Truth Wins Out,” it wasn’t sent out as an anonymous editorial, it was given a clear author. All signs that it was, you know, an opinion piece.
Yes, and?
Demonstrably false.
Actually no, I think the problem is that you are suffering from some very interesting compulsions. Mostly which revolve around an incessant need to participate in these childish games.
This is a statement that was specifically refuted… in the post you are addressing. Refutations you very clearly did not respond to. Now who, exactly, is arguing in bad faith?
Not what I claimed at all. But note what is missing here: a quote. If it is so obviously a lie (in which case my statement is not) where, exactly is the quote proving it so? Seems like a bit of strange thing to be missing all of a sudden. Something quite out of your typical style of posting…
And why should I? I posted that quote in response to you posting the the quote without the follow up line. Are you having issues keeping up or are you being deliberately deceitful?
It’s funny because I didn’t. I clearly stated that the article in question lacked objectivity. You can tell because I say, “There’s not even a pretense of objectivity in that article nor in the the Daily Mail in general.” Then I specifically state, “Please find an article about the story from a respectable news paper.” At no point did I even suggest I considered the story was “made up” nor “that there isn’t an ounce of truth in it.” That’s all your inference.
I do love how reiterating exactly what is said is somehow backpedaling. What you actually mean is “you won’t budge from your original position no matter how hard I try to push you. So I’m just going to claim your unmoveability is backpedaling because I can not think of how else to go about this!”
It’s rather sad, isn’t it?
Oh good! This should be fun!
Lying again. Remember that statement from 1990 (four years before this email) that I included? The one condemning power imbalances as leading to child abuse? The one you rather conspicuously left out of this post?
And somehow this action caused the past to suddenly change. Yes, that Jesse Helms was one awesome time traveler.
It’s funny because I didn’t. I clearly stated that the article in question lacked objectivity. You can tell because I say, “There’s not even a pretense of objectivity in that article nor in the the Daily Mail in general.”
Which, again, means that you are stating that the article is a lie and is all made up.
Please provide your own counter-evidence and prove that the article is not objective. Your failure to do so is no doubt due to the fact that you thought it was a lie, found out it wasn’t, and are now desperate to avoid being required to admit that you defended gays and lesbians who sexually molested children and claimed that it was “homophobic” to investigate such.
Indeed, you do seem to have an amazing ability to rationalize and support the gay and lesbian community’s endorsement and support of pedophiles and child rape.
And what did NAMBLA say about that in the email in question?
NAMBLA supported this position. Do you understand? Gays and lesbians like yourself do not consider having sex with underage children to be abusive, exploitative, or coercive. You are arguing that children can consent to sex with adults.
Again, this is no surprise. You can’t even get 80% of gay and lesbian people to agree that sex with underage children is wrong. That shows just how deeply pedophilia and child molestation is involved with the gay and lesbian community, to the point that even the Association of Gay and Lesbian Psychiatrists and its members are defending dressing toddlers as sex slaves and taking them to a sex fair as an “educational experience”.
No. When I say “the article lacks objectivity” it means, the article lacks objectivity. It has nothing to do with the veracity of the events mentioned. I say what I mean and I mean what I say, unlike you. I think that’s the problem you are having with these concepts. You wish to push me off my point and off my words and I won’t allow you to do so.
First off, it is posted in the Daily Mail, a tabloid that has a long history of biased and shoddy journalism. Here.
Secondly, it is about a report but at no point do we learn any more about the report than who one of the authors happens to be. We don’t learn who initiated the report (other than one anonymous social worker saying it would be initiated), or the process of investigation. The report makes 41 recommendations to overhaul the foster care system, none of which are mentioned. Instead the article focuses on salacious details. So, like I said, I wanted a version of it written from a more objective point of view.
My failure to do something you just asked me to do in this post? How, exactly, was I supposed to do something between these two sentences? How? Please tell me.
Now, have I exactly been shy about calling things “lies” up until now? Because if I have not, then this is, on it’s face, ridiculous.
When, exactly, did I find out anything about it besides your initial claims about it?
Except I didn’t defend anyone. Obviously we have to add “defense” and its variations to that list of words you do not know.
