I’ll bet you didn’t know this. And if you do know it, you didn’t hear it from the mainstream media. Because we have the kind of media that doesn’t bother to report that the drunken scumbag who ran over an aged nun also happened to be an illegal alien who had been busted, handed over to the federal government, and then released.
Pfc. Bradley Manning, the guy who leaked so many thousands of documents that it’s positively unreal (it was 90,000 documents before the number exploded)? He’s an open homosexual who says, “Take me for who I am, or face the consequences!” And the consequences are a gigantic, naked act of treason.
Now America, the U.S. military in Afghanistan, and a whole bunch of Afghani civilians who were unfortunate enough to cooperate with the United States, are “facing the consequences.”
Bradley Manning, suspected source of Wikileaks documents, raged on his Facebook page
Bradley Manning, the prime suspect in the leaking of the Afghan war files, raged against his US Army employers and “society at large” on his Facebook page in the days before he allegedly downloaded thousands of secret memos, The Daily Telegraph has learnt.By Heidi Blake, John Bingham and Gordon Rayner
Published: 10:00PM BST 30 Jul 2010The US Army intelligence analyst, who is half British and went to school in Wales, appeared to sink into depression after a relationship break-up, saying he didn’t “have anything left” and was “beyond frustrated”.
In an apparent swipe at the army, he also wrote: “Bradley Manning is not a piece of equipment,” and quoted a joke about “military intelligence” being an oxymoron.
Mr Manning, 22, who is currently awaiting court martial, is suspected of leaking more than 90,000 secret military documents to the Wikileaks website in a security breach which US officials claim has endangered the lives of serving soldiers and Afghan informers.
Supporters claim the war logs leak exposed civilian deaths in Afghanistan which had been covered up by the military, and Mr Manning’s family, who live in Pembrokeshire, said he had “done the right thing”.
The Pentagon, which is investigating the source of the leak, is expected to study Mr Manning’s background to ascertain if they missed any warnings when he applied to join the US Army. The postings on his Facebook page are also likely to form part of the inquiry.
Mr Manning, who is openly homosexual, began his gloomy postings on January 12, saying: “Bradley Manning didn’t want this fight. Too much to lose, too fast.”
At the beginning of May, when he was serving at a US military base near Baghdad, he changed his status to: “Bradley Manning is now left with the sinking feeling that he doesn’t have anything left.”
Five days later he said he was “livid” after being “lectured by ex-boyfriend”, then later the same day said he was “not a piece of equipment” and was “beyond frustrated with people and society at large”.
His tagline on his personal page reads: “Take me for who I am, or face the consequences!”
Mr Manning was arrested at the end of May on suspicion of leaking a video of a US helicopter attack, and quickly became the main suspect when the Afghan war documents were leaked earlier this week.
You want another oxymoron, Mr. Manning? How about “normal homosexuality”?
And now Bradley Manning has done to military secrecy what Judge – and fellow homosexual – Vaughn Walker has done to the institution of marriage.
Ah, these pesky homosexual relationships that gays want to normalize.
Only, they aren’t anything even CLOSE to “normal.”
[Updated March 3, 2011]: Take domestic violence:
The American Journal of Public Health has published a detailed study of battering victimization in the male homosexual community (December 2002, Vol. 92, No. 12). The probability-based sampling of “men who have sex with men” (MSM) focused on four geographical areas (San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New York) and resulted in 2,881 completed telephone interviews.
Based on these responses, this first-of-its-kind study determined that the rate of battering victimization among gay men in the target group (men over 18 who had engaged in homosexual activity since age 14, or who identified as gay, homosexual, or bisexual) is “substantially higher than among heterosexual men” and also possibly higher than the rate for heterosexual women, according to the study.
The researchers report a high rate of battering within the context of intimate homosexual partnerships, with 39% of those studied reporting at least one type of battering by a partner over the last five years.
In contrast, only about 7.7% of heterosexual men of all ages report physical or sexual partner abuse during their entire lifetimes. (Lifetime rates of abuse are generally higher than those within a five-year period.) […]
The conclusion arrived at by the researchers, based upon these figures, is that the rate of abuse between urban homosexual men in intimate relationships “is a very serious public health problem.”
That’s not normal. That’s a 406.5% increase in violence.
Maybe you’d rather consider married women, versus lesbian women in domestic partnerships:
- The Journal of Social Service Research reported in 1991 that survey of 1,099 lesbians showed that slightly more than 50 percent of the lesbians reported that they had been abused by a female lover/partner, “the most frequently indicated forms of abuse were verbal/emotional/psychological abuse and combined physical-psychological abuse.” [14]
- A study of lesbian couples reported (2000) in the Handbook of Family Development and Intervention “indicates that 54 percent had experienced 10 or more abusive incidents, 74 percent had experienced six or more incidents, 60 percent reported a pattern to the abuse, and 71 percent said it grew worse over time.”[15]
- A study that compared domestic violence between lesbian couples and married women is even more pronounced in respect to the above statistics that suggest that homosexual couples are more violent than heterosexual couples.
