Is Russia's crackdown on gays an ethical action?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/213872231.html NEW YORK — As the hub of the Soviet Union, Russia was reviled for rights abuses by many U.S. conservatives during the Cold War. Now some are voicing support and admiration as Russian authorities crack down on gay-rights activism.
The latest step drawing praise from social conservatives is a bill signed into law Sunday by President Vladimir Putin that would impose hefty fines for holding gay pride rallies or providing information about the gay community to minors.
"You admire some of the things they're doing in Russia against propaganda," said Austin Ruse, president of the U.S.-based Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. "On the other hand, you know it would be impossible to do that here."
Ruse, whose institute is seeking accreditation at the United Nations, plans to travel to Russia this summer to meet with government officials and civic leaders.
Jacobs, in an interview, drew a link between Russia's disapproval of homosexuality and its worries about a population decline.
"They've got a problem with marriage rates and fertility, and it doesn't help if you're encouraging non-reproductive behavior," he said.
Abortion remains legal in Russia through the first 12 weeks of pregnancy — a contrast to the general view of most U.S. social conservatives that abortion should be outlawed. However, the current abortion law — passed in 2011 — is more restrictive than its predecessor.
There's little doubt that Russians, overall, are far less supportive of gay rights than Americans. According to a Pew Research Center survey released June 4, only 16 percent of Russians said homosexuality should be accepted by society, compared to 60 percent in the U.S., and 80 percent or higher in Canada, Spain and Germany. However, there's less support for gay rights in some Eastern European countries, and even in Western Europe the issue can fuel conflict, as evidenced by recent clashes in France between far-right protesters and police over a new gay-marriage law.
The Obama administration has said it would make gay rights an important part of its foreign policy, raising the possibility that countries viewed as discriminating against gays could suffer consequences.
Secretary of State John Kerry outlined this approach on June 19 at a gay pride event at the State Department. He did not mention Russia by name, though he spoke disapprovingly of "anti-propaganda laws in Eastern Europe" that are targeting gay-rights demonstrators.
"We just have to keep standing up for tolerance and for diversity," Kerry said.
The Russian bill has been assailed by gay-rights and human-rights groups in the U.S.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is it an ethical action for Russia to reject gay agenda? For Russia to seek to protect, promote its population by rejecting and legislating against a harmful gay agenda? I think it is an ethical choice as well as a moral choice based upon a standard of morality they want to maintain.. The government there has weighed the negatives against the positives and found the right course was to severely limit the gay perversion in their country. I think they chose wisely..-Tyr

[fj1200]

Is it an ethical action for Russia to reject gay agenda? ... I think they chose wisely..-Tyr

If you support a crackdown on liberty and the expansive government that must keep everyone in line then yes, I suppose it is.

[Larrymc]

http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/213872231.html NEW YORK — As the hub of the Soviet Union, Russia was reviled for rights abuses by many U.S. conservatives during the Cold War. Now some are voicing support and admiration as Russian authorities crack down on gay-rights activism.
The latest step drawing praise from social conservatives is a bill signed into law Sunday by President Vladimir Putin that would impose hefty fines for holding gay pride rallies or providing information about the gay community to minors.
"You admire some of the things they're doing in Russia against propaganda," said Austin Ruse, president of the U.S.-based Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute. "On the other hand, you know it would be impossible to do that here."
Ruse, whose institute is seeking accreditation at the United Nations, plans to travel to Russia this summer to meet with government officials and civic leaders.
Jacobs, in an interview, drew a link between Russia's disapproval of homosexuality and its worries about a population decline.
"They've got a problem with marriage rates and fertility, and it doesn't help if you're encouraging non-reproductive behavior," he said.
Abortion remains legal in Russia through the first 12 weeks of pregnancy — a contrast to the general view of most U.S. social conservatives that abortion should be outlawed. However, the current abortion law — passed in 2011 — is more restrictive than its predecessor.
There's little doubt that Russians, overall, are far less supportive of gay rights than Americans. According to a Pew Research Center survey released June 4, only 16 percent of Russians said homosexuality should be accepted by society, compared to 60 percent in the U.S., and 80 percent or higher in Canada, Spain and Germany. However, there's less support for gay rights in some Eastern European countries, and even in Western Europe the issue can fuel conflict, as evidenced by recent clashes in France between far-right protesters and police over a new gay-marriage law.
The Obama administration has said it would make gay rights an important part of its foreign policy, raising the possibility that countries viewed as discriminating against gays could suffer consequences.
Secretary of State John Kerry outlined this approach on June 19 at a gay pride event at the State Department. He did not mention Russia by name, though he spoke disapprovingly of "anti-propaganda laws in Eastern Europe" that are targeting gay-rights demonstrators.
"We just have to keep standing up for tolerance and for diversity," Kerry said.
The Russian bill has been assailed by gay-rights and human-rights groups in the U.S.------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is it an ethical action for Russia to reject gay agenda? For Russia to seek to protect, promote its population by rejecting and legislating against a harmful gay agenda? I think it is an ethical choice as well as a moral choice based upon a standard of morality they want to maintain.. The government there has weighed the negatives against the positives and found the right course was to severely limit the gay perversion in their country. I think they chose wisely..-TyrGiven the outcome of the gay rights out cry in our Country "YES", I support abuse of gays as a hate crime, I support their right to be, if that were their only agenda we wouldn't have problem, but sense they intend to force their agenda into all aspects of society, it seems that if you even support the first two points it only encourages them to demand more.

[fj1200]

Could I get a listing of the Gay Agenda? I'm not sure which liberties to support cracking down on. Thanks in advance.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Could I get a listing of the Gay Agenda? I'm not sure which liberties to support cracking down on. Thanks in advance. There is more but this will do for a good start... Tyr

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hutchison/040428 The dark, intolerant, and abusive nature of the gay agenda

<map name="article_menu"><area href="javascript:window.print()" shape="rect" coords="0,0, 31,33"> <area href="http://www.renewamerica.com/column_sender.php?columnist=hutchison&date=040428" shape="rect" coords="41,0, 76,33"> <area href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fc olumns%2Fhutchison%2F040428&t=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+nature+of+ the+gay+agenda" shape="rect" coords="5,41, 70,64"> </map> http://www.renewamerica.com/images/print_email_share.gif http://www.renewamerica.com/images/facebook.png (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fc olumns%2Fhutchison%2F040428&t=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+nature+of+ the+gay+agenda) http://www.renewamerica.com/images/twitter.png (https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+n ature+of+the+gay+agenda&url=http://renewamerica.com/c/833) http://www.renewamerica.com/images/google.png (https://plus.google.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fcolu mns%2Fhutchison%2F040428)


By Fred Hutchison (http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hutchison) Propaganda and Thought Control

I learned about jamming by reading the articles How America Went Gay, and Thought Reform and the Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of psychiatry at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. He is the Author of the book, Homosexuality: A Freedom too Far (1995). Socarides drew a lot of his information about the program which involves "jamming" from the book After the Ball: How America will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990's (1990) by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. This book is a blueprint for gay activists for applying brainwashing techniques developed by the totalitarian regime of Communist China. These techniques were catalogued in Robert Jay Lifton's seminal work, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China (1989).

The program borrowed from the Chinese and put forward for gay activism by Kirk and Madsen involves three steps: 1) desensitization, 2) jamming, and 3) conversion.

