Friday, August 01, 2008
(King James Dobson On His Theocratic Throne)I knew something was up when I received more than a dozen e-mails last night from irate religious fanatics who insulted me in their special "loving" way. To their credit, these zealots were slightly more polite than the despicable people who sent 50+ hate mails following my appearance on The O'Reilly Factor the night before. Most of these lovely folks wished me a painful death from AIDS or an eternity in Hell. While such letters don't bother me, as it is part of the job - I'm always impressed by conservative manners and morality.
I soon learned that the new batch of e-mails were generated from Focus on the Family, which had launched a sleazy personal attack against me and my integrity on their online tabloid Citizen Link. I've often said that a Focus on the Family ad for the website should read: "Citizen Link: For People Who Don't Think." Here is what the tabloid said:
It looks like there will be a few uninvited guests when Dr. James Dobson officially is inducted into the Radio Hall of Fame in November. Gay activist Wayne Besen, who reportedly preferred Howard Stern to win the popular vote, plans to protest the Chicago event. He's called Dr. Dobson "an extremist who has built his empire on the backs of gays and lesbians" and "a bigot who distorts scientific research. Gary Schneeberger, vice president for media and public relations (PR) at Focus on the Family, called Besen "a PR pro of the first order." "He puts words into sentences very colorfully," Schneeberger said. "And that attracts the media's attention. Unfortunately, he's a little less adept at putting truth into sentences."
The most outrageous lie told in the story was that it was gay activists, not James Dobson, who distorted research. I have written two books and hundreds of press releases and articles, yet I have
not once been accused by a scientist of distorting his or her work. Meanwhile, Dobson has been taken to the woodshed by seven scientists in two years for twisting their science to fit his version of Scripture. Talk about spin! Here is what Focus on the Falsehoods had to say:
As for "distorting research," Schneeberger said it's the gay activists who are doing the distorting.
In 2006, Dr. Dobson was invited to write an opinion piece for TIME magazine about the benefits of traditional marriage to children and society. In the article, Dr. Dobson pointed to a handful of scientific studies that found mothers and fathers parent differently.
"He never said the scientists agreed with his conclusion that gay marriage is bad for society," Schneeberger said. "He merely said their data could be used to reach his conclusion -- which is 100 percent true, but something the scientists didn't appreciate because of their ideological leanings."
Here are the facts: The seven scientists from three countries who said that Dobson distorted their work were not so-called gay activists. Indeed, I have no idea about their political leanings any more than Dobson does. When I cold called each scientist to let them know Dobson bastardized their work, they did not even know who I was. Yet, they were grateful at the opportunity to set the record straight and upbraid Double-Talk Dobson for manipulating their research.
Clearly, Dobson is the one lying, not me. By saying otherwise, Focus on the Family is bearing false witness. They are also trying to shoot the messenger (me) because they can't stand up to the seven scientists who accused Dobson of misrepresenting their studies for political gain.
Memo to Focus - this is not about me, this is about Dobson refusing to address the concerns of these scientists.These esteemed doctors ALL tried to address Focus on the Family and they were met with silence. What is Focus on the Family so afraid of? Why won't they take the calls or answer the letters from the very scientists that they misquote?
Make no mistake - what Dobson did was lowbrow. He wanted to make the point that gay people are inherently worthless, so he cherry picked work from respected researchers to make it look like their secular, scientific conclusions bolstered his religious opinions. As a former child psychologist, he has the training to splice and dice this legitimate research to make it appear as if it supported his erroneous and unsubstantiated conclusions. Thus, it is fair to conclude that Dobson knew exactly what he was doing and therefore his distortions were deliberate.
Dobson should apologize for his outrageously immoral behavior. Notice that in the Citizen Link article, he did not mention that there were SEVEN researchers who took him to task in a period of two years. Notice, that he and his PR puppet Gary Schneeberger did not link to any of Truth Wins Out's videos.
By withholding such crucial information, Focus on the Family ensured that their members who read the tabloid story were unable to judge the veracity of Dobson's claims. Leave it to Focus on the Family to give their fans half the story and a quarter of the facts so they are unable to come to their own conclusions. Sometimes, it seems this organization disrespects their own members and donors, even more than the gay community.
Focus on the Family must realize that Truth Wins Out is determined to expand its Respect My Research program in the coming year. We are only going to make lying more difficult for this organization. Dobson and Schneeberger are playing a game they are not going to win - as the Truth is a powerful weapon that can overcome the money-changer amounts of money that flow through their luxurious castle in Colorado Springs.
Please Donate to Truth Wins Out today by CLICKING HERE.
94 Comments:
Wayne is correct when he says that Dobson has built his business on the "backs of gays and lesbians." The expression of surprise from Dobson's own people on this point is amazing; either they are unaware of the difficult reality that is created by their gay-bashing, or they're lying. We'll leave that judgment for time to answer.
It is indeed most telling that Dobson's people simply respond by attacking Wayne personally without specifically pointing to any assertion that they disagree with. The days when gays and lesbians hid in the dark when businessmen like Dobson told lies about us is over.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 11:55 AM
I am very sorry that you all feel this way. Personally, I learned a lot with Focus on the Family these last 28 years. I'm a better mom and have learn to be a lover and a giver thru their broadcasts. I have raised my children who love and respect everyone, including gays. In fact, their gay friends feel welcome in our home and do not feel they have to run because we are christian and Dobson's listeners. This is the majority of the listeners I would say. I am sorry for those that say the darnest things about gays and lesbians. I think it is addressed when political issue are at hand... Please keep an open mind as well as most of us do. Free speach works both ways and I for one am on your side as well eventhough I read Dobson's book on parenting. He is not as bad as media is painting him to be. And I am not sure if some of the hate mail is not written by others than Dobson's supporters. I have never heard a word about hating gays on any programs. Political issue and votes yes, but no hate message!
posted by , at
8/01/2008 12:35 PM
Here is a typical "loving" letter I have received from Dobson's followers:
My knephew (SIC)died because of what lesbian and gays taught him about free sex or what ever. Lesbean (SIC) and gays led him into prostitution, strange sexual practices and AIDS. I believe One man, one woman. If these men and women can not be controled,(SIC) like child molesters etc. , they should be jailed or in men's cases the urge reomoved. (SIC)What do you say Mr Happy. Maybe you Ellen, Rosy, and Oprah can get to gather and get us someone like Obama. Hitler was a great orator too! That doesn't mean we should follow him.'