And what you actually find is that these statistics – as terrible as they are – are actually dramatically UNDERREPORTED:
“But the issue of gay domestic abuse has been shrouded by silence until recently…” (New York Times, November 6, 2000)
“Domestic abuse is under-reported in the gay community…” (Nursing Clinics of North America North Am. 2004 Jun;39(2):403)
Why would any morally intelligent person want this? [end update]
When you compare drug use, suicides, rape, promiscuity/infidelity, psychiatric problems, child molestation, and sexually transmitted disease, the rates between heterosexuals in marriages and homosexuals in committed relationships are likewise so through the roof that it’s positively unreal.
And you can add treason to that list as well.
We’re not talking about normal, healthy people in normal, healthy relationships that should be encouraged in society. We’re talking about broken, fractured people in broken, fractured relationships that are a lot more like cancer and a lot less like healthy.
But in order to be “tolerant,” I have to drill a giant hole in my head, scoop out all my brains, slam then on the floor, and then repeatedly stomp on them.
I have to accept whatever lame answer I’m spoon-fed regarding the massive issue with homosexuality in our prison system. We’re assured that if we were thrown in jail for a weekend, we’d surely all turn gay for the duration of our sentences. Baloney. These violent felons are homosexuals with massive identity issues. I’m forced to accept whatever answer I’m handed regarding the massive problem with homosexual Catholic priests and the fact that most of the sexual abuse occurred between priests and teenage boys. 80% of priests who sexually abuse do so with adolescent boys rather than prepubescent minors. The “Pedophile Priests” are mainly homosexuals, and not so-called “pedophiles.” And the cancer they have inflicted upon the once-respected Catholic Church, and upon the larger society, cannot be underestimated.
Homosexuality IS dangerous to America. And a California homosexual judge just said that he frankly doesn’t care; he’s going to usurp the clearly expressed will of the people and impose his own twisted morality on a state that already has more than enough problems.
Tags: Afghanistan, Bradley Manning, Catholic priests, child molestation, documents, domestic violence, drug use, gay, gay marriage, homosexual, homosexuality, infidelity, Judge Vaughn Walker, mainstream media, or face the consequences, Pfc, prison, promiscuity, Proposition 8, psychiatric problems, rape, same-sex marriage, sexually transmitted diseases, STDs, suicides, Take me for who I am, tolerance, treason, Vaughn Walker, Wikileaks
Start Thinking Right 
August 9, 2010 at 11:18 am
Thanks for posting this, interesting read . . . I will come back to it to check out your references . . . I appreciate it . ..
August 10, 2010 at 11:06 am
You’re welcome, Charlene.
My “references” are merely links that contain the information I’m alluding to (for example, that homosexuals have high rates of STDs). I’m not trying to say that these are the best links out there. I heartily recommend you do your own search.
August 10, 2010 at 7:33 pm
So because “Bradley Manning” was a person who did terrible things, (and from the article, he seems like he might need psychiatric help) this means that homosexuality is dangerous to America? I’m sorry but I definitely do not see the relevance.
What about Adolf Hitler? He was heterosexual. He was engaged to a woman, Mimi Reiter, and cheated on her with a woman named Eva Braun. It’s also suspected that he had sexual relations with his half-niece, Geli Raubal. Adolf Hitler was responsible for the Holocaust. The Holocaust caused MILLIONS of deaths to innocent people.
Now in regards to that neat little graph you have there, on Domestic Violence. I did a bit of research on Domestic Violence and The Extent, Nature, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence.
I came across the website for The National Criminal Justice Reference Service by the U.S. Department of Justice.
Here’s a little quote from a PDF file I found on the website.
“Research on violence in same-sex relationships
has been limited to studies of small, unrepresentative
samples of gay and lesbian couples. Results
from these studies suggest that same-sex
couples are about as violent as heterosexual
couples.”
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf – Page 36
August 11, 2010 at 9:15 pm
Few things to correct the factual record:
1) There is in fact rather good reason to believe that the homosexuality of Bradley Manning – aka Mr. “Take me for who I am, or face the consequences!” – was directly related to his actions of treason. He had just broken up with his boyfriend, and from his own postings on his Facebook page was in a terrible state of mind as a result of his homosexual relationship.
So it is simply not right to argue that there is no “relevance.”