1) Desensitization — Through constant exposure to homosexuals on television, in the movies, on radio, and in the newspapers, the public would become accustomed to gays being a normal part of their life. The image conveyed would be that gays are ordinary people like everyone else. As the gays came out of the closet to show a public face, the startling aspects of gay perversion and pathology would be left in the closet — concealed from the public eye. The goal of desensitization is public indifference.

2) Jamming — The object of jamming is to shame gay opponents into silence. The shame comes from the accusation of bigotry and social stigmatization.

"All normal people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack...The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicted twinge of shame....when his homohatred surfaces. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths...It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. (Kirk and Madsen)

Notice the two elements — the shaming of the alleged "bigot" by making him feel like a social pariah and the depiction of the suffering gay to win sympathy. In my personal experience, I have met with two versions of the shaming tactics from gays. The first is the personal attack (ad hominem, meaning "against the man"). The ad hominem attack ignores the logic and facts put forward by the opponent and accuses him of being a bigot, i.e., a shameful being. The insult is pure assertion and unsupported by facts. It is essentially a threat to socially stigmatize the person if he does not desist from his opposition to the gay agenda.

This tactic is very effective in a politically correct group-think environment — such as college campuses and news rooms. Politicians as a class, are extremely sensitive to the threat of being publicly stigmatized. Remember Kirk and Marsden's idea that "...people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack." These may be primitive wolf-pack group-think tactics but they are powerful none the less.

Almost all of us has been through this kind of thing. A perfect example is the high school clique. Retribution for violating the code of the clique involves public shaming and expulsion and demonization. One becomes an "untouchable" — a pariah to every clique and caste in the school.

[fj1200]

There is more but this will do for a good start... Tyr

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hutchison/040428 The dark, intolerant, and abusive nature of the gay agenda

You missed the last one:


3) Conversion

The third step is conversion of the public to be receptive to the gay agenda. Conversion requires a change of heart. The change of heart will occur "...if we can actually make them like us," says Kirk and Madsen. "Conversion aims at just this...conversion of the average American's emotions, mind, and will, through a planned psychological attack, in the form of propaganda fed to the media." When the audience begins to sympathize with Tom Hanks inPhiladelphia, the process of conversion has begun.

So the agenda boils down to being "liked"? Sounds nefarious. Which crackdowns on liberty should come first?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

You missed the last one:



So the agenda boils down to being "liked"? Sounds nefarious. Which crackdowns on liberty should come first? It's Russia not much liberty there to crack down on. None of my concern what laws they chose to make to handle what they deem to be a problem and a serious threat. The tragedy is we will suffer because the gay lifestyle and perversion is now deemed to be a civil right. Obama jumped on that train because the gays are vocal, committed to forcing a bad change in our culture and will donate large sums of money to the dem party. And yes I caught that you tried to paint me as a huge supporter of crackdowns on gays when I am just for them not getting a "special status " and special protection. What the Russians do is not my concern. I do applaud the Russians approaching the problem without any of our PC, DUMBASS MEDIA PROMOTED PROPAGANDA AND VOTE BUYING CRAP. -Tyr

[aboutime]

Only one way to answer the Thread's question.

Move to Russia, and demand they (Putin & Friends) change their minds about being gay, and Prepare to DUCK as they laugh at you if you bring up the word "ETHICAL".

[fj1200]

It's Russia not much liberty there to crack down on. None of my concern what laws they chose to make to handle what they deem to be a problem and a serious threat. The tragedy is we will suffer because the gay lifestyle and perversion is now deemed to be a civil right. Obama jumped on that train because the gays are vocal, committed to forcing a bad change in our culture and will donate large sums of money to the dem party. And yes I caught that you tried to paint me as a huge supporter of crackdowns on gays when I am just for them not getting a "special status " and special protection. What the Russians do is not my concern. I do applaud the Russians approaching the problem without any of our PC, DUMBASS MEDIA PROMOTED PROPAGANDA AND VOTE BUYING CRAP. -Tyr

:confused: If you think that they "chose wisely" then why wouldn't you support the same measures here? I agree that no one should have a special status but that's not really the case here.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

:confused: If you think that they "chose wisely" then why wouldn't you support the same measures here? I agree that no one should have a special status but that's not really the case here. Here I yield to the Constitution and the current status permitted by the Rule of Law. Doesn't mean I agree with that law or the special status some groups get that we ordinary , patriotic and decent citizens do not get. I just chose not to break the law. I also speak the truth so others may consider the current state of things and just may decide to vote differently in the future. Call it a small bit of optimism I still have. However that dwindles by the day and Obama is the main reason for that vanishing . I never back down from speaking my true view on any subject. I view gays as perverts and do not give a damn who doesn't like that or who takes any kind of offense to reading my words stating that. That's a double for me . 1. Promoting free speech as opposed to PC BULLSHAT and 2. promoting TRUTH over propaganda that seeks to convince one and all that a damn sexual perversion is a civil right. I hope I am being very clear on this. Sexual perversions exist and are not civil rights nor are they any kind of diversity that we should happily embrace and/or promote! -Tyr

[red states rule]

There is more but this will do for a good start... Tyr

http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hutchison/040428 The dark, intolerant, and abusive nature of the gay agenda

<MAP name=article_menu><AREA href="javascript<strong></strong>:window.print()" shape=rect coords="0,0, 31,33"><AREA href="http://www.renewamerica.com/column_sender.php?columnist=hutchison&date=040428" shape=rect coords="41,0, 76,33"><AREA href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fc olumns%2Fhutchison%2F040428&t=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+nature+of+ the+gay+agenda" shape=rect coords="5,41, 70,64"></MAP>http://www.renewamerica.com/images/print_email_share.gif http://www.renewamerica.com/images/facebook.png (http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fc olumns%2Fhutchison%2F040428&t=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+nature+of+ the+gay+agenda) http://www.renewamerica.com/images/twitter.png (https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=The+dark%2C+intolerant%2C+and+abusive+n ature+of+the+gay+agenda&url=http://renewamerica.com/c/833) http://www.renewamerica.com/images/google.png (https://plus.google.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.renewamerica.com%2Fcolu mns%2Fhutchison%2F040428)


By Fred Hutchison (http://www.renewamerica.com/columns/hutchison) Propaganda and Thought Control

I learned about jamming by reading the articles How America Went Gay, and Thought Reform and the Psychology of Homosexual Advocacy by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., President of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality (NARTH) and a clinical professor of psychiatry at Albert Einstein College of Medicine. He is the Author of the book, Homosexuality: A Freedom too Far (1995). Socarides drew a lot of his information about the program which involves "jamming" from the book After the Ball: How America will Conquer its Fear and Hatred of Gays in the 1990's (1990) by Marshall Kirk and Hunter Madsen. This book is a blueprint for gay activists for applying brainwashing techniques developed by the totalitarian regime of Communist China. These techniques were catalogued in Robert Jay Lifton's seminal work, Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of Brainwashing in China (1989).

The program borrowed from the Chinese and put forward for gay activism by Kirk and Madsen involves three steps: 1) desensitization, 2) jamming, and 3) conversion.