Mike
posted by Wayne Besen, at
8/01/2008 12:44 PM
Wayne: you do have amazing manners. And they want to discredit you by making you lose them. Don't give them the pleasure. I am not as strong as you in that way. They do not address anyone because they can always fall back on saying it is their opinion if ever backed up against a wall far enough. Of course they will sprinkle it with god and some good ol fashion mom and pop crap too. I am sure you realize it but it is worth mentioning that you are dealing with people who say the most dispicable things to you. Ghastly. Diabolical. Evil. That is essentially what the award is honoring.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 1:47 PM
Still, it has to make you wonder. Where is the exact research and how was it conducted etc... If both sides are talking about it and using it to their advantage - and they are - then whom do you believe? I for one - don't believe anything that come from a gay actvisit nor a right winged group such as FOTF or Dobson. Both sides have too much invested to back down and admit a wrong.
So..... niether side is credible.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 2:20 PM
Wayne,
That's one letter from a very bitter parent. One bitter parent does not speak for others. I am just as outraged that anyone thinks that any group is repsonsible for their son or daughters actions. We do have free will in this country.
Exaggeration in any form is unbelievable. No, gays are not repsonsible for anyone's death due to drugs, promiscuity etc..., nor are groups like FOTF or LWO responsible for those who say they wasted time and money.
Both groups are responsible to report true facts - both sides, pros and cons. Neither do that.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 2:24 PM
"I for one - don't believe anything that come from a gay actvisit nor a right winged group such as FOTF or Dobson. Both sides have too much invested to back down and admit a wrong."
Obviously, you did not read what I wrote. I gave a link to scientists who took Dobson to task. That you are calling them activists is not only false and misleading - it makes you an activist.
I really feel sorry for your kind. You have a stiff aversion to the reality based community and will try to blur the issue when you can't win based on the merits of your arguments.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
8/01/2008 2:53 PM
"nor are groups like FOTF or LWO responsible for those who say they wasted time and money."
Um, of course they are responsible. They sold snake oil and people drank it.
If you sell a person such poison and they think it is cherry cola, then then the responsibility lies primarily (but not fully) with the salesman.
Your role as an apologist for Focus on the Family is a slap in the face to the victims of such therapy and their families.
Exodus and Focus should offer refunds for their ex-gay product. Without doing borders on consumer fraud.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
8/01/2008 2:56 PM
Here is the latest letter from one of Dobson's brainwashed followers. It is so heartbreaking that these people have such an awful vision of God. They wrongly portray him as this pissed off white dude that did not get his coffee in the morning, and is waiting to smite anyone who forgot to bow. Such an uninspiring, unappealing version of God is not only childish, but makes God look bad.
Wayne:
I am truly sorry that you have chosen the livestyle that you have or feel that you have to "protest" against those who disagree with that livestyle. However, God the Creator, sees everything you do and I pray that at some point, you change your life and ask for his forgiveness. It is terrifying to think what will happen if you don't. You can get mad all you want, but it doesn't change the way things are in the end. He is the righteous judge and even if you choose not to believe that there is a God, He is there and you will face him one day!'
posted by Wayne Besen, at
8/01/2008 4:10 PM
Wayne is right. Of course all Focus on the Family do is stir the pot. They have no basis for their hateful rhetoric and when confronted they send out the ignorant members with nasty comments and letters bashing the perceived enemy. Anonymous is justifying that while at the same time telling us that she/he understands us. Do you really think we buy that nonsense? I am sure you convince yourself you are ever so noble at your feeble attempts at objectivity. The question posed is about manipulating the words and statements of scientists professional research results. Focus on the Family is guilty of exactly that. If you cannot answer a direct question Anonymous, then pipe down.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 4:13 PM
I know that both sides misrepresent research. I'm not saying the researchers per se are actvists - but you get the idea. Dobson has every right to interpret research as he does - is it accurate - I don't know. Sometimes the results are not what we want and can lead to conslusions we would rather not have. I'm not saying this about any specific research - just saying that it does happen all the time in other research fields etc...
Saying only right winged groups do this is also misrepresentation.
I'm sorry you recieve those kinds of letters. People can pray for you without letting you know. Their feeling to be compeeled to let you know speaks volumes about their real intentions for writing such a letter.
BTW, I am sure that people like Dobson and his kind recieve such letters everyday from gay people.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 4:55 PM
Remember when Dorothy missed the balloon ride with the Wizard/Professor. Well, let's take a moment and imagine ourselves in Dorothy's place as if she had made the balloon ride.
As we rise above the crowd, we get a better view of the wonderful changes. Californina, Massachusetts, DODT hearings, . . .its all coming together and is scaring the Dobson Klan, the AFA, Peter LaBarbera, Bam Bam Barber, etc. And they should be trembling. I wrote a note to Jennifer Kerns of Protect Marriage:
Greetings Jennifer,
I am wondering how you will explain yourself to your family, and if you have children, how you will explain your work on Prop 8? And if you are fortunate to have grandchildren, how will you explain your activity and participation in Prop 8? There is a high probability that you have and will have gay or lesbian or even transgendered persons in your life.
How will this sit in your soul? How will you explain your stance to these folk.
Prop 8 is not going to be defeated by just gays and lesbians, but families with gays and lesbians in their lives, co-workers, politicians, and neighbors will be supporting SSM. and equality for the LGBT folk
Just something to think about. . .why did someone like Benkof distance himself from the Protect Marriage coalition?
KUDOS TO WAYNE BESEN
posted by , at
8/01/2008 5:03 PM
oops that should be DADT, (DONT ASK, DONT TELL)
posted by , at
8/01/2008 5:06 PM
Keep up the good work, Wayne.
Anytime you're a target of an orchestrated attack by the right-wing nutcases, it means you scored a direct hit!
Don't stop doing what you're doing.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 5:33 PM
Go get em Wayne!! Dobson is a scumbag and he hates you for bringing this fact to the rest of America. He is scum and you are the scum-buster.
Way to go!!!!