From there, there is the fact that some of the most damaging acts of treason in the history of Western Civilization were perpetuated by homosexuals – who are massively responsible for acts of treason in spite of their tiny numbers in the general population. Kim Philby was one such example. Guy Burgess is another. Anthony Blunt is another. Donald Maclean is another. You’re talking about people who have massive “issues,” and who are easily blackmailed compared to other people.
So here we are trying to increase the massively numbers of homosexuals in the military, while we’ve got Bradley Mannings and their “Take me for who I am, or face the consequences!” attitude. And you’re out saying, “Nothing to see here, folks!”
2) There is also significant evidence that Adolf Hitler was in fact a homosexual, which really just blows your counterexample to hell. From the GuardianUK:
So, I mean, thank you for helping me conclusively demonstrate just how dangerous homosexuals are to human civilization.
Now, I didn’t bother to go to your link, because the idea of sorting through pages of a PDF pretty much bores me to tears. I’ll simply point out that the chart I showed came from the US government, too. And it presents actual NUMBERS, versus some “point of view” by some researcher. So I’ll take my numbers-based government report over your fact-free government report.
So I’ve got a very pro-liberal, pro-gay source that explains why gays massively underreport their violence. Which is why someone like you can trot out a study that says, “Hey, we hardly found ANY gay violence at all!”
Thanks to your citation of him as a made-up counterexample, I’ve also got Adolf Hitler, perhaps the most violent man who ever lived. Along with the SA, a bunch of violent and very homosexual thugs who helped Hitler in his rise to power.
And please don’t forget that the prison system is so full of violent homosexuals that it is positively unreal. Please don’t forget that homosexuals are mentally unbalanced at a whopping rate compared to heterosexuals. Please don’t forget that homosexuals demonstrate that mental unhingedness by committing suicide, by resorting to drug addiction, and by shocking rates of sexual promiscuity.
Having said all the above, it is not my point that homosexuals were born bad people. I have compassion for many homosexuals precisely because I DON’T think one is “born gay,” but rather because they are people who were abused and psychologically and morally destroyed by others. On my view, homosexuals are broken people who deserve compassion.
But when others – be they gay or straight – attempt to impose this broken lifestyle on society, then homosexuality becomes an enemy to our society.
December 1, 2010 at 3:26 am
No doubt that homosexuality is an additional factor to other factors that destabilize the personality and may lead to crime against the nation. Other factors are such as lack of classical family values, lack of classical moral values, unfaithfulness, excessive individuality, etc. All of them are identified as facts in Manning’s life. All of them are the result of too much of liberal values in the Western society – in North America as well as in Europe.
Sexual perversity seems to go through WikiLeaks as a read thread. As you may know, the founder, Julian Assange, is charged with accusations of sexual abuse and rape in Sweden (my country). The man obviously had some perverse sexual fantasies and desires which he let loose in the Swedish atmosphere of respect for his work together with sexually “liberated” women (also members of socialist or anarchistic movements). Obviously Assange overstepped their limits.
By the way, I prefer to call WikiLeaks for “WickedLeaks”.
December 2, 2010 at 1:27 am
Penumbra,
Totally concur. Homosexuality is by no means the only sin in the world.
On my view, homosexuality is brokenness. Somehow (recalling a study favorable to homosexuals in uber-liberal Portland State University’s magazine some years back, most homosexuals acknowledged being sexually molested as children) psyches are damaged, fractured. These people were hurt, and they are damaged as a result.
I live in the Palm Springs area of California. As a result, I practically can’t help but know a number of homosexuals. Some are caring and compassionate human beings. They don’t want to be gay; they just don’t know how not to be. I personally have found most to be bitter and cynical people. And many of these want others to feel as hurt and angry as they feel. My own experience, obviously, is only my own.
I have encountered so many homosexuals who turned out to also be atheists it is amazing. While only about 1 out of 10 Americans are atheist, I’d swear that 9 out of 10 homosexuals are, again from my own experience.
What’s the difference between helping someone and hurting them? If you are a moral relativist, if you are an atheist who believes in Darwinian ethics versus divine ethics? From the perspective of a gang-banger, why SHOULDN’T he hurt people??? In his gang culture, hurting people is good. By hurting people, he shows his loyalty to his gang (his “tribe”), he provides for them by stealing and running drugs and killing. From a strictly evolutionary point of view, how do you criticize this guy?
And, of course, how do you criticize Assange from a Marxist worldview? He’s sowing the seeds of destruction, he’s bringing a decadent capitalist system down.
No wonder the left actually thinks he’s a hero. Seriously, Julian Assange is on the list of heroes from liberal Nation Magazine.