1) Desensitization — Through constant exposure to homosexuals on television, in the movies, on radio, and in the newspapers, the public would become accustomed to gays being a normal part of their life. The image conveyed would be that gays are ordinary people like everyone else. As the gays came out of the closet to show a public face, the startling aspects of gay perversion and pathology would be left in the closet — concealed from the public eye. The goal of desensitization is public indifference.

2) Jamming — The object of jamming is to shame gay opponents into silence. The shame comes from the accusation of bigotry and social stigmatization.

"All normal people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack...The trick is to get the bigot into the position of feeling a conflicted twinge of shame....when his homohatred surfaces. Thus, propagandistic advertisement can depict homophobic and homohating bigots as crude loudmouths...It can show them being criticized, hated, shunned. It can depict gays experiencing horrific suffering as the direct result of homohatred-suffering of which even most bigots would be ashamed to be the cause. (Kirk and Madsen)

Notice the two elements — the shaming of the alleged "bigot" by making him feel like a social pariah and the depiction of the suffering gay to win sympathy. In my personal experience, I have met with two versions of the shaming tactics from gays. The first is the personal attack (ad hominem, meaning "against the man"). The ad hominem attack ignores the logic and facts put forward by the opponent and accuses him of being a bigot, i.e., a shameful being. The insult is pure assertion and unsupported by facts. It is essentially a threat to socially stigmatize the person if he does not desist from his opposition to the gay agenda.

This tactic is very effective in a politically correct group-think environment — such as college campuses and news rooms. Politicians as a class, are extremely sensitive to the threat of being publicly stigmatized. Remember Kirk and Marsden's idea that "...people feel shame when they perceive that they are not thinking, feeling, or acting like the pack." These may be primitive wolf-pack group-think tactics but they are powerful none the less.

Almost all of us has been through this kind of thing. A perfect example is the high school clique. Retribution for violating the code of the clique involves public shaming and expulsion and demonization. One becomes an "untouchable" — a pariah to every clique and caste in the school.

What can I say? The convoy took a direct hit. Nice job Try



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cwWzFSePevw

[red states rule]

It's Russia not much liberty there to crack down on. None of my concern what laws they chose to make to handle what they deem to be a problem and a serious threat. The tragedy is we will suffer because the gay lifestyle and perversion is now deemed to be a civil right. Obama jumped on that train because the gays are vocal, committed to forcing a bad change in our culture and will donate large sums of money to the dem party. And yes I caught that you tried to paint me as a huge supporter of crackdowns on gays when I am just for them not getting a "special status " and special protection. What the Russians do is not my concern. I do applaud the Russians approaching the problem without any of our PC, DUMBASS MEDIA PROMOTED PROPAGANDA AND VOTE BUYING CRAP. -Tyr

Amazing how Obama and his minions are screaming about the rights of gays in Russia while Obama's IRS stomps on the rights of Tea Party members, and ignores the 4th Amendment.

[fj1200]

What can I say? The convoy took a direct hit. Nice job Try

Not exactly but it's refreshing when a poster responds with some actual thought even if it is just googling "gay agenda." Give it a try.

[fj1200]

Here I yield to the Constitution and the current status permitted by the Rule of Law. Doesn't mean I agree with that law or the special status some groups get that we ordinary , patriotic and decent citizens do not get. I just chose not to break the law. I also speak the truth so others may consider the current state of things and just may decide to vote differently in the future. Call it a small bit of optimism I still have. However that dwindles by the day and Obama is the main reason for that vanishing . I never back down from speaking my true view on any subject. I view gays as perverts and do not give a damn who doesn't like that or who takes any kind of offense to reading my words stating that. That's a double for me . 1. Promoting free speech as opposed to PC BULLSHAT and 2. promoting TRUTH over propaganda that seeks to convince one and all that a damn sexual perversion is a civil right. I hope I am being very clear on this. Sexual perversions exist and are not civil rights nor are they any kind of diversity that we should happily embrace and/or promote! -Tyr

Without wading too far into that minefield of fallacies I'm glad we can agree on the supremacy of the Constitution. But first I have to ask what special status or rights do they have that ordinary citizens, patriotic and decent, do not? Back to the OP for a moment; if Russia is acting in an ethical manner then would it be ethical for us to take the same action? Especially given the expansion of the State that would be required to carry out the law.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Without wading too far into that minefield of fallacies I'm glad we can agree on the supremacy of the Constitution. But first I have to ask what special status or rights do they have that ordinary citizens, patriotic and decent, do not? Back to the OP for a moment; if Russia is acting in an ethical manner then would it be ethical for us to take the same action? Especially given the expansion of the State that would be required to carry out the law.


But first I have to ask what special status or rights do they have that ordinary citizens, patriotic and decent, do not? ----------------------------------------- Get into a fight with a gay and watch how you are charged with a hate crime in addition to the other charges! dats bez speciaaaaallll.................................... .................................................. .
Back to the OP for a moment; if Russia is acting in an ethical manner then would it be ethical for us to take the same action? ----------------------------- Indeed a thorny problem . Constitutionally we could not do as Russia is doing. However , would it be ethical to limit their bad influence and militant agenda? I say yes but that would require a higher morality than currently the majority of American citizens have.. Russian ethics are not to be compared to ours my friend. They are for the most part Godless savages that drink vodka like we drink water and fornicate every chance they get because they have no other form of enjoyment that rates higher than farting just to hear the boom..:laugh: The government there just wants the fornicating to bear results (more Russians) and it damn sure doesn't when two bulls do it to each other.. ;)--Tyr

[Larrymc]

Without wading too far into that minefield of fallacies I'm glad we can agree on the supremacy of the Constitution. But first I have to ask what special status or rights do they have that ordinary citizens, patriotic and decent, do not? Back to the OP for a moment; if Russia is acting in an ethical manner then would it be ethical for us to take the same action? Especially given the expansion of the State that would be required to carry out the law.Sodomy was illegal here, only in resent years was it removed from the books, in some states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

[red states rule]

Sodomy was illegal here, only in resent years was it removed from the books, in some states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

Remember the source is FU and he has been drunk on the Obama Kool Aid for years

http://api.ning.com/files/tnhkXHV5t6QhwLMNO49ezSz5Xv99DQPssTaxglZnuYJy3QS8To 8sXHMWHZIUkQ2h02W2jChUSN9xF4EPKnZAy2wEzYCmf7Fk/ObamaAid500.jpg?width=474&height=600

[fj1200]

----------------------------------------- Get into a fight with a gay and watch how you are charged with a hate crime in addition to the other charges! dats bez speciaaaaallll.................................... .................................................. .

Well if I get in a fight screaming gay epithets then I suppose I will be charged with a hate crime. But I would agree with you that the crime should be the crime. Not the way I thought you would go though.


----------------------------- Indeed a thorny problem . Constitutionally we could not do as Russia is doing. However , would it be ethical to limit their bad influence and militant agenda? I say yes but that would require a higher morality than currently the majority of American citizens have..


Russian ethics are not to be compared to ours my friend. They are for the most part Godless savages that drink vodka like we drink water and fornicate every chance they get because they have no other form of enjoyment that rates higher than farting just to hear the boom..:laugh: The government there just wants the fornicating to bear results (more Russians) and it damn sure doesn't when two bulls do it to each other.. ;)--Tyr

I'm not even sure if that last part is sincere or not... :eek: :poke: but their problem is the lack of results from their excessive fornication and I'm guessing that the gays are not contributing to that very much. Toss in some lesbos to that equation who would have kids and it's probably a wash.