Missy
Alabama
posted by , at
8/01/2008 6:16 PM
Well, of course these people will end up with someone GLBT in their family. It's true they are not thinking ahead and how the consequences of their actions will be interpreted years or generations later. Too bad.
posted by , at
8/01/2008 6:27 PM
"I know that both sides misrepresent research."
Please cite one instance where gays have intentionally misrepresented research.
"I'm not saying the researchers per se are actvists - but you get the idea."
The only idea I get is that you think both sides are equal in this. Sorry, they are not.
"Dobson has every right to interpret research as he does"
Not when he says the data reaches conclusions that it clearly does not. Not when he twists the statements by the researchers to put words in their mouths. He's entitled to his opinion, but he's not entitled to lie in order to support his opinions with fabricated "facts".
"Sometimes the results are not what we want and can lead to conslusions we would rather not have. I'm not saying this about any specific research"
And therein lies the problem. You're commenting on things you've obviously done zero research on. I know as a skeptic it can be tempting to stand in the middle and say "everyone makes mistakes" but to know what is ACTUALLY going on, you'll have to read up on it. Start with the links that Wayne provided.
Gays don't distort research to support their positions...Dobson, Cameron, the anti-gay crowd does. They distort research or outright lie about it. Check out Box Turtle Bulletin for clear examples.
posted by Unknown, at
8/01/2008 11:23 PM
Jason,
Um you accuse me of not knowing - do the research yourself. You may be biased and that is fine but I have read here and other places where research is skewed.
I know you have invested your life in this but I can't take the word of a gay activist nor a right winger on face value. I, too, have a lot invested and that is why I would like to see more truth come out.
Like many people, propoganda has swayed many opinions as well as yours. We are all subject to it. Any blatant commnet that says "No way. Gays don't ever do that." is proof enough for me to believe that you have taken in all the stories hook, line, and sinker - without question.
Sorry Jason. Your naivity is showing.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 12:09 AM
Here is the latest e-mail I received. And Dobson and his ilk don't think that his rhetoric leads to hatred and violence. Who do they think they are kidding:
"fuck you faggot . . .dobson is right all the time about you shit swillers'
posted by Wayne Besen, at
8/02/2008 12:18 AM
Wayne,
Of course that kind of thing leads to hatred and violence. I have read as much in some of these blogs here by gay people.
Keep in mind, not all christians support that kind of remark and in no way do I support it. To whomever wrote that to you - they should be ashamed of themselves because that does not represent christianity in any form. That is not a christian that is a hateful person who lacks understanding. AND that person is NOT representative of people like myself.
I am truly sorry you are receiving such mail. This should not happen to anyone.
But again - one person or several people do not represent everyone. Just as some of the remarks made by gays in blogs across the country, they do not represent most of the real people who are kind, generous, patient, and able to hold differences of opinions without resorting to that kind of hateful speech.
Again, sorry that some who calls themsleves a christian wrote such a hypocritical note to you or to anyone who is gay.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 1:10 AM
Anonymous at 12:09-
You keep ignoring the salient point. It isn't "gay activists" who are saying Dobson distorted research, it's THE SCIENTISTS WHO DID THE RESEARCH THEMSELVES.
I know it's a fun rhetoric to fall back on the old "both sides distort" thing, but it's really just a cheap excuse to avoid facing reality here, and everyone, including you, knows it. Burying your head in the sand isn't going to change the fact that Dobson lied, it's just cowardice, nothing more.
And anyone who takes parenting advice from a guy who beats his dog really shouldn't call other people naive:
http://bulldogpolitics.blogspot.com/2005/08/struggle-continues-james-dobson.html
posted by , at
8/02/2008 8:09 AM
Funny, nowhere in your post is there a link to a website or article showing how gays distort legitimate research in order to further their cause. I'm still waiting.
so, anonymous, are you going to cite any sources, or just continue to lob personal attacks?
posted by Unknown, at
8/02/2008 8:18 AM
I'm not surprised dobson abuses animals, his rhetoric and even his perpetually sour looking face reveals what a mean, sadist, spiteful person he really is. Why this type of person is usually drawn to fanatical religion is because they can use the absolutes of their belief system to justify everything from oppression and discrimination to flying airplanes into skyscrapers. God said it was ok, and that trumps any man-made laws for civility and protection.
These letters to Wayne remind me of an interview I heard a long time ago with the late famous atheist Madelyn Murray O'Hare. She said someday she was going to publish a book called Letters from Christians, filled with all the vile, hateful, threatening letters they had sent her over the years. She died before this was ever done. I believe she was murdered, probably by someone who writes letters like the ones Wayne receives from the rabble at FoF.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 11:33 AM
I am the anon who talks about not believing research and acticists.
I would not allow Dobson into my house or anywhere near my house. I believe the man is not in sync with my value system. Having said that, I still believe that gay activists and right wingers distort the research findings and research.
I am not going to go in to a long recount of the researh. That the gay people are unaware of such research kind of floors me.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 1:07 PM
Well then give us citationas/websites where we can find it. If it REALLY exists AND comes from a legitimate source!
posted by , at
8/02/2008 1:36 PM
I am sorry but i cannot decipher between all these anonymous posts and who is who. I have to reiterate what one of them said to another though. SHOW US THE BEEF!! What research has gay people distorted. Examples please?
posted by , at
8/02/2008 2:06 PM
Evelyn Hooker
posted by , at
8/02/2008 2:46 PM
Gay people distorted something said about Evelyn Hooker? Need more info please.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 4:50 PM
Read the research Ewe. If you are not informed - then you need to do the work. I am not your foot soldier or order boy.
so far you have proven to be uniformed and have listened to what others have to say. Why would you listen to me? Don't you think doing your own research would be more valuable? Give you more credible source to rely on???
posted by , at
8/02/2008 5:01 PM
and who is this great message coming from this time? So when someone wants to initiate a conversation with someone who alleges all these distortions, they come back and say do your own research. I got a great big statement to repeat you charlatan. Exactly what in the hell research are you exploiting this time and not mentioning. Jack ass.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 5:59 PM
Weird anonymous person- since you're the one making the claim about gay people distorting research (which still, by the way, has NOTHING TO DO WITH WAYNE'S POST), then the onus is on you to back it up. If I tell you I'm the empress of Mars, it's my job to prove it to you, not your job to go out and prove me wrong. As for example, when I pointed out Dobson's dog beating, I back it up with the citation leading back to his book.