Which goes to show just how utterly depraved the left is these days.
Perverts on every level under the sun.
December 2, 2010 at 4:06 am
@Michael Eden
The liberal idea is that a normalization of homosexuality will eliminate bitterness and anger among homosexuals against the society. May be so, but are we not betraying these unfortunate people?
I see homosexuality as a personality disorder – in many cases caused by unfortunate circumstances like child molestation, in some cases congenital. In any case, it is not normal, it can never be normal and the liberal idea to normalize homosexuality (along other sexual divergences) is a wrong way of solving the problem. By declaring homosexuality as perfectly normal human quality, all medical research in order to find causes and treatments has been stopped. The “logic” says that there is no point in treating something that is perfectly normal.
That is one big mistake. It will demoralize not only our military defenses and state security but the whole western civilization, which already suffers from other liberal ideas.
December 3, 2010 at 8:24 pm
Very well said, Penumbra.
Several decades ago now, homosexuality was taken off the list of psychological maladies (usual diagnosed as ‘personality disorder,’ as you point out). It wasn’t as a result of any new findings; it had everything to do with an embrace of political correctness. It was one of a thousand different examples of making “science” conform with liberal ideology.
I’m not about kicking down doors and making sure nobody is buggering anybody. What I AM about is protecting Judeo-Christian Western Civilization from the very things that have brought down every OTHER civilization in the past.
When I served in the infantry, the best way to get a serious “blanket party” beating was to just be THOUGHT to be homosexual. There was just no way in hell any unit I served with – from boot camp onward – would knowingly tolerate an open homosexual in their ranks.
January 26, 2011 at 2:03 pm
Your statics seem to be bogus. They were taken from two studies that measured different things, then compared as if they were the same. See:
http://metabunk.org/content/141-Abusing-Statistics-about-Homosexuality
January 26, 2011 at 8:00 pm
I’ll allow your link, even though YOU YOURSELF are guilty of the very thing you accuse me of.
I believe I was talking about “homosexuals.” There is a different term for women that is common: “lesbians.”
You use the argument (and I’m not sure it’s very substantiated, either, but will accept it merely for the sake of argument) that “homosexual couples” don’t have any more violence than married couples. But you smuggle in lesbians instead of homosexuals. And then pretend that you refuted me when in fact you didn’t.
Men are naturally more aggressive and violent than women. That’s why we make better soldiers and better football players.
You’re claiming, “Hey, all homosexuals are fine because these women over here aren’t kicking one another’s asses.” And that’s interesting, but let’s talk about when you put a pair of men together for a little while.
For the record, I did not alter the Dept. of Justice chart in any way, shape or form. Like it or not, it says what it says. And while you might find some portion of the report that says something you like, the guy who collected the data for this chart clearly was of a different mind. I myself have taken part in group reports, and I know for a fact that different people with different agendas can contradict each other in the same report. Which is to say that the paragraph you link to merely shows that two people who contributed to that report weren’t on the same page – not that people who consider the chart are somehow “bearing false witness,” as your link claims.
But you don’t stop there. You continue to do even worse.
You question ONE ELEMENT of ONE of the statistics I provide, and then say “Your statistics seem to be bogus.” As if you can find a single typo in a book and then claim “Every page seems to be full of errors.”
January 26, 2011 at 9:21 pm
Thanks for allowing my comment.
But if you read my post from the link, you’ll see the chart is a fabrication. There were two studies, one measured abuse down to the level of occasional unwanted phone calls, and the other measured actual violence. The maker of the chart took the gay figues from the first study, and the straight figures from the second. Obviously the rate of the first study is going to be much higher.
It’s not a DOJ chart. It’s not in the report. The statistics in the chart ARE bogus.
And on the point of homosexual vs. lesbian – I use “homosexual” to mean “same-sex-attraction”, as is quite common. My post talks more about lesbians, but the same distortion is there in the gay men figures. But clearly you are not in favor of marriage for lesbians either?
I understand your position here. But you will get much more credibility if you use real figures.
January 27, 2011 at 12:11 am
I wonder if there is any reliable statistic on this matter. There has been no critical social or medical research on the subject for at least three decades, after homosexuality was defined as normal human behavior. All serious scientific work has resulted in the same politically correct conclusions, because nobody is prepared to fond anything else and risk the bad will and the enormous criticism in media that will be the result.
In any other subject on human psychology and behavior, you may find scientists and researchers disagreeing and arguing, but not on homosexuality. The established scientific world in Europe and North America agree to the “tenth decimal”. How is that possible?