I would also prefer that the morality we show is one that honors the Constitution and influence our opinions of others. Also, did you show me the militancy in their agenda? I might have missed it.

[fj1200]

Sodomy was illegal here, only in resent years was it removed from the books, in some states. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodomy_laws_in_the_United_States

And? You are for expansive powers of the State that would police our interpersonal relationships?

[fj1200]

Remember the source is FU and he has been drunk on the Obama Kool Aid for years

So you choose ignorance over debate? You run from one (debate) and straight to the other (ignorance).

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Well if I get in a fight screaming gay epithets then I suppose I will be charged with a hate crime. But I would agree with you that the crime should be the crime. Not the way I thought you would go though.



I'm not even sure if that last part is sincere or not... :eek: :poke: but their problem is the lack of results from their excessive fornication and I'm guessing that the gays are not contributing to that very much. Toss in some lesbos to that equation who would have kids and it's probably a wash.

I would also prefer that the morality we show is one that honors the Constitution and influence our opinions of others. Also, did you show me the militancy in their agenda? I might have missed it. ------------------------------------------------ http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays
Militant gays is a term to describe the intolerant behavior of homosexual activists (http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_activist) that seek to intimidate, suppress, vandalize, and assault anybody that opposes their homosexual (http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual) movement. Militant gays seek civil rights, marriage for their same-sex partners (http://www.conservapedia.com/Same-sex_marriage), adoption of children, and federal and state benefits. They try to indoctrinate younger generations, organize protests to further their agenda and oppose traditional family values. Harmless Christians are almost always their target. [1] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-0)
Militant gays have powerful allies including Democrats (http://www.conservapedia.com/Democrats), Hollywood, Big Media and last but not least lawyers. When they are denied their agenda by legal means or through the democratic (http://www.conservapedia.com/Democratic) process, the results are mob assaults, death threats [2] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-1)[3] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-2) and vandalism. [4] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-3)

<tbody>
Contents [hide (javascript:toggleToc())]


1 Examples of morally offensive, anti-American behavior (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#Examples_of_morally_offensive.2C_ant i-American_behavior)
2 See Also (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#See_Also)
3 References (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#References)
4 External Links (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#External_Links)



</tbody>
Examples of morally offensive, anti-American behaviorThe radical homosexual anarchist group known as "Bash Back! planned for over a month the assault on the Mt. Hope Church in Lansing, Michigan. November 9, 2008 a band of about 30 homosexuals stormed the church during services shouting “Jesus was a homo” on a megaphone and carrying an upside-down pink cross. They distributed fliers to passersby, threw condoms at parishioners and set off the fire alarms. [5] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-4) Catholic League president Bill Donohue (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Bill_Donohue&action=edit&redlink=1) responded, “This is urban fascism (http://www.conservapedia.com/Fascism) come to America’s heartland."
Mass Resistance has compiled a list of militant gay actions in the wake of California's successful Proposition 8 (http://www.conservapedia.com/Proposition_8) campaign. [6] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-5)
<dl><dd>More than 200 protesters screamed and chanted in front of the Catholic Cathedral (http://www.conservapedia.com/Cathedral) of Our Lady of the Angels in Los Angeles (http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Los_Angele&action=edit&redlink=1) during Sunday services, intimidating families. </dd></dl><dl><dd>Street preacher gets physically assaulted at a gay pride event in Seattle. [7] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-6) </dd></dl><dl><dd>In Palm Springs, an enraged crowd of homosexual activists attacked an elderly woman carrying a cross. </dd></dl><dl><dd>Pastor Rick Warren (http://www.conservapedia.com/Rick_Warren)'s Saddleback Church was targeted, a swastika (http://www.conservapedia.com/Swastika) constructed. Same situation occurred targeting parishioners at a Catholic church (http://www.conservapedia.com/Catholic_church) in Riverside, Ca. </dd></dl><dl><dd>A disgusting anti-Mormon (http://www.conservapedia.com/Mormon) TV ad was broadcast across California, portraying LDS missionaries invading a home of lesbians. </dd></dl><dl><dd>Several thousand homosexual (http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual) activists rioted at a Mormon temple in the Los Angeles </dd></dl><dl><dd>Lesbians parked a van with a big sign "Bigots" in front of a Mormon family's house (parents and five kids) near San Francisco (http://www.conservapedia.com/San_Francisco). </dd></dl><dl><dd>A Mormon church near Sacramento (http://www.conservapedia.com/Sacramento) was spray-painted with "No on 8" . </dd></dl><dl><dd>A Sacramento theater director was forced to resign from his job after it was revealed that he had given a $1000 donation to the Yes on Prop 8 committee. </dd></dl><dl><dd>There were instances of cars vandalized with Hate 8 engraved with a knife. </dd></dl>Gay activists have disrupted and viciously vandalized churches nationwide for their stances against gay "marriage."[8] (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_note-7)
See AlsoChristian persecution (http://www.conservapedia.com/Christian_persecution)
References

↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-0) Gay activists terrorize Boston church (http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/09b/ParkStreetChurch_0428/index2.html) Mass Resistance, May 1, 2009
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-1) Gay Hate Crimes against Churches? (http://www.thevoicemagazine.com/society/607-gay-hate-crimes-against-churches.html) The Voice Magazine
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-2) Sparks fly as 'gay' activist mob swarms Christians (http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=81310) WND.com, November 17, 2008
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-3) San Francisco Catholic Church Attacked by Pro-Homosexual Marriage Vandals (http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=41858) CNSNews.com, January 13, 2009
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-4) Homosexualist Anarchists Storm Michigan Church During Sunday Service (http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/nov/08111104.html) Lifesitenews.com, November 11, 2008
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-5) Mormons singled out for special wrath (http://www.massresistance.org/docs/gen/08c/Prop8/church_attacks.html) MassResistance.org, November 13, 2008
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-6) Lesbian Mob Beats Street Preacher at Seattle Gay Pride, The Black Sphere, Jul4, 2013 (http://theblacksphere.net/2013/07/lesbian-mob-beats-street-preacher-at-seattle-gay-pride/)
↑ (http://www.conservapedia.com/Militant_gays#cite_ref-7) Churches Vandalized, Ransacked, and Threatened with Disrup (http://www.christianpost.com/blogs/liberty/2010/05/churches-vandalized-ransacked-and-threatened-with-disruption-27/)

[Perianne]

I view gays as perverts and do not give a damn who doesn't like that or who takes any kind of offense to reading my words stating that.


Gays suck.

[fj1200]

Militant gays is a term to describe the intolerant behavior of homosexual activists (http://www.conservapedia.com/Homosexual_activist) ...

OK, so "militant" as an adverb will be applied to some homosexual activists so that we can define all homosexuals? Because I'm sure that they all have the same agenda.

[fj1200]

Gays suck.

erm...