Just making X claim and then telling people it's their job to prove you wrong and if they don't then they're uninformed is childish. Grow up please.
And the other anonymous who wrote about Madayn O'Hair; she was murdered by a member of her own organization for money, and she was fairly nasty herself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madalyn_Murray_O'Hair
And first anonymous who really should just pick and arbitrary consistent psuedonym; all I had to do was google, instant reference. See? It's easy.
And interestingly enough, plunking "gay people distort research" into Google returns tons of links about anti-gay activists distorting research but nothing about gay people distorting research.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 6:01 PM
here hold on everybody. Let me throw another name out there. God. Oops. I mean Evelyn Hooker. I mean Freud. I mean Noam Chomsky. Hold on, how about Jerry Fallwell, i mean Ronald Reagan. what exactly is the latest anonymous post. Oh Evelyn Hooker is doing what? Being?? Saying something? Whats the post in relation to my question on distortion? How about Devil? I mean heterosexual devil. I mean promiscuous heterosexual devil. What does it all mean. Well lets just throw out the name EVELYN HOOKER. So what? Got something else to say. oh you must be one of those smug people right? How rediculous. If you got something negative to say about gay people, back it up with some facts. There are no facts except one. HOMOPHOBIA!!!!!!!!
posted by , at
8/02/2008 6:09 PM
thank you Boo. I tell you. I feel like i am dealing with mentally deranged people. As i said earlier, they seem to be retarded. They are stark raving idiots. We say do not distort. they reply Mickey Mouse. I have met people in the past and when you start talking to them, you soon realize that they are in an ego fueled misguided flipped out delusional world of their own. This is what these bible thumpers have turned out to be. They have nothing else. They just come out like roaches and termites at the request of Dobson. There is no meaning except to be abrasive and rally around their leader who is twirling them around his finger and keeping them in ignorance by having them say " god this and god that." They are pathetic and unworthy of our presence.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 6:41 PM
My goodness. Ewe is back to foul language. And Boo comes back with black statments. The onus isn't on me. I gave you inofrmation and you have chosen to ignore it.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 7:40 PM
My goodness. Ewe is back to foul language. And Boo comes back with black statments. The onus isn't on me. I gave you inofrmation and you have chosen to ignore it.
Black statements? I'd say troll except you're just so danged weird.
One last time silly, you did not give any "information." You made baseless accusations and then just tossed out a name, nothing more. You didn't give us anything to ignore.
I am the empress of Mars. Read the research.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 7:57 PM
I did google that and nothing came up.
Geez - is it so hard to ask someone not to do the research themsleves. Honestly, you would not believe ME if I gave it to you.
I know it is disheartening. It was for me when I found out about these things. I used think that gays would not resort to dirty tricks like dobson and his kind. But they do.
You can choose to stay uninformed - or do a little - just a little digging. It will hurt and it will make you angry.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 8:15 PM
Ewe - BTW, I'm not a bible thumper. I have not quoted scripture to you. I don't vote along religiously conservative lines, nor attend church on any regular basis. I support gay rights and have many gay friends. so alot of your name calling is sort of unwarranted. Also, I find it strange that you won't look up information, take someone else's word instead of doing the research yourself and then call me a mental retard. Hmmmm..... yeah, that make a lot of sense.
Just so you know - even though I know more about gays, gay rights movement, etc.... I still support people like you .... who don't or won't research for themselves.
posted by , at
8/02/2008 11:25 PM
anonymous, I've done a lot of reading on homosexuality over the years, and I make it a point to look up the sources that the authors use.
None of the pro-GLBT authors that I've read have distorted things like Dobson has done.
Admittedly, I have not read every book published or visited every website on the subject. There's a lot of them, after all, and I only have so much time.
It would help tremendously if you could point me in the right direction. I'm not asking for a 12 page report on how pro-GLBT people misuse research. A simple comment like "Book X by author Y claims such-and-such, but the study he quotes actually says the opposite." would be sufficient.
I have a very high regard for the truth, and if people (whether they're pro-GLBT or anti-GLBT) are misusing research to further their own ends, then I think their actions need to be revealed.
Simply commenting "Evelyn Hooker" is no help. (If that was you; it's difficult to tell who is saying what when people don't bother to use an identifier when they comment.) Are you saying that Hooker's work is being misused? Or are you saying that Hooker didn't do proper research and that her data is flawed? I've read her work and didn't see anything wrong with it, and all the books/websites I've seen that quoted her work have done so properly.
You've repeatedly refused to be helpful by providing examples. I'm not surprised that people are doubting that you even have proof; in my experience, people who say things like "do the research yourself" or "just google it" do so because they don't have any evidence but don't want to admit it.
We can't look up the information if we don't know where to look. You could prove that you do have proof to support your claim and send us in the right direction to do our own investigating, but you are refusing to do so. If you really do have evidence, then I don't understand why you are are not sharing it.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 12:02 AM
It would be on the first page of a google search. If I give you the info - you wouldn't believe it. Sorry but for your own education to avoid propoganda, social influences etc... you'll have to look this one up.
I agree Dobson takes the cake. But research does get skewed from both sides. That one person or group does it more is irrelevant - when you consider that it gets done at all.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 12:50 AM
Her research methods are flawed.
I am not saying the gay men are not healthy mentally - but her research was flawed - very obviously.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 12:52 AM
I do believe research can get skewed on any side, plane, and level of an issue, but individual cases have to be brought to light, not blanket statements. In the case of Wayne's post, Dobson distorted. Gays opposing him didn't. That is the issue at hand.
As for the Hooker study, I don't know any specifics, but I'm under the impression that she set out to find a discernible difference between gay men and straight men that proves they are "ill" beyond the simple fact that they have sex with other men. I was also under the impression that her work was not an end-all-be-all study but rather was a stepping stone to getting people to see that homosexuality - the mere condition of being attracted to the same sex - is not in and of itself a mental disorder, but is instead a sexual variant that occurs in healthy, functioning human beings.
posted by Emily K, at
8/03/2008 3:44 AM
so... heterosexuals are not mentally ill. I hope we all feel better. I will call CNN and let them know immediately.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 4:15 AM
It would be on the first page of a google search. If I give you the info - you wouldn't believe it. Sorry but for your own education to avoid propoganda, social influences etc... you'll have to look this one up.