Well, it is possible because it is dictated from “above”. There is no hope other than wait and see how our western societies and civilization become weaker and more morally corrupt for each new generation. The legalization of homosexuality is only one part of that process. There will be a day when we will reconsider many stupid liberal reforms but it will take some time.
The question is if we are not already there. The financial difficulties that we experience, in both the EU and the USA, are a result of taken the realities in life too easy. Moral values, integrity, discipline, hard work, sobriety, family values are no longer the foundations of our societies. What do you think will happen if this is allowed to continue for several generations ahead?
January 27, 2011 at 7:40 am
That’s a broader issue. The question here is is it morally acceptable to promote your position using graphs and figures that have been show to be false. Isn’t that just lying?
In Michael Eden’s post at the top, he says:
This is wrong. The actual figures from the study were 7.7% for heterosexual men, and 15.4% for homosexual men, an Increase of 100%.
January 27, 2011 at 6:43 pm
Mick,
I am not out to suppress truth. As long as someone doesn’t get nasty or overly irritating, I allow them to have their say.
My opposition to “lesbian marriage” is not based on how violent or non-violent lesbians or homosexuals are; it is based on what the Scriptures say about such relationships. E.g. Romans 1:24-28:
That IS in the “report.” And those “statistics” are NOT bogus. And it clearly applies to women as much as men.
Your denunciation of the statistics (actually, the chart that I found and posted) puts me in the following dilemma: I’m just not going to dedicate the HOURS it would take me to track down the two reports, read every single word in both reports, and then spend more time comparing and contrasting the two reports to try to refute your denunciation. So sorry, but I have more effective uses of my time.
I posted your comments and allowed your link, as you saw. If someone wants to track that down and make that comparison, they are welcome. For my part, what I saw in the link you posted to told me that it was every bit as biased as the source that you say is “bogus.” Your author clearly has a pro-homosexuality agenda, every bit as much as my source had an anti-homosexuality agenda. That doesn’t make him wrong; but nobody should take what he says for granted.
I think I made my point how easy it is to attack somebody’s point and discredit them based on an agenda. I can easily show you that “the movement” itself differentiates between lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgenders, etc. And I can easily demonstrate that what might apply to lesbians has nothing whatever to do with gay MEN. Depending on how I am disposed to you (my bias one way or the other), I can overlook what you did as an honest error, or denounce you as a liar. Which you kind of did to me, fwiw.
I can say one thing before I move on to my next point. I spent three years as a police officer before an injury forced me out, and some of the nastiest domestics disputes I ever saw in my life occurred in homosexual homes. That was just my experience, but my experience was real. I certainly didn’t see tidy, fussy effeminate men pooh-poohing each other in those homes.
Now, to your last point: “you will get much more credibility if you use real figures.”
You need to realize something, Mick. I am not a journalist or a reporter. I am not paid for my blogging, aside from the fact that I’ve sold publishing rights to some articles that appear here. To argue that I can’t use something unless I exhaustively document it is, to put it simply, insane.
Let me go to actual journalists and see what routinely happens there. The day that Gabrielle Giffords and many others were shot in Tucson, Arizona, CNN initially reported that Gabrielle Giffords had been killed. They also put on a Democrat politician who said that the shooter was an Afghan War veteran. Further, the New York Times via Paul Krugman reported just two hours after the shooting that the murder was directly attributable to the tea party movement and a “rightwing climate of hate.” And the entire mainstream media marched to that drumbeat for days.
None of the above was even remotely true. But many “journalists” continue to report the link between Tucson and “the right wing” even AFTER it has been revealed to be obviously false.
And try this one for size: the mainstream media jumped from all directions on Sarah Palin for having used a map that “targeted” Gabrielle Giffords. And the media reports were filled with indignation at the “climate of hate” she was guilty of. But NONE of those reports included the fact that it was DEMOCRATS who invented such targeting maps; NONE of them mentioned that such maps by Democrats were widely available; NONE of them mentioned that not only had the Daily Kos specificially “targeted” Gabrielle Giffords, but the founder of that site actually said, “she’s dead to me.” And NONE of them mentioned that the leftwing media had tried this MONTHS ago and their deceit and bias had already been documented.
I hope that any newspaper or news agency criticizing Sarah Palin for her map is now deemed to be “non-credible” in your eyes, Mick. I hope that you refuse to consider any future report that comes out of any of the mainstream media, based on your criteria in evaluating my credibility. But you probably don’t, because, again, of your own biases.
I don’t mention this bias, distortion and propaganda of the mainstream media to defend anything I wrote. I merely point out that if you think you have a right to attack my credibility, then please be consistent and throw out the entire mainstream media. Because they are FAR worse than me on a daily basis.