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Gays suck.
And a few other vile things too. :laugh: . Certainly no first hand experience for me but I hear tell they spread a lot of disease and misery too. Obama sucks, reckon' he is gay too? ;)--Tyr

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

OK, so "militant" as an adverb will be applied to some homosexual activists so that we can define all homosexuals? Because I'm sure that they all have the same agenda. Certainly not all of them. Some of them are just content to wallow in their perversion and bang as many other perverts as they can.. So we agree, right??? ;) Glad we settled that... -Tyr

[fj1200]

Certainly not all of them. Some of them are just content to wallow in their perversion and bang as many other perverts as they can.. So we agree, right??? ;) Glad we settled that... -Tyr

I must have forgot the :rolleyes: at the end of that last post. But yes, I suppose we agree that "militant" can be used to modify any group especially if we want to place certain value judgments.

[jimnyc]

Funny how Russia's "crackdown" makes international news - but no one dares speak up about how this is status quo around the islamic craphole countries.

[fj1200]

Funny how Russia's "crackdown" makes international news - but no one dares speak up about how this is status quo around the islamic craphole countries.

Because man-bites-dog.

[Perianne]

Obama sucks, reckon' he is gay too? ;)--Tyr

He is married to a he-beast.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Because man-bites-dog. Muslims hate dogs.. THEY UNCLEAN ANIMALS and muslim cab drivers demand the right to refuse customers that have a dog with them. Another special right given to our muslim scum here.

[fj1200]

Muslims hate dogs.. THEY UNCLEAN ANIMALS and muslim cab drivers demand the right to refuse customers that have a dog with them. Another special right given to our muslim scum here.

I thought you were for property rights. Would it be acceptable for a Muslim to refuse a cab ride to a gay couple?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

I thought you were for property rights. Would it be acceptable for a Muslim to refuse a cab ride to a gay couple? Only if they had a straight dog with them.. Or a bacon sandwich in either of their pockets.. ;) or even a Jewish manager.. :laugh:

[aboutime]

I thought you were for property rights. Would it be acceptable for a Muslim to refuse a cab ride to a gay couple?


Most cab drivers are private owners of their car, and pay huge amounts for their HACK license. So, their cab is their own Business. Therefore. A Muslim cab driver CAN refuse to allow ANYONE he/she decides.

[Perianne]

Most cab drivers are private owners of their car, and pay huge amounts for their HACK license. So, their cab is their own Business. Therefore. A Muslim cab driver CAN refuse to allow ANYONE he/she decides.

Can an American diner owner refuse to allow a black into his establishment?

[fj1200]

Most cab drivers are private owners of their car, and pay huge amounts for their HACK license. So, their cab is their own Business. Therefore. A Muslim cab driver CAN refuse to allow ANYONE he/she decides.

Legally? Unlikely.


Do note: it is against the law for a taxi cab driver to refuse a person based on race, disability, or a passenger's requested destination in New York City.
http://www.nyc.com/visitor_guide/taxis.75827/editorial_review.aspx

[aboutime]

Legally? Unlikely.


http://www.nyc.com/visitor_guide/taxis.75827/editorial_review.aspx


Doesn't matter in NYC. Laws only apply to Law-abiding people.
Cab drivers violate those laws every day. Much like citizens, and tourists Ignored the Mayor's 16 Oz. drink laws.

[fj1200]

Doesn't matter in NYC. Laws only apply to Law-abiding people.
Cab drivers violate those laws every day. Much like citizens, and tourists Ignored the Mayor's 16 Oz. drink laws.

That's why I prefaced with "legally." But some cities can take the initiative to enforce their laws:


WASHINGTON, D.C. (WUSA9) - The DChttp://images.intellitxt.com/ast/adTypes/icon1.png (http://www.wusa9.com/investigation/article/260413/453/DC-Taxis-Caught-On-WUSA9-Camera-Fined-500#) Taxi Commission says it issued 15 citations, including $500 fines for refusing to pick up black and disabled passengers, while tracking an undercover WUSA9 investigation.
http://www.wusa9.com/investigation/article/260413/453/DC-Taxis-Caught-On-WUSA9-Camera-Fined-500

Cities can force many policies when they are in the business of granting monopoly power and setting standards on which they give the "right" to operate under license.

[red states rule]

Folks, as usual FU offers up lame excuses and not facts. His link about DE cabbies does not mention Muslims, yet there have been many news articles abut Muslim cabbies refusing to take passengers with dogs (even seeing eye dogs) and people with alcohol

There have also been stories about Muslim cashiers refusing to touch meat and pork even though that is their job

It is clear most Muslims demand America change to suit them and anyone who opposes them is a racist. Meanwhile Obama lap dogs like FU thinks he safe in his Ivory Tower and immune from the virus known as Islam

[Larrymc]

And? You are for expansive powers of the State that would police our interpersonal relationships?Yes as it apples to Morality, Homosexuality has been unacceptable from the beginning, What has changed? Because America affords the freedom to be Gay, the same way people are free to practice Witch Craft, Satanism, Ect Ect such can not and should not be forced on society, For most of Americas history, yes you could be jailed for acts of homosexuality, it was rarely if ever enforced because in this country your privacy is protected, Now the right to be Gay has become widely accepted, but they are not happy, Most would accept Unions to offer them the benefits of Marriage, but there still not happy, So even though the majority still disprove of it, they still push there agenda, You ask for it here it is, They intend to push until Their life style is taught in schools, and not only accepted but Normalized in ever sector of society. "This Is Where I Have a Problem"

[fj1200]

Folks, as usual FU offers up lame excuses and not facts. His link about DE cabbies does not mention Muslims, yet there have been many news articles abut Muslim cabbies refusing to take passengers with dogs (even seeing eye dogs) and people with alcohol

There have also been stories about Muslim cashiers refusing to touch meat and pork even though that is their job

It is clear most Muslims demand America change to suit them and anyone who opposes them is a racist. Meanwhile Obama lap dogs like FU thinks he safe in his Ivory Tower and immune from the virus known as Islam

:laugh: Umm, the thread isn't about Muslims... or wasn't. Or you could post what wasn't a fact. More of your failure is waiting.

[fj1200]

Yes as it apples to Morality, Homosexuality has been unacceptable from the beginning, What has changed? Because America affords the freedom to be Gay, the same way people are free to practice Witch Craft, Satanism, Ect Ect such can not and should not be forced on society, For most of Americas history, yes you could be jailed for acts of homosexuality, it was rarely if ever enforced because in this country your privacy is protected, Now the right to be Gay has become widely accepted, but they are not happy, Most would accept Unions to offer them the benefits of Marriage, but there still not happy, So even though the majority still disprove of it, they still push there agenda, You ask for it here it is, They intend to push until Their life style is taught in schools, and not only accepted but Normalized in ever sector of society. "This Is Where I Have a Problem"

So we can chalk you up as another one of those big-government conservatives we have running rampant around here. Got it. You're in good company.

[Larrymc]

So we can chalk you up as another one of those big-government conservatives we have running rampant around here. Got it. You're in good company.How do you figure it takes a bigger government to keep morality where its been for over two hundred years, don't label me because you have a weak moral compose, and are willing to toss morality out in the name of liberty.

[fj1200]

How do you figure it takes a bigger government to keep morality where its been for over two hundred years, don't label me because you have a weak moral compose, and are willing to toss morality out in the name of liberty.

You need a bigger government to police your moral standards so please don't make your big-governmentism my fault. Also, I don't believe that morality is based on government diktat.

[Larrymc]

You need a bigger government to police your moral standards so please don't make your big-governmentism my fault. Also, I don't believe that morality is based on government diktat.wouldn't need more Gov, if the liberal Gov, would stop pandering to deviants, so don't blame that on me. Government diktat is only necessary to prevent a moral decline not dictate it.