As I said, the first, and second, pages of google search reveal only right-wing sources distorting research to anti-gay ends. Hiding behind your specious claim that "you wouldn't believe it" is a cheap excuse to avoid backing up your own claims, most likely because you know you can't. You've painted youself into a corner and now you have to resort to cheap tricks to try and draw attention away from that fact, but obviously it's not working.
It took me two seconds to find the reference to Dobson beating his dog. Are you really so lazy you can't do the same to back up your own claims? After all. you've made multiple posts on this claiming the info is out there somewhere and we should look it up for you. In the time it's taken you to write them all up, you could easily have found one reference and put it up, thus avoiding having to just repeat the same baseless claims over and over again. That you chose to spend all that time doing so just tells us you can't put your money where your mouth is.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 8:00 AM
Wayne, I have to say that after reading the article on Focus on the Family, and also reading your article, I am deeply saddened by all the character attacks. I personally am a fan to some extent of Focus on the Family. (I think it's important to recognize that every person is fallible and I don't think I've ever agreed with anybody 100%.) It just seems that the argument between you two is all about trashing character and not really about the issue at hand--the homosexual lifestyle. It seems that there could be more productive and meaningful talk if the character attacks would stop. I want you to know that I am a Bible-believing conservative Christian. And while I don't believe that the Bible condones the gay lifestyle in any way, I do know that we are to love our neighbors. In our society, it seems that we are told that in order to love someone, we have to accept their lifestyle as well. Because my viewpoint is that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not a genetic issue, I don't agree with accepting your lifestyle anymore than if you told me that I had to accept a rapist's lifestyle. (That's a bad comparison and I know that you are not harming anyone, but I used it to show how difficult it is for me to accept your lifestyle.) That said, I'm sure you--apart from your lifestyle--are a wonderful man with many positive things to give to our society. I'm sure you are a good friend, and a hard worker, and I'm sure you're quite intelligent. And I'm sure I wouldn't be uncomfortable around you if I met you at the store. But I resent the idea that I have to accept your personal lifestyle to accept you as a person. Also, I have to just say that I resent the fact that you painted the picture that people who support Focus on the Family are uneducated people. I consider myself to be a bright, well educated woman. I graduated top of my class at the university. But it's just a character attack to say that Focus followers are uneducated. And you also said that Dr. Dobson has been criticized by 7 people in the last two years. And that you have written 2 books with no criticisms. Do you know how many books Dr. Dobson has written, and how long he has been writing? If all he has had is 7 criticisms for his huge career and dozens and dozens of written works, I'd say he's doing pretty well. So, back to my original point--I think if you and Dr. Dobson made sure to stick to facts without trying to attack each other personally, you would get a lot further in meaningful discussion. At this point, the argument is getting so nasty that you (and Dr. Dobson) are doing nothing but making you and your viewpoint very unattractive.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 10:47 AM
Boo,
Anything I say you would call right winged. It doesn't matter to you. I could say the sky is blue and you would say I was a right winged liar just as soon as the sun started setting - because the colors change.
Your own personal bias is pretty clear. It's funny how you use Dobson's dog beating as absolute but not anything else? Strange man you must be??
And bias no doubt - unwilling to see past the smoke.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 12:23 PM
Boo,
Are you saying that these reports are wrong and that they are lying?
Just curious.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 12:28 PM
anonymous: "It would be on the first page of a google search."
And you can't even be bothered to tell me what I should search? Like boo, I've typed in several different keywords, and all I'm getting is information on how the anti-GLBT side is distorting the facts.
If you can't be considerate enough to give me a URL, could you at least tell me what keywords I'm supposed to be entering into Google?
anoymous: "If I give you the info - you wouldn't believe it."
Gee, thanks for telling me what I would and would not believe. Did I ever state that I wouldn't believe you? No, I didn't. So I'd like to know why are you making assumptions about me.
To set the record straight, I'd be more likely to believe you if you could give me a URL or something to work with. The fact that you are refusing to be cooperative is what makes me think you are bluffing.
anonymous: "Sorry but for your own education to avoid propoganda, social influences etc... you'll have to look this one up."
How does your refusing to post a simple URL help me avoid propaganda and social influences? If I find the page on my own or if you link to it, what difference does it make?
anonymous: "Her research methods are flawed."
How? An explanation would be helpful. Your tendency to be as vague as possible is only hurting your arguments, not helping them.
Like Emily K. pointed out, Hooker's research was meant more as a starting point. Her study was meant to point out the flaws in the system at the time. Back then, the only gay people who had been studied were those who were mentally ill, and it was thus assumed that all gay people were mentally ill. Hooker was simply showing the error in that manner of thought. She wasn't doing a study on the mental health of all gay people or anything of the sort.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 2:02 PM
I'm not saying that getting attention was a bad thing. I am saying that the research was flawed. The method, the primary datqa collection etc...
Back peddling to the "it was needed at the time" kind of argument goes against scientific sensibility. The same argument (poor as it is) could be used by right winged activists today??
No.
Standards are standards. And both sides misrepresent.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 4:31 PM
Sorry piasharn - but i have to be vague. Being specific would engage too many attacks. People are fixated on their biases. Have you ever tried to tell an alcoholic that they drink too much? Have you ever been told by someone close to you that you need to improve something?? It doesn't feel good to see your blind spots. And with the wrath of bloggers here - I am leaving it up to them to discover for themselves. Having someone tell you is very different than discovery through your own work.
That's what I'm saying. Instead of acting like herded cows, take a step out of line and go look for yourself. There's a lot of information out there that begins to show the biases and misdeeds of both sides to this issue. It's kind of scarey when you think you were being told the truth. Or when you start making excuses to fit your needs. I know. I've done it. It's painful to look beyond that which is most comfortable.
It's really not about me proving a point. It's up to the individual to learn - if that's what they want to do. I'm just pointing out that we all get the slip from both sides. Better to do the work yourself.