I do the best I can. I have never once written something that I knew to be false. When somebody says something I report is false (which has happened an incredible few times, fwiw), I allow them to have their say. Like I did with you.
Also, unlike too many blogs – particularly leftwing blogs, in my experience – I don’t delete anything. When the Daily Kos hatefully attacked Sarah Palin and her daughter Bristol and claimed that Bristol Palin had been impregnated by her own father with a baby, and that Sarah Palin faked being pregnant – only to have that hateful and vile lie blown away by Bristol giving birth to a child of her own – they scrubbed it like nothing had happened.
I’m not that despicable. Every single article I have ever written remains on my blog. And with all due respect, I think that gives me more credibility, not less: I don’t hit and run and then scrub the evidence of my lies.
Now, when I make the kind of money for writing blog articles that Paul Krugman makes for writing documented lies, you may feel free to hold me to the standards of journalism (that you probably don’t hold leftwing journalists accountable to). But until then, realize that I spend a couple of hours a day blogging, and I do the best I can to call ’em as I see ’em in the time that I’ve got. And sadly I don’t have a team of researchers making sure my sources are completely accurate, such as, oh, say the New York Times (again) does.
Kapeesh?
January 27, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Penumbra,
That’s a great point.
Homosexuality was viewed by psychologists as a personality disorder until all of a sudden it became politically correct to say that the “lifestyle” was just as valid as any other.
But it quickly went far, FAR beyond “acceptance.” Homosexuality became a cause for the world of “psychology” to defend; and any view that did NOT embrace homosexuality became one to attack.
Consider the Christian counseling student who literally was forced to undergo thought control because of her views on homosexuality.
And consider the Christian psychologist who is literally going to lose her credentials because a homosexual approached her under false pretenses and secretly recorded her doing what she told him she was going to do.
Our system has degenerated to a point where our “mental health” experts claim that cutting off your own penis is a bastion of psychological health. When just how sick does a person clearly have to be to want to sexually mutilate himself???
On the law enforcement front, in Palm Springs, local businesses demanded that the police do something about men having sex with each other in public near their businesses. A subsequent police sting caught something like 19 gay men for public lewdness in one night. During said sting, a police officer was reported to have uttered a gay slur. And you would have thought that the police had been assassinating people when they weren’t selling heroin to kids. The police chief has been forced to resign; the police department was forced into an investigation of their “bias.” The police officers were forced to undergo gay-sensitivity training. The fact that 19 gay men were having sex in public to the disgust of nearby businesses has been entirely overlooked. The witch hunt is still in full swing. Those 19 men are victims, heroes even. And the police are rogues who belong in prison. It has been frankly amazing to see the story spew out of the paper on a daily basis.
And we’re supposed to think for a single second that these people are going to do an honest study????
January 27, 2011 at 9:22 pm
Michael, you seem to be saying that “if other people sin, then I can sin too”. You think because the liberal media lie, then you too can lie?
The link I posted very clearly explains that the chart is basically a lie. It would not take you “hours” to verify, just ten minutes to read the metabunk article. Far less time than it took you to write that last comment.
The graph is very, very, wrong. Continuing to leave it in your article is essentially a lie. Simply a tacit one.
January 28, 2011 at 9:51 pm
No, Mick, you simply failed to read correctly understand what I said. What I already said was this, and I quote myself:
I don’t know how much more clearly I could put it. Again, I do the best I can with the time and the talent I have. After I post something, I allow those who have a problem with something I said to state their case. And I stand behind what I’ve done, rather than posting crap and then destroying the evidence. And I’ve actually got a pretty darn good record.
You seem to think that you can hold me to some impossible journalistic standard even as YOUR side violates that standard left and right while YOU refuse to hold them accountable. Which is hypocrisy. Nor, as I showed, do you even bother to hold YOURSELF accountable to the standard that you want to hold me to.
Which is to say I’m NOT saying that “if other people sin, then I can sin too.” What I’m saying is that you’re a sinner representing an ideology that is steeped in sin decrying the speck in my eye while ignoring the log in your own.
I read the link you posted. And I basically wasn’t nearly as impressed with it amounting to a refutation to the chart as you clearly are. For example, the metabunk article starts right off claiming that the person who wrote the article/chart he’s attacking was deliberately dishonest; does he actually show that this person was being deliberately deceitful, rather than merely not so good with statistics??? “Bearing false witness” is perjury; it is intentionally lying. Your author doesn’t even come close to showing that.
All that said, I googled “homosexuality” and “domestic violence” and came up with enough to tell me that you were correct in your attack of the table I used and the conclusions I drew from it. You are correct; homosexual couples are 100% more violent than heterosexual couples. As I earlier said, I’m still 100% correct that homosexuality is dangerous to America, but I overstated the evidence.