[fj1200]

wouldn't need more Gov, if the liberal Gov, would stop pandering to deviants, so don't blame that on me. Government diktat is only necessary to prevent a moral decline not dictate it.

We wouldn't need more government to interfere in interpersonal relationships if you weren't calling for it. And do you really think government can prevent a moral decline? Government reflects the people, the people don't reflect the government.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Government reflects the people, the people don't reflect the government. That's being changed. The new plan is the people reflect whatever the hell the government wants. And if they don't the consequences will not be pretty! The punitive measures against private citizens and businesses that have been installed just since the Obama regime have been massive! -Tyr

[fj1200]

Yes, the "new" plan. :rolleyes: It's the same old leftie plan that's been encroaching for 100 years.

[Gaffer]

Yes, the "new" plan. :rolleyes: It's the same old leftie plan that's been encroaching for 100 years.

Your right, it started with teddy roosevelt and then Wilson. Expanded from there.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Yes, the "new" plan. :rolleyes: It's the same old leftie plan that's been encroaching for 100 years. Yes, its been around a long time. We were once too powerful, too educated for it to succeed. That's no longer the case. Obama simply being the President proves that!! -Tyr

[Larrymc]

We wouldn't need more government to interfere in interpersonal relationships if you weren't calling for it. And do you really think government can prevent a moral decline? Government reflects the people, the people don't reflect the government.What world or you living in, if the Government condones it, then people will embrace it, Do you think the people chose to have open homosexuality, if that were true there would be no problem putting it on a ballot, but i haven't seen one gay who wants that. So according to your logic, there should be no problem with, Brother Sister, Father Daughter, or something closer to what were talking about. Pedophilia, i know the argument kids can't decide, but for how long, and how long has it been sense Homosexuality was considered just as despicable, after all they have the same argument their born that way, they don't chose it. considering past civilizations who have given in to the gays and ended up with all the other relationships, what makes you think were not going the same way, by your on logic Gov. should already be staying out of these interpersonal relationships.

[fj1200]

Your right, it started with teddy roosevelt and then Wilson. Expanded from there.


Yes, its been around a long time. We were once too powerful, too educated for it to succeed. That's no longer the case. Obama simply being the President proves that!! -Tyr

BO proves that we have moved left no question. Nevertheless I reiterate: Repeal the 17th.

[fj1200]

What world or you living in, if the Government condones it, then people will embrace it, Do you think the people chose to have open homosexuality, if that were true there would be no problem putting it on a ballot, but i haven't seen one gay who wants that. So according to your logic, there should be no problem with, Brother Sister, Father Daughter, or something closer to what were talking about. Pedophilia, i know the argument kids can't decide, but for how long, and how long has it been sense Homosexuality was considered just as despicable, after all they have the same argument their born that way, they don't chose it. considering past civilizations who have given in to the gays and ended up with all the other relationships, what makes you think were not going the same way, by your on logic Gov. should already be staying out of these interpersonal relationships.

My logic? None of that was my logic. There is quite the difference between government condoning it and not criminalizing the behavior. I do state that government should stay out of interpersonal relationships; it's not the place for government to be. The only place they should have is in any contract disputes that may arise between civil unions between consenting adults; two, non-related, and of legal age.

I'm not sure what you're saying no "gay wants that." Gay marriage has been on the ballot and ended its losing streak last November and overall has been gaining acceptance in society.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2013/03/gay-marriage-trend2.jpg

[Larrymc]

My logic? None of that was my logic. There is quite the difference between government condoning it and not criminalizing the behavior. I do state that government should stay out of interpersonal relationships; it's not the place for government to be. The only place they should have is in any contract disputes that may arise between civil unions between consenting adults; two, non-related, and of legal age.

I'm not sure what you're saying no "gay wants that." Gay marriage has been on the ballot and ended its losing streak last November and overall has been gaining acceptance in society.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/files/2013/03/gay-marriage-trend2.jpgsure you see it in local elections. were they think they have the numbers, both in gays and liberal politicians like CA im talking about a national election were We the people actually choose, I have been verbally attacked many times for even suggesting it be put on a national ballet let the people speak and be done with it, and thank you for the graph it shows a steady increase in approval with the current Administration, which confirms what i said about the government condoning it and the people embracing it. You notice a down tic toward the end of 2004 that was before Obama decided he needed those votes and came out for it, now a national ballet would have a chance of passing it, but go back a few years and there would not have been a chance. Thank for distinguishing none related and legal age, not that it will matter in years to come, with folks like you fighting ever vigilant to keep the powers that be out of moral issues.

[fj1200]

sure you see it in local elections. were they think they have the numbers, both in gays and liberal politicians like CA im talking about a national election were We the people actually choose, I have been verbally attacked many times for even suggesting it be put on a national ballet let the people speak and be done with it, and thank you for the graph it shows a steady increase in approval with the current Administration, which confirms what i said about the government condoning it and the people embracing it. You notice a down tic toward the end of 2004 that was before Obama decided he needed those votes and came out for it, now a national ballet would have a chance of passing it, but go back a few years and there would not have been a chance. Thank for distinguishing none related and legal age, not that it will matter in years to come, with folks like you fighting ever vigilant to keep the powers that be out of moral issues.

Umm, a couple of things; the government hasn't condoned anything, it's a long-term trend (see graph), and in '04 BO was nothing more than a guy who gave a speech. And also many things get decided at the local/state level; to suggest a national election is why we have a Republican form of government.

http://rack.2.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzA2LzI2LzMyL2dheW1hcnJpYWdlLjU5ZWNlLnBuZw pwCXRodW1iCTEyMDB4OTYwMD4/74410b4a/30b/gay-marriage-pew.png

And yes, folks like me. :rolleyes: Your faith in government as the bastion of morality is misplaced IMO.

[Larrymc]

Umm, a couple of things; the government hasn't condoned anything, it's a long-term trend (see graph), and in '04 BO was nothing more than a guy who gave a speech. And also many things get decided at the local/state level; to suggest a national election is why we have a Republican form of government.

http://rack.2.mshcdn.com/media/ZgkyMDEzLzA2LzI2LzMyL2dheW1hcnJpYWdlLjU5ZWNlLnBuZw pwCXRodW1iCTEyMDB4OTYwMD4/74410b4a/30b/gay-marriage-pew.png

And yes, folks like me. :rolleyes: Your faith in government as the bastion of morality is misplaced IMO.Yea i realized i had got the years wrong, it obvious why there was a dip in 04, to much time and money is spent on such things, what i suggested was to put in on a national ballet along with the Presidential elections let the people speak and be done with this and abortion and any other moral or social issues, but of course you would be against that, the liberals couldn't get any done, as for misplaced faith, i have no faith in our government, but if can't see that it takes Politicians Judges Mayors ect ect to change what is acceptable in society, then i think your the one who is misguided.