You don't have to look. You may go along the same path you have treaded and worn all these years. Many people do just that. And their lives have stayed just the same.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 4:46 PM
Boo: whoever the hell it is that is playing with you feels that it is their divine destiny to teach and in their minds they throw out what they deem little pearls of wisdom. I say they should read their own words to themselves. What a sick childish way of having a conversation on hate speech. Forget about addressing them. It fuels their fantasies.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 4:50 PM
Anonymous. You do not have to be vague. You do not even have to post anything at all. For some reason you do not know what the rest of all already do because we experience it every day. You are not saying nothing new or anything of substance. By the way i am thinking of typing something more. What is it? Take a guess. Come on and do some research. I mean after all just like you say, i cant be totally straightforward because i am always subjected to attack by people like you.
"Place your head directly up your ass now. thank you."
posted by , at
8/03/2008 4:57 PM
Anonymous: Round and round we go. I will ask you once again. What biases are gay people pushing? Perhaps you can string a sentence together this time that includes the name of the gay person pushing lies. You can't. Shut up. It is just the fundamentalists always trying to convince themselves superior because they think they have a direct line to the supreme being. "Insert foot up backhind."
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:03 PM
There you go again ewe. Yes, you need to learn that spitting at people whether physically or literally is childish on your part.
You just don't get it. And yes, I have been where you are today. So.... there goes yet another one of your long held opinions out the door.
Somehow you are unable to grasp that a person who was gay believed everything. And now they are not gay, they don't subscribe to right wing politics and that person happens to read.
That's funny - your stereotypes are being thrown out and yet you are still looking for something to attach me to your "hate group" - as you see it.
Too bad. You are firmly held in place by your thinking (not learning mind you) but by your thinking.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:04 PM
i would spit directly in your face as a statement if it was legal. It is not childish. It is hate and i hate your ignorance. I have a feeling i am answering the post of Ms. Alan Chambers herself. Was that another derogatory comment to me about not reading even though we never met Ms.curedfag Only one thing you said was true.
I am firmly held in my place because of my thinking, that is true. You should try it.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:14 PM
oh and one more thing. Do not ever say you were where i was at one time because you have never accepted and loved yourself for being the homosexual you are and you certainly have never supported other gay people either. You are a liar Anonymous. Typical.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:18 PM
That's too bad ewe. You've proven yourself an ardent follower. Nothing spectacular about you. Your anger is surprising.
Mmmmm. Yeah, I've marched in the parade - several years. I had a family that totally supported me. A church to go to etc... I was out and proud. No secrets, no denying, nothing to hide.
Strange you admit to wanting to be violent towards me in the same way that the fundies were. I know - I was there when they did it. You have little or no experience with the rights we fought for and stood up for - had you - you would not say the things you do.
Sometimes - people change. That should be their choice. Maybe being gay wasn't really who I felt like? I don't know. I do know - that people do change their direction, their likes and dislikes etc... Not everyone does - nor should they feel compelled to change. People should be free - to think for themselves.
I guess - you want to think for me and tell me I did not accept myself? Strange. If I were not thinking for myself - I'd let your words offend me, hurt me, change me.
Hmmm. You use all the same tactics that the fundies used to use.
I'm not telling you anything about you except what you put out there. You still don't believe me, you act like a fundie, and you call yourself a free thinking person?
Are you sure?
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:34 PM
Just so you know.
I am not Alan Chambers. He holds political opinions that I do not support.
Whoops - you forgot to read again and started jumping into assumptions.
I don't attend church regularly, vote along right wing lines, I do support gay rights, etc...
Alan Chambers I'll bet goes to church regularly, does vote along right win lines and is against gay rights. Keep up Ewe. I keep having to remind you of things.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:37 PM
Truthfully, Alan Chambers would not spend his time doing this. I however think it is important to point out that both sides misrepresent research and science etc...
Ewe - you have become so ... out of bounds angry that I think you are offended that someone told you to read for yourself?
I 'm not sure. But hey, I'll ease up - you're far too invested in keeping your reality intact that you are beginning to lose control of yourself.
That was never my intention.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:42 PM
it is true you and your kind offend me. You come on these sites and put gay people down and then hold yourselves up like you are loving. Go bother someone else who believes your crap. When all else fails, you can always pull god out of bag of tricks. But we have been over and over this Anonymous Alan.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:54 PM
anon:
You cannot shake my reality. You are a lying ugly hateful piece of fundamental right wing simple dirt. Nothing you say is of truth. I respond to you so other gay people can see that you scumbags that exploit god and everything else as excuses for your hate are confronted. I don't care about you at all. People i do not know or care about cannot form or alter my reality. Especially people like you who say nothing based in reality. You are as nutty as a loon.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 5:58 PM
I did not put gay people down. Now you are lying.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 8:14 PM
You are a liar and you have said nothing of value regarding this Dobson character and the fact he uses people like you to promote and agenda of hate and oppression against gay people.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 8:58 PM
Ewe - your statments are false.
However, I'm sure if you repeat it a hundred times, you will believe it - or at least someone else will. Forget about the facts.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 9:31 PM
Anon: Take your own advice and just read what you have written. The writing is on the blog. You can deny it all you want. You are a homophobe. Keep it to yourself.
posted by , at
8/03/2008 10:43 PM
Beth, no one gives a shit what you think of the gay lifestyle. I don't even want you to accept it, as I don't accept the evengical life style. I want nothing to do with you narrow minded people. It is fanatics like youself who are the cause of so much unrest in the world today. You are analogs of the Islamofacists. You are a tiresome pius bunch of hypocrits. I doubt you were a virgin until you were married. statistics would indicate that if you are you represent about 5% of the US population. You see morality through a sexual lense. My advice to you is sell everything you own and follow jebus. Now I gotta go and suc some dic
posted by , at
8/04/2008 12:31 AM
Who is Beth?
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:37 AM
Anything I say you would call right winged. It doesn't matter to you. I could say the sky is blue and you would say I was a right winged liar just as soon as the sun started setting - because the colors change.
Wow. You've got me all figured out, haven't you. I wish I had your amazing powers of long distance telepathy. So, how come you're not putting them to use hunting terrorists for the government? With the ability you've demonstrated here, we could bag Osama inside of a week!
Here's the thing, you silly, silly person, you have no way of knowing what I'd say in response to any ACTUAL EVIDENCE you'd present because you've never bothered to do so. What you're really saying is, once again, you know you can't actually back up the claims you've made, so you have to resort to ad hominem attacks because you've got nothing else.
