In San Francisco, there are several homosexual activists who are pushing to loosen rules in the city’s bathhouses. Michael Petrelis, leader of Queer Nation says, “We want to increase the number of venues where adult gay men can practice safe, consensual sodomy.”
San Fransisco has the highest rate of AIDS in America, and almost eighteen thousand people there have died of AIDs since it was first diagnosed. This is akin to youngsters who have access to loaded guns, complaining that they don’t have a safe place to shoot each other.
But shouldn’t the same standards be applied to gay activist groups as are applied to the tobacco industry and gun manufacturers? The courts determined that because smokers who are on medicare and medicaid, might get lung cancer, the tobacco industry should be held accountable.
And the gun manufacturers are supposed to be responsible for how someone uses their product.
So if tobacco use might cause lung cancer and we know unprotected sex with people infected with AIDS does spread the disease. . . should the groups, individuals, businesses and communities that support this activity be held liable and accountable, as the tobacco and gun industries are? What do you think?
A high school science teacher in Minnesota was removed from his job after being quizzed by school officials about his faith, and whether he ever mentioned God or the Bible during science class.
Their great fear was that he would tell the kids the truth that God created the heavens and the earth and it wasn’t a ball of lint exploding through the cosmos.
Even though his text book had “creation” as a teaching option, he was grilled, humiliated and fired for just having sincerely held religious beliefs, and not even mentioning them.
On the other hand, James Hormel has just recently been named by Clinton as the Ambassador to Luxembourg and will be the first homosexual to openly display his lifestyle in that position. He is applauded for his bravery, his resolve to do the right thing.
On one hand, the government fires a man for potentially mentioning his lifestyle, his beliefs, because they might be offensive. And on the other hand a man who practices a lifestyle, openly, without concern for the feelings of others, is promoted to a position of representing our nation abroad.
Is it just me, or does this seem a little hypocritical . . . let me know what you think.
The State of California, in its haste to appease the homosexual community has passed a law that says state employees will get domestic partner health benefits. Instead of looking at this as “anti-family,” “pro-gay,” we should see this as a great opportunity to get a lot of people on state-sponsored health care that otherwise would not qualify.
For example, if a state employee lives in a house with several other friends, these friends should qualify for benefits. The new law says the couple “should have a close and exclusive relationship in which each is responsible for the common welfare.” Well if sharing rent, meals and phone bills doesn’t qualify what does? It doesn’t say anything about having a sexual relationship. And the fact that they use the word “couple” should be challenged by, say a fraternity house, that can claim their brotherhood is as close as any couple’s.
I encourage every creative individual to take full advantage of the cowardice and lack of principle by the majority in the Californian Legislature and find a roommate that works for the state and let your tax dollars work for you for a change.
Either homosexuality is normal behavior or it’s not. Those whose agenda is to teach it in the public schools as a legitimate lifestyle also try and keep another foot in the victim camp.
You can’t say it is normal, acceptable, and equal to heterosexual behavior while claiming that any homosexual who is assaulted was assaulted because they are homosexual. Either assault is illegal or it isn’t. It can’t be more illegal because of a lifestyle, especially if we are all told constantly that that lifestyle is normal.
If the homosexuals want special privileges and special laws to protect them, it must mean they know they are different from the rest of society. They have created a class unto themselves while expecting the rest of society to identify them as normal. If the special class is protected, then it is only logical that that special class be allowed to be identified as different or abnormal from the rest of society.
You can’t have it both ways. And if they continue to want special rights as victims, does that mean their victims have no rights at all? Either justice is blind, or she isn’t.
We have heard all the arguments concerning homosexuality and special rights from a moral and legal perspective. But there is one crucial angle that everyone seems to have overlooked.
Homosexuality is a sexist, misogynist, chauvinistic movement that declares women irrelevant, unnecessary and less than equal. All the gains the women’s movement made to have the law recognize men and women equally is being overturned.
It’s actually quite clever. They are claiming they need special rights and privileges based on a behavior that no one can prove that they participate in.
So basically, some heterosexual guy who isn’t getting the loan or the job, or the promotion he wants can just claim to be gay and not only does he beat out the straight man but the straight woman as well. It’s the good ol boys network of the new millennium and judging by their numbers… 1.5% of the population… they have proven they have political power and clout… while 51% of the population is told they are not deserving of the same rights as these men.
This is Nina May for the Renaissance Women who support equal rights, not special ones.
On May 12, the CEO of Nike told the members of the National Press Club that Reggie White was not evil, just crazy.
Let’s back up. Reggie White is a Christian who happens to be a football player. He is loyal to the teachings of Christ and the Bible. Religious freedom in this country allows this. Not only is it allowed, but the nation was founded on these very same principles that Reggie White is now being called crazy for following. And over 85% of the American people call themselves Christians, which means, they must follow the same Christ and adhere to the same Bible.
So in Nike’s opinion, 85% of the population is crazy. It seems odd though, that the same people who would condemn Reggie for standing by his Man and his belief system, find nothing odd about standing by their man who has brought nothing but ridicule and shame to the nation.
So Nike, in its wisdom, has alienated 85% of the market to appease a small minority. That’s real economic wisdom. No wonder the market is plunging as we speak. This is Nina May in search of an honest, market-savvy running shoe.
Why is it that people coming out of the closet and admitting homosexual tendencies are lauded in that community as being heroes. They are paraded around as the new poster child for an ego-driven movement and praised for their honesty and sensitivity.
But heaven help that same person if they decide they either want to go back in the closet, or get rid of the closet all together. They are seen as victims of the vast right wing Christian propaganda machine, brain-washing their new protégé.
Could it not be that they decided they really were not gay? That they found the lifestyle to be oppressive and degrading? Aren’t they the same person who freely decided to try it?
Should this same philosophy be applied to everyone who tried cigarettes, alcohol, drugs or any other addictive behavior and discovered it was more harmful than they expected?
Instead of condemning them, they should be applauded for their courage in discovering who they are . . . not who a movement wants them to be. It kind of makes you wonder about a movement that is so desperate to find and keep its members.
It is interesting to see an Anheuser Busch ad blatantly trying to appeal to the homosexual community… by encouraging men to “just be themselves.”
It shows two men strolling hand in hand, muscles rippling just above their entwined fingers. It is hard to understand the business savvy to appeal to 1% of the population by alienating the other 99%. But look at the slogan, which I would imagine is an exhortation to everyone… to “just be themselves.”
That means the gang of guys sitting around the set watching Monday night football can make gagging sounds when the commercial comes on. Or they can decide if this is the “queer” beer, then it’s not for them. After all, they really should follow their heart and do what is best for them.
And it means that people who truly believe that the homosexual lifestyle is deceptive, and destroys lives, should be themselves, and express this openly in every forum.
So I applaud Anheuser Busch for having the courage to finally challenge men to just be themselves… be men for a change and defend heterosexuality as the preferred lifestyle… by 99% of the American public. This is Nina May for the Renaissance Women and men.