[red states rule]

Yes, its been around a long time. We were once too powerful, too educated for it to succeed. That's no longer the case. Obama simply being the President proves that!! -Tyr

FU seems to be getting more and more desperate Tyr. His link on Muslim cabbies blew up in his face, now he seems to be on board with the gay agenda. Is there anymore proof we need that he is a loyal and paper trained Obama lap dog? Perhaps this explains his constant use of slurs against women. After a lifetime of rejection he has went the other way :laugh2:

He also is getting a very short fuse when folks disagree with his far left wacko agenda. Sort of like his boy Obama

HE is clearly enjoying the downward slide America is taking and it is rather amusing to read his posts denying such a slide is even talking place

FU reminds me of some of the passengers on the Titantic. They denied the ship was sinking right up until the water reached their lower lip

[red states rule]

sure you see it in local elections. were they think they have the numbers, both in gays and liberal politicians like CA im talking about a national election were We the people actually choose, I have been verbally attacked many times for even suggesting it be put on a national ballet let the people speak and be done with it, and thank you for the graph it shows a steady increase in approval with the current Administration, which confirms what i said about the government condoning it and the people embracing it. You notice a down tic toward the end of 2004 that was before Obama decided he needed those votes and came out for it, now a national ballet would have a chance of passing it, but go back a few years and there would not have been a chance. Thank for distinguishing none related and legal age, not that it will matter in years to come, with folks like you fighting ever vigilant to keep the powers that be out of moral issues.

Larry if you are going to waste your time trying to have a back and forth conversation with FU you have to know how this Obama lap dog "debates"

Here is a link to how FU "debates"





1. SHOW UP WITH YOUR TALKING POINTS. Make sure you have something that you feel will show your opponents in a negative light, and make that the subject of the discussion.

2. DEMONIZE YOUR OPPONENT. Attempt to cover them with shame

3. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DOING #2 ABOVE, SUPPORT HIM IMMEDIATELY.

4. ACCUSE YOU OPPONENT OF SAYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T. Attempt to define his statements in a negative light. Interpret them this way and state it as fact that he did actually say it. NEVER ask him…always TELL him what his meaning was.

5. CLAIM THAT IT IS “OLD NEWS” AND NOT WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. This applies especially when the discussion turns to the misdeeds of Democrat Party Leadership.

6. QUOTE AN UNSOURCED NEW ARTICLE. Always quote the article selectively, or describe it in a general manner.

7. IF ASKED DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEWS YOU HAVE PROVIDED, RESPOND INDIRECTLY. Never actually answer the specific of the question.

8. IF ASKED TO SOURCE YOUR NEWS ARTICLE, IGNORE THE QUESTION.

9. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A MENTAL DEFECT OR LACK OF INTELLIGENCE. Personal attacks of this sort are especially useful as the target will almost always try to defend himself, thus changing the subject.

10. IF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP IS ATTACKED, ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TABLES BY INFERRING THAT SOMEONE IN YOUR OPPONENTS PARTY IS JUST AS BAD.

11. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. Try to do this before he has an opportunity to. Try to infer that it you have given him multiple opportunities to do so. Do it even if the question has been answered. If he misses the question and asks you to repeat it DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR HIS BENEFIT).

12. RESORT TO INSULTS. Try to question you opponent’s masculinity, his resolve, ANYTHING, but try to diminish and demean him. (This is know as the “LBJ Rule” codified by him thus: “Accuse your opponent of being a pig fornicator, then make him deny it.) REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TACTIC, IT MEANS YOUR OPPONENT IS WINNING!

13. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF BEING UNINFORMED. This works especially well when you are asked to provide your sources. It is especially effective if you work in a reference to someone you have already demonized. Rush Limbaugh is currently the Demon of Choice.

14. SPEAK CRYPTICALLY. Try to make it difficult for people to divine your meaning

15. CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Try to get it back to your original talking points (see #1 above)

16. APPEAR TO AGREE. You will need to do this in order to achieve #15.

17. CLAIM YOUR OPPONENT IS BEING UNREASONABLE OR WON’T LISTEN TO REASON, AND LEAVE IN A HUFF.

18. BAIT YOUR OPPONENT. Needle him, tease him, call him names until he makes an inappropriate post, then scream bloody murder to the Moderator.

19. DENY THE EVIDENCE EXISTS. Ask for evidence of wrongdoing by those you support. When that evidence is presented, continue denying that it exists.


http://battalions2.wordpress.com/2006/06/21/good-old-liberal-debate-tactics/

[fj1200]

Yea i realized i had got the years wrong, it obvious why there was a dip in 04, to much time and money is spent on such things, what i suggested was to put in on a national ballet along with the Presidential elections let the people speak and be done with this and abortion and any other moral or social issues, but of course you would be against that, the liberals couldn't get any done, as for misplaced faith, i have no faith in our government, but if can't see that it takes Politicians Judges Mayors ect ect to change what is acceptable in society, then i think your the one who is misguided.

What is the reason for the obvious dip? Please explain for the class why I would "be against that." And no, it takes society to change what is acceptable in society.

[fj1200]

FU seems to be getting more and more desperate Tyr. His link on Muslim cabbies blew up in his face, now he seems to be on board with the gay agenda. Is there anymore proof we need that he is a loyal and paper trained Obama lap dog? Perhaps this explains his constant use of slurs against women. After a lifetime of rejection he has went the other way :laugh2:

He also is getting a very short fuse when folks disagree with his far left wacko agenda. Sort of like his boy Obama

HE is clearly enjoying the downward slide America is taking and it is rather amusing to read his posts denying such a slide is even talking place

FU reminds me of some of the passengers on the Titantic. They denied the ship was sinking right up until the water reached their lower lip

Your failure is leaking past your ignorance again. I didn't make a post about Muslim cabbies, it was about enforcement against discrimination. Got any other "women" jokes to display your misogyny?


Larry if you are going to waste your time trying to have a back and forth conversation with FU you have to know how this Obama lap dog "debates"

Here is a link to how FU "debates"

Debate? What would you know about debate?

The 'rsr' principles:


. (http://www.physics.smu.edu/pseudo/Propaganda/goebbels.html)

Avoid abstract ideas - appeal to the emotions.
Constantly repeat just a few ideas. Use stereotyped phrases.
Give only one side of the argument.
Continuously criticize your opponents.
Pick out one special "enemy" for special vilification.

[Larrymc]

What is the reason for the obvious dip? Olease explain for the class why I would "be against that." And no, it takes society to change what is acceptable in society.Bush up held don't ask don't tell, You seem to be completely in favor of the moral decay in our country, which if it were truly up to the people would be hard to accomplish. The last part is your opinion, its wrong but you are welcome to it.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Larry if you are going to waste your time trying to have a back and forth conversation with FU you have to know how this Obama lap dog "debates"

Here is a link to how FU "debates" I've had all those tactics pulled on me numerous times both here and even more so at other forums. Appears that you just gave the dem/lib/leftist playbook. --Tyr



1. SHOW UP WITH YOUR TALKING POINTS. Make sure you have something that you feel will show your opponents in a negative light, and make that the subject of the discussion.

2. DEMONIZE YOUR OPPONENT. Attempt to cover them with shame

3. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DOING #2 ABOVE, SUPPORT HIM IMMEDIATELY.

4. ACCUSE YOU OPPONENT OF SAYING SOMETHING HE DIDN’T. Attempt to define his statements in a negative light. Interpret them this way and state it as fact that he did actually say it. NEVER ask him…always TELL him what his meaning was.

5. CLAIM THAT IT IS “OLD NEWS” AND NOT WORTHY OF DISCUSSION. This applies especially when the discussion turns to the misdeeds of Democrat Party Leadership.