Your own personal bias is pretty clear. It's funny how you use Dobson's dog beating as absolute but not anything else? Strange man you must be??
What else? Give me something else to use. I looked and couldn't find anything. You keep saying you know it's out there, so give me something. Anything.
And yes, I admit I am a very strange man, what with my boobs n' vag. Long distance telepathy fudged that one, eh?
"And bias no doubt - unwilling to see past the smoke."
That's because all you're doing is blowing smoke. And everyone here, including you, knows it.
Are you saying that these reports are wrong and that they are lying?
Well, if you were to maybe, you know, give me some clue as to WHAT REPORTS, and WHO IS LYING, then I might be able to answer your question. But again, since you've never seen fit to do anything besides handwaving, I can't rightfully say.
And will you please just pick a screen name? All the anons are confusing. It would take even less effort than googling actual research. How about Pringle?
Sorry piasharn - but i have to be vague. Being specific would engage too many attacks.
Well, you're already complaining about being attacked, so what's the dif? Give an actual reference. Call our bluff. Go on, do it. I triple dog dare you Pringle.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 7:57 AM
Beth- there is no such thing as "the homosexual lifestyle" anymore than there is "the left handed lifestyle." You are free to hold whatever religious views of homosexuality that you please. The issue is injecting religious beliefs into public policy to make our lives harder than they need to be. If I marry the gal of my dreams, it does nothing to you or your marriage. Accept us or don't accept us, as you please. Just don't try to force the government to follow suit.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 8:00 AM
Boo,
I did not attack you. I simply noted the obvious - as you have demonstrated -that anything I say you will go against.
Hmm. ad hominom attacks - I didn't call you a silly person - just strange.
My question - that you have not answered is... if the info is fromn a right wing source and it is true - do you not believe it because it is from a right wing source?
posted by , at
8/04/2008 11:55 AM
I did not attack you. I simply noted the obvious - as you have demonstrated -that anything I say you will go against.
Yes Pringle, you did attack me. You claimed without evidence that I am hopelessly biased and incapable of evaluating evidence objectively, and you have nothing to base that on. You have also ad hominem attacked other people (and to be fair, Ewe has ad hominem attacked you as well). I called you silly, but I stand behind that. Your behavior on this thread has been exceptionally silly. The problem is that you so far have demonstrated nothing but ad hominems. You've been asked to provide substance repeatedly and you always refuse.
My question - that you have not answered is... if the info is fromn a right wing source and it is true - do you not believe it because it is from a right wing source?
If I follow the info back to its source and it checks out, then I believe it. Right wing sources naturally recieve more scrutiny from people because they have such a long track record of distorting and lying about research, from Paul Cameron to Focus to The Republican War On Science (written by a "left winger" but very well referenced).
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:02 PM
I would slap that bitch across the face with all the crap that has been said about gay people.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:26 PM
I attacked as self defense. There is a world of difference and no guilt. No apology. I would do it again and again until they either stop their hate or drop dead.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:27 PM
Anon says: "If the info is from a right wing source and it is true- do you not believe it because it from a right wing source?
YOU DONT HAVE ANY INFO. YOU HAVE NOT SUPPLIED ANY INFO. YOU ARE SUCH A DENSE FREAGEN IDIOT. IF IF IF. You are an instigator of hate and i see right through you. You hate yourself because you are attracted to the same sex and you have cleaved onto the most negative groups full of people who put down what you hate about yourself. That is the reason you are hanging around hate groups anony or beth or whoever the fuck you are. You have furnished nothing, continue to furnish nothing concrete to talk about and now you are asking if that nothingness comes from a right wing group, do we object. Of fucking course you fool. You are so ill in your thinking it is impossible to have a conversation with you.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:41 PM
Anonymous: you are gonna completely fall apart someday emotionally. And when you do, it will be gay men and women here to help you.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 1:45 PM
Saying that you are biased is not an attack.. If you think that is an insult?? Well... don't know what to tell you.
And how come this diverse group of people who are so against hate crimes and hate speech are letting folks like ewe go unchecked and without comment??
Is the silence of those gays who post here - a nod to ewe's behavior?
Just wondering.
Boo. Look at Evelyn Hooker's research methods etc... it would not go far in today's world. I am not saying that gay men are mentally ill - not at all. I am saying that her research is not passable and the way it was used was improper. Just one example.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:01 PM
What i say is nothing in comparison to what you and people you assist say about gay people. There you go again attacking the minority for giving you a taste of your own medicine. And still your statement about Evelyn Hooker goes on and on without any sentiment about anything to talk about. Be specific. Did you hear what the request has been. BE SPECIFIC. I still say you are damn fool and all you are trying to do is manipulate everything by getting the focus off your own biased rhetoric.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:07 PM
Ewe,
At every chance I get to speak to Christians and right wingers about gays and the way gays are treated - I do so. It is true that there is a long ways to go but I am trying to change the opinions and treatment towards gays. I have done this ever since I was marching in the parades. Not being gay did not take away my common sense and humanity.
Part of the problem is in reaching out to gays. Just like you, many have anger and hostility towards religious people. I understnad that. I have anger and hostility towards some religious people, too.
Somehow, I hope that in the future religious people view gays in a different light and treat them with the same respect they would treat anyone. Tony Campola is a very sincere christian. Someday, I hope when you see a cross or dove or fish sign - instead instant feelings of hate and fear you see comfort, peace, sanctuary.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:14 PM
ANON or Beth or whoever you are: You say look at the research methods of Evelyn Hooker. That is like me saying to you to look at the research methods of Salk. Look at the research methods of AIDS. Look at the research methods of Dr. Fauci. Look at the research methods of Carl Jung. WHICH RESEARCH METHODS ARE YOU SAYING TO LOOK AT TO DISCUSS? WHAT SPECIFICALLY ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? That is the reason i have called you dense, retarded and idiotic. And why not? You cannot or will not answer the inquiry even though a slew of people have asked you to elaborate.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:15 PM
Anon: you do not define god or religion for that matter. Do not put gay people in your box so you can explain your beliefs to yourself. I know many religious people who are NOTHING LIKE YOU. How dare you put yourself in their company. Lastly, dont' you for one second define what and how i believe and assume that i am not or cannot be a religious person you fool. You will not hijack god in front of my face. You remain the pathetic and pious charlatan you are. Don't read people up and down and you will fare much better. Keep it focused on yourself.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:21 PM
Ewe,
Goggle her and you will have to read for yourself. It's not that far into any reading. That you are unaware of her is sunstantial evidence that you really don't check out anything anyone tells you. Checking her is not like checking Salk, AIDS, etc... there is tons more on those topics.