Conservapedia provides the evidence of a number of various studies and the links to those studies showing the significant difference (and with all due respect, the 100% higher figure you yourself affirmed is statistically massively significant) between homosexuals and heterosexuals.
But my case was hardly limited to stating what you and I both agree is a massive increase in homosexual domestic violence over heterosexuals. I provided a BUNCH of other stuff to substantiate my argument that homosexuality is bad for America. To wit, after pointing out the treason we have seen (actually repeatedly) from homosexuals, and the aforementioned domestic violence, I went on to point out:
My article was not limited to one point, but a whole collection of them. And they all lead to the same conclusion.
But I thank you for pointing out that I had something wrong. I don’t mind being corrected by the facts.
I had a very busy day today, and I’ve got a daylong family event for tomorrow. But as soon as I can get to it, I will write an update to this article correcting what I had that was incorrect, along with a link to your post explaining the need for a correction.
January 28, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Penumbra,
I made mention of a local situation occurring in my area. Here’s what the Desert Sun had today:
A police chief and a police department tried to take on the worst, most disgusting aspect of homosexuality, and was destroyed by it. Even the most vile aspect of homosexuality must be protected.
It is little wonder that law enforcement would never dare be honest or accurate in describing the problems caused by homosexuality. Just look at what will happen to them.
January 28, 2011 at 10:35 pm
Thanks for that Michael. I undersand what you are saying there. Now, I hesitate to bring this up, but for completeness, when you say:
You should also note that’s about homosexual MEN, and that lesbians are 50% LESS volent than heterosexual couples.
All of which points to the notion that the violence does not stem from sexuality, but from maleness.
January 28, 2011 at 11:15 pm
Mick,
To some extent I would agree with you (and I think I pointed that out myself, earlier); it seems intuitively obvious that men, who are naturally more aggressive, would tend to have a lot more problems than a man and a woman, or two women. That said, I wold argue that the “two men” thing is the essence of homosexuality. Which means it most certainly IS a part of sexuality.
There’s also this:
So there does seem to be an issue of increased violence even among lesbians, though there isn’t a direct comparison to heterosexual women (particularly married women).
Mick, you don’t describe your own sexuality (nor do you need to), and I don’t venture to guess what it is. But let me say more about my own view of homosexuality.
There are many sins in this world. And homosexuality is one of them. There are worse sins than homosexuality. And in my own life I’ve been guilty of at least one of those.
My beliefs about homosexuality are not based on my personal animus, but on the Bible. It guides my moral understanding; I place myself under its authority and am judged by it, rather than me judging it.
Homosexuality is a sign of brokenness. It is a manifestation that something is wrong inside a person. I believe it is akin to an addiction. And like an addiction, the more you feed it, the more it tends to corrupt the soul.
I believe that the overwhelming majority of homosexuals and lesbians were victims of abuse. Something was done TO them. They were victimized. They were hurt. They were broken.
I would say that, had I been so victimized, hurt and broken, that I could have become homosexual.
It is not like homosexuals are “freaks.” They are broken people who responded to pain and abuse in a way that is not good for them and is not good for society.
My project in this and the handful of other articles I’ve written about homosexuality is NOT to argue, “These people should be hated and despised,” but rather, “This is a lifestyle that should not be celebrated and encouraged.”
I’ve met homosexuals who openly told me that they know something is wrong inside them, and that they hate what they do and what they feel, and they would do anything to feel and be different. And my heart goes out to those people. I’ve also met defiant homosexuals who are literally the enemy who need to be stopped and defeated.
I can say this: I’M a sinner. Every single day I pray, and every single day I begin my prayer by confessing my sins and my need for a Savior who will save me from my sins. But I can also say that every single day I pray that God will sanctify me, make me more righteous, change my attitude and my behavior. I don’t celebrate and exalt in my sins.
There are hurting people who took part in divorce and adultery. But outside of a corrupt, decaying and morally insane popular culture, you don’t see people in churches celebrating their adultery and encouraging more and more adultery. But that’s exactly what many homosexuals are openly doing: thriving in and celebrating in their sin.
Psalm 52:3 says, “You love evil more than good, Falsehood more than speaking what is right.” 1 Timothy 4:2 describes people who devote themselves to the teachings of liars whose consciences are seared.
That’s the attitude and the mindset that I’m fighting.
St. Paul describes Christians who spread the truth of the Gospel. We are like the aroma of life to those who are saved; but we are a fragrance of death to those who are perishing in their sins.