6. QUOTE AN UNSOURCED NEW ARTICLE. Always quote the article selectively, or describe it in a general manner.

7. IF ASKED DIRECT QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NEWS YOU HAVE PROVIDED, RESPOND INDIRECTLY. Never actually answer the specific of the question.

8. IF ASKED TO SOURCE YOUR NEWS ARTICLE, IGNORE THE QUESTION.

9. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF A MENTAL DEFECT OR LACK OF INTELLIGENCE. Personal attacks of this sort are especially useful as the target will almost always try to defend himself, thus changing the subject.

10. IF THE PARTY LEADERSHIP IS ATTACKED, ATTEMPT TO TURN THE TABLES BY INFERRING THAT SOMEONE IN YOUR OPPONENTS PARTY IS JUST AS BAD.

11. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF NOT ANSWERING YOUR QUESTIONS. Try to do this before he has an opportunity to. Try to infer that it you have given him multiple opportunities to do so. Do it even if the question has been answered. If he misses the question and asks you to repeat it DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES REPEAT THE QUESTION FOR HIS BENEFIT).

12. RESORT TO INSULTS. Try to question you opponent’s masculinity, his resolve, ANYTHING, but try to diminish and demean him. (This is know as the “LBJ Rule” codified by him thus: “Accuse your opponent of being a pig fornicator, then make him deny it.) REMEMBER, IF YOU HAVE TO RESORT TO THIS TACTIC, IT MEANS YOUR OPPONENT IS WINNING!

13. ACCUSE YOUR OPPONENT OF BEING UNINFORMED. This works especially well when you are asked to provide your sources. It is especially effective if you work in a reference to someone you have already demonized. Rush Limbaugh is currently the Demon of Choice.

14. SPEAK CRYPTICALLY. Try to make it difficult for people to divine your meaning

15. CHANGE THE SUBJECT. Try to get it back to your original talking points (see #1 above)

16. APPEAR TO AGREE. You will need to do this in order to achieve #15.

17. CLAIM YOUR OPPONENT IS BEING UNREASONABLE OR WON’T LISTEN TO REASON, AND LEAVE IN A HUFF.

18. BAIT YOUR OPPONENT. Needle him, tease him, call him names until he makes an inappropriate post, then scream bloody murder to the Moderator.

19. DENY THE EVIDENCE EXISTS. Ask for evidence of wrongdoing by those you support. When that evidence is presented, continue denying that it exists.

[Larrymc]

Larry if you are going to waste your time trying to have a back and forth conversation with FU you have to know how this Obama lap dog "debates"

Here is a link to how FU "debates"I see your point, it always comes down to a difference of opinion.

[fj1200]

Bush up held don't ask don't tell, You seem to be completely in favor of the moral decay in our country, which if it were truly up to the people would be hard to accomplish. The last part is your opinion, its wrong but you are welcome to it.

More often than not it seems it always comes down to someone creating a fallacy and debating against your own imagination. And what does DADT have to do with the issue?


I see your point, it always comes down to a difference of opinion.

"If it were up to the people..." :confused: Is the 58% a wrong number?

[fj1200]

I've had all those tactics pulled on me numerous times both here and even more so at other forums. Appears that you just gave the dem/lib/leftist playbook. --Tyr

Yup, happens to me all the time. ;)

[Larrymc]

More often than not it seems it always comes down to someone creating a fallacy and debating against your own imagination. And what does DADT have to do with the issue?



"If it were up to the people..." :confused: Is the 58% a wrong number?Did I not say it would have a chance on a ballet today, but if it were up to the people it would have never got to this point. I can only hope that 58% is a bias number.

[logroller]

Yea i realized i had got the years wrong, it obvious why there was a dip in 04, to much time and money is spent on such things, what i suggested was to put in on a national ballet along with the Presidential elections let the people speak and be done with this and abortion and any other moral or social issues, but of course you would be against that, the liberals couldn't get any done, as for misplaced faith, i have no faith in our government, but if can't see that it takes Politicians Judges Mayors ect ect to change what is acceptable in society, then i think your the one who is misguided.
Perhaps you don't realize that we have a representative form of democracy, not a direct one. There is no national popular vote upon anything, not even the president, (which is done through the electoral college). Indeed, the president can be elected with a lesser popular vote. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that but, again, not by popular vote.

[fj1200]

Did I not say it would have a chance on a ballet today, but if it were up to the people it would have never got to this point. I can only hope that 58% is a bias number.

Honestly it's hard to tell sometimes. :poke: I would just rather the Feds remove all reference to marriage from the Federal Code.

[Larrymc]

Perhaps you don't realize that we have a representative form of democracy, not a direct one. There is no national popular vote upon anything, not even the president, (which is done through the electoral college). Indeed, the president can be elected with a lesser popular vote. It would take a constitutional amendment to change that but, again, not by popular vote.I agree 100% that's the only way Liberals can get anything done, Obama did not have the popular vote, this is what I've been trying to say if moral and social issues was up to the people, and not a small handful of Judges and Politicians we could solve these issues quickly. and if the moral decline continued at least it would be the peoples choice.

[red states rule]

I've had all those tactics pulled on me numerous times both here and even more so at other forums. Appears that you just gave the dem/lib/leftist playbook. --Tyr

As long as FU and LR are here, we will see the dem/lib/leftist playbook

Here is a pic of FU in his natural habitat (hint - FU is not the black guy)

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSvMx8xFtgBFxLDYYzcnuWH7hOmBFoyF m9WO4xh5X0gZyg1shUQ4w

[fj1200]

As long as FU and LR are here, we will see the dem/lib/leftist playbook

It's amazing how you manage to also lose debates that you're only passively involved in. A rare talent indeed.

[aboutime]

It's amazing how you manage to also lose debates that you're only passively involved in. A rare talent indeed.


fj. Most of us think it's odd how your definition of the words 'lose debates' is nothing but another of your cover statements to disguise, and avoid saying the word 'Truth'.

[fj1200]

fj. Most of us think it's odd how your definition of the words 'lose debates' is nothing but another of your cover statements to disguise, and avoid saying the word 'Truth'.

Why do I need cover statements when I'm winning? :poke:

And I say "truth" all of the time. Truth, truth, truth, truth... Post a lot of it too. :slap:

[aboutime]

Why do I need cover statements when I'm winning? :poke:

And I say "truth" all of the time. Truth, truth, truth, truth... Post a lot of it too. :slap:


Yup! Your perverted version of truth. Just like this....5390

[red states rule]

Before you know it, Christmas will be here. In the spirit of the holiday, and to offer an olive branch, ere are some gift suggestions for LR and FU :laugh2:



http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z79_yakppUk/Tvu3lKQCliI/AAAAAAAApjg/VpH0aOI3hzE/s1600/20111228-top_10_gifts_to_give_a_liberal.jpg

[Larrymc]

Before you know it, Christmas will be here. In the spirit of the holiday, and to offer an olive branch, ere are some gift suggestions for LR and FU :laugh2:



http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-z79_yakppUk/Tvu3lKQCliI/AAAAAAAApjg/VpH0aOI3hzE/s1600/20111228-top_10_gifts_to_give_a_liberal.jpgGoo info for those hard to buy for Liberals on your List, Thanks RS