Sorry, kid. You have to do the foot work or you won't know for yourself.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:22 PM
Okay - Ewe - you know what I mean by religious people. Of course, I never said you were not religious etc...
BTW, if you are asking me not to make assumptions about you? Don't you think it is fair for you to do the same for me?
I have an appt to go to and will not be able to respond for several hours.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:24 PM
Anon: Listen, just say right here right now it is just fine to be gay as it is to be straight and the slate can be wiped clean. We can begin again. If you cannot, then all my messages to you stand and remain.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:24 PM
Anonymous. I am not your kid. I am probably older than you. So don't be surprised when i call you a cunt. A dismissive cunt at that. I have read about Evelyn Hooker. You have chosen to ignore the countless questions posed to you to be more specific. You tire me in all the worst ways. Not to the point of silencing me but just sad that so much energy must be spent on your hateful words with my hateful words to keep you from spreading like a disease.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 2:29 PM
It's just as fine for you to be gay as it is for me to be straight.
I'm not trying to change your sexuality.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 4:43 PM
Ewe,
I'd be surprised if you were older than I. Your language is not needed to emphasize your anger.
I get that you are angry. There's not a whole lot I can do for you there. Your anger is directed at people that I do not identify with. Yes, I am christian. My beliefs about sexuality are probably different than yours. But they're mine and I am not imposing them onto you.
All that is being said is that if you read and devote equal time to researching both sides youwill find biases and misrepresentations. You don't have to search. You don't have to look. You can take what the gay and left winged population at large is saying about gays and right wingers and call it the truth .... or.... you can devote time to looking at both sides and how much science is being distorted. And really look at the statistical models, findings, conclusions etc...
I used to believe eveything that was in the news. Then I started to search and really dig into things. I was surprised. I think alot people would be.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 4:49 PM
I used to believe eveything that was in the news..........
You really were stupid. I was never that stupid, so I can't identify with you.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 4:53 PM
anon: the slate was wiped clean and you immediately tainted it again. I am not interested in your approval on how to express myself. Mind your own damn business.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 5:31 PM
anonymous: "Sorry piasharn - but i have to be vague."
You don't HAVE to be vague. You CHOOSE to be vague.
Reading your reply reminds me of one of my dad's sayings: "Those aren't reasons; those are excuses."
You haven't given me any reasons why you cannot post a reference. All you've provided are some very weak excuses.
Like this one: "Being specific would engage too many attacks." People here are attacking you because you refuse to back up your statements. In truth, there would probably be fewer attacks on you if you gave some sources.
And then there's the part where you said, "And with the wrath of bloggers here - I am leaving it up to them to discover for themselves."
Wrath of the bloggers? What exactly are they going to do to you? Call you mean names?
And for someone who dislikes people making assumptions about you, you sure like to make assumptions about others. You first told me that I wouldn't believe you even if you did post a URL. This was a false assumption on your part, and you've failed to acknowledge it. Pot, meet kettle.
You've assumed that I "...may go along the same path you have treaded and worn all these years." But how do you know what path I've been walking, much less that I've been on the same one for years? You seem to think that I believe what I believe because it is more comfortable because that's what you did. Again, these are both false.
You also are assuming that we are "...acting like herded cows..." and that I should "...take a step out of line and go look for yourself." Meanwhile, you've completely ignored the fact that both boo and I have reported that we are looking for this information and have not found anything.
Look, I don't take any information at face value. (This is why I'm asking you for sources; so I can verify your claims.) I question everything, and am open to the idea that new evidence may prove that what I currently believe is not the truth. I enjoy a good challenge, and, since I have friends all across the political spectrum, I'm used to people presenting me with ideas that do not mesh with my current beliefs. However, at least they have the courtesy to recommend a book or give me some websites.
What you are doing here is like depriving a child of all writing materials, and then demanding that he teach himself to write.
I'm more than willing to learn. But just like a kid can't learn to write if he has nothing to write with, I can't learn if I have no resources to learn from.
If you actually want me to learn something, then please post your sources so that I can evaluate them. Otherwise, don't bother replying. This discussion is going nowhere, and I'm tired of your lousy excuses and your assumptions.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 9:09 PM
Paisharn,
I apologize for using phrases etc.. that categorized you wihtout having greater knowledge of you.
However, it is easy to do research. And I stand by my statment. If you are really interested in the truth you'll go looking for it.
Again, my choice phrases and such were unfair.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 10:29 PM
Anon:
We have the truth. You are the one searching around looking for it. It would serve you better to be less judgemental with the people who are able to dispense the truth to you.
posted by , at
8/04/2008 10:51 PM
Piasharn, the reason why no sources were provided is that he has none. If people like that are so sure of what they say with evidence to back it up as they claim, let them provide it, its incumbent on them to do so. When they don't, you know you've called their bluff.
posted by , at
8/06/2008 9:21 AM
Not true robert.
I stand by what was written in my posts.
Really,the way I see it, and so do a lot of people who are in the middle, is that when gays only look to one side then they are just as guilty as the far right when they make claims and accusations.
The bloggers here have been given an opportunity - in fact an invitation to investigate for themselves. Seems that some have declined and do not accept that they too are responsible for finding out the facts.
posted by , at
8/06/2008 2:51 PM
Anon: your beliefs are not fact. Drop it already. You have nothing to say and worse yet nothing to point to for others to elaborate on. YOu are like an AM radio talk show. Just constant chatter, no substance.
posted by , at
8/06/2008 3:52 PM
Bearn JAPONAISE Bi-Fold Wallet Crocodile Black
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Agenda PM Multicolore Black
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Agenda PM Multicolore White
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Monogram Neverfull GM
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Monogram Neverfull MM
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Monogram Round Coin Purse
Louis Vuitton Murakami Chibi Kinoko Pochette Porte Monnaie NM Multicolore White
lv beige M40253
lv beige M40256
posted by , at
1/06/2010 9:38 AM
<< Home