Anyone who’s homosexual or lesbian and who is struggling with thoughts and desires that you do not want to have, and cries out for deliverance from what you know deep down is wrong, my heart goes out to you. I don’t have homosexual desires, by the grace of God, but I have more than my own share of sinful thoughts and desires that I pray for forgiveness for and deliverance from as I try to become more like what I know my Creator wants me to be.
Our Creator hears our prayers. When we come to Him through the sacrifice of His Son Jesus Christ, and ask for forgiveness, and sincerely pray that God will make us more like Jesus through the transforming power of the Holy Spirit, we can ALL have new life.
March 3, 2011 at 6:00 pm
Well at least someone understands the dangers of The Homosexual Agenda. Even the CDC seems to grasp this by comparing two deadly choices that can be made: http://www.theonion.com/video/new-antismoking-ads-warn-teens-its-gay-to-smoke,14373/
March 3, 2011 at 6:45 pm
I can only WISH that the homosexual agenda was as harmless as getting people to smoke.
June 7, 2012 at 9:33 am
I think that the Word is clear that no one is exempt from faillng into sinful behavior after becoming saved. Some do it more than others, and God never drew the line of how much we could get away with. He also never drew the line as to what sin was worst than another; if you break one part of the law you break the whole law. So if you tell me your a Christian, and you think you are saved and I ask you if you think I look fat im my dress and you say no, when you really think I do, you have lied to and decieved me. That might seem like a very small matter on the surface, but it is what it is, sin. In the words of Christ, you who are without sin may cast the first stone. If a homosexual cannot be Christian because it is sin, then NOONE can be a Christian because we all sin to some degree and will continue to for the rest of our lives. God did not give us a measure to determine our salvation. If you say a one cannot be homosexual and a Christian, I would have to challange you to never again sin. I doubt it can be done.By the way, I agree homosexual thoughts and acts are sin and should not be practiced. I think homosexual Christians are either those who know it’s wrong but cannot, or will not, control their impulses (much like a drug addict or alcoholic), or those who are very misguided regarding Biblical teachings. There is a lot of twisted information out there that is very convincing. Somehow I believe that deep in their hearts they know it’s wrong but like anyone else who sins, they can still be a Christian.
June 7, 2012 at 10:10 am
Desta,
Wow, what a great example of moral idiocy.
If I tell you that you don’t look fat in your dress when I really think you DO look fat in your dress, on your moral view, I am every bit as morally guilty as Adolf Hitler for murdering six million Jews and for starting a World War that killed over 60 million people.
Even worse, you claim that God is every bit as morally stupid and incapable of judging or differentiating evil as YOU are.
With the obvious exception of yourself, the overwhelming majority of human beings – because they were created in the image of God – can rightly affirm that mass murder is morally more blameworthy than telling a “white lie” to spare a fat lady’s feelings. And God is at LEAST as morally intelligent as most of us are. Just for the record.
As to what you are trying to conclude, that one can conceivably be a Christian and struggle with homosexuality, it might surprise you that I agree that a person can be a Christian but struggle with homosexuality.
I’ll provide an analogy of adultery (cheating on your spouse). Is it possible that genuine Christians will commit adultery? Yes, sadly it is. But what we don’t see – at least yet – is morally idiotic people coming into morally idiotic “churches” and CELEBRATING ADULTERY AND CLAIMING THAT GOD MADE US TO BE ADULTERERS AND CHEAT ON OUR WIVES AND HUSBANDS.
That is EXACTLY what is going on in the homosexal and liberal community right now: there is a willful, rabid hostility to the declared will of God.
So, can someone who was sexually molested as a kid and messed up find Christ or be a Christian and still struggle with sins like homosexuality. Absolutely, and my heart goes out to people who were saddled with that burden.
But if you are out there celebrating open sin and declaring that what is sin is NOT sin at all, but something wonderful, then there is no presence of the Holy Spirit in you and you are not a Christian and in fact you have seared your conscience in the way that Paul described.
Those who are quietly struggling with desires that they know are wrong are not people I ever want to attack. I truly feel for them. But those who are out celebrating sodomy and pushing for it and trying to destroy marriage are under the wrath of a holy God and will one day experience that wrath in hell.
May 5, 2013 at 5:40 pm
love and let love!!!
(you all have very messed up views)
(sorry for judging you…but, well, I did)
May 12, 2013 at 5:39 pm
nikki,
At least you honestly admit it, unlike most liberals who will literally judge me up one side and down the other and then idiotically claim, “I’m not judging you!”
I wonder if you think “love and let love!!!” when it comes to pedophiles who have the same natural (I would argue UNnatural) attraction for children that homosexuals have for other homosexuals. Particularly when they use the same reasoning that “Do you think I’d choose to be this way?” that homosexuals have used to “prove” they were “born gay.”