Rationalize! Another word on the list.
A statement not supported by anything in that article. Except for possibly your paranoid and imaginary version of the “gay and lesbian community.”
And what does NAMBLA say? You are the expert.
Yes, and? NAMBLA’s support or lack there of was entirely irrelevant to the position itself (which was absolutely anti-child abuse), that the position was taken four years before the alleged PR disaster, and that the entire situation is now 16 years old. The issues we are talking about.
Yes. Yes I do. It is called an “Association Fallacy.” This is pretty simple logic. Sixteen years ago NAMBLA was kicked out of ILGA (four years after they took an anti-child abuse stand) therefore the present “gay and lesbian community” is pro-child molestation. Even though all the evidence you presented shows that the actual, non-imaginary gay and lesbian community is anti-child molestation.
Please prove I do not think that. I should most love to hear what my own thoughts on the situation are. Again, make sure said statements are absolutely on topic and have no need for you to make them “clear.”
Loki continues to make this far too simple.
Which is interesting, given that Loki quotes as a valid source:
an article that says this:
So Loki is stating that a valid argument is that, since the Mail was allegedly pro-Nazi back in the 1930s, it cannot possibly be objective today, 70 years later — just after pontificating how such a thing was an “association fallacy” and not valid.
Again, no surprise. Loki is very typical of the gay and lesbian community’s mindset; shoddy fact-checking, attempts to impose rules on others that it will never follow itself, and trying to get out of such obvious and blatant hypocrisy by playing the minority status card.
Which you refuse to provide, even after having been asked. Mainly because doing so would make obvious what you consider to be “objective”, and make it clear that your definition of “objective” has less to do with reporting facts than it does slanting and spinning coverage for the gay and lesbian community.
Right where it was previously. Again, you tried to claim no proof had been provided, and once again, you’ve been shown to be a liar, just as when you lied about Evan Hurst’s statements.
You don’t consider having sex with underage children to be abusive, exploitative, or coercive, and you believe children to consent to sex with adults.
Be honest with yourself and acknowledge that. Then you won’t be stuck in the invidious position of trying to explain why NAMBLA was an honored member of the gay and lesbian community for decades, or why your only response to an article clearly detailing how gays and lesbians bully adoption and fostering agencies into allowing them to have and sexually molest children is to claim that, since the source was allegedly pro-Nazi seventy years ago, it cannot be reliable today.
ND30, the fact is, your source is a TABLOID, not known for professional journalism. You quoted the UK version of The National Enquirer. Do you expect anyone to take a tabloid as a serious source?
Secondly, IF the story is true, would it not be covered in other, more mainstream press? When an article appears in a tabloid and ONLY a tabloid, that should be your clue that it may not be factual. Periodically a tabloid covers a real story, from a gossipy angle, or they cover a real story from a real angle, but the incidence is quite low.
For the record, I am king of the gay community, I don’t support suicide or anyone who does support suicide. I don’t support bullying or molesting children or NAMBLA. There you go, you have a direct quote from The King of the Gay Community, so you can no longer claim the gay community supports such things because, I, the King of the Gay Community said so. As a gay person, and therefore part of The Gay Community, I would ask that you stop presenting this falsehood about your bretheren. As a gay person yourself, you don’t support these things, either, do you?
Jason– of course he supports NAMBLA and bullying. He’s a gay man, albeit a homo-hatin’-homo, and since we all think the same things– we have a hive mind, doncha know– ipso facto presto chango, dallas likes to do both.
Or maybe he just supports projeciton. Hard to tell.
Secondly, IF the story is true, would it not be covered in other, more mainstream press? When an article appears in a tabloid and ONLY a tabloid, that should be your clue that it may not be factual.
And when the gay and lesbian community whines that this story is not true because it “appears in a tabloid and ONLY a tabloid”, this should be your clue that they were incapable of or unwilling to do any of their own research.
Was it really worth being liked by your fellow gay and lesbian people who also deluded themselves into believing this story was not true and made fools of themselves in the process? Why did you not do some basic, simple fact-checking before arbitrarily declaring this story to be false?