McCullough, supposedly the leader of what he calls the "Musclehead Revolution" had the following to say:
1. What happens to housing, on base and in theater?
If it is morally questionable to have men and women housed together because of the sexual tension that exists between primarily men who would be predatorily interested in the women they might shower with or frequently be seen in the act of dressing and undressing on a regular basis, why is it any different if you have identified the predatory homosexual male who might have an unrequited "thing" for a fellow service member? If it is proper to keep men and women housed separately do we now go to four sets of housing. Men who don't engage in homosexual activity, Men who do, Women who don't, Women who do? Practically speaking Mr. President how do you get past the fundamental sexual tension that will be present the minute some make it known?
2. Do you expect the military system or the civilian courts to deal with the influx of phony sexual harassment cases to follow?
Oh brother. With this monstrosity of a column, McCullough unites two of his favorite targets of ridicule - President Obama whom he feels he has a right to criticize because he is a man who has fathered a son whose skin is darker than the average African American (his exact words) and the lgbt community, whom he swears up and down are created by older, lecherous gay men molesting younger men:
The "alphas" in homosexual relationships, be they men or women, are many times recruiting younger partners. A vast percentage of those who enter the homosexual life do so after having been sexually initiated by an older person of their sex – be it consensual or not – it usually has the feel of enticement or seduction. - The 'gay' truth
And then rabid right-wing site Free Republic is throwing a mega tantrum, actually threatening to delete the accounts of members who dare to support the lgbt community:
If you support the homosexual agenda you are anti-constitution and you'll get the zot from FR. Homosexuals already have the same "rights" as everyone else. God did not grant and the constitution does not guarantee homosexuals any special rights. In fact, the homosexual agenda is a full frontal attack on OUR God-given, constitutionally protected rights to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of association, Life, Family, Marriage, Pursuit of Happiness, etc.
I don't want it on FR and won't have it on FR.
Like abortion, if you support the homosexual agenda on FR, your account here will be zotted!
Don't like it? Tough frickin Shinola! Get the hell OFF this conservative site!!
I wouldn't bother to read anything further on the thread. It's rife with ugliness and comments like McCullough's but less, shall we say, polite.
You really can't say anything about people like this. You keep one eye open so as not to take what they say lightly, but at the same time, you don't give them more credit than what they deserve.
The only reason why I am talking about them is because I want to point out just how sad it is that not only are some people on the wrong side of history, but they are actually wearing that dubious honor like a banner.
These are not honorable people, these are not moral people. They are pitiful people worse than a pig who proudly covers itself with mud and manure.
We are honorable people fighting for what should have been ours from day one - equality, dignity, the right to love, and the right to self-determination.
We must never forget the differences between them and us.
"The predatory homosexual male"? It's interesting that he starts his piece by identifying heterosexual males as sexual predators (and rightly so, as 30% of women service personnel report being sexually assaulted by fellow service men). But looking at another "forced communal living" environment (prison), it is again the heterosexual male who are the sexual predators. (The majority of men who rape fellow inmates identify as heterosexual; homosexual inmates are often victims as are other heterosexual males). Seems that it is the gay and lesbian soldiers who stand the most to fear from their heterosexual peers. Maybe McCullough is projecting?
ReplyDeleteI kept thinking I was reading about the werewolves coming out at night (vampires or zombies, take your pick) and not about sexual orientation. This is just freaking weird to here people talk about since gays have been living with straights for years!
ReplyDeleteBoys are infected by men
ReplyDeletehttp://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2010/10/take_pride_in_a.html
Homosexuals are bigots
http://www.drjudithreisman.com/archives/2010/11/homosexists_fan.html
Nice anonymous,
ReplyDeletebut that is the SAME Judith Reisman who not only makes the inaccurate linkage of pedophilia and homosexuality but also lost a lot of credibility - not that she had any in the first place, she is not a researcher but a former writer of the show Captain Kangaroo - when she falsely claimed that famed sex researcher Alfred Kinsey caused children to be sexually abused when gathering his data.
When the Kinsey Institute easily refuted her charges, she later tried to use the Institute for defamation and slander. THAT case was dismissed. Reisman has as much credibility as the discredited Paul Cameron. Please try again or get better sources.
Just an observation, Alvin: Why is it that on your blog, a number of comments (e.g. the one posted above yours) that supposedly "prove" the Christian conservatives are right are posted anonymously? ;) Surely they must have read this before:
ReplyDelete"For everyone practicing evil hates the light, and doesn’t come to the light, so that his works might not be rebuked. But the one doing the truth comes to the light, so that his works should be made manifest, that they have been worked in God." (John 3:20-21)
What need is there to hide behind a cloak of anonymity when you speak the truth?
Gyah, why don't the haters just come out of the closet, already?
ReplyDeleteAnonymous,
ReplyDeleteI wouldn't post your second comment because I will not post your linkage. Sorry. Bottom line is though, it has not been proven that Kinsey was a pedophile, but getting to the issue at hand - there is NO link between pedophilia and homosexuality.
One more thing, anonymous.
ReplyDeleteIf you want ANY credibility, please don't push links from World Net Daily. That alone hurts you.
I have have just one more thing to say. First of all I don't think you even looked at the sources I provided for you. Second of all where is the information that Kinsey was not a pedophile and why would Judith Reisman dedicate her life to Kinsey if nothing was true.
ReplyDeleteBrittany
I've seen your sources before. And the idea that Reisman "dedicated" her life to it means nothing. The burden of proof is on her side and she hasn't proven it. Your question about that is like saying, "I think this certain person is a thief therefore it's up to him to prove that he isn't." Even our judicial system doesn't work like that.
ReplyDeleteEdwardianbeauty: By that very same logic then, why would Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and other non-Christians adhere to their religion if their tenets were untrue? A good number of Christians (myself included) reject that logic on its face.
ReplyDeleteblack tsunami I was exposed to a pedophile group as a child. I can tell you from my experience that most were homosexuals. just my experience.
ReplyDeleteI can certainly understand Judith Reisman's outrage at Alfred Kinsey using pedophile data. Children suffered for that data. Don't you get that!
Johnny Hoo
First of all, johnny, what happened to you was wrong and a damn shame. I am truly for that.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it is not fair of you to blame all lgbts for the evil of those you encountered. I don't blame all Christians for the behavior of the religious right and by that same token, you shouldn't blame all lgbts for the actions of those you encountered.
Also, Kinsey didn't lead children to be molested. The molestation angle hasn't been proven, period.
Chris Cool
ReplyDeleteThe difference is that people of non Christian religions believe that their religion is true. Judith Reisman would know whether or not it was true. It doesn't make sense for her to build her entire career on lying on a guy who died back in 1956.
Why shouldn't Reisman build an entire career on lying about Kinsey? There are members of the religious right who have built entire careers on lying about the gay community. And she does travel in those circles.
ReplyDeleteThis is my last time that I will ask this. Do you mind giving me some sources?
ReplyDeleteI feel like a broken record!
I should have gotten that in writing. LOL. for you edwardianbeauty - although you COULD have found it yourself if you had looked - http://www.kinseyinstitute.org/about/contro-03.html
ReplyDeleteAnd here is some more stuff on reisman - http://conwebwatch.tripod.com/stories/2006/kinsey.html
ReplyDelete